Jump to content
  • Sign Up

It's unfair this part of my build got nerfed as collateral damage. My build wasn't OP!


mortrialus.3062

Recommended Posts

I wanted to talk about something I see a lot from players. It's something I've saw all the time all throughout the core game and while it's changed a bit post Heart of Thorns it's still omnipresent.

And that's the notion of "OMG its so unfair my build got nerfed because it shared some aspect of this other build that was OP, deserved to be nerfed. But mine wasn't OP and didn't!' Over time, this particularly complaint has morphed into "Don't nerf core just to hit the Elite Specialiation! It's the elite specialization that's OP!"

Now, I certainly get the annoyance with suffering nerfs and your play style getting caught up in nerfs directed towards other builds. I dunno, I just figured we'd be over this already. I figured we'd all understand that the health of the meta overall is more important than any one individual build.

This knee jerk pear clutching over the idea of nerfing core traits is so tired. We have had 6 years of nerfing traits, weapons, and utilities and people crying "Why did you nerf X trait!? I used that trait in my non-meta spec and my spec wasn't over powered! It's not fair I get nerfed too when its the other spec that's over powered."

We've had 4 years of core traits getting nerfed along side elite specialization nerfs when the Elite Specialization is overperforming.

I'm going to let you in on a little math lesson. If core traits traits of a particular profession get nerfed because a meta Elite Specialization has been an overperforming top tier build , it unfairly impacts the 20 or so people running the core profession out there and fairly impacts literally everyone else playing every other profession and build in the game.

My general personal philosophy when it comes to balance has always been:

  1. Every profession has at least one build that can be played at the meta level. Doesn't particularly matter if it's a core build or an elite specialization. Everything past 1 is gravy. Tasty gravy but gravy.
  2. There are multiple viable options for every single role in conquest; Multiple viable Support, multiple viable Team Damage, Multiple viable roamers, and multiple viable 1vX dueling builds. Right now we need more support builds desperately and absolutely not more 1vX duelists.
  3. If an elite specialization has a build that performs too well (Or several builds), core traits, skills and specializations are never, ever safe from being adjusted in response because a healthy meta overall is more important than individual builds, and as long as each profession has one build that's still great after the nerfs.

We're never going to see a meta where all professions are run 100% equally, and all professions and elite specializations are all equal in performance and usage. We're never going to see a meta where the warrior population is 33% core, 33% berserker, 33% spellbreaker. It's just not going to happen. Even looking at Evo and other competative games, you usually see about half of all characters completely abandoned at the high end and just not run. The good ones still have plenty of options with interesting metas and match ups and with the potential for surprises as well. Heck, how many Magic The Gather cards are around that have never ever seen any kind of serious play? Pokemon gets millions of viewers for the world tournaments and is one of the most popular games in the world and what 10% of all pokemon ever see use in the world tournament. Best case scenario for GW2's balance is likely going to look like fighting games and Mobas, with about 50% of all core and elites being considered high end viable.

Besides there's a lot of toxic and unfairly designed stuff in the core profession as well, even if the core isn't run all that widely. There's a reason most top tier players find Mantra of Pain and Mantra of Distraction with Power Block extremely obnoxious to fight against. It's long range and have absolutely no tell or wind up. No one likes how passive Evasive Mirror is and it's very high up time. No one likes Burred Inscription's invulnerability. Chaos's traitline provides crazy amounts of sustain. Stuff like this is in all the core traitlines, passive on health % saves, instant cast damage, free passive knock downs. Just because the core profession isn't dominating right now, doesn't mean it's core traits are good for the game at large and aren't toxic. I mean heck, Mirage managed to ruin Sigil of Energy and Rune of Adventure for everyone.

Just wanted to vent my frustrations against this particular philosophy. Guild Wars 2 has never had a philosophy of laser focused nerfs that only impact one build at a time ever. Not once in it's lifetime. People have complained about collateral damage nerfing in Pre-HOT. They've complained about it during HOT and they still complain about it as if never under any circumstances nerfing core traitlines, skills, and weapon loadouts is a good philosophy to have if the core profession isn't meta.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Quadox.7834 said:Tldr but if this is about nerfing core to nerf elite specs I disagree for the most part. It's better in the long run to fix the problems at their source.

