On roles and 'optimum' team comp. — Guild Wars 2 Forums

On roles and 'optimum' team comp.

So, there's the perfect dream right? The dream that your group will have all of the following:

  • 25 might
  • fury
  • quickness
  • alacrity
  • spotter
  • sun spirit
  • frost spirit
  • empower allies
  • assassin's prescience
    And more I'm sure I forgot.

So what I'd like to do in this thread is break down WHY the specific meta builds are what they are.

So, a druid covers lots of those above points. If your team has no druid, then you need someone else to cover might, and heals, and unique buffs.

So, which classes can do what jobs? We all know what the meta is. But I want to figure out why.

Are there other classes that can stack 25 might? Why don't we use them for that? Are there other quickness classes? Other alacrity? Other healers? Are there builds that scratch a couple itches, but won't get used because, say, druid is too good? Is it a different class that's too good?

I want to wrap my head around the team comp. And why we pick which classes, in what builds...?

<1

Comments

  • borgs.6103borgs.6103 Member ✭✭✭

    Druid is meh, at least in 5-man comps. Still fine bringing one on raids though.

    Spotter could be replaced by the 100 precision/70 Ferocity food.

    Soulbeasts can bring spirits as well - they're Ranger skills.

    Firebrand + Renegade can easily maintain permanent 25 might, Fury, Alacrity, Regeneration and Quickness for 5 people, and Renegades can provide a raid group's alacrity needs. Either one of them can also go healer. Renegades are preferred, as Firebrands put out more damage than a Renegade, but Healer FB is much safer.

    Empower Allies is good, but not really needed. An all-power damage party benefits from it the most. With the recent Tactics rework, might see it becoming meta again, but a power Berserker's damage bringing banners easily offsets that extra 500 power. Strength/Discipline/Berserker traitlines are too good to replace one. Maybe go core Warrior and use Phalanx Strength as well if your group of five can't generate permanent 25 might and/or need more breakbar damage.

    Apathy is death.

  • sokeenoppa.5384sokeenoppa.5384 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2, 2019

    Common pug strat has:
    2 chronos(quickness, soi, some boons and alacrity)
    Warrior (banners)
    Druid (might, other boons, spotter, healing and spirits)
    Sometimes off healer (heals and boons)
    Dps players.

    Other common squad comp is:
    Chrono (quickness, soi and some boons)
    Alacrity renegade (alacrity, some boons, AP, soul cleave summit)
    Quickbrand (quickness, other boons)
    Druid( heal, spirits, might, boons, spotter and healing)
    Warrior(banners)
    Dps

    Many classes can stack might or heal, but druid has alot of other cool stuff, thats why its taken.
    However a bit better groups can actually change the squad comps with dps class choises. Lets take xera for example:
    Every dps player plays power chrono which means that dps classes covers quickness so quickbrand or support chrono is not needed. This comp would look like this:
    1 druid (tank and usual druid stuff)
    Warrior (usual warrior stuff)
    Alacrity renegade (alacrity + other rene stuff)
    Power chronos (quickness and dps)

    At some bosses players also drop druid out and takes dps soulbeast instead, as it can still bring spotter and spirits.
    There is many other squad compositions aswell that are meta or atleast works, like boon thief comp but i think yoy got the point already.

    I'll have two number 9s, a number 9 large, a number 6 with extra dip, a number 7, two number 45s, one with cheese, and a large soda.

  • BrokenGlass.9356BrokenGlass.9356 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 2, 2019

    The reason I'm looking at getting details like the above (thanks for that @sokeenoppa.5384 and @borgs.6103) is because I'm trying to figure which classes can take jobs that are already 'covered'.

    For example. If I make a banner warrior keep up 25 might, and fury on the group, is this ever useful? Or is it that, because druids exist, there's no point to ever build a warrior like that?

    Also... If I showed up with said warrior build, is there some trait I can just point at my druid and say, "take x instead of Grace of the Land, I've got might covered." and what are the odds folks will just say, 'yeah, OK, well take a warrior for might. Now that we know we don't need a druid, is there someone here who wants to heal whose class can't output might by itself?'

    Im trying to figure out what, if any, alternative team comps exist.

    We know that alacrity and quickness are pretty restricted... But are the other roles as locked down? And if so, why? If not, what other builds can we use to get around the standard supports, and open the door for say, a warrior support build?

  • Linken.6345Linken.6345 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Is it 10 man on warrior tho?

  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2, 2019

    @BrokenGlass.9356 said:
    For example. If I make a banner warrior keep up 25 might, and fury on the group, is this ever useful? Or is it that, because druids exist, there's no point to ever build a warrior like that?

    Druid covers might for the whole 10-man squad. Warrior supplies might for 5-man group. That's why originally, before phalanx strength nerf and Grace of the land changes you used two warriors. Obviously, having one build do the work of two others is better - role compression is quite important.
    This is for raids, though. Fractals are 5-man, so this consideration is not important there.

    The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.

  • borgs.6103borgs.6103 Member ✭✭✭

    @BrokenGlass.9356 said:
    The reason I'm looking at getting details like the above (thanks for that @sokeenoppa.5384 and @borgs.6103) is because I'm trying to figure which classes can take jobs that are already 'covered'.

    For example. If I make a banner warrior keep up 25 might, and fury on the group, is this ever useful? Or is it that, because druids exist, there's no point to ever build a warrior like that?

    Also... If I showed up with said warrior build, is there some trait I can just point at my druid and say, "take x instead of Grace of the Land, I've got might covered." and what are the odds folks will just say, 'yeah, OK, well take a warrior for might. Now that we know we don't need a druid, is there someone here who wants to heal whose class can't output might by itself?'

    Im trying to figure out what, if any, alternative team comps exist.

    We know that alacrity and quickness are pretty restricted... But are the other roles as locked down? And if so, why? If not, what other builds can we use to get around the standard supports, and open the door for say, a warrior support build?

    It really depends on what end-game PVE you're doing. Right now, some group compositions perform way better on fotms than raids. In your example, the druid's better on raids because it covers might and spirit buffs for the whole group, and spotter, fury, protection and swiftness for the sub-group. Bring that to fotms where the group's limited to 5 slots the druid's might coverage doesn't matter.

    Alternate team comps exists. It's not as if you'll automatically fail if you don't follow the meta. Multiple sources of boons, especially Might and Fury provide more leniency for rotations, positioning and dealing damage. Example - you can party a support tempest with FB+Rene and get the important boons covered. Granted an ele would be better off as a DPS than the FB/Rene, it would still achieve very good results. Though I wouldn't feel comfortable with this set-up on fractals.

    Apathy is death.

  • sokeenoppa.5384sokeenoppa.5384 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @BrokenGlass.9356 said:
    The reason I'm looking at getting details like the above (thanks for that @sokeenoppa.5384 and @borgs.6103) is because I'm trying to figure which classes can take jobs that are already 'covered'.

    For example. If I make a banner warrior keep up 25 might, and fury on the group, is this ever useful? Or is it that, because druids exist, there's no point to ever build a warrior like that?

    Also... If I showed up with said warrior build, is there some trait I can just point at my druid and say, "take x instead of Grace of the Land, I've got might covered." and what are the odds folks will just say, 'yeah, OK, well take a warrior for might. Now that we know we don't need a druid, is there someone here who wants to heal whose class can't output might by itself?'

    Im trying to figure out what, if any, alternative team comps exist.

    We know that alacrity and quickness are pretty restricted... But are the other roles as locked down? And if so, why? If not, what other builds can we use to get around the standard supports, and open the door for say, a warrior support build?

    -Alacrity comes from chrono(5man) or alacrity renegade(10man)
    -quickness comes from quickbrand(5man), chrono(5man) OR stacking dragonhunters or power chronos.
    Thats basics of quickness.

    Might can come from many classes but pugs favor druid because healer is needed for raids and this one specific healer will bring so much. It has:spotter, spirits, heals, fury, regen, vigor, might and some skills that gives utility for pug strats like entangle.
    If your squad is running with two healers and one of them is a druid, second one can any healer.

