Sic Em idea - Page 3 — Guild Wars 2 Forums
›

Sic Em idea

13>

Comments

  • Solori.6025Solori.6025 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Asuran.5469 said:

    @praqtos.9035 said:

    @Trevor Boyer.6524 said:

    That post is from last year. A lot has changed since then. There has been an enormous amount of gradual DPS power creep to almost every other class. The Ranger no longer needs any damage cuts tbh. As Eurantien had even mentioned in a previous post, it actually could use a buff if Arenanet wants it to stay competitive in top tiers & AT play.

    ^ I know many of you get raged and throw up on keyboard when you read this, but its true. Right now, FB/Scourge/Herald/Holo/Scrapper/Spellbreaker dominate competitive scenes. Right now, DPS Soulbeast is just like Berserker or Power Mes, it's performance is fickle in the aspect that depending on what is in your team comp or against you, it could be a great idea to run or a detrimental error to run. Example:

    • Run DPS Soulbeast against: FB/Scourge/Reaper/Core Guard/Thief comp = Good idea
    • Run DPS Soulbeast against: Scrapper/Spellbreaker/Herald/Herald/Condi Mirage = Bad idea

    It's a counter class, that's all it is. It's to be used when it's advantageous and only when it is advantageous. If you run it when it isn't advantageous, it often ends up being in a situation where it can't do squat and dies the entire match. This goes back into my point of how it is too good vs. certain things, but absolute trash tier vs. others. Ranger doesn't need an ultra game wide nerf due to this "which would destroy all viability" What it needs is some kind of alteration that downs its potency vs. things like the cliché Necro gank, but enhances it's combat mechanic vs. the things that normally shut it down completely.

    Don't let the 5 people who are capable of running these specs to efficiency fool you into believing it is anywhere near a top tier meta, because it isn't.

    I see you edited your post instead of making a new one, that's fine though I wish it would ping so I could at least respond to things a faster. Changing your stance when it is convenient is hypocritical, it's also kind of sad. But everyone is allowed to change their mind, just wish you had done so while you were calling for other classes to be nerfed to the core. See Solo's post above, pick a stance, instead of just flopping around when it isn't your class. I don't think anyone will rage at you for thinking your class needs a buff. Remember, incissor thought mes needed a buff and the "knowledgeable community" berated and harassed him. Now you call power mirage a counter build? Counter to what? people stuck in gold 1? It doesn't do damage thanks to people in the "Knowledgeable community" calling for nerfs even when it wasn't present in any high tier competitive arena. At least we got a couple of meme's from it though right?

    He clearly pointed out to you that the post you quoted was from many metas ago.

    What you did is like if I quoted someone from 2013 saying that a Hambow was OP and then posted that quote on them in 2019 and expected them to still take the stance that a Hambow was OP.

    That's not what it is at all actually. 😆
    We had people complain that damage was too high.
    So burst damage for a few specific classes( guard,mes ,and thief) was gutted. But then it's suddenly ok when it's something else. The same people who thought damage was too high are now defending their builds tooth and nail using the same arguments that were largely shot down.

    Why is it ok for Some classes, but not ok for others?

    In Trevors case. He did in fact support nerfing core things to balance elite specs.
    When it was mes. Now we should support a new balancing direction for ranger? So kitten mes and its core. But we should be careful with ranger, because we don't want to hurt it's build diversity?
    Why is ranger allowed to get a free pass while every other class gets the hammer?

    Tingle my stingleberry

  • Badcat.7320Badcat.7320 Member ✭✭

    Boyer said in other threads guard and thief did not need nerf

  • GaijinGuy.8476GaijinGuy.8476 Member ✭✭✭

    @sephiroth.4217 said:
    Instead of 40/20% damage increase how about a 10% damage increase and pet sniffs out any stealth class in a 600 radius and applies revealed?

    Would that also be for the skill when not using Soulbeast? I see lots of posts saying "nerf sic'em" and while I agree 40% is insane on a player, nerfing that damage modifier to 10% would make it completely useless outside Soulbeast.
    I'm sure there are others, like me, who play core ranger still. That 40% on Smokescale with quickness is nice.

