nerfs where needed

the nerfs where needed and they are not as bad as some claim.ive played tons of mmos and this is the best dev team ive ever seen plus this is by far the best mmo on the market

I'm sorry, but concerning class-balance, this is by far one of the worst MMORPGs I've ever played. Even some cheap Free-to-Pay-MMORPGs offer better class-balance than GW2 does. The class-design in GW2 lacks both coherence and consistence. The game is far too focused on some sort of "flavor of the game-mode"-design and even in specific game-modes - especially (instanced) PvE - you have some "flavor of the encounter"-design where some classes are the king of the hill at encounter X while being utter trash at encounter Y. This is ludicrous. At least in PvE: Besides some overpowered, always needed classes like Chronomancer, Druid or Warrior, you barely have class-identity. That's a major flaw in MMORPG game-design.

@"Raizel.8175" said:I'm sorry, but concerning class-balance, this is by far one of the worst MMORPGs I've ever played. Even some cheap Free-to-Pay-MMORPGs offer better class-balance than GW2 does. The class-design in GW2 lacks both coherence and consistence. The game is far too focused on some sort of "flavor of the game-mode"-design and even in specific game-modes - especially (instanced) PvE - you have some "flavor of the encounter"-design where some classes are the king of the hill at encounter X while being utter trash at encounter Y. This is ludicrous. At least in PvE: Besides some overpowered, always needed classes like Chronomancer, Druid or Warrior, you barely have class-identity. That's a major flaw in MMORPG game-design.

I agree. The idea of anyone can be anything to the detriment of the holy-trinity, it backfired.

@"robert.3475" said:the nerfs where needed and they are not as bad as some claim.ive played tons of mmos and this is the best dev team ive ever seen plus this is by far the best mmo on the market

Thats a broad statement to be made with no frame of reference. I could make this same claim (which can only be implied as mutually exclusive) for at least 2 other MMOs, and still find a thousand faults within each. The real issue is one that has existed since the beginning of software games....... people have a loss aversion, coupled with the delusion of infinite improvement. IE: the only acceptable change is upward/stronger/better, making the whole concept of "balance" a fundamental negative that, ironically, must be achieved in order for anything to function. "Everything MUST be balanced.... unless its something I like".

The big issue with this whole discussion right now is no common frame of reference for what the ideal situation should be. Partly this is due to the narrow scope of the metrics used..... but mostly boils down to the fact that people can't agree on what those metrics means. Most argue the damage potential is balanced by Risk vs Reward..... but they often say the same thing about Genji in Overwatch, a build to which no other build can compete with once the skill cap is reached. The real question most folks are avoiding is..... should the Ele be normalized, or should the other builds be expanded to follow the same model?

@"Raizel.8175" said:I'm sorry, but concerning class-balance, this is by far one of the worst MMORPGs I've ever played. Even some cheap Free-to-Pay-MMORPGs offer better class-balance than GW2 does. The class-design in GW2 lacks both coherence and consistence. The game is far too focused on some sort of "flavor of the game-mode"-design and even in specific game-modes - especially (instanced) PvE - you have some "flavor of the encounter"-design where some classes are the king of the hill at encounter X while being utter trash at encounter Y. This is ludicrous. At least in PvE: Besides some overpowered, always needed classes like Chronomancer, Druid or Warrior, you barely have class-identity. That's a major flaw in MMORPG game-design.

You need to explain why you are still here

I have my doctorate in Important Game Opinions from Smart University and in my professional capacity as a human garbage disposal and wastepaper basket I would like to say that I am appalled with the decision to turn the Thief profession into the Daffodil Kisser and that this needs some dedicated reworking if it's going to be viable in endgame content [roleplaying as a Hapsburg]

@ugrakarma.9416 said:

@"Raizel.8175" said:I'm sorry, but concerning class-balance, this is by far one of the worst MMORPGs I've ever played. Even some cheap Free-to-Pay-MMORPGs offer better class-balance than GW2 does. The class-design in GW2 lacks both coherence and consistence. The game is far too focused on some sort of "flavor of the game-mode"-design and even in specific game-modes - especially (instanced) PvE - you have some "flavor of the encounter"-design where some classes are the king of the hill at encounter X while being utter trash at encounter Y. This is ludicrous. At least in PvE: Besides some overpowered, always needed classes like Chronomancer, Druid or Warrior, you barely have class-identity. That's a major flaw in MMORPG game-design.

But did it?