Define source. People hated the 30 confusion stacks Illusions Ineptitude Mirage but 70% of that was JUST from core traits. Builds are like decks of cards with tons of moving pieces. It's actually quite rare for one trait or aspect of the elite specialization to so clearly super charge the whole thing into being OP like with pre-nerf Elusive Mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@mortrialus.3062 said:

My general personal philosophy when it comes to balance has always been:

  1. Every profession has at least one build that can be played at the meta level. Doesn't particularly matter if it's a core build or an elite specialization. Everything past 1 is gravy. Tasty gravy but gravy.

Wow, that bar is so low I don't even have to lift my foot to step over it. What concoction of factors resulted in your bar for game variety dropping so low?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ovark.2514 said:

My general personal philosophy when it comes to balance has always been:
  1. Every profession has at least one build that can be played at the meta level. Doesn't particularly matter if it's a core build or an elite specialization. Everything past 1 is gravy. Tasty gravy but gravy.

Wow, that bar is so low I don't even have to lift my foot to step over it. What concoction of factors resulted in your bar for game variety dropping so low?

About a few years of Ele's only moderately good build being one of the most limp feeling blobs to have ever existed in the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

im fine if op core stuff gets nerfed, but more often then not core up stuff gets nerfed for no reason.lets talk about soulbeast and beastmastery for a sec. sb gaining all of their pets passive traits is pretty strong, possibly op. that along with sic em is definitely op. which would make more sense, nerfing all the beastmastery traits along with sic em, or nerfing the amount sb gets when merged?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:im fine if op core stuff gets nerfed, but more often then not core up stuff gets nerfed for no reason.lets talk about soulbeast and beastmastery for a sec. sb gaining all of their pets passive traits is pretty strong, possibly op. that along with sic em is definitely op. which would make more sense, nerfing all the beastmastery traits along with sic em, or nerfing the amount sb gets when merged?

Nerfing longbow?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@mortrialus.3062 said:

My general personal philosophy when it comes to balance has always been:
  1. Every profession has at least one build that can be played at the meta level. Doesn't particularly matter if it's a core build or an elite specialization. Everything past 1 is gravy. Tasty gravy but gravy.

Wow, that bar is so low I don't even have to lift my foot to step over it. What concoction of factors resulted in your bar for game variety dropping so low?

About a few years of Ele's only moderately good build being one of the most limp feeling blobs to have ever existed in the game.

Nerf Weaver

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@mortrialus.3062 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:im fine if op core stuff gets nerfed, but more often then not core up stuff gets nerfed for no reason.lets talk about soulbeast and beastmastery for a sec. sb gaining all of their pets passive traits is pretty strong, possibly op. that along with sic em is definitely op. which would make more sense, nerfing all the beastmastery traits along with sic em, or nerfing the amount sb gets when merged?

Nerfing longbow?

its not just one weapon tho lol...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:im fine if op core stuff gets nerfed, but more often then not core up stuff gets nerfed for no reason.lets talk about soulbeast and beastmastery for a sec. sb gaining all of their pets passive traits is pretty strong, possibly op. that along with sic em is definitely op. which would make more sense, nerfing all the beastmastery traits along with sic em, or nerfing the amount sb gets when merged?

Nerfing longbow?

its not just one weapon tho lol...

Nerf automatic pet knock downs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We see ArenaNet nerf core traits all the time to tone down meta builds:

  • That doesn't make it the smart decision.
  • That further betrays the balance goal where elite specs are horizontal-profession instead of correcting this.

OP is basically telling people to shut up, because nerfing core specs is already common practice at ArenaNet.

I wonder if anyone can refute the notion that:

  • When an OP spec gets nerfed, limiting those nerfs to the elite spec is the best possible solution for game balance.

