do you think balancing for the top 10% of players is a good idea? — Guild Wars 2 Forums

do you think balancing for the top 10% of players is a good idea?

Stand The Wall.6987Stand The Wall.6987 Member ✭✭✭✭

what I mean is that should profession and class balance be done in such a way that only the most skilled players are taken into account when changes are made.
i.e. class x gets a buff, good player a vs good player b the buff is fine. good player a vs bad player b the buff is op, or even bad player a vs bad player b its op.

please share why or why not!

you don't know till you know, ya know.

do you think balancing for the top 10% of players is a good idea? 126 votes

yes
50%
Grimjack.8130derd.6413Crypto.7609Curunen.8729Velimere.7685Katary.7096Daishi.6027Arheundel.6451Dadnir.5038Miles Smiles.8951Whitworth.7259Cyninja.2954Mr Godlike.6098Airdive.2613Master Ketsu.4569Raiden The Beast.3016otto.5684Emapudapus.1307Anativ.2374sigur.9453 64 votes
no
49%
Krispera.5087MithranArkanere.8957Sigmoid.7082Nimrod.9240XxsdgxX.8109Alek Seven.2374Talek.6795sephiroth.4217Exedore.6320EnderzShadow.2506Ithilwen.1529BadMed.3846DonArkanio.6419Elmo Benchwarmer.3025Aza.2105Regon Phoenix.8215Tunderbrew.9531Ziggityzog.7389Crab Fear.1624Slapinator.4196 62 votes
<1

Comments

  • BadMed.3846BadMed.3846 Member ✭✭✭
    no

    Absolutely not. It's minority and should be treated like one. For majority, we need Mirage nerfs. Condi mirage still pathetically broken and spammable. Even bots use it now.

  • Sampson.2403Sampson.2403 Member ✭✭✭
    no

    This is a really good poll and a tough vote. IMO if you only balance for the top players then your going to have a really small player base.

  • Maddog.3716Maddog.3716 Member ✭✭
    edited July 13, 2019
    no

    Anet is doing on his own and not listening to what write on the forum even if it is the top 10% of player. I saw what they wrote about nerf Rev. Anet does it her way. No one could guess how it will be.
    P. S. If you look at the statements about nerfs from some top 10% players judging by their reasoning, they like to just twist the numbers and play in the same thing.

  • Dreddo.9865Dreddo.9865 Member ✭✭✭
    no

    No and this is why the population is declining each season. I am a fairly experienced player and get triggered by the 'balance' and the meme builds. Now imagine a new player trying to learn the basics and keep getting "one shotted" by that pesky mirage. As someone said this is not an FPS where you take a head shot and boom you 're down but an MMO (rpg).

    PS - same and worse is in WvW where you have soulbeasts one shotting people with the mount attack skill ^^

  • Aza.2105Aza.2105 Member ✭✭✭
    no

    From a business perspective, are you making the game for the 90% or the 10%? The 10% tend to be the players who exploit the game mechanics...not hacking but finding the most "efficient" way to play. While the 90% plays the game as its presented.

  • Elmo Benchwarmer.3025Elmo Benchwarmer.3025 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 13, 2019
    no

    You mean that group of players that has repeatedly sold, shared and abused their and other players' accounts for their own illegitimate profit? Yeah. No.

  • no

    This game pretty much has no competitive scene so no point in balancing for that anymore. However with elite specs we have been given "spam to win" playstyles which cater more to your average player, yet everyone still complains about them. If you want a balanced competitive game cheese classes like mirage, fb, scourge, deadeye etc. cant exist.

  • HeadCrowned.6834HeadCrowned.6834 Member ✭✭✭

    Well they never done it so far, so they might give it a try now. Doing it by themselves clearly didnt work out.

  • Daishi.6027Daishi.6027 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 14, 2019
    yes

    Yes.

    What a class is capable of at the highest level is where the balance should sit, otherwise you artificially make builds (and in some cases entire classes) inferior and uncompetitive just to accommodate bads.

    This is unfair for the class and it’s mains. Why should the upper limit of what they are capable of be artificially throttled for bads?

    If something is “over powered” because bad’s can’t deal with it, however it by design has reasonable counter play, then people should get good and learn to deal with it.

    There is an argument to be made regarding techniques that require a certain level of technical skill that some people may physically be incapable of achieving. However, at the very least by design, for every action having a optimal response; balance should be set towards the top.

  • Ouk.5914Ouk.5914 Member ✭✭
    yes

    yes.