GW2 is somewhat unique imo, with regards to at least open world PvE, as you can pick any profession, any race/gender, and use any of the allowed weapons or stat combinations (eg. power, condi, sustain/healing), and still be successful in playing the game. Some professions and loadouts will be more successful, but if you really really want to play Ranger with LB + D/D wearing Celestial Gear, you certainly can complete hearts, metas and personal story. I don't think that is something that should be ignored.

To your point about "some overpowered, always needed classes", that's true for pretty much all the MMOs I played, at least at one time. Thinking back to WoW for example, there were plenty of times where your tank was a Warrior, end of discussion, your tank healer was a Paladin and the group/raid healer was a Druid. Mages were Arcane, Warlocks were shadow, Hunters were Beastmastery, etc... Now to combat this, Blizzard went on a purge of class uniqueness to the point where every spec of every class was viable, but each spec/class was a shadow of their former glory, with very little difference in what they brought to an encounter - it all came to the look of the class and their rotation, everything else was the same. Boooorrrrrring.

I'd also counter that the "some overpowered, always needed classes" part only applies to certain game modes, and only at certain levels. For example, if you're running T4 without a Chrono, you're just making it harder for yourself, but nobody 'needs' a Chrono at T1/T2, or even really T3. Raiding, sure, is all about min / max, but you can complete all other group content (dungeons/fractals/metas/world bosses) with a wide variety of professions and builds. WvW currently has a pretty narrow meta, but only for zerging. If you want to solo roam or havoc, you have more options (still limited, I agree). AND, that is only if you really intend to conquer at T1 level. But if you just want to go into WvW and pew pew other players, you can pick and play whatever you want, and while you won't be as successful, you can still have fun and still participate, though your teammates will have to carry you a bit.

So in my opinion anyways, class balance is something I've rarely, if ever, seen in a multiplayer game. There will always be FoTM OP classes, and there will be others that are "plz switch", and then a round of nerfs and buffs come and everything gets shaken up again - that is life outside of single player games. I don't think ANET is any better or any worse than any other developer, but I will say this: for casual play, I've yet to see an MMO that allowed me so much choice in how I play the game (again, open world). I think that is something that should be applauded.

The Magnum Opus will an all Thief Meta, where all builds are just DPS, and all the other roles are considered, at best redundant, or otherwise just a plain liability. This is THE problem with how "players" are using the meta.... the goal of a perfect efficiency where all risks are mitigated, clears are fast and reliable, and anything less (ie sub-optimal) should be purged from the group.

The question here is whats most valuable. Most players would quickly call out diversity and balance in classes as being most important. But I would call that out in a heart beat; because in practice they will pick the easiest path to the reward, until the reward no longer interests them. Everything else is just an anecdote to how it unfolds.

@"Raizel.8175" said:... The game is far too focused on some sort of "flavor of the game-mode"-design and even in specific game-modes - especially (instanced) PvE - you have some "flavor of the encounter"-design where some classes are the king of the hill at encounter X while being utter trash at encounter Y. This is ludicrous. At least in PvE: Besides some overpowered, always needed classes like Chronomancer, Druid or Warrior, you barely have class-identity. That's a major flaw in MMORPG game-design.

Most of the things you are describing are the ones that keeps me playing GW2 and loving each second of it. You see, for me the few classes that become mandatory are the only problem that remain to solve, the others got plenty of identity without needing to be OP.

@robert.3475 said:the nerfs where needed and they are not as bad as some claim.ive played tons of mmos and this is the best dev team ive ever seen plus this is by far the best mmo on the market

Best MMO in the market? I agree. Best dev team? That is very vague. I think the world/map development team was one of the best in all gaming industry, until PoF was released. Balance team opperates in theory world and ignore most feedback. Story, it never really was GW2 strong point and no one plays the game for it.

Even with Though map quality has dropped much lately, I think it is still GW2 strongest suit. Combat is solid, but imbalanced.

@"robert.3475" said:the nerfs where needed and they are not as bad as some claim.Some nerfs were needed. Some were needed, but were applied in wrong places. Others were dubious at best, harmful at worst. And some should have been balanced by buffs, because their net results without those balancing buffs were way bigger than just "bad".

@otto.5684 said:

@robert.3475 said:the nerfs where needed and they are not as bad as some claim.ive played tons of mmos and this is the best dev team ive ever seen plus this is by far the best mmo on the market

Tons of people play this game for the story, I wouldn't make that assumption. There are constantly people talking about lore, what happened in the past, and where we are going in the future.

The balancing around this game is "nerf this, nerf that", not "bring this class up to par, and that class up to par" like it should be.

