Which is better, buffing or nerfing? — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Which is better, buffing or nerfing?

Poelala.2830Poelala.2830 Member ✭✭✭

Would you prefer all classes were buffed to make them all viable, or all classes were nerfed to make them all viable?

Which is better, buffing or nerfing? 91 votes

Buffing all classes
13%
Zaraki.5784Arcaedus.7290Coolguy.8702Ashanor.5319ZhouX.8742MissCee.1295ChartFish.1308UfoCoffee.2084ChronosCosmos.9450Guardian.2560Wizardauz.3761Gamble.4580 12 votes
Nerfing all classes
86%
Exciton.8942derd.6413Glider.5792reikken.4961Aktium.9506witcher.3197Diabolo.4876Stand The Wall.6987Sunshine.5014Krysard.1364Emtiarbi.3281Alatar.7364MrForz.1953MithranArkanere.8957Undo.5091Nimrod.9240XxsdgxX.8109Coronit.9432Ajax of Telamona.6974Axl.8924 79 votes

Comments

  • Menyus.4610Menyus.4610 Member ✭✭✭
    Nerfing all classes

    Nerfing ofc, but if thief gets another nerf it will proly die out

  • derd.6413derd.6413 Member ✭✭✭✭
    Nerfing all classes

    combo of the 2 with mostly nerfs.

    I Have No friends, so I Must pug

  • Stand The Wall.6987Stand The Wall.6987 Member ✭✭✭✭
    Nerfing all classes

    god only knows how op the next specs will be.

    The horror...…….the horror...…….the horror...…….

  • Arcaedus.7290Arcaedus.7290 Member ✭✭✭✭
    Buffing all classes

    Currently, it would be beneficial to see nerfs across the board, but if we're talking in general over time, buffing is generally better than nerfing.

  • XxsdgxX.8109XxsdgxX.8109 Member ✭✭✭
    Nerfing all classes

    Bring almost everything down to current Revenant's level.
    Risk/Reward wise

  • The problem with blanket nerfs is that has implications on difficulty of content.
    For competitive game modes I understand the desire to revert power creep.

    I don't think it is as objectively simple as "is it better to buff everything or nerf everything".
    Equally - there is a 3rd option: not blanket buffing or nerfing.

  • Hoodie.1045Hoodie.1045 Member ✭✭✭✭
    Nerfing all classes

    @Poelala.2830 said:
    Would you prefer all classes were buffed to make them all viable, or all classes were nerfed to make them all viable?

    Just nerf some of the elite specializations and buff some of the core specializations, especially core engineer.

    Karras The Engineer

  • Eddbopkins.2630Eddbopkins.2630 Member ✭✭✭

    This is a good question....im a need some time to think about it.....you can buff everything so that they are equal and all have 1 hit kill potenials or outstanding team healing support, or nerf it all and have control over what will be powerful each week or month...mmm i a need to think for a bit.

  • Poelala.2830Poelala.2830 Member ✭✭✭
    Nerfing all classes

    A ‘both’ option was ignored with intention and not by accident. A combination of buffs and nerfs is balance by definition. Why would I ask “Do you want everything balanced?” Of course you do. The core of the question was how do you think balance would be achieved in pvp’s current state? Generally by seeing a bunch of nerfs or by generally seeing a bunch of buffs? Most people agreed with me in thinking that classes need nerfs at the moment, not buffs. And through these nerfs would we find balance.

  • reikken.4961reikken.4961 Member ✭✭✭
    Nerfing all classes

    burst, healing, damage avoidance, conditions, and anti-condi, are all way over the top and makes gameplay feel very spammy and haphazard instead of as skill-focused as it could be. Also isn't terribly fun to watch.

  • Arheundel.6451Arheundel.6451 Member ✭✭✭✭

    The only class that needs hard nerfs is mesmer and the one needing buffs is ele

    -A wise man once said- "Fight cheese with cheese or be cheesed in return, mind not those who will accuse you of being a cheese as they like cheese themselves"

  • MrForz.1953MrForz.1953 Member ✭✭✭
    Nerfing all classes

    It's painfully obvious to find out which one will cause major and possibly irreversible damage.

    Disgruntled Charr Engineer and Pirate - Jade Quarry

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @SlippyCheeze.5483 said:
    You forgot to add "both" (and "neither") to the poll, which is very disappointing. The right answer is that there should be a performance target, and classes and class abilities should be buffed, nerfed, or left alone depending how they perform toward it. That way lies balance; only moving in one direction always converges to either zero or infinity because every inaccuracy leads further and further down that path for every single class.