    In rare scenario you can drop druid out tho. For example at w2 first boss slothasor you can use:
    Sub1:
    1power soulbeast, 1alacrity heal renegade and 3 dragonhunters.
    Sub2:
    1 boon chrono, 1 might renegade, 1 banner warrior and 2 dragonhunters.

    ^with that comp all the boons are covered, even without a druid. However that composition is for an HC play and soulbeast should be swapped to heal druid in more casual runs.

    I'll have two number 9s, a number 9 large, a number 6 with extra dip, a number 7, two number 45s, one with cheese, and a large soda.

  • Eramonster.2718Eramonster.2718 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Once boons are settled, the next step is usually to fill it in with other roles eg. dps classes that can fully optimize it (classes that can deals good damage). The more available spots open; the better. Hence meta players tend to squeeze boons duty into few, to have more spots open.

    Its possible for to spread it out, each to fill a boon/role and the set up's efficiency is always open for debate. Pros and cons.

  • @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @BrokenGlass.9356 said:
    For example. If I make a banner warrior keep up 25 might, and fury on the group, is this ever useful? Or is it that, because druids exist, there's no point to ever build a warrior like that?

    Druid covers might for the whole 10-man squad. Warrior supplies might for 5-man group. That's why originally, before phalanx strength nerf and Grace of the land changes you used two warriors. Obviously, having one build do the work of two others is better - role compression is quite important.
    This is for raids, though. Fractals are 5-man, so this consideration is not important there.

    How over capped is druid on 25 might?

    Why won't a tactics warrior spill might stacks over if the 5 in his subgroup are full? (is the just something the engine doesn't do?)

  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @BrokenGlass.9356 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @BrokenGlass.9356 said:
    For example. If I make a banner warrior keep up 25 might, and fury on the group, is this ever useful? Or is it that, because druids exist, there's no point to ever build a warrior like that?

    Druid covers might for the whole 10-man squad. Warrior supplies might for 5-man group. That's why originally, before phalanx strength nerf and Grace of the land changes you used two warriors. Obviously, having one build do the work of two others is better - role compression is quite important.
    This is for raids, though. Fractals are 5-man, so this consideration is not important there.

    How over capped is druid on 25 might?

    On old Magi builds, it might have been a struggle to keep the cap up (depending on you skill), but on harriers keeping the whole squad capped is generally not a problem.

    Why won't a tactics warrior spill might stacks over if the 5 in his subgroup are full? (is the just something the engine doesn't do?)

    Boons do not work that way. The engine doesn't "spill" overcapped boons on other players, they are just wasted.

    The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.

  • sokeenoppa.5384sokeenoppa.5384 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 3, 2019

    @BrokenGlass.9356 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @BrokenGlass.9356 said:
    For example. If I make a banner warrior keep up 25 might, and fury on the group, is this ever useful? Or is it that, because druids exist, there's no point to ever build a warrior like that?

    Druid covers might for the whole 10-man squad. Warrior supplies might for 5-man group. That's why originally, before phalanx strength nerf and Grace of the land changes you used two warriors. Obviously, having one build do the work of two others is better - role compression is quite important.
    This is for raids, though. Fractals are 5-man, so this consideration is not important there.

    How over capped is druid on 25 might?

    Why won't a tactics warrior spill might stacks over if the 5 in his subgroup are full? (is the just something the engine doesn't do?)

    Might wont work like that. And most of the time its pretty pointless to find replacement for druid might as squad takes druid 90% of the time anyways, not only coz of might but coz of all the other nice things that it brings.

    Edit: is druid must to complete raids? Ofc not, all kinds of non optimal squad comps can clear most nosses.

    I'll have two number 9s, a number 9 large, a number 6 with extra dip, a number 7, two number 45s, one with cheese, and a large soda.

  • So, it seems as though druid's ability to hit all 10 players with might is too strong.

    If druid could might only 5 players, what other classes can produce enough might?

    I'm curious because I'm trying to figure out if the overwhelming amount of support, boons, and unique buffs provided by druid was intended.

    Like... I'm going to make my boonbot banner warrior. It'll be fun, especially every fractal I play that's druid-free.

    It just seems that, what would otherwise be a really functional system of various classes all designed to swap and overlap to provide raid bonuses... Has been neutered by the overperformance of one class as far back as HoT launch.

    Seems to me like, they need to cut down druid's unique buffs, (or give other versions of them to other classes) and they need to nerf its might application to 5 people. Then they need to introduce alacrity and quickness to one new class each. Do that, and we'll be able to shuffle the meta into a ton of varying shapes.

  • ButcherofMalakir.4067ButcherofMalakir.4067 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 3, 2019

    @BrokenGlass.9356 said:
    So, it seems as though druid's ability to hit all 10 players with might is too strong.

    If druid could might only 5 players, what other classes can produce enough might?

    I'm curious because I'm trying to figure out if the overwhelming amount of support, boons, and unique buffs provided by druid was intended.

    Like... I'm going to make my boonbot banner warrior. It'll be fun, especially every fractal I play that's druid-free.

    It just seems that, what would otherwise be a really functional system of various classes all designed to swap and overlap to provide raid bonuses... Has been neutered by the overperformance of one class as far back as HoT launch.

    Seems to me like, they need to cut down druid's unique buffs, (or give other versions of them to other classes) and they need to nerf its might application to 5 people. Then they need to introduce alacrity and quickness to one new class each. Do that, and we'll be able to shuffle the meta into a ton of varying shapes.

    Herald can provide 25 might to 10 players in real raid too. Same as tempest (i think).

    Reason why everyone take druid are spirits. Also many strategies vere defised when there was no option so they require druid. Top tier players use druid because of spirits and newer players use druid because they dont want to /cannot devise new strategies with diferent healer in mind

  • So... Spirits are too strong?

    Seems like they need buffs of that sort to be balanced out. Shouldn't multiple classes have access to a 'frost spirit'? Especially if those buffs can't overlap? Like... 'we already have thief's imaginary 'surprise strike' for 10% damage.... And we aren't runing any condi, so you can swap off your druid.'

  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 3, 2019

    @BrokenGlass.9356 said:
    Seems to me like, they need to cut down druid's unique buffs, (or give other versions of them to other classes) and they need to nerf its might application to 5 people. Then they need to introduce alacrity and quickness to one new class each. Do that, and we'll be able to shuffle the meta into a ton of varying shapes.

    And when they're at it, let's take away banners from warrior as well. You know, that thing that gave warrior a guaranteed spot in raid meta since raids launched till now.

    (i mean if you're aiming at spirits, you do have to go the whole distance, and not just stop halfway)

    The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.

  • Hey now. Don't jump the shark. I didn't say 'remove any reason to take druid.' I rather specifically meant 'make reasons for other classes to be taken'.

    That basically can't mean 'take a class that is currently taken for only one thing, and debuff it.'

    So.... If you can agree that every raid always wants a druid... And you can also agree that, it would be nice if other classes could do a druids job.... Then we pretty much totally agree.

    I don't know what form a nerf should take. But if a druid is such a no brainer that there's always at least one... Maybe it's nerf time? I got suggestions. But there's a reason I don't do balance for Anet 40 hours a week.

  • Sapphire.3609Sapphire.3609 Member ✭✭
    edited October 3, 2019

    As some have said earlier, the reason why Druid is pretty much irreplaceable (almost) in raid squads is the fact that they can provide 25 Might, class-specific offensive buffs, as well as healing to all 10 players, among other things. These are very important squad considerations condensed into a single player (i.e. very efficient).

    This is so good because:

    • Grace of the Land is 10-target Might
    • Spirit bonuses are 10-target
    • Unlike 5-target based boon-share, 5-target healing will leak to the other subgroup, provided your subgroup is topped-off, making a single Druid capable of healing the entire squad.

    Also mentioned above, other classes can provide some of these (Tempest, Herald, Warrior(?) for 25 Might to entire squad, Soulbeast for spirits, other solo-healers, etc.), but almost always aren't as efficient as just bringing a Druid.