Why shouldn't there be constant negative feedback when core stuff is nerfed instead of elite spec mechanics to achieve the same result?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Chaith.8256" said:We see ArenaNet nerf core traits all the time to tone down meta builds:

  • That doesn't make it the smart decision.
  • That further betrays the balance goal where elite specs are horizontal-profession instead of correcting this.

OP is basically telling people to shut up, because nerfing core specs is already common practice at ArenaNet.

I wonder if anyone can refute the notion that:

  • When an OP spec gets nerfed, limiting those nerfs to the elite spec is the best possible solution for game balance.

Why shouldn't there be constant negative feedback when core stuff is nerfed instead of elite spec mechanics to achieve the same result?

Because most of the time it's not any one aspect of an elite specialization that makes it over powered. It's actually very rare for there to be a situation like Elusive Mind where there is so clearly one trait that's so obviously overpowered and toxic for the game. Holosmith's damage out put by itself is not problematic. It's holosmith combined with alchemy and over tuned healing skills that gives it far too much sustain for something with that much baseline damage. It's not mirage by itself that's over powered, it's mirage combined with deceptive evasion combined with chaos's inherent sturdiness. It's not Spellbreaker that's concerning. It's spellbreaker combined with the percentage modifiers of Strength and rampage having a low enough cooldown to be up every single fight. Ect. Ect.

The "Why nerf core when its the elite specialization" is the new "Why nerf fresh air damage when my fire fresh air healing support spec isn't op".

At the end of the day what happens to builds that are relevant with lots of people playing are relevant. What happens to builds that are irrelevant with next to no one playing are irrelevant. A nerf that unfairly impacts 20 players playing core engie is a greater good considering the quality of life improvements everyone else faces in terms of balance. Your philosophy on balance, for engineer to be made up of 33% core, 33% scrapper 33% holo in terms of usage and performance is an impossible pipe dream and getting there requires stripping everything interesting about builds. "Holosmith doing more damage than core engineer gives it an unfair edge so it should be nerfed so that it's equal to core engineer. Scrapper's tankiness makes it more tanky than core engineer and that's imbalanced."

.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:im fine if op core stuff gets nerfed, but more often then not core up stuff gets nerfed for no reason.lets talk about soulbeast and beastmastery for a sec. sb gaining all of their pets passive traits is pretty strong, possibly op. that along with sic em is definitely op. which would make more sense, nerfing all the beastmastery traits along with sic em, or nerfing the amount sb gets when merged?

Nerfing sic em (at least in PvP) makes the most sense, cuz the interaction of it giving 40% bonus damage to the player was not was the skill designed to do. Trying to figure the nerfs to pets and pet skills is a much more intensive endaver (though the most used pets probably need examining).

New elites will always result in new interactions with old skills. I would still give preference to nerfing elites first, but it is not always the right option.

@mortrialus.3062 For a game that will enter its seventh year, with 9 classes, 7 trailines each 50-60 skills, having 1 meta build per class (9 total), is the defention of epic fail. And that is really where balance is and continues to be since PoF release.

And you know what, I am willing to accept that new elites will take some time to sort out. But who the fuck thought that scourge shades at release were not broken. It does not even require any testing. Or FC at release. Or Bulwark just recently.. just basic logic should weed this stuff out. For fucks sake Anet pays people real money for that shit. Fucking fan boys can figure that out. I wonder if literally someone at Anet pulls something from a random number generator and makes a balance or design decision.

I dunno if the people who understood shit left, got fired or stopped caring. But saying that the balance is terrible, since PoF release, is significant understatement. We literally Hoping Anet can get 1 meta build per class fucking 7 years after game release...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@otto.5684 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:im fine if op core stuff gets nerfed, but more often then not core up stuff gets nerfed for no reason.lets talk about soulbeast and beastmastery for a sec. sb gaining all of their pets passive traits is pretty strong, possibly op. that along with sic em is definitely op. which would make more sense, nerfing all the beastmastery traits along with sic em, or nerfing the amount sb gets when merged?

Nerfing sic em (at least in PvP) makes the most sense, cuz the interaction of it giving 40% bonus damage to the player was not was the skill designed to do. Trying to figure the nerfs to pets and pet skills is a much more intensive endaver (though the most used pets probably need examining).