The problem with nerfing is people spend time, a lot of time investing into a character and class, and in some cases money, only to have the spec wiped out allowing no other spec on the class to fit their play style. This just happened to me and I just realized it, I opened up a bunch of bag slots on 1 class I tend to play the majority of the time only to have class get repeatedly knee-capped to the point it no longer makes sense to play them. This would be fine if bag slots were opened up across all characters, but they aren't.

@Klowdy.3126 said:

@otto.5684 said:

@robert.3475 said:the nerfs where needed and they are not as bad as some claim.ive played tons of mmos and this is the best dev team ive ever seen plus this is by far the best mmo on the market

I think when he was talking about map quality he means the story, and pve in general.

@Turkeyspit.3965 said:

@ugrakarma.9416 said:

@"Raizel.8175" said:I'm sorry, but concerning class-balance, this is by far one of the worst MMORPGs I've ever played. Even some cheap Free-to-Pay-MMORPGs offer better class-balance than GW2 does. The class-design in GW2 lacks both coherence and consistence. The game is far too focused on some sort of "flavor of the game-mode"-design and even in specific game-modes - especially (instanced) PvE - you have some "flavor of the encounter"-design where some classes are the king of the hill at encounter X while being utter trash at encounter Y. This is ludicrous. At least in PvE: Besides some overpowered, always needed classes like Chronomancer, Druid or Warrior, you barely have class-identity. That's a major flaw in MMORPG game-design.

Exactly, but WoW never promised to remove the holy trinity.

I'd also counter that the "some overpowered, always needed classes" part only applies to certain game modes, and only at certain levels. For example, if you're running T4 without a Chrono, you're just making it harder for yourself, but nobody 'needs' a Chrono at T1/T2, or even really T3. Raiding, sure, is all about min / max, but you can complete all other group content (dungeons/fractals/metas/world bosses) with a wide variety of professions and builds. WvW currently has a pretty narrow meta, but only for zerging. If you want to solo roam or havoc, you have more options (still limited, I agree). AND, that is only if you really intend to conquer at T1 level. But if you just want to go into WvW and pew pew other players, you can pick and play whatever you want, and while you won't be as successful, you can still have fun and still participate, though your teammates will have to carry you a bit.

Nobody needs a healer in WoW, or a tank, or anything. The holy trinity is only needed if you want the "optimal" engagment. There's no magical guardian pushing you away from dungeons preventing you from doing them if you don't have the exact correct comp, in any MMORPG out there.

So in my opinion anyways, class balance is something I've rarely, if ever, seen in a multiplayer game. There will always be FoTM OP classes, and there will be others that are "plz switch", and then a round of nerfs and buffs come and everything gets shaken up again - that is life outside of single player games. I don't think ANET is any better or any worse than any other developer, but I will say this: for casual play, I've yet to see an MMO that allowed me so much choice in how I play the game (again, open world). I think that is something that should be applauded.

Arena Net is pretty much the worse out of their competition. And it's by a simple metric. Their inflexibility. They've decided that balance patches will be in a certain schedule, and barring a class burning down the servers or something like that, they don't care how bad things are, that schedule will be kept. And with such a long schedule, they do a piss-poor job of it.League of Legends has 128 champions to balance (i think it's 128) and yet they do it pretty well, every 2 weeks. Black Desert online releases a patch weekly, some of it content, some of it patches. PvP there is quite balanced, i hear, if you're not getting ganked by the strongest guy in a server than can go one vs entire guilds... Warframe, pretty balanced, way more classes and combinations than this game, definetly, i could keep going, but it's late.

Making excuses for the devs is what led the company to have to fire one of it's oldest, and one of it's most important narrative designers.

Some of what GW2 does works, and some of it doesn't. For instance, I really like the way the weapons you choose determine your playstyle. But at the same time it feels extremely limiting because most builds only have a couple of realistic options to choose from. To make matters worse, group support usually makes it most effective to rely on one weapon set that deals maximum damage, perhaps swapping between two off-hands (but not really changing up the playstyle significantly).

The non-trinity style is another area. If there are truly no group roles whatsoever, the result is that all classes essentially serve the same purpose. The moment you try to introduce these roles, you end up with essential classes like chronomancer and druid because everyone else is basically just there to provide damage and unique class buffs.

That's not to say that GW2 doesn't have some really great stuff. HoT's open world is simply amazing, like nothing I've ever seen before from an MMO. And the combat system feels awesome. I love the speed and mobility!

It just feels like a mixed bag to me. And perhaps every MMO is, when it comes down to it.