    This.

    Buffing
    To break it down, from a acceptance perspective buffing classes is always more appreciated by the community and is usually a lot easier to do since most of the time all you have to do is increase performance.

    This unfortunately leads to power creep which can be unhealthy to a game overall as well as unbalance in competitive game modes (high end fractals, raids, spvp, wvw) which in turn leads to more buffs being required on other classes which in turn leads to more power creep, etc.

    Nerfing
    Harder to do than buffing. In general not very accepted by the community.

    Usually does not lead to a nerf spiral since developers often try to not over do the nerfing due to the negative acceptance it receives from the player base.

    Both are needed to keep a game balanced especially in case of a game like GW2 where all content is meant to remain interesting at least somewhat. While games like WoW or ESO which are based around a gear treadmill can better get away with a power creep spiral of buffing because this can be somewhat offset with new future gear.

  • Chorazin.4107Chorazin.4107 Member ✭✭✭
    Nerfing all classes

    Nerfing, nerfing can bring classes that have not been buffed back into contention without them being touched.

    [lion] - [tRex] - [nâh]

  • Huskyboy.1053Huskyboy.1053 Member ✭✭✭
    Nerfing all classes

    @Poelala.2830 said:
    A ‘both’ option was ignored with intention and not by accident. A combination of buffs and nerfs is balance by definition. Why would I ask “Do you want everything balanced?” Of course you do. The core of the question was how do you think balance would be achieved in pvp’s current state? Generally by seeing a bunch of nerfs or by generally seeing a bunch of buffs? Most people agreed with me in thinking that classes need nerfs at the moment, not buffs. And through these nerfs would we find balance.

    According to the poll, the VAST majority of people agree with you. People saying it needs to be both are being too literal, I understand that you meant that the balanced team needs to change their perspective on balancing to be more focused on nerfing.

  • MithranArkanere.8957MithranArkanere.8957 Member ✭✭✭✭
    Nerfing all classes

    When you nerf, fights get longer. The longer a fight it, the more time for skill to show.

    When you buff, they get too short. Whoever hits first wins, so people with less skill can get lucky and win without deserving it more often.

    Too far towards either side is always bad, but it's generally better to err on the safe side.

  • phokus.8934phokus.8934 Member ✭✭✭✭
    Nerfing all classes

    When in doubt, nerf.

  • SlippyCheeze.5483SlippyCheeze.5483 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Huskyboy.1053 said:

    @Poelala.2830 said:
    A ‘both’ option was ignored with intention and not by accident. A combination of buffs and nerfs is balance by definition. Why would I ask “Do you want everything balanced?” Of course you do. The core of the question was how do you think balance would be achieved in pvp’s current state? Generally by seeing a bunch of nerfs or by generally seeing a bunch of buffs? Most people agreed with me in thinking that classes need nerfs at the moment, not buffs. And through these nerfs would we find balance.

    According to the poll, the VAST majority of people agree with you. People saying it needs to be both are being too literal, I understand that you meant that the balanced team needs to change their perspective on balancing to be more focused on nerfing.

    FWIW, I think it is entirely possible to hold the "both" opinion, and that the way @Poelala.2830 puts it isn't actually the right way to think about this, without being over-literal in reading the question. (Though, of course, it is their post, and I accept that they are empowered to judge my comments any way they want.)

    I think that, right now, most classes sit in a reasonable position in GW2. If you drew a graph of their DPS over time, most would be clustered fairly closely in the center, with a few distinct outliers above and below that single line, across the population.

    When I say both are needed, I mean that center line is actually, IMO, a reasonable position: not too strong, and not too weak, but rather, pretty good. So, bringing those outliers closer to the center is the best way to deliver overall a good result. If you just focus on bringing everything down to the lowest line, or raising them up to the highest line, you end up with a game where damage etc are either too low (and slow, and feel bad) or too high (and fast, and feel bad, because really it isn't much fun after the first time you one-shot everyone else.)

    I completely agree that most of what needs to happen is probably power reductions on a few specs. The number that are low seem, subjectively, to be smaller than the number that are high right now. I just don't think a good result is either "everyone is now at the level of the lowest", or "everyone is at the center, except the ones at the lowest".