New elites will always result in new interactions with old skills. I would still give preference to nerfing elites first, but it is not always the right option.

@mortrialus.3062 For a game that will enter its seventh year, with 9 classes, 7 trailines each 50-60 skills, having 1 meta build per class (9 total), is the defention of epic fail. And that is really where balance is and continues to be since PoF release.

League of Legends is still going strong and 75% of its entire roster have a less than 5% pick rate. When you look at professional players opinions on the roster only about 30% are considered even viable. Now while League isn't the absolute king of competitive games anymore but its still going great in terms of population and viewer ship, it's still top 5 so certainly doing leagues better than guild wars 2. It's kind of almost like how a philophy of adding more options and asymmetries results in a more consistent and active user base than trying to carefully the roster is perfectly symmetrical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@mortrialus.3062 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:im fine if op core stuff gets nerfed, but more often then not core up stuff gets nerfed for no reason.lets talk about soulbeast and beastmastery for a sec. sb gaining all of their pets passive traits is pretty strong, possibly op. that along with sic em is definitely op. which would make more sense, nerfing all the beastmastery traits along with sic em, or nerfing the amount sb gets when merged?

Nerfing sic em (at least in PvP) makes the most sense, cuz the interaction of it giving 40% bonus damage to the player was not was the skill designed to do. Trying to figure the nerfs to pets and pet skills is a much more intensive endaver (though the most used pets probably need examining).

New elites will always result in new interactions with old skills. I would still give preference to nerfing elites first, but it is not always the right option.

@mortrialus.3062 For a game that will enter its seventh year, with 9 classes, 7 trailines each 50-60 skills, having 1 meta build per class (9 total), is the defention of epic fail. And that is really where balance is and continues to be since PoF release.

League of Legends is still going strong and 75% of its entire roster have a less than 5% pick rate. When you look at professional players opinions on the roster only about 30% are considered even viable. Now while League isn't the absolute king of competitive games anymore but its still going great in terms of population and viewer ship, it's still top 5 so certainly doing leagues better than guild wars 2. It's kind of almost like how a philophy of adding more options and asymmetries results in a more consistent and active user base than trying to carefully the roster is perfectly symmetrical.

I haven’t played LoL, but I played Dota for years. The balance in Dota was not perfect, but outside AT, almost all hero’s were competitive.

Also, I am not talking AT level, cuz you will never have more than dozen builds competitive at that level. But even there, most games tend to have limited competitive pool due to synergies, not cuz handful of builds are extremely stronger than the rest.

Why cannot we get 30-40 builds on near equal competition in gold 3? That is a fucking low bar, that the only reason GW2 we cannot cross as of late is either due to tardiness or incompetence (or both).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@mortrialus.3062 said:Holosmith's damage out put by itself is not problematic.

This is so incredibly short-sighted its like you have no imagination at all! You could easily nerf Holo sustain by ANY measure you want by adjusting Heat Therapy, increasing heat gains, nerfing Vent Exhaust. Trust me, there are vast ways to nerf a spec's offensive/defensive utility, damage, or sustain just by changing the elite spec's abilities and traits. This is a super absurd notion to be honest. You could nerf Heat therapy from anywhere between 30-90% to whatever balance goal your heart desires, and it'd just be a simple number change.

At the end of the day what happens to builds that are relevant with lots of people playing are relevant. What happens to builds that are irrelevant with next to no one playing are irrelevant.

I already addressed this, and you're just repeating yourself. The point is that you CAN properly nerf a spec properly just by creatively tweaking the elite spec (more creativity than you or ArenaNet possesses at this time), so instead of justifying nerfing with a broad brush as only nerfing 'irrelevant builds, so who cares', just very easily do it right way that will bring the game closer to horizontal progression instead of vertical. Now you made me repeat myself, stop it. :lol:

Your philosophy on balance, for engineer to be made up of 33% core, 33% scrapper 33% holo in terms of usage and performance is an impossible pipe dream

Don't try to make up a dumb idea, call it my balance philosophy and then attack it. Lol, that's absurd. I don't want equal outcome for every spec. This isn't affirmative action 101. This is keeping in line with ARENANET's philosophy where elite specs are not vertical progression, it's an anti-p2w philosophy that practically everyone in the entire game agrees with.

