We definitely need more radical changes on the skills and traits to change the meta — Guild Wars 2 Forums
Home Professions

We definitely need more radical changes on the skills and traits to change the meta

anduriell.6280anduriell.6280 Member ✭✭✭✭
edited December 2, 2020 in Professions

It doesn't matter if we talk about nerfing meta builds or buffing non-meta builds but we definitely need a change where unwanted classes can be used in roles which aren't the commonly used.

  • Why can't a Holosmith replace the role of the reaper/warrior as melee powerhorse. It is almost there, it just need better sustain for short times depending in the number of allies in an small radius (An idea: a trait which provided pulsing protection while the photon forge is active, but greatly increases the speed of the overheat . The overheat speed is decreased for each ally around the holosmith)
  • Wouldn't it be fun to see Druid to fill the role of the support scourge (without the corruptions but more support) with heals and ranged AoE spirit actives? (an Idea: Druid has a trait (minor or otherwise) to make spirits to follow the druid, Spirits have ranged AoE actives which release them and the skill goes into CD)
  • Would be very amazing to have a build for the Medic Thief, an hybrid dps/support build with access to share venoms and other specific buffs from thief and single target BIG heals. Preparations was a good step but wasn't pushed enough, the portal is the idea which should have been pushed further(an Idea: Preparations which provide life leach while the allies are in the AOE, A very small preparation which provides a big heal to the ally over it , Portal was a great design, preparations to work like supportive static AOEs so the thief activate the preparation when the ally if over the area )
  • I have already voiced my desire for the soulbeast to be an alternative to guardian. No need to repeat how it could be done.
  • I think it would be great for the mesmer to have to different roles: One for chronomancer as alternative for core necro with wells which can rip boons at range and apply ranged CC, other for mirage as an alternative for spellbreaker with boon rip (or corruption) in an AoE around the mirage.

I think those possibilities could be possible to add without many changes and it would increase greatly the squad variety and even some of those meta classes can be replaced.
What do you think? What other roles could be designed for all those specializations or classes which aren't wanted in WvW (like weaver for example)?

Comments

  • anduriell.6280anduriell.6280 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 23, 2020

    @Justine.6351 said:
    I would rather the classes be more heterogeneous than homogeneous.
    I don't really understand this all inclusive mentality. I think the base game comes with 4 character slots.

    I personally don't like the MOBA design for an RPG. Gatekeeping classes to one specific role only works when you have a lot of different classes. GW2 has 9 which is not many for a MOBA game play.

    I think all classes should be able to fill different roles, it's not all classes can do the same but different combinations. For example: If you would be using Druids to replace some scourges you would still desire boon rips. Thus you would bring more chronomancers.
    Then if you bring Druid and Chronomancers and an Herald maybe Firebrand is not needed. So you are fulfilling 3 spots with 3 no-meta builds: Druid (heals,cleanses, ranged AoE), Chrono (boon rips, ranged CC, reflects ), hybrid Herald ( ranged DPS, Boons support) . You get the same final result but with different synergies.

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @anduriell.6280 said:

    @Justine.6351 said:
    I would rather the classes be more heterogeneous than homogeneous.
    I don't really understand this all inclusive mentality. I think the base game comes with 4 character slots.

    I personally don't like the MOBA design for an RPG. Gatekeeping classes to one specific role only works when you have a lot of different classes. GW2 has 9 which is not many for a MOBA game play.

    GW2 isnt a MOBA and has never been designed for that outside of the abandoned Stronghold sPvP mode.

    gaggle - /ˈɡaɡ(ə)l/ - noun
    A disorderly group of Asura.
    "The gaggle of Asura tried to agree on whether a phase-shifted thermonuclear energy matrix was sufficiently powerful for a device capable of heating bread"

  • @anduriell.6280 said:

    @Justine.6351 said:
    I would rather the classes be more heterogeneous than homogeneous.
    I don't really understand this all inclusive mentality. I think the base game comes with 4 character slots.