  • Poelala.2830Poelala.2830 Member ✭✭✭
    Nerfing all classes

    @SlippyCheeze.5483 said:

    @Huskyboy.1053 said:

    @Poelala.2830 said:
    A ‘both’ option was ignored with intention and not by accident. A combination of buffs and nerfs is balance by definition. Why would I ask “Do you want everything balanced?” Of course you do. The core of the question was how do you think balance would be achieved in pvp’s current state? Generally by seeing a bunch of nerfs or by generally seeing a bunch of buffs? Most people agreed with me in thinking that classes need nerfs at the moment, not buffs. And through these nerfs would we find balance.

    According to the poll, the VAST majority of people agree with you. People saying it needs to be both are being too literal, I understand that you meant that the balanced team needs to change their perspective on balancing to be more focused on nerfing.

    FWIW, I think it is entirely possible to hold the "both" opinion, and that the way @Poelala.2830 puts it isn't actually the right way to think about this, without being over-literal in reading the question. (Though, of course, it is their post, and I accept that they are empowered to judge my comments any way they want.)

    I think that, right now, most classes sit in a reasonable position in GW2. If you drew a graph of their DPS over time, most would be clustered fairly closely in the center, with a few distinct outliers above and below that single line, across the population.

    When I say both are needed, I mean that center line is actually, IMO, a reasonable position: not too strong, and not too weak, but rather, pretty good. So, bringing those outliers closer to the center is the best way to deliver overall a good result. If you just focus on bringing everything down to the lowest line, or raising them up to the highest line, you end up with a game where damage etc are either too low (and slow, and feel bad) or too high (and fast, and feel bad, because really it isn't much fun after the first time you one-shot everyone else.)

    I completely agree that most of what needs to happen is probably power reductions on a few specs. The number that are low seem, subjectively, to be smaller than the number that are high right now. I just don't think a good result is either "everyone is now at the level of the lowest", or "everyone is at the center, except the ones at the lowest".

    It was an either or question. Which is better, buffing or nerfing? You don’t respond with caramel when I ask if you like vanilla or chocolate more.

  • SlippyCheeze.5483SlippyCheeze.5483 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Poelala.2830 said:

    @SlippyCheeze.5483 said:

    @Huskyboy.1053 said:

    @Poelala.2830 said:
    A ‘both’ option was ignored with intention and not by accident. A combination of buffs and nerfs is balance by definition. Why would I ask “Do you want everything balanced?” Of course you do. The core of the question was how do you think balance would be achieved in pvp’s current state? Generally by seeing a bunch of nerfs or by generally seeing a bunch of buffs? Most people agreed with me in thinking that classes need nerfs at the moment, not buffs. And through these nerfs would we find balance.

    According to the poll, the VAST majority of people agree with you. People saying it needs to be both are being too literal, I understand that you meant that the balanced team needs to change their perspective on balancing to be more focused on nerfing.

    FWIW, I think it is entirely possible to hold the "both" opinion, and that the way @Poelala.2830 puts it isn't actually the right way to think about this, without being over-literal in reading the question. (Though, of course, it is their post, and I accept that they are empowered to judge my comments any way they want.)

    I think that, right now, most classes sit in a reasonable position in GW2. If you drew a graph of their DPS over time, most would be clustered fairly closely in the center, with a few distinct outliers above and below that single line, across the population.

    When I say both are needed, I mean that center line is actually, IMO, a reasonable position: not too strong, and not too weak, but rather, pretty good. So, bringing those outliers closer to the center is the best way to deliver overall a good result. If you just focus on bringing everything down to the lowest line, or raising them up to the highest line, you end up with a game where damage etc are either too low (and slow, and feel bad) or too high (and fast, and feel bad, because really it isn't much fun after the first time you one-shot everyone else.)

    I completely agree that most of what needs to happen is probably power reductions on a few specs. The number that are low seem, subjectively, to be smaller than the number that are high right now. I just don't think a good result is either "everyone is now at the level of the lowest", or "everyone is at the center, except the ones at the lowest".

    It was an either or question. Which is better, buffing or nerfing? You don’t respond with caramel when I ask if you like vanilla or chocolate more.

    OK, I'm sorry. Here is a response that matches the question asked: Your question is impossible to answer, because the real world is more complicated than that, and I can't reduce it to a simple "A or B" when the real answer is neither of them.