I don't expect equal representation between core and elite specs. But they should be closer to damn good alternatives instead of further.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Chaith.8256 said:

@mortrialus.3062 said:Holosmith's damage out put by itself is not problematic.

This is so incredibly short-sighted its like you have no imagination at all! You could easily nerf Holo sustain by ANY measure you want by adjusting Heat Therapy, increasing heat gains, nerfing Vent Exhaust. Trust me, there are vast ways to nerf a spec's offensive/defensive utility, damage, or sustain just by changing the elite spec's abilities and traits. This is a super absurd notion to be honest. You could nerf Heat therapy from anywhere between 30-90% to whatever balance goal your heart desires, and it'd just be a simple number change.

At the end of the day what happens to builds that are relevant with lots of people playing are relevant. What happens to builds that are irrelevant with next to no one playing are irrelevant.

I already addressed this, and you're just repeating yourself. The point is that you CAN properly nerf a spec properly just by creatively tweaking the elite spec (more creativity than you or ArenaNet possesses at this time), so instead of justifying nerfing with a broad brush as only nerfing 'irrelevant builds, so who cares', just very easily do it right way that will bring the game closer to horizontal progression instead of vertical. Now you made me repeat myself, stop it. :lol:

Your philosophy on balance, for engineer to be made up of 33% core, 33% scrapper 33% holo in terms of usage and performance is an impossible pipe dream

Don't try to make up a dumb idea, call it my balance philosophy and then attack it. Lol, that's absurd. I don't want equal outcome for every spec. This isn't affirmative action 101. This is keeping in line with ARENANET's philosophy where elite specs are not vertical progression, it's an anti-p2w philosophy that practically everyone in the entire game agrees with.

I don't expect equal representation between core and elite specs. But they should be closer to kitten good alternatives instead of further.

Though I am curious, what is your idea for core engi? Feels like the hardest one to execute out of all classes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@BlackTruth.6813 said:

@"mortrialus.3062" said:Holosmith's damage out put by itself is not problematic.

This is so incredibly short-sighted its like you have no imagination at all! You could easily nerf Holo sustain by ANY measure you want by adjusting Heat Therapy, increasing heat gains, nerfing Vent Exhaust. Trust me, there are vast ways to nerf a spec's offensive/defensive utility, damage, or sustain just by changing the elite spec's abilities and traits. This is a super absurd notion to be honest. You could nerf Heat therapy from anywhere between 30-90% to whatever balance goal your heart desires, and it'd just be a simple number change.

At the end of the day what happens to builds that are relevant with lots of people playing are relevant. What happens to builds that are irrelevant with next to no one playing are irrelevant.

I already addressed this, and you're just repeating yourself. The point is that you CAN properly nerf a spec properly just by creatively tweaking the elite spec (more creativity than you or ArenaNet possesses at this time), so instead of justifying nerfing with a broad brush as only nerfing 'irrelevant builds, so who cares', just very easily do it right way that will bring the game closer to horizontal progression instead of vertical. Now you made me repeat myself, stop it. :lol:

Your philosophy on balance, for engineer to be made up of 33% core, 33% scrapper 33% holo in terms of usage and performance is an impossible pipe dream

Don't try to make up a dumb idea, call it my balance philosophy and then attack it. Lol, that's absurd. I don't want equal outcome for every spec. This isn't affirmative action 101. This is keeping in line with ARENANET's philosophy where elite specs are not vertical progression, it's an anti-p2w philosophy that practically everyone in the entire game agrees with.

I don't expect equal representation between core and elite specs. But they should be closer to kitten good alternatives instead of further.

Though I am curious, what is your idea for core engi? Feels like the hardest one to execute out of all classes.

He has a big thread in the engi forums called "what is required for near perfect build diversity" or something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Chaith.8256 said:

@mortrialus.3062 said:Holosmith's damage out put by itself is not problematic.