    I personally don't like the MOBA design for an RPG. Gatekeeping classes to one specific role only works when you have a lot of different classes. GW2 has 9 which is not many for a MOBA game play.

    I think all classes should be able to fill different roles, it's not all classes can do the same but different combinations. For example: If you would be using Druids to replace some scourges you would still desire boon rips. Thus you would bring more chronomancers.
    Then if you bring Druid and Chronomancers and an Herald maybe Firebrand is not needed. So you are fulfilling 3 spots with 3 no-meta builds: Druid (heals,cleanses, ranged AoE), Chrono (boon rips, ranged CC, reflects ), hybrid Herald ( ranged DPS, Boons support) . You get the same final result but with different synergies.

    What kind of hybrid herald are you talking about? Plain hammer Herald is definitely meta and it adds more than enough boon support if you’ve got 1 per 5 people as it adds might, fury, swiftness and then protection during pushes. During dwarf times you get a small amount of stab and damage reduction. I don’t think you need to go hybrid to get that, just go marauders/scholar and pump out the damage.

  • holo has crystal config eclipse, shield block, and elixir s. its fine on survivability. its problem is most of its big damage is projectiles (grenades, holo4). laser disk is good. mine field is too spread out to be useful (you can only hit 1 person with 3 mines tops). you're left with bomb kit, and you might as well play power scrapper with that.
    druid needs bigger aoe in CA and boon support.
    support mes needs bigger aoe on its mantras and more direct support (heals, condi cleanse, boons). pain mantra spam for heals is good but thats the only option. chrono is useless without IP and offers nothing for group utility other then double cc well. mirage useless with 1 dodge. mesmer useless cuz clones die to aoe. no damage option. ggwp.

    te lazla otstara.
    fingers crossed meta ~

  • Yasai.3549Yasai.3549 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Mesmer can rip boons with Null Field and steal boons with Arcane Thievery.

    In fact, alot of stuff yu mentioned can already be fulfilled with what's in the game, like Protection Holo, Healing Power Sword Thief etc.

    Sure they aren't meta and they aren't meta for a reason, but they exist.

    Do yu even play the game or just post on forums blind like a goon?

    If I play a stupid build, I deserve to die.
    If I beat people on a stupid build, I deserve to get away with it.

  • Caedmon.6798Caedmon.6798 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 24, 2020

    Imagine how broken this kitten will be when they release their xpack. Can't wait !

  • God.2708God.2708 Member ✭✭✭

    You can't change the meta by changing traits and skills, as silly as that sounds.

    META is the game outside the game. In order for the meta to change, people have to actively engage in analyzing what other people are doing and how to beat them. That doesn't require changes to traits and skills, though that can initiate such build movement. It just requires competition. Which WvW sorely lacks right now.

  • anduriell.6280anduriell.6280 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @God.2708 said:
    You can't change the meta by changing traits and skills, as silly as that sounds.

    META is the game outside the game. In order for the meta to change, people have to actively engage in analyzing what other people are doing and how to beat them. That doesn't require changes to traits and skills, though that can initiate such build movement. It just requires competition. Which WvW sorely lacks right now.

    Well while i agree with your point, META is something constructed by the players themselves, it is heavily influenced by the game design. So if other classes come around offering not a replacement but an alternative although the players may resist for some time at the end the new build variety will settle. It would be a new "META" that is correct, but it would bring more variety to the game mode.

  • GW2 isn't a MOBA.

    Second, it already provides a platform in which you can essentially theorycraft a build into existence and have it be viable.

    A buddy of mine almost exclusively plays his support Druid in WvW and does very, very well with it. Entanglement is such a massive skill used in our group that creates a lot of situations for us to win fights, and has many times. Medic Thief also exists and can be viable, but it's just not popular as most thieves are looking to be pure dps. It doesn't mean that they can't be support, it just means that most players aren't playing them as one.