    I added the rest -- the "caramel" recommendation -- because I felt that simply saying "your question is incomplete and so unanswerable" and not adding anything more is unhelpful.

    I appreciate you can ask any question you like, in any framing you like, with any arbitrary restrictions you like, but ... I don't believe you get to have, how to put it... consequence-free speech here. Your post is public, and open to public comment, which means that you are subject to people who don't believe it is answerable telling you so.

  • Poelala.2830Poelala.2830 Member ✭✭✭
    Nerfing all classes

    @SlippyCheeze.5483 said:

    @Poelala.2830 said:

    @SlippyCheeze.5483 said:

    @Huskyboy.1053 said:

    @Poelala.2830 said:
    A ‘both’ option was ignored with intention and not by accident. A combination of buffs and nerfs is balance by definition. Why would I ask “Do you want everything balanced?” Of course you do. The core of the question was how do you think balance would be achieved in pvp’s current state? Generally by seeing a bunch of nerfs or by generally seeing a bunch of buffs? Most people agreed with me in thinking that classes need nerfs at the moment, not buffs. And through these nerfs would we find balance.

    According to the poll, the VAST majority of people agree with you. People saying it needs to be both are being too literal, I understand that you meant that the balanced team needs to change their perspective on balancing to be more focused on nerfing.

    FWIW, I think it is entirely possible to hold the "both" opinion, and that the way @Poelala.2830 puts it isn't actually the right way to think about this, without being over-literal in reading the question. (Though, of course, it is their post, and I accept that they are empowered to judge my comments any way they want.)

    I think that, right now, most classes sit in a reasonable position in GW2. If you drew a graph of their DPS over time, most would be clustered fairly closely in the center, with a few distinct outliers above and below that single line, across the population.

    When I say both are needed, I mean that center line is actually, IMO, a reasonable position: not too strong, and not too weak, but rather, pretty good. So, bringing those outliers closer to the center is the best way to deliver overall a good result. If you just focus on bringing everything down to the lowest line, or raising them up to the highest line, you end up with a game where damage etc are either too low (and slow, and feel bad) or too high (and fast, and feel bad, because really it isn't much fun after the first time you one-shot everyone else.)

    I completely agree that most of what needs to happen is probably power reductions on a few specs. The number that are low seem, subjectively, to be smaller than the number that are high right now. I just don't think a good result is either "everyone is now at the level of the lowest", or "everyone is at the center, except the ones at the lowest".

    It was an either or question. Which is better, buffing or nerfing? You don’t respond with caramel when I ask if you like vanilla or chocolate more.

    OK, I'm sorry. Here is a response that matches the question asked: Your question is impossible to answer, because the real world is more complicated than that, and I can't reduce it to a simple "A or B" when the real answer is neither of them.

    I added the rest -- the "caramel" recommendation -- because I felt that simply saying "your question is incomplete and so unanswerable" and not adding anything more is unhelpful.

    I appreciate you can ask any question you like, in any framing you like, with any arbitrary restrictions you like, but ... I don't believe you get to have, how to put it... consequence-free speech here. Your post is public, and open to public comment, which means that you are subject to people who don't believe it is answerable telling you so.

    But you did answer it, and your answer was nerfing. Your same logic in that answer is the same logic everyone else who answered that way thought about it.

  • SlippyCheeze.5483SlippyCheeze.5483 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Poelala.2830 said:

    @SlippyCheeze.5483 said:

    @Poelala.2830 said:

    @SlippyCheeze.5483 said:

    @Huskyboy.1053 said:

    @Poelala.2830 said:
    A ‘both’ option was ignored with intention and not by accident. A combination of buffs and nerfs is balance by definition. Why would I ask “Do you want everything balanced?” Of course you do. The core of the question was how do you think balance would be achieved in pvp’s current state? Generally by seeing a bunch of nerfs or by generally seeing a bunch of buffs? Most people agreed with me in thinking that classes need nerfs at the moment, not buffs. And through these nerfs would we find balance.

    According to the poll, the VAST majority of people agree with you. People saying it needs to be both are being too literal, I understand that you meant that the balanced team needs to change their perspective on balancing to be more focused on nerfing.

    FWIW, I think it is entirely possible to hold the "both" opinion, and that the way @Poelala.2830 puts it isn't actually the right way to think about this, without being over-literal in reading the question. (Though, of course, it is their post, and I accept that they are empowered to judge my comments any way they want.)