    Some Snowcrows meta compositions actually don't include Druid if they can find a way to provide what the Druid provides more efficiently.
    Their meta Slothasor composition currently has:

    • Two Alacrity Renegades (one for healing and Alacrity, one to top off Might), these are brought for superior CC
    • DPS Soulbeast for spirits, as healing and Might are already covered by the Renegades

    Their meta MO composition currently has:

    • Boon Thief (healing, 10-target all boons except Alacrity)
    • DPS Soulbeast for spirits, as healing and Might are already covered by the Boon Thief

    tldr, it's all about efficiency and role condensation. A lot of classes can provide the unique combinations of boons/buffs required for comfortable raid clears, but some classes (such as Druid or Boon Thief) can do it in a much more efficient manner.

  • To be honest I think the only class that any raid kinda NEED to have atm is banner warrior. Any other class can be replaced with a minor efficientcy drop.
    Chrono <>FB+ren
    Druid<>FB+ren+SB or temp+chrono+SB or temp+FB+ren+SB or DH stacking+ren+SB

    War or the other hand is hard to replace, and the banners are by no means the only reason to this. Think of it this way, its a dps spec that do insane cc and bring support in banners.

    I can understand why you feel like creating a banner/might giving war build after the last patch. And you can, and it might even be pretty ok. The main problem is not that is "DONT work", it will. The main problem is that it ½ way require the rest of the squad to be build around it. Atm groups are mainly build around either 2*chrono+druid+second healer or chrono+ren+FB+druid.

    If you want to make a might war and have a group that are cool with changing/building around it. Super. But you might have a hard time in a pug.

    A group comp with might war could be something like:

    might/fury/banner war (dont forget to bring cc)
    heal FB (quickness+ might and fury for other group)
    AlaRen
    chrono (or DpsFB)
    SB (dps but with spirits)
    5*DPS

    Not quite a speed clear squad, but for kills you by no means need a speed clear group and if your group enjoy this settup, go for it

  • I do love the idea of buffing other support to be able to handle raids. Seems to me that the only fallout from this would be overpowering zergs in WvW which just screams for split skill and trait action.

  • sokeenoppa.5384sokeenoppa.5384 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 3, 2019

    @BrokenGlass.9356 said:
    I do love the idea of buffing other support to be able to handle raids. Seems to me that the only fallout from this would be overpowering zergs in WvW which just screams for split skill and trait action.

    Something to note for, even tho druid is a king of supports atm for optimised/hc groups, many groups would do better without one. Ill kinda start a new topic now, sorry about it. Players say that raids are too hard, thats usually not true, raids arent hard, kill strats are. If group of semi new raider keeps wiping at boss with standard 1 druid, 1 heal, 1 warrior, 2 chronos and deeps groups, they would do alot better if they replace druid.
    If you replace druid with an other heavy healer like tempest they would still have 25 stacks of might, 25 stacks vulnerability on boss and more or less around same amount of other buffs that druid bring. Only thing that they would lose is 7%dmg from frost spirit. However for a bad group that 7%means nothing, with 2 heavy healers instead of druid they can easily cheese many bosses fromw1-w4
    Edit: after all druid is the worst healer.

    I'll have two number 9s, a number 9 large, a number 6 with extra dip, a number 7, two number 45s, one with cheese, and a large soda.

  • Which begs the question. Is the meta stale? Or is it the perception of the meta that's stale?

    Like, can we just plow ahead with new builds and rewrite the meta? Cause it seems like we'll get beaten back by the gatekeepers of tradition.

    Like, I didn't know frost spirit was reduced to 7% down from 10... Seems like the devs are trying to correct the problem.

    So, I guess we just need a few supports upgraded to 10 man influence, and a few more classes that can do quickness and alacrity.

    I dream of a world where I can see a class's potential, make a build (like the new might warrior using the tactics line.) and join a squad, and be able to tell them which roles I've got covered and it's all good. Folks would be able to dust off various builds, and use them. Folks wouldn't look at builds like a heal thief and go, "yeah, so, you can heal OK and all... But this isn't one of the 3 fights where you're good.... So, get out." I'd imagine a world where other players can simply swap a trait here or there... Or swap characters to something they'd rather play.

    We've all heard the expression 'chrono jail'. Or 'druid jail' or 'banner jail' because lots of the players who run these builds are tired of playing them, because they are ALWAYS needed. And so, I want to let these players out of jail. Let other classes cover thier jobs, and shuffle the meta.

  • sokeenoppa.5384sokeenoppa.5384 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @BrokenGlass.9356 said:
    Which begs the question. Is the meta stale? Or is it the perception of the meta that's stale?

    Like, can we just plow ahead with new builds and rewrite the meta? Cause it seems like we'll get beaten back by the gatekeepers of tradition.

    Like, I didn't know frost spirit was reduced to 7% down from 10... Seems like the devs are trying to correct the problem.

    So, I guess we just need a few supports upgraded to 10 man influence, and a few more classes that can do quickness and alacrity.

    I dream of a world where I can see a class's potential, make a build (like the new might warrior using the tactics line.) and join a squad, and be able to tell them which roles I've got covered and it's all good. Folks would be able to dust off various builds, and use them. Folks wouldn't look at builds like a heal thief and go, "yeah, so, you can heal OK and all... But this isn't one of the 3 fights where you're good.... So, get out." I'd imagine a world where other players can simply swap a trait here or there... Or swap characters to something they'd rather play.

    We've all heard the expression 'chrono jail'. Or 'druid jail' or 'banner jail' because lots of the players who run these builds are tired of playing them, because they are ALWAYS needed. And so, I want to let these players out of jail. Let other classes cover thier jobs, and shuffle the meta.

    Atm we have tho most healthy meta that this game has ever seen. Atm meta is more or less stale, some stuff still might change coz of last patch but meta is basically math and many ppl have done that math. One thing about meta tho, i have been raiding a long time now and i think that i have never seen meta squads in LFG.

    I'll have two number 9s, a number 9 large, a number 6 with extra dip, a number 7, two number 45s, one with cheese, and a large soda.

  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 3, 2019

    @BrokenGlass.9356 said:
    Hey now. Don't jump the shark. I didn't say 'remove any reason to take druid.' I rather specifically meant 'make reasons for other classes to be taken'.

    That basically can't mean 'take a class that is currently taken for only one thing, and debuff it.'

    But that's what you suggest doing to druid. It's not like they are being taken for healing (they are currently probably the worst healer of several options), and for might there are also other options.

    So.... If you can agree that every raid always wants a druid... And you can also agree that, it would be nice if other classes could do a druids job.... Then we pretty much totally agree.

    Every raid also wants a warrior. And i am sure that many other classes would want to be in warrior's spot.

    I don't know what form a nerf should take. But if a druid is such a no brainer that there's always at least one...

    There's not always a druid, there are comps without them nowadays. It's mostly due to inertia now anyway. Warrior however is pretty much a staple.

    So if you don;t like the druid's position in meta, and think that it is a reason for nerf, you definitely should start with warrior first.

    Not saying that you need to do that (i was pretty much against "balancing support options" via continuously hitting chrono with a nerf bat and checking if it still moves, and i always thought that just making a good alternative would be better, for example), but that's the logical conclusion to your complains.

    The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.

  • What I was suggesting. Opinions evolve. And mine have changed across this thread. I openly admit to not understanding how to edit the balance myself.

    Every raid does also want a warrior. Only for its banners. Which are stat bonuses, rather than flat damage bonus unique to the class.

    If warrior was also producing 25 might on 10 man squads and preventing others from taking even part of its job, then I might be suggesting a nerf to warrior. But only in context. For me to suggest a warrior nerf.... It'd have to be so obviously good, that other classes are unable to unseat it, the way druid has been historically.

    However, folks have persuaded me that druid presence is now mostly due to inertia. Fair enough.

    Tldr. I get it you want to be right. But I don't know how to conceded the point any harder.