    It's all about learning the build you created and realizing it's potential, rather than just following the meta builds and assume those are the only builds that are viable.

    "meta" doesn't mean "only", it just means "most effective tactics available" and in GW2 this is built around FOTM builds that are just common, but it doesn't mean that variations don't exist. You will see meta shift as certain builds become rampant and other builds come out to counter them.

    I play a Shoutbreaker, which is my variation of the Healbreaker build. It's a more all-around type of build that provides a lot more damage while still giving great cleanse, barriers, healing, and Winds. I also play a 1-shot DH where my entire build is created around my LB2 skill and pre-buffing myself to basically one-shot people with 18k+ crits. It's hella fun for what it is.

    Step away from "meta" and thinking that you need to play these very specific builds in WvW to be viable.

    Just play what you have fun playing and enjoy the game, that's what WvW is all about.

  • God.2708God.2708 Member ✭✭✭
    edited December 1, 2020

    @Loffels.5934 said:
    GW2 isn't a MOBA.

    Second, it already provides a platform in which you can essentially theorycraft a build into existence and have it be viable.

    A buddy of mine almost exclusively plays his support Druid in WvW and does very, very well with it. Entanglement is such a massive skill used in our group that creates a lot of situations for us to win fights, and has many times. Medic Thief also exists and can be viable, but it's just not popular as most thieves are looking to be pure dps. It doesn't mean that they can't be support, it just means that most players aren't playing them as one.

    It's all about learning the build you created and realizing it's potential, rather than just following the meta builds and assume those are the only builds that are viable.

    "meta" doesn't mean "only", it just means "most effective tactics available" and in GW2 this is built around FOTM builds that are just common, but it doesn't mean that variations don't exist. You will see meta shift as certain builds become rampant and other builds come out to counter them.

    I play a Shoutbreaker, which is my variation of the Healbreaker build. It's a more all-around type of build that provides a lot more damage while still giving great cleanse, barriers, healing, and Winds. I also play a 1-shot DH where my entire build is created around my LB2 skill and pre-buffing myself to basically one-shot people with 18k+ crits. It's hella fun for what it is.

    Step away from "meta" and thinking that you need to play these very specific builds in WvW to be viable.

    Just play what you have fun playing and enjoy the game, that's what WvW is all about.

    "Most effective tactic available" is a made up term. It's important to understand the history behind the term because "Most effective tactic available" loses a lot of context without it. Meta-gaming is the game outside of the game. If you know what the enemy is going to do, you adapt to their playstyle and adjust builds accordingly. There isn't a 'best' build or 'most effective' build. There's simply a point at which trying to seek an advantage stops being worth the effort. Which gets derived from a lack of competition.

    The 'Metabattle' builds and general 'meta' is formed to be usable by pugmanders to make easy party forming. It isn't the best set up. It's simply the easiest to understand. Again, game outside the game. Playing to and understanding expected userbase.

  • @God.2708 said:
    "Most effective tactic available" is a made up term. It's important to understand the history behind the term because "Most effective tactic available" loses a lot of context without it. Meta-gaming is the game outside of the game. If you know what the enemy is going to do, you adapt to their playstyle and adjust builds accordingly. There isn't a 'best' build or 'most effective' build. There's simply a point at which trying to seek an advantage stops being worth the effort. Which gets derived from a lack of competition.

    The 'Metabattle' builds and general 'meta' is formed to be usable by pugmanders to make easy party forming. It isn't the best set up. It's simply the easiest to understand. Again, game outside the game. Playing to and understanding expected userbase.

    Even though what you said is true, it's not the entire picture. There is a most optimal build. But it is as you said, impractical to identify it in any meaningful amount of time.

    The way you think about this kind of thing, is if you were to imagine a super computer that can analyze every single choice and combination of choices. The computer will eventually find this most optimal path, in some finite amount of time, and the time it takes is based on the complexity of the system.