This is so incredibly short-sighted its like you have no imagination at all! You could easily nerf Holo sustain by ANY measure you want by adjusting Heat Therapy, increasing heat gains, nerfing Vent Exhaust. Trust me, there are vast ways to nerf a spec's offensive/defensive utility, damage, or sustain just by changing the elite spec's abilities and traits. This is a super absurd notion to be honest. You could nerf Heat therapy from anywhere between 30-90% to whatever balance goal your heart desires, and it'd just be a simple number change.

And it would still never be the high risk high reward glass cannon it was intended to be, just because of alchemy+inventions and the most overtuned core healing skills in the game. You would need to adjust fundamentals in the specialization itself like just picking holosmith increases all incoming damage by 10%, or but reworking the entire mechanic of heat gains so that overheating is an actual risk every holosmith needs to be acutely aware of.

At the end of the day what happens to builds that are relevant with lots of people playing are relevant. What happens to builds that are irrelevant with next to no one playing are irrelevant.

I already addressed this, and you're just repeating yourself. The point is that you CAN properly nerf a spec properly just by creatively tweaking the elite spec (more creativity than you or ArenaNet possesses at this time), so instead of justifying nerfing with a broad brush as only nerfing 'irrelevant builds, so who cares', just very easily do it right way that will bring the game closer to horizontal progression instead of vertical. Now you made me repeat myself, stop it. :lol:

It's not my fault you're repeating yourself. I never invited you here in the first place. It's your choice to post.

Your philosophy on balance, for engineer to be made up of 33% core, 33% scrapper 33% holo in terms of usage and performance is an impossible pipe dream

Don't try to make up a dumb idea, call it my balance philosophy and then attack it. Lol, that's absurd. I don't want equal outcome for every spec.This isn't affirmative action 101. This is keeping in line with ARENANET's philosophy where elite specs are not vertical progression, it's an anti-p2w philosophy that practically everyone in the entire game agrees with.

I don't expect equal representation between core and elite specs. But they should be closer to kitten good alternatives instead of further.

You literally have a thread about making all aspects of engineer as good as possible so that literally anything can be run and be amazing with no regard for how any of it will synergize with the rest of it. Basically making ever skill and trait outrageously OP top tier once you actually take a look at how they synergize with each other outside of a vacuum.

Elite Specializations either 1. Add entirely new dimensions to a class (Such as druid with ranger opening up a way to be a pure healer) or add an extreme characterization to the class. You literally can't add an elite specialization that is offensively orientated like Holosmith that doesn't end up being more offensively powerful than engineer as a whole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While core traits shouldn't ever be immune to potential balance considerations, I still think that changing core traits and skills solely because of elite specs overperforming should be handled very delicately because build diversity is still important to the game. Sometimes core traits are simply overpowered and unhealthy for the game on any build and should be nerfed. Other times, it is only when it is combined with elite spec(s) that the problem arises. In these cases, I would rather they try to be more precise with their changes.One example I will bring up is Evasive Mirror. Did anyone ever complain about this trait before Mirage came to be? It is a fine trait on both core and Chrono, but Mirage adds absurdly stupid synergy to make it an overperforming trait. Why blanket nerf the trait when the nerfs can be split to just Mirage? ANet has shown that this is possible with Scourge and Corruption, and I applaud them for decisions like this because its impact is more precise and has less of a broad effect on off-meta builds.Yes, I am one of those people who plays off-meta builds, some of which are core. No, I don't ever expect my builds to ever become meta because I am simply playing them for fun, but I do find it frustrating when aspects of my builds are nerfed when the changes seem based out of convenience and laziness and there appears to be much more elegant solutions. This I do admit is subjective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Pterikdactyl.7630" said:I do find it frustrating when aspects of my builds are nerfed when the changes seem based out of convenience and laziness and there appears to be much more elegant solutions. This I do admit is subjective.