    So the lesson I take from everyone's points is, 'play what you want and deal with the fallout yourself, the meta is 80% illusion anyways'.

  • @Cyninja.2954 said:
    One thing to note, once again:

    Any negative change to support availability, no matter in what way, will make the raid composition more restrictive.

    One of the reasons why having druid provide 10 man might/fury/spirits is good is: it allows for other supports to tag along. Same as with warrior banners which affect 10 players.

    The solution is not to remove the ability to provide buffs to 10 people (aka an entire raid squad), it is to allow MORE classes to provide 10 people support as to open up raid spots (which the devs have been implementing more and more, see renegade 10 man alacrity and similar deisgn decisions. Showing that the devs understand this issue).

    Back during HoT the raid composition was:

    • 2 chronos
    • 2 druids
    • 2 warriors
    • 4 dps

    The reason was simple: boons were 5 mann capped, same as banners. Pretty much all raid meta improvement came from making abilities and boons reach 10 people, freeing up slots. If you change druid boons or spirits to 5 people, the net result would not be less druids in raids, it would be more.

    This is a very interesting point you make, but I always wonder what you and anyone else reading this would rather choose (if you HAVE to choose):

    • A meta where all 9 classes have a spot in the 10-man squad with a quite specific/pigeon-holed role they perform
      OR

    • An almost perfect balance where there is almost no real diversity between classes, so it doesn't really matter which class you take, they all do the job as fine as the other

    I know they're both outer bounds of the spectrum, but what should ANet according to you (and anyone else) balance towards, because I've got a feeling they're not really sure themselves. You indeed give the examples of unique class buffs: Banners and Spirits (changed from 5 to 10 players), but ANet did quite the opposite with Alacrity being a unique mesmer buff before, and making it more available across the board now.

  • Linken.6345Linken.6345 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    One thing to note, once again:

    Any negative change to support availability, no matter in what way, will make the raid composition more restrictive.

    One of the reasons why having druid provide 10 man might/fury/spirits is good is: it allows for other supports to tag along. Same as with warrior banners which affect 10 players.

    The solution is not to remove the ability to provide buffs to 10 people (aka an entire raid squad), it is to allow MORE classes to provide 10 people support as to open up raid spots (which the devs have been implementing more and more, see renegade 10 man alacrity and similar deisgn decisions. Showing that the devs understand this issue).

    Back during HoT the raid composition was:

    • 2 chronos
    • 2 druids
    • 2 warriors
    • 4 dps

    The reason was simple: boons were 5 mann capped, same as banners. Pretty much all raid meta improvement came from making abilities and boons reach 10 people, freeing up slots. If you change druid boons or spirits to 5 people, the net result would not be less druids in raids, it would be more.

    This is a very interesting point you make, but I always wonder what you and anyone else reading this would rather choose (if you HAVE to choose):

    • A meta where all 9 classes have a spot in the 10-man squad with a quite specific/pigeon-holed role they perform
      OR

    • An almost perfect balance where there is almost no real diversity between classes, so it doesn't really matter which class you take, they all do the job as fine as the other

    I know they're both outer bounds of the spectrum, but what should ANet according to you (and anyone else) balance towards, because I've got a feeling they're not really sure themselves. You indeed give the examples of unique class buffs: Banners and Spirits (changed from 5 to 10 players), but ANet did quite the opposite with Alacrity being a unique mesmer buff before, and making it more available across the board now.

    Why not take it 1 step further mix the 9 classes down to 1 class and be done with it?

  • Agrippa Oculus.3726Agrippa Oculus.3726 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 3, 2019

    @Linken.6345 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    One thing to note, once again:

    Any negative change to support availability, no matter in what way, will make the raid composition more restrictive.

    One of the reasons why having druid provide 10 man might/fury/spirits is good is: it allows for other supports to tag along. Same as with warrior banners which affect 10 players.

    The solution is not to remove the ability to provide buffs to 10 people (aka an entire raid squad), it is to allow MORE classes to provide 10 people support as to open up raid spots (which the devs have been implementing more and more, see renegade 10 man alacrity and similar deisgn decisions. Showing that the devs understand this issue).

    Back during HoT the raid composition was:

    • 2 chronos
    • 2 druids
    • 2 warriors
    • 4 dps

    The reason was simple: boons were 5 mann capped, same as banners. Pretty much all raid meta improvement came from making abilities and boons reach 10 people, freeing up slots. If you change druid boons or spirits to 5 people, the net result would not be less druids in raids, it would be more.

    This is a very interesting point you make, but I always wonder what you and anyone else reading this would rather choose (if you HAVE to choose):

    • A meta where all 9 classes have a spot in the 10-man squad with a quite specific/pigeon-holed role they perform
      OR

    • An almost perfect balance where there is almost no real diversity between classes, so it doesn't really matter which class you take, they all do the job as fine as the other

    I know they're both outer bounds of the spectrum, but what should ANet according to you (and anyone else) balance towards, because I've got a feeling they're not really sure themselves. You indeed give the examples of unique class buffs: Banners and Spirits (changed from 5 to 10 players), but ANet did quite the opposite with Alacrity being a unique mesmer buff before, and making it more available across the board now.

    Why not take it 1 step further mix the 9 classes down to 1 class and be done with it?

    I know they're both really outer-bound, but it's not called 'balancing' for nothing. You will never achieve perfect balance (and you probably don't even want to) because of numerous reasons: the sheer complexity of it being one of them. But I do think you should have at least a direction in mind: i.e. your goal should never be actively unbalancing the game.

    And I also know the spectrum is never this 2 dimensional. But if you HAVE to choose between those two simplified balanced states, which one would you choose and why?
    (but if I read your sarcasm correctly you would rather go towards the first state than the latter, right? Why?)
    Edit: to add to my last question for: @Linken.6345: The latter was actually the design philosophy which ANet aimed for when they launched GW2 back in 2012: Every class is capable to heal, deal damage, tank, etc.: the specific role design came more or less with the launch of HoT after a lot of feedback from the community (so they said) steering towards that direction.

  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 3, 2019

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:
    This is a very interesting point you make, but I always wonder what you and anyone else reading this would rather choose (if you HAVE to choose):

    • A meta where all 9 classes have a spot in the 10-man squad with a quite specific/pigeon-holed role they perform
      OR

    • An almost perfect balance where there is almost no real diversity between classes, so it doesn't really matter which class you take, they all do the job as fine as the other

    Or maybe instead of going for extremes, just go with more sensible, moderate choice, and make it so that every class can have a dps build (ideally both condi and power) that qualifies to be included into meta, and that for every other role there are at least 2-3 classes that can fulfill it well. And that those classes are not too heavily dependent on other specific classes, so it's easy to mix and match, instead of having to create a whole specific group around a single class or two.

    The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.

  • Agrippa Oculus.3726Agrippa Oculus.3726 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 3, 2019

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:
    This is a very interesting point you make, but I always wonder what you and anyone else reading this would rather choose (if you HAVE to choose):

    • A meta where all 9 classes have a spot in the 10-man squad with a quite specific/pigeon-holed role they perform
      OR

    • An almost perfect balance where there is almost no real diversity between classes, so it doesn't really matter which class you take, they all do the job as fine as the other

    Or maybe instead of going for extremes, just go with more sensible, moderate choice, and make it so that every class can have a dps build (ideally both condi and power) that qualifies to be included into meta, and that for every other role there are at least 2-3 classes that can fulfill it well. And that those classes are not too heavily dependent on other specific classes, so it's easy to mix and match, instead of having to create a whole specific group around a single class or two.

    I thinks that's more or less reality as well at the moment (save for some odd ones out), and maybe we should be happy with what we have at the moment. But it's also a bit of a weird "balance" as well, don't you think? Why are there only a few classes (or 2-3 like you mentioned) allowed to do real good support/heal/other specific roles and (almost) all classes should be good at dealing DPS?