    There is a thread i would invite you to read that goes full in depth into how this is the case
    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/1376183#Comment_1376183

    I also wanted to respond to this quote here

    You can't change the meta by changing traits and skills, as silly as that sounds.

    META is the game outside the game. In order for the meta to change, people have to actively engage in analyzing what other people are doing and how to beat them. That doesn't require changes to traits and skills, though that can initiate such build movement. It just requires competition. Which WvW sorely lacks right now.

    I don't disagree with this statement, but i don't think it's true either. I agree that competition is the driving force for all changes in the meta. 100% agree with that. But what i disagree with is that changes to traits and skills don't change the meta, cause they do. However, some changes don't do anything, and these changes are in the realm of moving numbers around in an attempt to make skills equal. In this comment here i show this to be the case.
    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/1344346#Comment_1344346

    Along with a few other analysis of the problem, you can logically conclude that the changes that need to be made must be certain kind of changes, in particular to skill design and how those skill designs have to be more meaningful in order to encourage a larger possibility space for different builds to appear. That's talked about in the previously mentioned thread.

  • God.2708God.2708 Member ✭✭✭
    edited December 1, 2020

    @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:
    Along with a few other analysis of the problem, you can logically conclude that the changes that need to be made must be certain kind of changes, in particular to skill design and how those skill designs have to be more meaningful in order to encourage a larger possibility space for different builds to appear. That's talked about in the previously mentioned thread.

    I feel like a lot of people aren't fully comprehending my statement. Since the META is the game outside the game, it can't be changed by changes in the game. It's the players engaging with the changes to see if something new became the best option. It took almost 6 months for power guardian to become a standard and accepted build despite being exactly the same since the Feb. patch. The changes to the meta are, to use your supercomputer example, purely an issue of computing power and interest in seeing change. Changing the traits and skills doesn't do anything beyond generate interest in seeing if changes actually occurred and inspiring a very brief 'Can I find the next best thing before anyone else does?'. Hell they completely threw scourges like a kitten kicked into a wall and people are still sitting on them.

    Edit: I do want to say that I don't disagree with the premise of changing those things as important, but changing the skills and traits is not the only way to change the META. And, at this juncture, is not even the most important though probably the most simple/accessible given ANETS history.

  • JusticeRetroHunter.7684JusticeRetroHunter.7684 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 1, 2020

    @God.2708 said:
    Edit: I do want to say that I don't disagree with the premise of changing those things as important, but changing the skills and traits is not the only way to change the META. And, at this juncture, is not even the most important though probably the most simple/accessible given ANETS history.

    Sure. I agree, that I think there are many ways one could change the meta. Aside from what I mentioned, What you mentioned is the game outside the game which is the consensus to which people can agree on what the best strategies are.

    If metabattle and all relevant sites shutdown or if some website appears that somehow encourages competition like Teapot tourneys, or if some new streamer plays a hot build and people pick up on it, then the meta might change... Of course this isn't the only way to change the meta. It's just one of the many ways that a meta can change.

    None of the ways that a meta can change are set in stone either. Suppose some computer did find the most optimal build, if that computer doesn't share the build, the meta won't change. Likewise, if the streamer plays a hot build, but nobody watches their stream, they will have no impact on the meta.

    So ya if I misinterpreted your comment, my bad,. I just thought what you said implied that changes to traits and skills don't change the meta.

  • @God.2708 said:

    I feel like a lot of people aren't fully comprehending my statement. Since the META is the game outside the game, it can't be changed by changes in the game. It's the players engaging with the changes to see if something new became the best option. It took almost 6 months for power guardian to become a standard and accepted build despite being exactly the same since the Feb. patch. The changes to the meta are, to use your supercomputer example, purely an issue of computing power and interest in seeing change. Changing the traits and skills doesn't do anything beyond generate interest in seeing if changes actually occurred and inspiring a very brief 'Can I find the next best thing before anyone else does?'. Hell they completely threw scourges like a kitten kicked into a wall and people are still sitting on them.