@Klowdy.3126 said:

@otto.5684 said:

@robert.3475 said:the nerfs where needed and they are not as bad as some claim.ive played tons of mmos and this is the best dev team ive ever seen plus this is by far the best mmo on the market

Lore in GW2 is solid. I view lore more part of the world building. Story the other hand...

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Klowdy.3126 said:

@otto.5684 said:

@robert.3475 said:the nerfs where needed and they are not as bad as some claim.ive played tons of mmos and this is the best dev team ive ever seen plus this is by far the best mmo on the market

@Turkeyspit.3965 said:

@ugrakarma.9416 said:

@"Raizel.8175" said:I'm sorry, but concerning class-balance, this is by far one of the worst MMORPGs I've ever played. Even some cheap Free-to-Pay-MMORPGs offer better class-balance than GW2 does. The class-design in GW2 lacks both coherence and consistence. The game is far too focused on some sort of "flavor of the game-mode"-design and even in specific game-modes - especially (instanced) PvE - you have some "flavor of the encounter"-design where some classes are the king of the hill at encounter X while being utter trash at encounter Y. This is ludicrous. At least in PvE: Besides some overpowered, always needed classes like Chronomancer, Druid or Warrior, you barely have class-identity. That's a major flaw in MMORPG game-design.

I'd also counter that the "some overpowered, always needed classes" part only applies to certain game modes, and only at certain levels. For example, if you're running T4 without a Chrono, you're just making it harder for yourself, but nobody 'needs' a Chrono at T1/T2, or even really T3. Raiding, sure, is all about min / max, but you can complete all other group content (dungeons/fractals/metas/world bosses) with a wide variety of professions and builds. WvW currently has a pretty narrow meta, but only for zerging. If you want to solo roam or havoc, you have more options (still limited, I agree). AND, that is only if you really intend to conquer at T1 level. But if you just want to go into WvW and pew pew other players, you can pick and play whatever you want, and while you won't be as successful, you can still have fun and still participate, though your teammates will have to carry you a bit.

Nobody needs a healer in WoW, or a tank, or anything. The holy trinity is only needed if you want the "optimal" engagment. There's no magical guardian pushing you away from dungeons preventing you from doing them if you don't have the exact correct comp, in any MMORPG out there.

So in my opinion anyways, class balance is something I've rarely, if ever, seen in a multiplayer game. There will always be FoTM OP classes, and there will be others that are "plz switch", and then a round of nerfs and buffs come and everything gets shaken up again - that is life outside of single player games. I don't think ANET is any better or any worse than any other developer, but I will say this: for casual play, I've yet to see an MMO that allowed me so much choice in how I play the game (again, open world). I think that is something that should be applauded.

Arena Net is pretty much the worse out of their competition. And it's by a simple metric. Their inflexibility. They've decided that balance patches will be in a certain schedule, and barring a class burning down the servers or something like that, they don't care how bad things are, that schedule will be kept. And with such a long schedule, they do a kitten-poor job of it.League of Legends has 128 champions to balance (i think it's 128) and yet they do it pretty well, every 2 weeks. Black Desert online releases a patch weekly, some of it content, some of it patches. PvP there is quite balanced, i hear, if you're not getting ganked by the strongest guy in a server than can go one vs entire guilds... Warframe, pretty balanced, way more classes and combinations than this game, definetly, i could keep going, but it's late.

This Exactly. Gw2 has no reason for why they can not deliver what they should in this game by now. Their numbers in profits always come back positive, yet their releases are usually mediocre content in the end. If we are paying, are they not suppose to cater to the customers interest?? What the issue is, is that many have slapped them on the wrist for releasing awesome skins and living world and pve content, but with this game having being built with pvp in mind, their pvp and wvw scene is almost dead which makes up more than half the other game! the customers interest are being ignored and its a shame to see how balance is basically like dictatorship in this game. I thought WoW balance was unfair, but GW2 takes the cake.

@"DeadlySynz.3471" said:The balancing around this game is "nerf this, nerf that", not "bring this class up to par, and that class up to par" like it should be.

The problem with nerfing is people spend time, a lot of time investing into a character and class, and in some cases money, only to have the spec wiped out allowing no other spec on the class to fit their play style.The feeling that your spec became useless compared to another spec that performs much much better but that you simply don't like to play, it's quite common, unfortunately. I feel the same.

But I disagree with you when you say that ANet should balance the specs boosting the weakest ones, rather than nerfing the most powerful. In the end, the important is that every spec performs more or less on par with others. If you reach this balance using nerfs or boosts, it doesn't really matter. If you decide to boost instead of nerfing, you create potentially more gap between a geared player and a casual. The game would punish you more if you do some mistake during a fight and sinergies between classes could create broken effects. There's no reason to go high.