  • Linken.6345Linken.6345 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 3, 2019

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Linken.6345 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    One thing to note, once again:

    Any negative change to support availability, no matter in what way, will make the raid composition more restrictive.

    One of the reasons why having druid provide 10 man might/fury/spirits is good is: it allows for other supports to tag along. Same as with warrior banners which affect 10 players.

    The solution is not to remove the ability to provide buffs to 10 people (aka an entire raid squad), it is to allow MORE classes to provide 10 people support as to open up raid spots (which the devs have been implementing more and more, see renegade 10 man alacrity and similar deisgn decisions. Showing that the devs understand this issue).

    Back during HoT the raid composition was:

    • 2 chronos
    • 2 druids
    • 2 warriors
    • 4 dps

    The reason was simple: boons were 5 mann capped, same as banners. Pretty much all raid meta improvement came from making abilities and boons reach 10 people, freeing up slots. If you change druid boons or spirits to 5 people, the net result would not be less druids in raids, it would be more.

    This is a very interesting point you make, but I always wonder what you and anyone else reading this would rather choose (if you HAVE to choose):

    • A meta where all 9 classes have a spot in the 10-man squad with a quite specific/pigeon-holed role they perform
      OR

    • An almost perfect balance where there is almost no real diversity between classes, so it doesn't really matter which class you take, they all do the job as fine as the other

    I know they're both outer bounds of the spectrum, but what should ANet according to you (and anyone else) balance towards, because I've got a feeling they're not really sure themselves. You indeed give the examples of unique class buffs: Banners and Spirits (changed from 5 to 10 players), but ANet did quite the opposite with Alacrity being a unique mesmer buff before, and making it more available across the board now.

    Why not take it 1 step further mix the 9 classes down to 1 class and be done with it?

    I know they're both really outer-bound, but it's not called 'balancing' for nothing. You will never achieve perfect balance (and you probably don't even want to) because of numerous reasons: the sheer complexity of it being one of them. But I do think you should have at least a direction in mind: i.e. your goal should never be actively unbalancing the game.

    And I also know the spectrum is never this 2 dimensional. But if you HAVE to choose between those two simplified balanced states, which one would you choose and why?
    (but if I read your sarcasm correctly you would rather go towards the first state than the latter, right? Why?)
    Edit: to add to my last question for: @Linken.6345: The latter was actually the design philosophy which ANet aimed for when they launched GW2 back in 2012: Every class is capable to heal, deal damage, tank, etc.: the specific role design came more or less with the launch of HoT after a lot of feedback from the community (so they said) steering towards that direction.

    Yes every class should be self suffiecent thats not the same as making them balanced in a group composition at all tho.
    Right now every class can survive by their own 10 skills just fine in the game anet nailed it down perfectly.

    In groups or raids (dubble groups) thats not going to be the same beast at all. ( not the way they have been churning em out and I dont know if you can make em were 10 people do 10 diffrent things on 150 diffrent traitline compositions and be equaly good at everything tbh)

    First clearly you dont remember the 1 mesmer 4 warrior meta in dungeons before hot release it was even worse then now.

    And my sarcasm was towards option 2 not option 1

    Since we dont have option 1 now all 9 classes dont have a pigoned holed hole to fit in.
    Were in the pve meta do necromancer or any of it elite specs fit in mate?
    If wer going by meta we would have nothing but what power chrono dps, power dhs, condi 40k weavers and mirrages. ( only fight I seen mirrages prefered is twins other then that you look for cdps or dps)
    Tanks only chrono and healers 1 druid +1 healer if needed.

    If you want anet to buff more people to 10 man buffs like spotter (ranger), assassins presence (revenant) . life leech (necro buff that one damage vise obviously) pinpoint (engi)
    Empower allies (war)
    Elementalist could give 10 wide crit chance boost maybe
    Mesmer 10 man chance to dubble strike your weapon get a mirror image.
    Guardian will need something else their buffs toughness.
    Thief I really have no idea.

    If thats what you want then advocate for more 10 wide buffs so you only need 1 of each class. ( and Im all for that to happen but it wont unless the buffs are significant) Then you get the oh I want to play x class, check lfg all the groups in looking for group already have x class anet please buff my class since I cant play it.

    But its not going to change that some classes do better at some bosses then others.
    If you want balance cut 8 out of 9 classes thats the only way to get balance

  • @Linken.6345 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Linken.6345 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    One thing to note, once again:

    Any negative change to support availability, no matter in what way, will make the raid composition more restrictive.

    One of the reasons why having druid provide 10 man might/fury/spirits is good is: it allows for other supports to tag along. Same as with warrior banners which affect 10 players.

    The solution is not to remove the ability to provide buffs to 10 people (aka an entire raid squad), it is to allow MORE classes to provide 10 people support as to open up raid spots (which the devs have been implementing more and more, see renegade 10 man alacrity and similar deisgn decisions. Showing that the devs understand this issue).

    Back during HoT the raid composition was:

    • 2 chronos
    • 2 druids
    • 2 warriors
    • 4 dps

    The reason was simple: boons were 5 mann capped, same as banners. Pretty much all raid meta improvement came from making abilities and boons reach 10 people, freeing up slots. If you change druid boons or spirits to 5 people, the net result would not be less druids in raids, it would be more.

    This is a very interesting point you make, but I always wonder what you and anyone else reading this would rather choose (if you HAVE to choose):

    • A meta where all 9 classes have a spot in the 10-man squad with a quite specific/pigeon-holed role they perform
      OR

    • An almost perfect balance where there is almost no real diversity between classes, so it doesn't really matter which class you take, they all do the job as fine as the other

    I know they're both outer bounds of the spectrum, but what should ANet according to you (and anyone else) balance towards, because I've got a feeling they're not really sure themselves. You indeed give the examples of unique class buffs: Banners and Spirits (changed from 5 to 10 players), but ANet did quite the opposite with Alacrity being a unique mesmer buff before, and making it more available across the board now.

    Why not take it 1 step further mix the 9 classes down to 1 class and be done with it?

    I know they're both really outer-bound, but it's not called 'balancing' for nothing. You will never achieve perfect balance (and you probably don't even want to) because of numerous reasons: the sheer complexity of it being one of them. But I do think you should have at least a direction in mind: i.e. your goal should never be actively unbalancing the game.

    And I also know the spectrum is never this 2 dimensional. But if you HAVE to choose between those two simplified balanced states, which one would you choose and why?
    (but if I read your sarcasm correctly you would rather go towards the first state than the latter, right? Why?)
    Edit: to add to my last question for: @Linken.6345: The latter was actually the design philosophy which ANet aimed for when they launched GW2 back in 2012: Every class is capable to heal, deal damage, tank, etc.: the specific role design came more or less with the launch of HoT after a lot of feedback from the community (so they said) steering towards that direction.

    Yes every class should be self suffiecent thats not the same as making them balanced in a group composition at all tho.
    Right now every class can survive by their own 10 skills just fine in the game anet nailed it down perfectly.

    In groups or raids (dubble groups) thats not going to be the same beast at all. ( not the way they have been churning em out and I dont know if you can make em were 10 people do 10 diffrent things on 150 diffrent traitline compositions and be equaly good at everything tbh)

    First clearly you dont remember the 1 mesmer 4 warrior meta in dungeons before hot release it was even worse then now.

    I definitely can (or with thief for skips), I never said ANet did a good job at it, I actually think they did a terrible job at it, but it was their design philosophy.

    And my sarcasm was towards option 2 not option 1

    oops, misread you there!

    Since we dont have option 1 now all 9 classes dont have a pigoned holed hole to fit in.
    Were in the pve meta do necromancer or any of it elite specs fit in mate?

    I agree wholeheartedly: again, ANet isnt that great at balancing imho, I mean: the Necro is literally a meme in the PvE endgame and has been since launch! I'm a big advocate of starting to fix that issue urgently (being the fact that it's my primary since launch). But what makes it even worse, is that ANet doesnt even have a philosophy and/or general direction anymore, by the looks of it! I mean, take the Death Magic rework: it couldn't be more useless regarding the PvE endgame ... what were they thinking: what's their direction? What's their philosophy behind it? Where would it fit in a PvE endgame scenario? Just an example of course, since you mentioned the Necro!