This happened in CoreGW2 before Elite Specializations were ever a thing as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"mortrialus.3062" said:And it would still never be the high risk high reward glass cannon it was intended to be, just because of alchemy+inventions and the most overtuned core healing skills in the game. You would need to adjust fundamentals in the specialization itself like just picking holosmith increases all incoming damage by 10%, or but reworking the entire mechanic of heat gains so that overheating is an actual risk every holosmith needs to be acutely aware of.

Well, I have all kinds of suggestions to nerf Holosmith, way better ideas than having picking Holosmith increase incoming damage by 10%.

You literally have a thread about making all aspects of engineer as good as possible so that literally anything can be run and be amazing with no regard for how any of it will synergize with the rest of it. Basically making ever skill and trait outrageously OP top tier once you actually take a look at how they synergize with each other outside of a vacuum.

Hm, no, I hold in very high regard for how my suggestions would synergize with the rest of specs. Feel free to go to my thread there and provide actual examples of what you're accusing me of.

Elite Specializations either 1. Add entirely new dimensions to a class (Such as druid with ranger opening up a way to be a pure healer) or add an extreme characterization to the class. You literally can't add an elite specialization that is offensively orientated like Holosmith that doesn't end up being more offensively powerful than engineer as a whole.

From a high level design perspective, Holosmith could & should be the melee mod to core Engineer. It doesn't "literally" have to be more offensively powerful as a whole, seeing Holosmith as the spec that does damage gooder is your own spin.

So you "literally" can, in fact Holosmith and core Engi right now are very comparable nukers. Comparing the successful builds of each, core engi builds have more burst potential & less defensive utility, side by side. How it works is that Holosmith doesn't have to spend build choices on damage, (unlike core) and in turn is able to do consistent damage while mostly building for defensive utility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@mortrialus.3062 said:

@mortrialus.3062 said:Holosmith's damage out put by itself is not problematic.

This is so incredibly short-sighted its like you have no imagination at all! You could easily nerf Holo sustain by ANY measure you want by adjusting Heat Therapy, increasing heat gains, nerfing Vent Exhaust. Trust me, there are vast ways to nerf a spec's offensive/defensive utility, damage, or sustain just by changing the elite spec's abilities and traits. This is a super absurd notion to be honest. You could nerf Heat therapy from anywhere between 30-90% to whatever balance goal your heart desires, and it'd just be a simple number change.

And it would still never be the high risk high reward glass cannon it was intended to be, just because of alchemy+inventions and the most overtuned core healing skills in the game. You would need to adjust fundamentals in the specialization itself like just picking holosmith increases all incoming damage by 10%, or but reworking the entire mechanic of heat gains so that overheating is an actual risk every holosmith needs to be acutely aware of.

A serious reduction in heat therapy is massive nerf in the sustain of holo. Increasing passive heat generation or heat generation on certain skills can reduce the damage output and survivability of holo. I'm not sure you understand how big of nerfs those would be:

  • Heat Therapy can theoretically heal over 6500 health per full heat cycle, which can happen nearly every 30 seconds.
  • Corona Burst provides a significant source of stability. Increasing heat gen on it will reduce damage output and make holos have to choose between stability or damage.
  • Holographic shockwave does large AoE CC and some fair damage. This is useful for both sustain and offense.
  • And the synergy between holo leap and invigorating speed allows for extra vigor, and therefore defense.

Changing the numbers on any of those could have massive balance impacts on holo without impacting core in the slightest.

@mortrialus.3062 said:

Your philosophy on balance, for engineer to be made up of 33% core, 33% scrapper 33% holo in terms of usage and performance is an impossible pipe dream

Don't try to make up a dumb idea, call it my balance philosophy and then attack it. Lol, that's absurd. I don't want equal outcome for every spec.This isn't affirmative action 101. This is keeping in line with ARENANET's philosophy where elite specs are not vertical progression, it's an anti-p2w philosophy that practically everyone in the entire game agrees with.

I don't expect equal representation between core and elite specs. But they should be closer to kitten good alternatives instead of further.

You literally have a thread about making all aspects of engineer as good as possible so that literally anything can be run and be amazing with no regard for how any of it will synergize with the rest of it. Basically making ever skill and trait outrageously OP top tier once you actually take a look at how they synergize with each other outside of a vacuum.