    I think that, right now, most classes sit in a reasonable position in GW2. If you drew a graph of their DPS over time, most would be clustered fairly closely in the center, with a few distinct outliers above and below that single line, across the population.

    When I say both are needed, I mean that center line is actually, IMO, a reasonable position: not too strong, and not too weak, but rather, pretty good. So, bringing those outliers closer to the center is the best way to deliver overall a good result. If you just focus on bringing everything down to the lowest line, or raising them up to the highest line, you end up with a game where damage etc are either too low (and slow, and feel bad) or too high (and fast, and feel bad, because really it isn't much fun after the first time you one-shot everyone else.)

    I completely agree that most of what needs to happen is probably power reductions on a few specs. The number that are low seem, subjectively, to be smaller than the number that are high right now. I just don't think a good result is either "everyone is now at the level of the lowest", or "everyone is at the center, except the ones at the lowest".

    It was an either or question. Which is better, buffing or nerfing? You don’t respond with caramel when I ask if you like vanilla or chocolate more.

    OK, I'm sorry. Here is a response that matches the question asked: Your question is impossible to answer, because the real world is more complicated than that, and I can't reduce it to a simple "A or B" when the real answer is neither of them.

    I added the rest -- the "caramel" recommendation -- because I felt that simply saying "your question is incomplete and so unanswerable" and not adding anything more is unhelpful.

    I appreciate you can ask any question you like, in any framing you like, with any arbitrary restrictions you like, but ... I don't believe you get to have, how to put it... consequence-free speech here. Your post is public, and open to public comment, which means that you are subject to people who don't believe it is answerable telling you so.

    But you did answer it, and your answer was nerfing. Your same logic in that answer is the same logic everyone else who answered that way thought about it.

    Huh. I definitely don't see it that way, but I do appreciate your explanation. I certainly agree that "bring everyone up to the current top end" is not the right answer, with those posters. Anyway, it is very useful to me to have this feedback on how my discussion was heard, which can be very hard to know in a forum like this.

    Thank you very much.

  • Huskyboy.1053Huskyboy.1053 Member ✭✭✭
    edited June 18, 2018
    Nerfing all classes

    @SlippyCheeze.5483 said:

    @Poelala.2830 said:

    @SlippyCheeze.5483 said:

    @Poelala.2830 said:

    @SlippyCheeze.5483 said:

    @Huskyboy.1053 said:

    @Poelala.2830 said:
    A ‘both’ option was ignored with intention and not by accident. A combination of buffs and nerfs is balance by definition. Why would I ask “Do you want everything balanced?” Of course you do. The core of the question was how do you think balance would be achieved in pvp’s current state? Generally by seeing a bunch of nerfs or by generally seeing a bunch of buffs? Most people agreed with me in thinking that classes need nerfs at the moment, not buffs. And through these nerfs would we find balance.

    According to the poll, the VAST majority of people agree with you. People saying it needs to be both are being too literal, I understand that you meant that the balanced team needs to change their perspective on balancing to be more focused on nerfing.

    FWIW, I think it is entirely possible to hold the "both" opinion, and that the way @Poelala.2830 puts it isn't actually the right way to think about this, without being over-literal in reading the question. (Though, of course, it is their post, and I accept that they are empowered to judge my comments any way they want.)

    I think that, right now, most classes sit in a reasonable position in GW2. If you drew a graph of their DPS over time, most would be clustered fairly closely in the center, with a few distinct outliers above and below that single line, across the population.

    When I say both are needed, I mean that center line is actually, IMO, a reasonable position: not too strong, and not too weak, but rather, pretty good. So, bringing those outliers closer to the center is the best way to deliver overall a good result. If you just focus on bringing everything down to the lowest line, or raising them up to the highest line, you end up with a game where damage etc are either too low (and slow, and feel bad) or too high (and fast, and feel bad, because really it isn't much fun after the first time you one-shot everyone else.)

    I completely agree that most of what needs to happen is probably power reductions on a few specs. The number that are low seem, subjectively, to be smaller than the number that are high right now. I just don't think a good result is either "everyone is now at the level of the lowest", or "everyone is at the center, except the ones at the lowest".

    It was an either or question. Which is better, buffing or nerfing? You don’t respond with caramel when I ask if you like vanilla or chocolate more.

    OK, I'm sorry. Here is a response that matches the question asked: Your question is impossible to answer, because the real world is more complicated than that, and I can't reduce it to a simple "A or B" when the real answer is neither of them.