    Anyone who doesn't understand why should start looking into things more to get a better idea of how game balancing is .

  • Megametzler.5729Megametzler.5729 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Why not both? Not only for the top, but also not only for the average. That is what they seem to try - why else would FA ele have been nerfed, power shatter mesmer and stuff?

    Or maybe they don't balance for the top at all...? :no_mouth: I don't know, but they should obviously not ignore anybody.

  • zinkz.7045zinkz.7045 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 13, 2019

    @Ouk.5914 said:
    yes.

    Anyone who doesn't understand why should start looking into things more to get a better idea of how game balancing is .

    Anyone who understands balance firstly realizes you balance for different groups of players, not just one group. Secondly that GW2's skill/class/gear system doesn't really fit that approach very well. And thirdly that it is basically irrelevant in GW2 because balance will always be a total car crash when they are trying to simultaneously balance across PvP conquest, PvE raids / fractals and a little bit of large scale WvW.

    GW2 is another example of why no one with a clue treats PvP in MMORPGs seriously.

  • Dirame.8521Dirame.8521 Member ✭✭
    yes

    Haha if we balance for the majority this game would be DEAD! DEAD I TELL YOU! DEAD!

    How fickle is this community? One day this is weak, then someone plays it on a stream and wrecks face, then the next day it is too OP. Yea balance with the majority and see what happens.

  • Sampson.2403Sampson.2403 Member ✭✭✭
    no

    The thicker the strings are on a guitar, the better the sound. Stevie Ray Vaughn played on size 12 electric guitar strings and obviously sounded awesome. Anyone who has played guitar knows how hard it is to play (bend, hold down) with thicker strings and MOST musicians do not play with thicker strings, just the best ones.

    If guitars only came with size 12 strings, barely anyone would be playing guitar today.

    Not everyone wants to be a pro at GW2. Most people just want to log in and have fun. Force every gw2 player to play with size 12 strings and you can kiss the already low population goodbye.

  • yes

    All those casual PvPers thinking they have a voice in the overall PvP balance... actually funny. If you don't invest time in PvP, you should not be taken into account because you do not know how your class works either way! The top 10% at least gave a lot of time into the game, ya know. Something truly broken in high end may not be truly broken in low end (things like one shot Mesmers for example) because they're less effective due to the lack of skill knowledge. Should that not be nerfed because the top 10% thinks it's op but the 70% under them (10% being bots and another10% being gold farmers) think it's ok, thus shouldn't be nerfed? Should Scourge not be nerfed because people in low gold can't play it, when in very competent hands they just basically rip teamfights apart in pogs vs pogs? In the same way, Revenant's nerfs shouldn't be applied either... most low gold players don't know how to 100-0 2 to 3 people in less than 10 seconds using Herald. Because that's what happens in plat+ games.

    If you'Re a casual, stay in unranked where you can hone your skills. Unranked doesn't really matter either way, am I right? Ranked is exactly made to be competitive (lol, that one is a good joke I must say : WINTRADING is sadly a thing), thus the top end of players should have a higher input into what should be balanced out because they know best in class' synergies.

    Ok I'm done with my rant.

  • yes

    @Sampson.2403 said:
    The thicker the strings are on a guitar, the better the sound. Stevie Ray Vaughn played on size 12 electric guitar strings and obviously sounded awesome. Anyone who has played guitar knows how hard it is to play (bend, hold down) with thicker strings and MOST musicians do not play with thicker strings, just the best ones.

    If guitars only came with size 12 strings, barely anyone would be playing guitar today.

    Not everyone wants to be a pro at GW2. Most people just want to log in and have fun. Force every gw2 player to play with size 12 strings and you can kiss the already low population goodbye.

    You're taking a fact and bringing in a false conclusion.

    In a way, I get what you mean, although Ranked and Tournaments are made to be those 12-size cords. It's more difficult to play, yes, but that's because it's more competitive.

    Unranked is where you should be having fun with your friends. You can test builds, change stuff, and overall enjoy yourself. Ranked and Tournaments though should be balanced towards the top for the sake of higher skill ceiling bringing more interest in the game. Nobody likes to hear a 5 years old smash its fingers on the guitar's strings, be it an easy or more advanced stringed one.

    I hope I make sense, my head ache is quite heavely interfering with my communication skills roflmao

  • Crab Fear.1624Crab Fear.1624 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 13, 2019
    no

    I have seen "top" players use the same tactics over obviously broke skills as us low levelers.

    They rush to the forums and start a thread about it.