Way to summarize a several-years-long thread that's an attempt to fix unbalanced stuff without making it too powerful or too weak. Hasty generalization much?

If you read the thread, they're pretty good suggestions. I think some things don't go far enough, but they would generally be balanced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Vagrant.7206 said:

@mortrialus.3062 said:Holosmith's damage out put by itself is not problematic.

This is so incredibly short-sighted its like you have no imagination at all! You could easily nerf Holo sustain by ANY measure you want by adjusting Heat Therapy, increasing heat gains, nerfing Vent Exhaust. Trust me, there are vast ways to nerf a spec's offensive/defensive utility, damage, or sustain just by changing the elite spec's abilities and traits. This is a super absurd notion to be honest. You could nerf Heat therapy from anywhere between 30-90% to whatever balance goal your heart desires, and it'd just be a simple number change.

And it would still never be the high risk high reward glass cannon it was intended to be, just because of alchemy+inventions and the most overtuned core healing skills in the game. You would need to adjust fundamentals in the specialization itself like just picking holosmith increases all incoming damage by 10%, or but reworking the entire mechanic of heat gains so that overheating is an actual risk every holosmith needs to be acutely aware of.

A serious reduction in heat therapy is massive nerf in the sustain of holo. Increasing passive heat generation or heat generation on certain skills can reduce the damage output and survivability of holo. I'm not sure you understand how big of nerfs those would be:
  • Heat Therapy can theoretically heal over 6500 health per full heat cycle, which can happen nearly every 30 seconds.
  • Corona Burst provides a significant source of stability. Increasing heat gen on it will reduce damage output and make holos have to choose between stability or damage.
  • Holographic shockwave does large AoE CC and some fair damage. This is useful for both sustain and offense.
  • And the synergy between holo leap and invigorating speed allows for extra vigor, and therefore defense.

Changing the numbers on any of those could have massive balance impacts on holo without impacting core in the slightest.

Your philosophy on balance, for engineer to be made up of 33% core, 33% scrapper 33% holo in terms of usage and performance is an impossible pipe dream

Don't try to make up a dumb idea, call it my balance philosophy and then attack it. Lol, that's absurd. I don't want equal outcome for every spec.This isn't affirmative action 101. This is keeping in line with ARENANET's philosophy where elite specs are not vertical progression, it's an anti-p2w philosophy that practically everyone in the entire game agrees with.

I don't expect equal representation between core and elite specs. But they should be closer to kitten good alternatives instead of further.

You literally have a thread about making all aspects of engineer as good as possible so that literally anything can be run and be amazing with no regard for how any of it will synergize with the rest of it. Basically making ever skill and trait outrageously OP top tier once you actually take a look at how they synergize with each other outside of a vacuum.

Way to summarize a several-years-long thread that's an attempt to fix unbalanced stuff without making it too powerful or too weak. Hasty generalization much?

If you
, they're pretty good suggestions. I think some things don't go far enough, but they would generally be balanced.

To use Holosmith as an example, you could remove Heat Therapy entirely as well as every single Holosmith skill and trait and leave nothing except Photon Forge and probably still have a spec better than current core engi.

Why? Because

@Chaith.8256 said:Holosmith doesn't have to spend build choices on damage, (unlike core) and in turn is able to do consistent damage while mostly building for defensive utility.

The main reason Holosmith is good is because it gets Engineer's best damage + CC weapon (photon forge) and it gives up basically nothing (a single toolbelt skill) to get it.

In order to come close to equalling this damage, a core engi needs to spend maybe 2 traitlines worth of traits and probably at least 2/3 of their utility skills. Holosmith can fill all of these with defensive options instead and STILL have crazy damage without really having to invest in it in their build. It just comes for free with the elite spec. I think the heat mechanic actually needs to add some serious element of risk to playing Holo if it's going to come with such a powerful damage + CC package.

I recognize that not every elite spec is like this. You can point to Reaper/Scourge as at least in principle balanceable specs because they trade off their shroud mechanics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...