    Edit: I do want to say that I don't disagree with the premise of changing those things as important, but changing the skills and traits is not the only way to change the META. And, at this juncture, is not even the most important though probably the most simple/accessible given ANETS history.

    I don't think it's people who aren't comprehending your statement, It's more that your statement addresses a surface-level point that isn't actually being discussed as a priority to context here.

    "META" is just a term, the semantics behind the term isn't the priority to the actual interpretation of how we think of it pertaining to GW2. I agree with you that "META" doesn't mean "best", it shouldn't be viewed as a ranking system even though its name suggests that. However, again, that point isn't really a priority to context here. Regardless if you think "META" means best, most efficient tactics available, or whatever, it's still 100% created around the game and what it offers.

    While I agree with you that the "META" is the game outside the game, the bigger point is that the influence of this comes directly from the game, so it is absolutely changed by making changes to the game (but not be confused as the ONLY way). This has nothing to do with the pace at which things become discovered, which is a completely different point but in no way does this negate the fact that the META can be changed by in-game changes. It doesn't matter if things get discovered right away or 6-months later, it all stems from the platform of the game and what's available. You see games like LoL have META changes quite often specifically due to the updates and changes they make in the game, which is somewhat forced but nevertheless affected.

    "Generating interest in seeing if changes actually occurred" is the level of depth that goes into what creates the META, it's essentially for why the entire term exists. There are people who have this interest in theory-crafting and work to discover these "new formulas" to see what works. Without that level of interaction, "META" wouldn't exist and you'd just have people playing whatever they want, but that's not the case. There are many players who want some variation of min/max, so they research the META and see what others are doing, while you have some coming up with new things to alter that META. It's just the living-cycle, "game outside of the game" as you said, but it is all based around the platform it stems from.

  • God.2708God.2708 Member ✭✭✭

    @Loffels.5934 said:

    I don't think it's people who aren't comprehending your statement, It's more that your statement addresses a surface-level point that isn't actually being discussed as a priority to context here.
    ...

    So. Yes. But at the same time no. Any game's META exists not through interaction with the game, but rather with interaction outside of the game. To use your LoL example, there was a point where they nerfed a champion in the patch notes, but didn't actually include the changes in the patch. The champions winrate dropped by a noticeable amount anyway. I guess you can argue patch notes are part of the 'game', but I'd personally still default that to external community interaction.

    The game inspires that interaction sometimes through things like balance patch notes, but my whole initial point is that you won't get radical changes to the META via changing skills and traits. They trash scourge and people still run scourge because it works and why go to the trouble of getting new gear or learning a new build? Some guild equips a rune as a meme and you have 100+ post forum discussions on why it should get removed despite the rune being the same for anywhere from (arguably) 9 months to almost 2 years.

    Now you could do something radical like make SYG no longer give stability, but I'd argue -interesting- META changes come from much deeper things. IE since PoF released we've undergone a dozen patches of traits and skill changes and the 'core' of what makes up a group is still basically the same (there's just more invited to the table now). And the META is still essentially the same sense of 'pirateship'. All the changes do is make people bicker over which trait is best when usually the answer is 'it depends'. Where as the warclaw was released and there was a dramatic shift in how roaming was done (not going to argue it was good, bad, dead, or alive, but it is very different).

  • I don't really disagree with your point, I just think a deeper conclusion can be made from it.

    I DO think you could get radical changes to the meta depending on what skills/traits were changed, but I don't want this confused with it being the ONLY way meta can shift nor was I trying to say that, I apologize if it sounded that way.