    Soon™ ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

  • Crab Fear.1624Crab Fear.1624 Member ✭✭✭✭
    no

    @Dirame.8521 said:
    Haha if we balance for the majority this game would be DEAD! DEAD I TELL YOU! DEAD!

    How fickle is this community? One day this is weak, then someone plays it on a stream and wrecks face, then the next day it is too OP. Yea balance with the majority and see what happens.

    What is the current OP druid build?

    I'm dumb, but I perceive it is a bit too weak to be accessed competitively by the majority at this time.

    What is the insight of our top players for this?

    Soon™ ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

  • Naxos.2503Naxos.2503 Member ✭✭✭
    no

    If you run a normal game with a multiplayer element, sure. This is a MMo. If you take into account only 10% of the playerbase, 10% of the playerbase is all you'll have left after a while.

  • otto.5684otto.5684 Member ✭✭✭✭
    yes

    I find this question is quite silly. Mostly everyone posting here would probably be invested in the game and invested in PvP. Also, it seems that the sPvP posters think that everyone is in P1 and everyone below that is a noob. Roughly only 10% of the player base make it beyond G3.

    In addition, the question does not make sense cuz the balance is based on the class/build optimal usage. Optimal usage is not in G1. There are 2 far more important questions:

    1) should balance be based on optimal use of random teams or optimal use of organized. This makes a big difference, since many builds that work great solo do not work as well with an organized group and vice versa.

    2) where do you create your measurement break points? 1500, 1600, 1700 or even higher. Or should you consider lower? Is using a bell curve and nerf/buffing a class based on the standard of deviation would work? Or should you focuse on outliers?

  • Khalisto.5780Khalisto.5780 Member ✭✭✭
    no

    Taking the top players opinion is important for the competitive gameplay and this ppl also know what is really needs to be nerf, and if you watch their stream they just don't pretend everything is fine so their OP spec doens't get nerfed.

    The other nerfs should be centered where the player base is bigger, gold 2 atm.

    Balancing for ppl below this I dont think it's a good idea, because there're complaints about everything that kills them, Deadeye killed me, OP, Fresh Air Core Ele killed me, OP.

    One thing that's not OP at all in plat 2 and up is Scrapper, this class is absolutely god in gold 2, and it should be nerfed.

    I think this is the right direction to take balance.

  • Bigpapasmurf.5623Bigpapasmurf.5623 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I believe it should be taken into consideration, however should not be the only factor when balancing. Reason being is that some players are just legit good and dont let their class carry them (which is where it should be balanced)

    Red = Dead...or someone runs away. Either way it's gone.
    twitch.tv/TRMC
    Lover of Jumping puzzles, Squirrels, WvW, and Taimi
    Co-Leader of SOmething inAPpropriate {SOAP}

  • Vicariuz.1605Vicariuz.1605 Member ✭✭✭
    yes

    Yes because balancing for bad players won't stop them from getting facerolled no matter how many excuses they attempt to make for it. If you play badly, it doesn't matter what class or build the opponent is using, you are going to die.

    When the people who invest the most into your game aren't your target demographic your game dies, as is shown QUITE well in gw2 history.

  • Cobrakon.3108Cobrakon.3108 Member ✭✭✭

    on a 1v1 basis... then yes if you mean based on a high level team play then absolutely not.
    The worst balance is when its optimally balanced around high level TEAM PLAY. .. that is the worst balance ever. However, if its based on a focus for 1v1 , then hot kitten.... light of the world beacon of hope, prophecy of encouragement, greatness personified, all that is holy in games, self determination, greatest thing ever, the promise land, the holy grail of gaming.

  • Sampson.2403Sampson.2403 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 13, 2019
    no

    Well, what's the goal behind balance? Do you balance this game for high skill level competition or entertainment?

    For example, YES, if you invest a lot of time into this game, then "finding the right mesmer in the sea of clones is easy". But for most players, this isn't fun at all.

  • no

    Gw2 already caters to the top% at every turn, including when it comes to balance; despite a minority of that top% being a direct cause in the population dropping.

    Double Holo DuoQs in the top 10% were already very common. The top 2 players for most of the current season had been doing that and getting away with 80-90% winrates, and when the balance patch preview finally hits Holo isn't nerfed, but straight up buffed. I'm sure the golds and silvers they often get paired with are going to love that.

    For most games, people would be excited to see the meta change up, but in Gw2 a lot of top players seem to enjoy having the easiest and least competitive experience possible.