    If wer going by meta we would have nothing but what power chrono dps, power dhs, condi 40k weavers and mirrages. ( only fight I seen mirrages prefered is twins other then that you look for cdps or dps)
    Tanks only chrono and healers 1 druid +1 healer if needed.

    If you want anet to buff more people to 10 man buffs like spotter (ranger), assassins presence (revenant) . life leech (necro buff that one damage vise obviously) pinpoint (engi)
    Empower allies (war)
    Elementalist could give 10 wide crit chance boost maybe
    Mesmer 10 man chance to dubble strike your weapon get a mirror image.
    Guardian will need something else their buffs toughness.
    Thief I really have no idea.

    Yea, could be a solution, you are a bit pigeon holed of course, if you want to raid with a certain class, you have to take that unique buff, but it's not like it's a very severe change from the builds you can choose from now (they are by design quite pigeon holed as well). So all in all, I think you got at least my vote there! Wondering what others think, though!

    If thats what you want then advocate for more 10 wide buffs so you only need 1 of each class. ( and Im all for that to happen but it wont unless the buffs are significant) Then you get the oh I want to play x class, check lfg all the groups in looking for group already have x class anet please buff my class since I cant play it.

    Well, and there you mention indeed another issue that you'll probably see happening then! Might still be better than the alternative where you sometimes see where certain classes are literally kicked in advance or at least frowned upon, cause they're just not good enough!

    But its not going to change that some classes do better at some bosses then others.
    If you want balance cut 8 out of 9 classes thats the only way to get balance

    Sure, that's the absolute extreme, you can still go for 9 different classes, they do the same (same numbers, same statistics, etc.), their look and feel just differ. Again, not really what anyone want, but you could at least go towards a more fully self-sufficient: every class can fulfil every role kind of balance (which is more towards the original second option I was proposing ... not really my favourite ... I think)

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 3, 2019

    Going to adress some of the points raised and try to also touch on group composition without specifically quoting people.

    I think when talking group composition and meta composition, people are forgetting (or unknowingly ignoring or not seeing) that there is multiple meta setups, only that most of them are unknown the further you follow the skill ladder down (less skilled players whould absolutely not use snowcrow meta builds but rather safer setups. Unfortunately we don't have a site for safe compositions but rather those require experienced raiders to pass along). Meta composition or balance is NOT needed for class participation accross the board. Unfortunately, some raiders are to inexperienced to understand which team composition they should be using for their raid comp.

    What is needed for success in raids?:

    • access to mandatory boons/buffs (fury, might, alacrity, quickness, etc). The benefits here are to huge to not count some of the buffs as mandatory
    • access to enough sustain for the groups skill level (often manifested in 1 or 2 healers)
    • access to enough crowd control to be able to pass defiance bar checks on certain fights
    • access to specific skills for certain encounters (like pushes for SH or Samarog)
    • access to occasionally a tank type of class for high boss damage
    • access to enough damage to pass the dps checks

    Those are THE essentials to pass all raid encounters. Everything else is gravy. Some of these points are covered by all classes (say damage checks. Every class has damage builds which are more than enough to finish ANY raid encounter, even condi druid on KC for example would work). Some of these points are only covered by specific classes or worse on others (boon availability and tank in form of access to regular damage ignore for example).

    Most people do not distinguish between those different points when talking about balance, which is a mistake. Reducing access to essentials makes the raid composition more riggid, since now you are limiting the pool of classes who can be brought and might even require 2 of the same class (see past 2 warriors, 2 druid setups). Ideally we should have as many classes as possible (or class compositions as to not create full mirrors, which is more difficult obviously than mirroring class abilities) which can provide or fullfill these roles (currently visible in druid+chrono and Firebrigade composition). Firebrigade while stronger than druid+chrono (in part to encourage a meta shift) does not invalidate chrono+druid. The old comp is perfectly fine to clear fractals for example and some people still use it.

    Balancing things like damage, healing power/group sustain, crowd control, etc. which are essentially available to all classes, does not reduce team compositions, it merely makes some a bit more difficult (I know someone who plays warrior as Quadim solo kite and Deimos Handkite for example, even though other classes are way easier for those roles). The roblem here is: many players simply argue balance for non essentials the same way as with the essentials.
    Is it unfortunate that we do not have perfect balance on non essentials? Sure. Is it an issue for access to raids per class, no. If a player is skilled enough, he can play any class in one of these roles, the skill gap between average players and top tier players is big enough to "get gud".

    This does not even cover off meta compositions which would be of way more use to most raiders than snowcrow compositions. Think healing scourge or healing tempest which make a lot of content a lot easier, even if not ideal for a perfect setup.

    To summarize, for raid balance we ideally want:

    • as least a restrictive balance for essentials as possible (most often now achieved via either easier access to boons, or via 10 player caps instead of 5)
    • as many classes which can perform the essential roles as good as possible (balance does not need to be perfect here, druid+chrono or Firebrigade both get the job done. There will always be a BEST setup, we just need more "good" setups)
    • as good a balance on the non essentials like damage as possible, but this is not actually of major significance even if people focus way to often on how well the top 1% of players perform.
  • @BrokenGlass.9356 said:
    Every raid does also want a warrior. Only for its banners. Which are stat bonuses, rather than flat damage bonus unique to the class.

    If warrior was also producing 25 might on 10 man squads and preventing others from taking even part of its job, then I might be suggesting a nerf to warrior. But only in context. For me to suggest a warrior nerf.... It'd have to be so obviously good, that other classes are unable to unseat it, the way druid has been historically.

    However, folks have persuaded me that druid presence is now mostly due to inertia. Fair enough.

    Tldr. I get it you want to be right. But I don't know how to conceded the point any harder.

    So the lesson I take from everyone's points is, 'play what you want and deal with the fallout yourself, the meta is 80% illusion anyways'.

    About war, banners are by far the only reason (or in many cases even the main reason) to bring a war. The huge CC capability and the very competible damage output are often more then enough reason. That is also why you often will see people join as dps war (same build as banner war, just without banners).

    About meta, meta carry different meaning depending on who you ask. But for many it is the "best" settup for clearing a fight as fast as possible. And by this diffenition there will naturally only by 1 settup pr. fight. And genrally only a few classes will be in that "best" settup for any given fight.

    That said, atm there are alot of builds/classes that are NEAR meta, so they might preform 99.9999% as good as the meta settup and even more builds/classes will preform better then the meta for a specific player or specific group. This is why Cyninja mention that many groups will do better with a heal temp/scourge etc and why 2 war's in a group for many fights will be stronger then 1 war + 1 other dps (just do sama with 2 wars and get carryed during cc). All that said, this do not make the meta a lie or an illusion. It just mean that when a raider/player have a good enough understanding of a given fight and of the different builds that different classes can use then that player will often be able to ajust the groups classes/builds/tactics to preform better for a given group.

    The big thing you need to understand is that the meta group is made in a specific way for a reason. And if you change 1 class (or build) then it will often mean that you need to change other things as well. So when you mention wanting to join a group as a might/banner war then you need to understand that this also mean that the group need to think, ok. What other changes do we need to make this work. It might including dropping the druid and bringing a might/heal giving tempest or FB or Ren or something. But its rarely just 1x joined, so now we dont need 1y and to make this kind of changes from the meta (or near meta settups) require that the commander (or group) have a really good understanding of ALL the classes/builds + mechanics of the fight. And this is why pugs often just fall back to 1 of the meta/near meta settups so they dont need to think to hard about it.

  • LadyKitty.6120LadyKitty.6120 Member ✭✭✭

    @Sigfodr.9576 said:

    @BrokenGlass.9356 said:
    Every raid does also want a warrior. Only for its banners. Which are stat bonuses, rather than flat damage bonus unique to the class.