    There are a plethora of things that can alter meta, and sometimes it doesn't come from any objective change in the game what so ever. Like you mention (i'm assuming), Golemmancer runes have been around for a while and it seems like just recently it's 'potential' has been discovered, however, most of that is literally based around an exploit that we've seen ANet adjust in the past with similar runes but right now they aren't, thus why so many people are talking about it. It's something that objectively needs a fix.

    WvW is literally all I play and just last night we went against [FLUX] who legit runs a core 30+ man Golemmancer guild group. It's basically a murder-ball type comp that focuses heavily on DPS build because if you have everyone running these Golemmancer runes you don't need to worry much about defense. The topic around this goes far deeper than what's on paper because not only are they objectively overpowered with their 100% proc, 50k+ HP baseline and Stun, they also glitch through walls/gates and create massive lag for many players when they all spawn at once are being exploited for that fact. The exploiting through gates/walls and the lag generated is a far bigger issue than what people assume, but you'll never acknowledge this point unless you objectively go against it in real-time. When you already have the largest blob on the map + capability of generating another 30+ minions that can soak 50k HP EACH + Stun + Cause Lag + Glitch through gates then you start to understand why these 100s forum posts exist. For us, It created a scenario in which the best option is to literally avoid them because it feels impossible to match them head to head. I'm not saying IT IS impossible, but for the vast majority of situations, it will be.

  • DemonSeed.3528DemonSeed.3528 Member ✭✭✭✭

    The radical changes are coming, but not the ones you want xd

  • Threather.9354Threather.9354 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 2, 2020

    Holos are pretty good but main issue is that it isn't easy to play. Like it has large radius AoE pull + pulsing cleansing field with inventions traited. Durability proc that removes condis, big melee DPS and permanent infinite targetcap superspeed with low radius. Slick shoes are also pretty dank CC combined with separate stunbreak in largescale fights.

    Overall all DPS classes have to remove boons or provide some kind of unique utility and heal scrapper took the superspeed gimmick away.

    There is still a possibility composition with 2 holosmiths to provide everyone permasuperspeed instead of 10 scrappers combined with tempests as healers and multiple other classes is optimal. But its just easier to get 1 scrapper per party. Tempest auras also have diminishing returns if theres too many of them so optimal comp for 10 parties could be something like this:

    2 holos (for perma superspeed + cleanse)
    3 tempests (For auras)
    17 firebrands
    +28 other specs

    But as you see its not easy comp to gather or execute compared to 10 firebrand and 10 scrapper ones. Is the return worth it? Maybe in different meta, this meta is about 1 pushes or cloud anyways.

    Ri Ba - Charr of logic
    ~Key to fixing WvW with minimal effort resides in my post history~

  • JusticeRetroHunter.7684JusticeRetroHunter.7684 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 2, 2020

    @Threather.9354 said:
    Holos are pretty good but main issue is that it isn't easy to play. Like it has large radius AoE pull + pulsing cleansing field with inventions traited.

    Pulsing Cleanse field? Which field would that be. Also what inventions trait are you talking about?

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 3, 2020

    Absolutely no ... wanting change itself isn't a reason to change meta on purpose and if it means making random changes to established elements of the game ... doubly no. It doesn't even make sense to think the meta is something Anet can 'engineer' with specific changes anyways.

    If we want a more 'interesting' game, we need new elements, not just old ones that are rolled around like dice.

    If you're on a highway and roadrunner goes "beep beep"
    Just step aside or you might end up in a heap

  • Touchme.1097Touchme.1097 Member ✭✭✭

    Dear ArenaNet, before you release your new expansion please do a balance patch for support builds in order to break the meta of dominating support specialisations like Chrono-alacrity, Heal Druid-boon support, Alacrigrade, banner slave Warrior.
    Look at support builds that are currently off the Meta like Heal Tempest and make them competitive in PvE by adding some offensive boons to their tool kits in order to make every support builds equally competitive in PvE. The current state of Heal Tempest needs serious improvements on the support role. Perhaps add spotter and Alacrity to all support specialisations to break the current Meta so people don't have to spend years to invest time in 7 different characters in order to enjoy some PvE, this would be very much appreciated from me.
    Regards

  • Sobx.1758Sobx.1758 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 7, 2020

    @Touchme.1097 said:
    Dear ArenaNet, before you release your new expansion please do a balance patch for support builds in order to break the meta of dominating support specialisations like Chrono-alacrity, Heal Druid-boon support, Alacrigrade, banner slave Warrior.