    Remove Ranked DuoQ pls&ty

  • JTGuevara.9018JTGuevara.9018 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 13, 2019
    no

    I picked no, but I think there should've been a third option for neither. I say neither because in game-after-game, if the balancing input is left to players, they will naturally benefit themselves at the expense of the game. They'll f-- it up! It's player psychology. Players don't like to lose. The skill level doesn't even matter. Whether it's bad players not wanting to adapt, or top players protecting their spots...the result is the same, the game suffers. Honestly, player-enforced "metas" are the worst thing about this pvp mess. Especially from the top e-kitten strokers in ranked. I used to buy into it...but not anymore. That's what happens when developers can't decide what they want pvp to be. Instead, the devs balance patterns as I see them are pretty much: "Change stuff around and let the players decide!"

    In gw1, on the other hand, devs knew right away what they wanted. (Warrs = frontline smash, Monks = heal/ Eles = make it rain) There were obvious strategies. Still, there were variations like the second professions to make those roles interesting. It was also actually competitive, unlike this mess.

  • sephiroth.4217sephiroth.4217 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 14, 2019
    no

    I only say no because the top 10% in this game lack integrity.
    They abuse the systems, fill boards with alts, sell top spots, match manipulate, removed anet from esl and further pvp development whey embarrassed the game on a world stage and continue with thier shannanigans till this day.
    If Anet was my company, I would have scrapped the cash tournies too after that. Anet rubbed the backs of these players and these players spat back.

    Ontop of that, these players want to win more than most and in the past I have seen top players get beaten by nobodies then proceed to ask for nerfs against the class that beat them.
    They are just as bias as the rest of us "low tier plebs".

    For most other games on the market, balancing for top 10% makes complete sense.

    Edit: Just going to clarify I have nothing against the few top ten percent that still have thier integrity, you have been unfairly lumped in with the rest)

    Not to brag, but I put together a puzzle in 4 days and the box said 2-4 years.
    Please allow team queue with rewards again at our own discretion.
    06210311 251521 121512

  • DeadlySynz.3471DeadlySynz.3471 Member ✭✭✭✭
    no

    Nope! That's like buffing the game around raids (which they primarily do), and look where it gets us.

  • Crab Fear.1624Crab Fear.1624 Member ✭✭✭✭
    no

    I guess to make sure feelings don't get hurt, what is the top ten percent?

    I mean do 10% of the players make it into basic plat and higher?

    If it is only plat 2 and higher, holy kitten we have a small player base.

    If we are targeting only the top 50 players, gg bros. No one cares. (assuming you think this is the top 10%)

    What is the rating threshold of 10%?

    Soon™ ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 14, 2019
    yes

    Balance should be done based on realistically achievable maximum performance for competative modes. Not sure if top 10% qualifies, but maybe top 20%. It depends on how big a sample size we have.

    @DeadlySynz.3471 said:
    Nope! That's like buffing the game around raids (which they primarily do), and look where it gets us.

    Exactly, class performance is closer than ever compared to before. Utility and abilities have been adjusted for multiple classes to be able to fullfill multiple roles. From a pure balance perspective, the decision to balance around raids was the best approach they could have ever taken for PvE. That is IF you actually take a realistic approach to how things were pre HoT balance and how unbalanced different classes were against each other in PvE.

  • no

    great idea, so in few monthes only 10% of the pvp players play the game .

  • MyPuppy.8970MyPuppy.8970 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 14, 2019
    no

    Balancing should not be done only around what an elite can do, but done coldly, logically and mathematically with a multitude of factors like skill floor (what a newcomer clicker can do) and theoretical skill ceiling (what a pro with macros could potentially do) which should never be too low and too high; risk VS reward, global efficiency, clear trade-offs and return on investments, etc. If some people can take a build to its utmost limit with sheer skill, it wouldn't mean the build is OP, just that they're that good.

    A game where everyone can play and the best can shine is what makes a popular game.

  • TinkTinkPOOF.9201TinkTinkPOOF.9201 Member ✭✭✭
    yes

    All games should be balanced based on the highest skill levels.

    The reason for this is that lower skill level fights can be very random, as someone doesn't understand a mechanic of another class, so they always lose to it, even though they have a skill that can counter it. This is something you don't see in higher level of play. When you look at top end players, the out comes are very easy to see, where they are going. But lower skilled someone can be on a better class/build and still lose due to lack of skill/knowledge, which has NOTHING to do with the class/build or what it can do.

    When you balance based on the average player, you end up with broken builds that are ungodly in the hands of skilled, top level players, and you end up with those being the only builds or classes played. This is also a competitive PvP mode, higher skill should be rewarded, as my signature says...