    If warrior was also producing 25 might on 10 man squads and preventing others from taking even part of its job, then I might be suggesting a nerf to warrior. But only in context. For me to suggest a warrior nerf.... It'd have to be so obviously good, that other classes are unable to unseat it, the way druid has been historically.

    However, folks have persuaded me that druid presence is now mostly due to inertia. Fair enough.

    Tldr. I get it you want to be right. But I don't know how to conceded the point any harder.

    So the lesson I take from everyone's points is, 'play what you want and deal with the fallout yourself, the meta is 80% illusion anyways'.

    About war, banners are by far the only reason (or in many cases even the main reason) to bring a war. The huge CC capability and the very competible damage output are often more then enough reason. That is also why you often will see people join as dps war (same build as banner war, just without banners).

    About meta, meta carry different meaning depending on who you ask. But for many it is the "best" settup for clearing a fight as fast as possible. And by this diffenition there will naturally only by 1 settup pr. fight. And genrally only a few classes will be in that "best" settup for any given fight.

    That said, atm there are alot of builds/classes that are NEAR meta, so they might preform 99.9999% as good as the meta settup and even more builds/classes will preform better then the meta for a specific player or specific group. This is why Cyninja mention that many groups will do better with a heal temp/scourge etc and why 2 war's in a group for many fights will be stronger then 1 war + 1 other dps (just do sama with 2 wars and get carryed during cc). All that said, this do not make the meta a lie or an illusion. It just mean that when a raider/player have a good enough understanding of a given fight and of the different builds that different classes can use then that player will often be able to ajust the groups classes/builds/tactics to preform better for a given group.

    According to Kitty's testing, there's lots of builds within 10-15% below the most potent ones and many of the alternative weapons don't fall too far below the most optimal weapon combo for a class (though there's still horrible options like necromancer's staff and warrior's rifle).

    The big thing you need to understand is that the meta group is made in a specific way for a reason. And if you change 1 class (or build) then it will often mean that you need to change other things as well. So when you mention wanting to join a group as a might/banner war then you need to understand that this also mean that the group need to think, ok. What other changes do we need to make this work. It might including dropping the druid and bringing a might/heal giving tempest or FB or Ren or something. But its rarely just 1x joined, so now we dont need 1y and to make this kind of changes from the meta (or near meta settups) require that the commander (or group) have a really good understanding of ALL the classes/builds + mechanics of the fight. And this is why pugs often just fall back to 1 of the meta/near meta settups so they dont need to think to hard about it.

    This, most of all. Especially in LFG scene, majority of the peoples play 2-3 builds max. and they're usually unaware how other options than obvious druid+chrono work. Surprisingly few actually understand when stuff like boonthief are truly beneficial and Kitty's usually had to guide pugmanders and squads on how to organize when there's a boonthief around.
    And from what Kitty's been raiding with her guildies, making a squad comp work depends on how well the commander knows the classes. Someone who actually knows all classes and their real capabilities can make almost any comp work decently enough to clear raid bosses as long as there's enough support and dpsers who are skilled enough at their role.

    It's also unfortunately common for people to think that "only chrono can tank due to all the evades and blocks! We need a CHRONOtank" when pretty much every support build can tank most of the bosses (though Deimos can get a bit annoying on necro and tempest). It's only a matter of understanding how to counteract boss mechanics and the skill to execute those methods.

    It's Kitty. The young lady who streams and records videos playing various (non-)metabuilds. Raid/fractal videos at youtube.com/LadyKitty, Kittymarks test results at youtube.com/Kittymarks and tinyurl.com/Kittymarks and streams at twitch.tv/ladykittygw2 .

  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:
    I thinks that's more or less reality as well at the moment (save for some odd ones out), and maybe we should be happy with what we have at the moment. But it's also a bit of a weird "balance" as well, don't you think? Why are there only a few classes (or 2-3 like you mentioned) allowed to do real good support/heal/other specific roles and (almost) all classes should be good at dealing DPS?

    Due to imbalance between roles - in short, way more players want to play dps than support, heal or tank. That's pretty much uniform in any MMORPG, and GW2 is no exception.
    Besides, good dps is useful also outside endgame instanced content. We don;t want classes that are only good for support, because those classes would have it harder in OW and/or story instances.

    The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.

  • I appreciate the thoughtful responses.

    But, I'd like to go back to @Cyninja.2954 's original question.

    I think they should balance towards every class being applicable to every role. But I don't think this means cookie cutter. Because buffing is so spread out across a spectrum of boons and possible unique buffs, and dps is unique to direct damage and various conditions.... And now healing is splt to include cleanse and barriers... It seems to me that the sub-splits created here mean that the optimum build for a class shouldn't be able to be that general.

    A thief designed for buffing, should have an identifiable flavor. Covering some quantity of the boon, cleanse, heal, barrier, stealth spectrum. And the tools available to this theoretical thief, should be useful, and desirable based on raid content.

    The idea here is that say, 3 classes can do alacrity extremely well. 2 others provide enough of it to limp by. The same would be true of quickness and might and so on. Allocating the significant raid buffs in a round, bassicly. So that the various support builds that provide x, are more varied, but... I'm OK with a quickbrand still being a quickbrand.

    This is bassicly true already, but the scaling is WAY off. 2 of 9 professions can do quickness? (notice how I don't count boon thief... Which I play...) 2 of 9 can do alacrity? And.... One of them overlaps? 1 of 9 is capable of significant barrier? 9 of 9 capable of self sustain at the expense of dps.

    This could perhaps be addressed with a carefully prebalanced set of elite specs. And it's probably how it will get done. (fingers crossed for elite specs in living story) The main thing I want to see is more classes able to do more roles. And red herring traits, that make a class only ever quite get to 80% of what your lunch-break-skill-builder-messing looks like it can do... They just don't feel good.

  • Lan Deathrider.5910Lan Deathrider.5910 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I'll point out that two PS Berzerkers spamming Decapitate while carrying a single banner and FGJ will provide the requisite Might and banners for the comp allowing the Druid to run Lingering Light for better healing. Maybe that won't be better for the speed clearing groups, but it may be better for other comps.

  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Lan Deathrider.5910 said:
    I'll point out that two PS Berzerkers spamming Decapitate while carrying a single banner and FGJ will provide the requisite Might and banners for the comp allowing the Druid to run Lingering Light for better healing. Maybe that won't be better for the speed clearing groups, but it may be better for other comps.

    If you need to run lingering light for healing, it's way better to just take a scourge or tempest as secondary healer. You definitely won't be thinking about optimizing dps and boon uptime in such situation anyway.

    The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.

  • Lan Deathrider.5910Lan Deathrider.5910 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Lan Deathrider.5910 said:
    I'll point out that two PS Berzerkers spamming Decapitate while carrying a single banner and FGJ will provide the requisite Might and banners for the comp allowing the Druid to run Lingering Light for better healing. Maybe that won't be better for the speed clearing groups, but it may be better for other comps.

    If you need to run lingering light for healing, it's way better to just take a scourge or tempest as secondary healer. You definitely won't be thinking about optimizing dps and boon uptime in such situation anyway.

    Well, like I said, might not be the best for a Speed Clear comp, but for generic comp maybe. As has been said in this thread already there are a fair number of non-meta comps that do just fine.

  • Linken.6345Linken.6345 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Well why not take a soulbeast for the spirit and any other healer that got better healing if its for none spead clearing squads?

  • Anyone else seeing new posters having huge empty space before thier posts? Just wondering if that's a bunch of admin, check to censor this text tags... Or what?

    It seems that alternative team comps are completely viable. It's just that any time folks even admit they can work, they must insert a caveat for, 'but that's not the best way, so if you want to do that, it's on you'. Which is fair. Lots of salmon die going upstream.

  • Lan Deathrider.5910Lan Deathrider.5910 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @BrokenGlass.9356 said:
    Anyone else seeing new posters having huge empty space before thier posts? Just wondering if that's a bunch of admin, check to censor this text tags... Or what?

