Jump to content
  • Sign Up

New balance patch, time to change downstate?


lodjur.1284

Recommended Posts

I enjoy the "no downstate" events. Do I want that for the game mode all the time? Hell no. It becomes a pure zerg and 1-shot fest.

Please also don't mix downstate with rallying. One works off the other, but I would much rather have a "no rally from kills" week or change, thus requiring skills or manual resurrecting, over a complete removal of downstate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Cyninja.2954" said:I enjoy the "no downstate" events. Do I want that for the game mode all the time? Hell no. It becomes a pure zerg and 1-shot fest.

Hence the timing of this thread as 1 shots are taking a big hit.

Please also don't mix downstate with rallying. One works off the other, but I would much rather have a "no rally from kills" week or change, thus requiring skills or manual resurrecting, over a complete removal of downstate.

Out of curiosity, why do you hate rallying but not manual ressing, it seems quite a common opinion?

I am personally the exact opposite, if there was no manual ressing (or severly weaker) I would have rather few problems with the downstate. I also hate the various instaressing skills far more than rallying

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@lodjur.1284 said:

@"Cyninja.2954" said:I enjoy the "no downstate" events. Do I want that for the game mode all the time? Hell no. It becomes a pure zerg and 1-shot fest.

Hence the timing of this thread as 1 shots are taking a big hit.

Let's wait and see shall we? Also as far as being 1 shot downed in wvw squad fights, that's going no where.

@lodjur.1284 said:

@"Cyninja.2954" said:Please also don't mix downstate with rallying. One works off the other, but I would much rather have a "no rally from kills" week or change, thus requiring skills or manual resurrecting, over a complete removal of downstate.

Out of curiosity, why do you hate rallying but not manual ressing, it seems quite a common opinion?

I don't hate rallying. I said I'd prefer keeping the downstate and if at all removing the rallying but I am fine with the current system.

@lodjur.1284 said:I am personally the exact opposite, if there was no manual ressing (or severly weaker) I would have rather few problems with the downstate. I also hate the various instaressing skills far more than rallying

So you'd prefer for players who are in downstate to not be able to resurrect if no more enemies are close by? Or be forced to "wait" until everybody is out of combat or bleed out. Doesn't sound all to fun to me tbh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I voted to remove downstate but it was a mighty struggle.

Assuming even numbers, building to fast res downstate is a valid build strategy and tactic to employ. Downstate adds to fight dynamics and build creativity.

Unfortunately most fights happen with uneven numbers and Downstate favours the side with more numbers and should rightfully be removed.If the side with lesser numbers are good enough to generate a down, then the downed person should be an instant KO.

I recently transferred to BP to watch Alpha Wolves in action and by the gods, they are the NA equivalent of Legendary OCX guild LATE and SEA guild eA/FFFDominating is how I would describe their presence.With just 15 men, they could generate multiple downs when going up against blobs of 30-40+.They just didn’t have the ability to finish those downs when they are being pushed by the much larger enemy blob.I think removing downstate is a fair reward for skilful groups fighting outnumbered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@scerevisiae.1972 said:Downed state is still the worst thing about this game and prob one of the biggest reasons sPVP failed so hard.

At launch, and for the next year, all i heard over and over was that downed state sucked cause it made 1-shot builds possible and ruined the flow of combat.

Not once in the entirety of this game have I ever been downed and thought, wow this is cool, i've got 4 new crappy skills to choose from. I hope the guy that thought downed state would make the game better has already been fired and will never work in the game industry again so he/she can't screw up another game.

Yeah I hate it that much.

GW2 would be made much better if 1-shotting were removed, and maybe then add a resurrect skill to certain classes.Then dont go down. Problem solved. Isnt that the correct answer? Its what every downstate denier says anyway, that if you have a problem with no downstate, dont die.

And if you say that it helps the enemy when you fight them... Well there you go. Someone thinks its cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:I enjoy the "no downstate" events. Do I want that for the game mode all the time? Hell no. It becomes a pure zerg and 1-shot fest.

Hence the timing of this thread as 1 shots are taking a big hit.

Let's wait and see shall we? Also as far as being 1 shot downed in wvw squad fights, that's going no where.

Ye in large skill it will still exist, but zerg fights lasting a bit shorter wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing

@Cyninja.2954 said:Please also don't mix downstate with rallying. One works off the other, but I would much rather have a "no rally from kills" week or change, thus requiring skills or manual resurrecting, over a complete removal of downstate.

Out of curiosity, why do you hate rallying but not manual ressing, it seems quite a common opinion?

I don't hate rallying. I said I'd prefer keeping the downstate and if at all removing the rallying but I am fine with the current system.

Alright, it really wasn't meant as an attack, I was just curious.