    Nah, I see nothing wrong about specific classes having limited/unique effects and abilities. I don't think we should get rid of that.

    The current state of Heal Tempest needs serious improvements on the support role. Perhaps add spotter and Alacrity to all support specialisations

    Perhaps play more than one class instead of trying to pack... well, everything into everything.

  • Touchme.1097Touchme.1097 Member ✭✭✭

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Touchme.1097 said:
    Dear ArenaNet, before you release your new expansion please do a balance patch for support builds in order to break the meta of dominating support specialisations like Chrono-alacrity, Heal Druid-boon support, Alacrigrade, banner slave Warrior.

    Nah, I see nothing wrong about specific classes having limited/unique effects and abilities. I don't think we should get rid of that.

    The current state of Heal Tempest needs serious improvements on the support role. Perhaps add spotter and Alacrity to all support specialisations

    Perhaps play more than one class instead of trying to pack... well, everything into everything.

    I do currently play more than 1 profession and raid organisers always ask for meta builds in raids, the same I have mentioned above. Don't poopoo my post with nonsense please. Maybe you need to realise that every profession deserves a spot in raids and the current Meta is wrong.

  • Sobx.1758Sobx.1758 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 7, 2020

    @Touchme.1097 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Touchme.1097 said:
    Dear ArenaNet, before you release your new expansion please do a balance patch for support builds in order to break the meta of dominating support specialisations like Chrono-alacrity, Heal Druid-boon support, Alacrigrade, banner slave Warrior.

    Nah, I see nothing wrong about specific classes having limited/unique effects and abilities. I don't think we should get rid of that.

    The current state of Heal Tempest needs serious improvements on the support role. Perhaps add spotter and Alacrity to all support specialisations

    Perhaps play more than one class instead of trying to pack... well, everything into everything.

    I do currently play more than 1 profession and raid organisers always ask for meta builds in raids, the same I have mentioned above. Don't poopoo my post with nonsense please. Maybe you need to realise that every profession deserves a spot in raids and the current Meta is wrong.

    But every profession has a spot -or multiple- in raids. And they don't need to do the same thing. There will literally always be some kind of meta. If for some reason that's your problem (apparently despite having more than 1 class), it won't be solved.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 9, 2020

    @Touchme.1097 said:

    @Sobx.1758 said:

    @Touchme.1097 said:
    Dear ArenaNet, before you release your new expansion please do a balance patch for support builds in order to break the meta of dominating support specialisations like Chrono-alacrity, Heal Druid-boon support, Alacrigrade, banner slave Warrior.

    Nah, I see nothing wrong about specific classes having limited/unique effects and abilities. I don't think we should get rid of that.

    The current state of Heal Tempest needs serious improvements on the support role. Perhaps add spotter and Alacrity to all support specialisations

    Perhaps play more than one class instead of trying to pack... well, everything into everything.

    I do currently play more than 1 profession and raid organisers always ask for meta builds in raids, the same I have mentioned above. Don't poopoo my post with nonsense please. Maybe you need to realise that every profession deserves a spot in raids and the current Meta is wrong.

    The current meta isn't wrong because it's not a pre-determined element of the game. It's simply a result of a limitation that players place on themselves for how they want to play. That being said, nothing needs to change because of how players self-restrict themselves for playing. If you have a problem with the meta, just ignore it and all the players that want to tell you how to play with it.

    If you're on a highway and roadrunner goes "beep beep"
    Just step aside or you might end up in a heap