    It seems that alternative team comps are completely viable. It's just that any time folks even admit they can work, they must insert a caveat for, 'but that's not the best way, so if you want to do that, it's on you'. Which is fair. Lots of salmon die going upstream.

    I see that when I log in from my mobile, but not from a PC.

    I was mentioning two PS Zerkers with a single banner to cover the Might and banner buffs, though would also end up covering Fury. Would a Druid taking Lingering Light instead of Grace of the Land provide enough healing then as a single healer? Bear in mind there is room for one such warrior to take Shrug It Off, and for both Warrior's to take Soldier's Comfort to supplement party healing.

  • @Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

    @BrokenGlass.9356 said:
    Anyone else seeing new posters having huge empty space before thier posts? Just wondering if that's a bunch of admin, check to censor this text tags... Or what?

    It seems that alternative team comps are completely viable. It's just that any time folks even admit they can work, they must insert a caveat for, 'but that's not the best way, so if you want to do that, it's on you'. Which is fair. Lots of salmon die going upstream.

    I see that when I log in from my mobile, but not from a PC.

    I was mentioning two PS Zerkers with a single banner to cover the Might and banner buffs, though would also end up covering Fury. Would a Druid taking Lingering Light instead of Grace of the Land provide enough healing then as a single healer? Bear in mind there is room for one such warrior to take Shrug It Off, and for both Warrior's to take Soldier's Comfort to supplement party healing.

    I think it's doable. Depending on how tight your squad does mechanics. If you keep getting ported on Cairn, then... No, probably not. But if nobody does? Yeah. Single healer can definitely be a thing. You can even trim huge amounts of healing power off of it, in order to make it work right on the razors edge of functionality, and adding damage back in to bring up the total dps.

    The thing I find most interesting about the new Tactics line in warrior, and it's potential effect on the optimum team comp... Is that if you compare the dps between druid, chrono, bannerslave comp (just the supports, excluding the dps guys all together) the firebregade with tactics warrior has much higher personal dps. Yes at the loss of frost and fire spirits... But, gains a lot of personal dps. I don't know if this will be worth it or not, I'm still gearing my warrior in diviner's and have yet to pitch it to my static.

  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @BrokenGlass.9356 said:
    Anyone else seeing new posters having huge empty space before thier posts?

    Do you mean the banner at the top of the forums, that most forum users long ago disabled?

    The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.

  • @BrokenGlass.9356 said:
    The thing I find most interesting about the new Tactics line in warrior, and it's potential effect on the optimum team comp... Is that if you compare the dps between druid, chrono, bannerslave comp (just the supports, excluding the dps guys all together) the firebregade with tactics warrior has much higher personal dps. Yes at the loss of frost and fire spirits... But, gains a lot of personal dps. I don't know if this will be worth it or not, I'm still gearing my warrior in diviner's and have yet to pitch it to my static.

    Firebrigade do have higher dps then chrono/druid, but at the loss of alot of the healing (+ spirits). That is unless the FB go heal and then the damage is the same.

    I understand that you really want to test out banner/might war, and thats cool. But why in the world do you even consider diviner? Your only boon really is might so just swap your runes to strength and replace some berserker gear with assassin and you are done. Fury? np, you will have either a QFB or a HFB anf then fury is 100% taken care off or a chrono and then you just barely need to help with fury and just taking for great justise will be more then enought. And then you dont loose 80% of your damage.

  • @BrokenGlass.9356 said:
    Anyone else seeing new posters having huge empty space before thier posts? Just wondering if that's a bunch of admin, check to censor this text tags... Or what?

    Noticed it too over the past week. Though this was right after my phone updated Chrome, so I thought it was just me.

  • @Sigfodr.9576 said:

    @BrokenGlass.9356 said:
    The thing I find most interesting about the new Tactics line in warrior, and it's potential effect on the optimum team comp... Is that if you compare the dps between druid, chrono, bannerslave comp (just the supports, excluding the dps guys all together) the firebregade with tactics warrior has much higher personal dps. Yes at the loss of frost and fire spirits... But, gains a lot of personal dps. I don't know if this will be worth it or not, I'm still gearing my warrior in diviner's and have yet to pitch it to my static.

    Firebrigade do have higher dps then chrono/druid, but at the loss of alot of the healing (+ spirits). That is unless the FB go heal and then the damage is the same.

    I understand that you really want to test out banner/might war, and thats cool. But why in the world do you even consider diviner? Your only boon really is might so just swap your runes to strength and replace some berserker gear with assassin and you are done. Fury? np, you will have either a QFB or a HFB anf then fury is 100% taken care off or a chrono and then you just barely need to help with fury and just taking for great justise will be more then enought. And then you dont loose 80% of your damage.

    Diviner? Fury, vigor, resistance, and self quickness while not grouped. (swap a few traits) also, I like long swiftness. So, optimally perfect? It's probs not. But it's fun so far. I'm already set up in 90% berserker's gear now. Without some duration, the vigor and fury can fall off... I don't want that, bassicly.

  • Lan Deathrider.5910Lan Deathrider.5910 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @BrokenGlass.9356 said:

    @Sigfodr.9576 said:

    @BrokenGlass.9356 said:
    The thing I find most interesting about the new Tactics line in warrior, and it's potential effect on the optimum team comp... Is that if you compare the dps between druid, chrono, bannerslave comp (just the supports, excluding the dps guys all together) the firebregade with tactics warrior has much higher personal dps. Yes at the loss of frost and fire spirits... But, gains a lot of personal dps. I don't know if this will be worth it or not, I'm still gearing my warrior in diviner's and have yet to pitch it to my static.

    Firebrigade do have higher dps then chrono/druid, but at the loss of alot of the healing (+ spirits). That is unless the FB go heal and then the damage is the same.

    I understand that you really want to test out banner/might war, and thats cool. But why in the world do you even consider diviner? Your only boon really is might so just swap your runes to strength and replace some berserker gear with assassin and you are done. Fury? np, you will have either a QFB or a HFB anf then fury is 100% taken care off or a chrono and then you just barely need to help with fury and just taking for great justise will be more then enought. And then you dont loose 80% of your damage.

    Diviner? Fury, vigor, resistance, and self quickness while not grouped. (swap a few traits) also, I like long swiftness. So, optimally perfect? It's probs not. But it's fun so far. I'm already set up in 90% berserker's gear now. Without some duration, the vigor and fury can fall off... I don't want that, bassicly.

    Shouldn't some food and sigils take care of that though?

  • Henry.5713Henry.5713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Druids provide you with much more than just reliable squad-wide Might. This kinda comp only seems worth it if you are actually able to get away with running absolutely no healing which would indeed reward you with a slight increase in squad damage. But it would also ultimately mean that it isn't worth it for any group.
    You already sacrafice quite a bit of the warrior DPS by changing their role from pretty much a full DPS that happens to also bring banners to a hybrid build that might have very little personal DPS depending on the build you are talking about. The squad damage is going to be lowered even further with each additional sacrafice you have to make to replace the many Druid goodies outside of providing Might. Stuff like changing either part of the FB/Renegade duo to a full healing build because of the missing healing or bringing a Soulbeast who then has to run two spirits / taking the loss in squad damage due to the missing spirits. The missing Spotter will force you to run more Assassin gear (not much of a loss but it adds up). There is other stuff to consider like boons (Fury, Vigor), condition removal and more. Nothing you can't handle but it might result in even more sacrafices.

    Considering the "one healer/two healers" scenario, a freedom to run Lingering Light sounds good on paper but I much rather have my FB or Renegade swap to a healing build if the GOTL Druid alone couldn't cut it. Running either of these builds comes with so many additional benefits alongside WAY better healing than one trait on the Druid provides you with. Not to mention the sacrafice in warrior DPS you have to take which might actually be more than what you would lose by making the Renegade swap.

    The current setups seem to be more flexible, durable and reliable than anything revolving around a Tactics Warrior.

    Progress isn't made by early risers. It's made by lazy men trying to find easier ways to do something. ~ Robert Heinlein

©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.