    I added the rest -- the "caramel" recommendation -- because I felt that simply saying "your question is incomplete and so unanswerable" and not adding anything more is unhelpful.

    I appreciate you can ask any question you like, in any framing you like, with any arbitrary restrictions you like, but ... I don't believe you get to have, how to put it... consequence-free speech here. Your post is public, and open to public comment, which means that you are subject to people who don't believe it is answerable telling you so.

    But you did answer it, and your answer was nerfing. Your same logic in that answer is the same logic everyone else who answered that way thought about it.

    Huh. I definitely don't see it that way, but I do appreciate your explanation. I certainly agree that "bring everyone up to the current top end" is not the right answer, with those posters. Anyway, it is very useful to me to have this feedback on how my discussion was heard, which can be very hard to know in a forum like this.

    Thank you very much.

    I think we both agree that Poe could've worded this in a way that allowed for all possible answers, including some that aren't completely one way or the other; he simply chose not to, in the same way that the poll on whether or not Anet's changing of their social media logo was positive or negative deliberately did not include an "I don't care" option. If I'm understanding correctly, the point was to guide the discussion towards understanding which extreme the community prefers more.

  • Euthymias.7984Euthymias.7984 Member ✭✭✭
    edited June 18, 2018

    Buffing and Nerfing like that is too black and white.
    Even for the most "OP" professions, there are things that are underused that could use buffing while (GRADUALLY) toning down the over-performing aspects.
    There are also traits/abilities that should get reworks or sidegrades to make them viable (even if its not optimal) to expand build diversity.
    But most importantly - unexpected high levels of over-performance needs to be seen to in LESS than 3 months. Its fine if the devs want time to brainstorm a fix/nerf/rework for such things, but it shouldnt take more than one month or two months, especially with community feedback for alternatives. And speaking of dialogue, it would be GREAT to know exactly what level of performance and roles Anet Devs have in mind when it comes to the professions and specs, and explain how their changes are to push towards that goal - because some things in the patch notes just become headscratchers otherwise.

  • otto.5684otto.5684 Member ✭✭✭✭
    Nerfing all classes

    Man you did not give much options. As a general rule, nerfing outliers works better for class balance. Buffing leads to power creep and highly unstable game.

    I think what works best is creating a base line. Clearly not so easy in sPvP. But let’s hypothetically claim that ranger is performing at base line (not necessarily this is the case, just an example). Classes out perform it will need a nerf. Classes under perform it will need a buff.

  • Kovu.7560Kovu.7560 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited June 19, 2018
    Nerfing all classes

    Have any of you played Fire Emblem 10?
    Remember how units in that game promote twice instead of once resulting in a third tier?
    Remember how those overpowered third tier units were off the charts in the categories they specialized in? I.E. promoted knights could not be damaged, high strength axe users one shot everything (har Haar), units with abilities that proc'd sometimes based off their stats always proc'd and units with high speed/luck could be hit precisely 0% of the time?
    Third tiers were a bad idea. They didn't work with the core mechanics. That's why they haven't had a Fire Emblem game like that since.

    Same thing applies here. When the game came out in 2012 the professions were meticulously balanced around the core mechanics of the game. Lots of basic game elements such as hit point pools, dodging, the number of skills you have access to, the speed at which your character moves among others haven't been touched since day 1. However, because of a lot of skill changes, specialization additions, core mechanic changes, character abilities/traits and changes to stats among other changes (such as profession "balance" and sigil/rune changes/additions) the basic game elements don't interact with the professions as they are now in a way similar to how they interacted in 2012. The game was a lot more balanced back then and the extremes (burst and sustain) weren't nearly as lopsided both ways. As a result the game was, on the whole, funner for everyone.

    So we need to take a step back. Obviously some professions more than others (I have my opinions on that, but I'll save it for another thread) but on the whole everything both on the offensive end of things and on the defensive need to be toned down so that everyone feels a little more effective in their fights whilst never being too potent.

    There's probably an expression (I mean aside from "power creep") for the last three paragraphs, but I don't know it. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
    Time to revisit some old Extra Credits videos.

    ~ Kovu

    Ranger main before it was cool.
    Fort Aspenwood.

©2010–2018 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, Heart of Thorns, Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire, ArenaNet, NCSOFT, the Interlocking NC Logo, and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCSOFT Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.