  • Twilight Tempest.7584Twilight Tempest.7584 Member ✭✭✭

    The amount of cognitive dissonance this discussion evokes is something.

    Person A's Comments - hmm that kinda makes sense.
    Person B's Counter - hmm so does that.
    Person A's Reply - makes sense too. ugh!

    Also:
    "Here are the facts."
    "Wrong. Here's the real truth."

    What to believe? O_o

    As to balancing Sic 'Em (and Ranger/Soulbeast in general), looking to history, we see two classes that were the frequent subject of complaint and which ultimately received repeated, significant, and some would say, bad, nerfs over a long period of time, leaving them with gutted trait lines, weapon choices, and build options, and greatly diminished presence throughout the ranks. These are thief and mesmer. In fact, it is hard to argue that the "people can't distinguish between what is OP and what is simply annoying" fallacy applies more aptly to any other classes.

    For the still-doing-well classes that have yet to see such treatment, they must either agree that what happened to thief and mesmer was good and thereby extend the same to themselves, or admit that the "balance by loudest qq" method that was applied to thief and mesmer was bad, and should be reverted to some extent. The alternative is hypocrisy.

    Personally, I think balance necessarily must be driven by informed understanding of the class and where it falls within the bigger picture, not by bias on either side of the debate. I don't think there is a good track record of such balance in the past, and I would rather not see it perpetuated onto more classes, even if "it would only be fair". Balance the classes/traits that need balancing the right way, and go back and fix things that were balanced the wrong way.

    I know I'm speaking in generalities but I'm limiting to that because I don't have the answers.

  • Psycoprophet.8107Psycoprophet.8107 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited May 14, 2019

    @Twilight Tempest.7584 said:
    The amount of cognitive dissonance this discussion evokes is something.

    Person A's Comments - hmm that kinda makes sense.
    Person B's Counter - hmm so does that.
    Person A's Reply - makes sense too. ugh!

    Also:
    "Here are the facts."
    "Wrong. Here's the real truth."

    What to believe? O_o

    As to balancing Sic 'Em (and Ranger/Soulbeast in general), looking to history, we see two classes that were the frequent subject of complaint and which ultimately received repeated, significant, and some would say, bad, nerfs over a long period of time, leaving them with gutted trait lines, weapon choices, and build options, and greatly diminished presence throughout the ranks. These are thief and mesmer. In fact, it is hard to argue that the "people can't distinguish between what is OP and what is simply annoying" fallacy applies more aptly to any other classes.

    For the still-doing-well classes that have yet to see such treatment, they must either agree that what happened to thief and mesmer was good and thereby extend the same to themselves, or admit that the "balance by loudest qq" method that was applied to thief and mesmer was bad, and should be reverted to some extent. The alternative is hypocrisy.

    Personally, I think balance necessarily must be driven by informed understanding of the class and where it falls within the bigger picture, not by bias on either side of the debate. I don't think there is a good track record of such balance in the past, and I would rather not see it perpetuated onto more classes, even if "it would only be fair". Balance the classes/traits that need balancing the right way, and go back and fix things that were balanced the wrong way.

    I know I'm speaking in generalities but I'm limiting to that because I don't have the answers.

    That's the thing, using thief as a example I'd love to see a vid of the dev that balances thief show off how well HIS DD does brawling other specs or how well he bursts etc on a core s/d build on other classes considering burst to sustain ratio of core on other classes. I'd bet they wouldn't fair very well lol. Seems like a lack of understanding of where the class actually sits vs other classes and more from a basic understanding of what theyve gathered from the community (mostly non thief players). This is the reason when forums are filled with a complaint about a skill or aspect of thief the balance team nerfs aspects that have little to do with the complaints leaving people scratching their heads. Another example of why when they do nerf a skill or aspect they do it in such a way that nerfs other aspects of the class that were already struggling with zero counter balance again leaving people scratching their heads. Man if a employee at my station preformed like this lmao

©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.