    "When you power creep the game and make it so that spam gameplay is nearly as effective as deep knowledge and nuance, the quality of players will decrease." -Exedore

  • Raizel.1839Raizel.1839 Member ✭✭
    no

    Big NO!
    Balance should be aimed for the majority of players, not for top.

  • Flying.6509Flying.6509 Member ✭✭
    yes

    At this point I don't think they listen to anybody, but I'd rather they listen to someone who actually understands what's broken and (more importantly) WHY is it broken. Not me though, I'm just a casual.

  • Falan.1839Falan.1839 Member ✭✭✭
    yes

    Yes, because anything else means you don't balance classes and builds around their full potential and will only hit the dedicated noobstomper builds that are easy to play and effective against inexperienced players but actually have a lot of counterplay.

    Falásya / Caissech

    "When you say it's gonna happen "now"
    When exactly do you mean?
    See I've already waited too long
    And all my hope is gone"
    The Smiths about Balance and PvP changes

  • derd.6413derd.6413 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 14, 2019
    yes

    the only thing low to mid skill players could help with is if something is fun to play with or against. and really this shouldn't be a polll since that's pretty much standard practice for most competitive games

    I Have No friends, so I Must pug

  • ZhouX.8742ZhouX.8742 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 14, 2019
    yes

    It's an ironic question, because right now they don't, and is the prime reason we're in this situation to begin with. They don't make these spammy builds for top players, because top players can micro and understand classes and are able to player harder classes. They force simplistic builds into becoming metas to cater to casuals in an attempt to allow newcomers to come in. This is an obvious thing... They just simply don't balance around top players.

    I mean for people talking about driving population away... LoL balances around the competitive scene not around casuals. This is why champions are drastically different between divisions. While I know you can't compare to the 2 games, you can compare balance as a mindset around the objective.

    Either way though people get it confused though and a lot of people in here are saying the population is down because of balance... the matchmaking is where it drives the people away and taking away essential things that PvP used to have that kept the population here are gone now. These were more general directions the developers took in trying to form a route for THEIR vision of PvP as a whole (and not the playerbase's vision, essentially ignoring them) in this game that drove a lot of people away, not just balance. It's just one small part of the problem and I would say they focus too much on that instead of fixing those core issues.

  • yes

    The problem with balancing around the majority is that most of the time they think something's broken, while actually, it's just a rather high skill ceiling that struggles to be effective in a truly competitive game like an automated match in the monthly tournament. This brings unnecessary nerfs to a lot of classes because the said majority (which are mainly casuals to the game overall) can't be bothered learning the counterplays (like learning to dodge key skills or combos). The patch coming out Tuesday, although I am happy of the overall changes, shows just that. Most of the upcoming balance simply buffs a lot of the skill floor of professions like Chronomancer and Holosmith ( Chronomancer's rework Imo was needed but not to that extent, while Holosmith still has that broken aspect of spewing Stability out of the windows and still having such high survivability but gets super hard punished for over-heating because they felt like that was the correct nerf... lol) while dumbing down the skill ceiling of classes like Berserker, Weaver and Tempest by straight up buffing numbers.

    Ben once said in the Welcome to PvP Discord that their "statistics" come from Gold 2 and higher. Whilst people constantly in G3 are usually at least somewhat decent players, G2 players have 0 awareness overall of fights or engagements or objectives. Having an account in P1 and an account in G2 (hey, can't win all the placements when bots appear aye, and ranking on two accounts... oh hell nah I don't have that time), even though the population in G2 is HUGE, like I rarely face or am teamed with the same people at all (no one I recognize from account names and all), they have nearly 0 knowledge of their class. Let's not mention knowledge of other classes. I came to the conclusion that G2 players, which represent the majority of the game mode's population, really know barely enough to press 1 through 0 and an occasional random dodge. A streamer in that bracket demonstrates it rather well, playing a Condi trap ranger and not knowing his matchups or when to leave fights. G2 players and below, yeah they represent the majority of the population but lack the general knowledge necessary for good balance. That's why they shouldn't be just as sought-after for their input in balance patch notes, especially in PvP.

    Balancing around "fun" is the reason why this game isn't as competitive as it could potentially be. Balancing around "competitiveness" would lower the population, yes, but would, in the long run, be better for the game mode's health. In fact, that could bring GW2's competitive game mode known as sPvP to a larger public that could potentially even increase the overall population while keeping it fun in Unranked and competitive anywhere else.

©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.