I think that they should stop to balance classes touching old traits. The more we go ahead, the more specs are added to the game, the more chaos you create when you change a single trait. This could go out of control. I'm really scared if I think that next year we might receive another spec, when the classes are still not balanced. You have to think about core players, players with the first expansion, the second... If you want to slightly nerf a spec, you should nerf a trait of that spec, or even better, reduce the damage of that weapon. Not nerfing a trait of the core tree. This would affect every spec, and not with the same amount of dmg loss.

Nerfs are never needed. Buffs are far more fun! Make weak classes stronger. All we want to do is HUGE amounts of damage, don't we? ;)

@Alek Seven.2374 said:

@"Raizel.8175" said:I'm sorry, but concerning class-balance, this is by far one of the worst MMORPGs I've ever played. Even some cheap Free-to-Pay-MMORPGs offer better class-balance than GW2 does. The class-design in GW2 lacks both coherence and consistence. The game is far too focused on some sort of "flavor of the game-mode"-design and even in specific game-modes - especially (instanced) PvE - you have some "flavor of the encounter"-design where some classes are the king of the hill at encounter X while being utter trash at encounter Y. This is ludicrous. At least in PvE: Besides some overpowered, always needed classes like Chronomancer, Druid or Warrior, you barely have class-identity. That's a major flaw in MMORPG game-design.

There's something called "emotional investment" that keeps a lot of MMORPGs alive. Especially older MMORPGs like WoW. Plus, the current MMORPG-landscape is quite a wasteland. You have a lot of new Free-to-P(l)ay MMORPGs that almost instantly burn out due to the greed of their publishers. In that regard, even with all its fundamental flaws, GW2 is still one of the better options.

@ugrakarma.9416 said:

@"Raizel.8175" said:I'm sorry, but concerning class-balance, this is by far one of the worst MMORPGs I've ever played. Even some cheap Free-to-Pay-MMORPGs offer better class-balance than GW2 does. The class-design in GW2 lacks both coherence and consistence. The game is far too focused on some sort of "flavor of the game-mode"-design and even in specific game-modes - especially (instanced) PvE - you have some "flavor of the encounter"-design where some classes are the king of the hill at encounter X while being utter trash at encounter Y. This is ludicrous. At least in PvE: Besides some overpowered, always needed classes like Chronomancer, Druid or Warrior, you barely have class-identity. That's a major flaw in MMORPG game-design.

The problem with ArenaNets trinity-concept is that it's far too narrow-minded. Gameplay-wise, GW2 features the strictest trinity I've ever seen in any MMORPG due to the stacking of multiple roles on a select few classes (both Chrono as tank and Druid as healer are both also the most atrocious boon-bots). That design choice makes the affected classes mandatory. In more traditional MMORPGs, you either have more variety (tanks with high survivability and aggro-potential, off-tank with les survivability but a lot more dps, healers with strong healing-capabilities, off-healers as supporters with weak healing-capabilities but group-support, a variation of several dps-classes) or you don't have that many classes to begin with (maybe one dedicated healer and one dedicated tank and two til four dps-specs). If ArenaNet wants more variety, it has to split the roles on Chrono and Druid and it needs to avoid commiting the same design-mistake again. For that, ArenaNet should consider implementing a proper aggro-system - at least in raids and fractals.

@Ardid.7203 said:

@"Raizel.8175" said:... The game is far too focused on some sort of "flavor of the game-mode"-design and even in specific game-modes - especially (instanced) PvE - you have some "flavor of the encounter"-design where some classes are the king of the hill at encounter X while being utter trash at encounter Y. This is ludicrous. At least in PvE: Besides some overpowered, always needed classes like Chronomancer, Druid or Warrior, you barely have class-identity. That's a major flaw in MMORPG game-design.

Where is the class-identity apart from the perpetually overpowered/underpowered classes? There is barely any theory-crafting like in other games. The game is simply far too unbalanced. In a game, where you have too many classes (and almost all classes are dps), you can't have huge gaps in dps-potentials 'cause that devalues the weaker classes alltogether. Something like maybe 10%-15% is acceptable, but not any more (and even 15% is already huge). As a decent game-dev, you have to balance properly because your customers deserve to be able to play the class they have fun with.

@Albadaran.1283 said:Nerfs are never needed. Buffs are far more fun! Make weak classes stronger. All we want to do is HUGE amounts of damage, don't we? ;)

There's a give and take, the problem with GW2 is that they rarely give.Well, they give too much when Elite specs release, then they spend the rest of the time taking from the wrong places.