@lodjur.1284 said:I am personally the exact opposite, if there was no manual ressing (or severly weaker) I would have rather few problems with the downstate. I also hate the various instaressing skills far more than rallying

So you'd prefer for players who are in downstate to not be able to resurrect if no more enemies are close by? Or be forced to "wait" until everybody is out of combat or bleed out. Doesn't sound all to fun to me tbh.

I meant keeping only the self ress part as that's slow and interrupted by damage (well strikes more specifically).

[moderator: content edited]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in terms of Wvw, people need just learn to play with it. if everyone watches himself, the other and the surroundings, and the team focuses down dmg on the downed, then nobody will really. if some charge into a zerg with 5 people and get rolled after downing three, four people, then it's a pitty but had to be expected. 5 vs 20 rarely succeeds, unless you split them up - and a focused kill including downstate takes only seconds.

the dmg-nerfs that may come with "balance" patch might surely make this topic more annoying. we had kinda poll yet, i'd rather prefer dead not beeing revivable than no downstate. its useless in 90% of cases anyways. and i won 1v1s in downstate, especially when you kill them first but some downed/condi dirt gets you afterwards after cd's are not charged since you got jumped from behind.. :bleep_bloop:i don't want to give them the kill, just because the use some cancer build that kills me after i killed them. would require every class to get better condicleanses on their base healing, or condi imminently disappearing at death of your opponent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@lodjur.1284 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:I enjoy the "no downstate" events. Do I want that for the game mode all the time? Hell no. It becomes a pure zerg and 1-shot fest.

Hence the timing of this thread as 1 shots are taking a big hit.

Let's wait and see shall we? Also as far as being 1 shot downed in wvw squad fights, that's going no where.

Ye in large skill it will still exist, but zerg fights lasting a bit shorter wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing

I'd say most players who enjoy the strategic back and forth would disagree. That was one of the annoying things of the no downstate week: all fights were decided by 1 push. Yes, it's fun for a while, then a few days in it got very boring.

@lodjur.1284 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:Please also don't mix downstate with rallying. One works off the other, but I would much rather have a "no rally from kills" week or change, thus requiring skills or manual resurrecting, over a complete removal of downstate.

Out of curiosity, why do you hate rallying but not manual ressing, it seems quite a common opinion?

I don't hate rallying. I said I'd prefer keeping the downstate and if at all removing the rallying but I am fine with the current system.

Alright, it really wasn't meant as an attack, I was just curious.

No offense taken.

@lodjur.1284 said:

@lodjur.1284 said:I am personally the exact opposite, if there was no manual ressing (or severly weaker) I would have rather few problems with the downstate. I also hate the various instaressing skills far more than rallying

So you'd prefer for players who are in downstate to not be able to resurrect if no more enemies are close by? Or be forced to "wait" until everybody is out of combat or bleed out. Doesn't sound all to fun to me tbh.

I meant keeping only the self ress part as that's slow and interrupted by damage (well strikes more specifically).

Which still results in a lot of players now lying on the floor having to wait in downstate after a fight is over. Even worse, this shifts the entire fight onto the remaining not downed players, given the players in downstate are no danger any longer since they can't be resurrected with skills or by pressing F. Which in turn leads to even longer wait times for players who go into downstate with the winning team then at the end just farming off all the downstates.

Still does not strike me as very fun.

Now one might argue: but players would focus downstates to create rallies. No they would not. Damage is always pointed at the biggest threat of an enemy team, which without active heal skills of resurrection for downstates is active players. The only reason downstate players get focused now is because of the combined danger of them getting resurrected via skills instantly and by potentially rallying if ignoring them to long. Remove part of that equation and there is literally 0 reason to focus downstate players, especially if you can keep them in a permanent downstate with just 1 person hitting them occasionally.

There is only 1 place where no downstate is realistically most fun or useful:Roaming against even or higher numbers, where downstates would prevent one from thinning out the opposition and allow for easier 1vx wins. Suffice to say, roaming is a niche group of players in this game mode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@kamikharzeeh.8016 said:i'd rather prefer dead not beeing revivable than no downstate.

I think this change alone would help more to balance size of groups. If you kill it, its gone. If you don't get your downed up, they are gone. Adds more strategy to the fight than we have today and more balance of risk to reward. A zerg has to better manage their downs then just having more numbers to keep their push alive. I also think it would increase smaller numbers chancing larger groups if they know their death had an impact on the larger force and slowing them down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@TheGrimm.5624 said:

@"kamikharzeeh.8016" said:i'd rather prefer dead not beeing revivable than no downstate.

I think this change alone would help more to balance size of groups. If you kill it, its gone. If you don't get your downed up, they are gone. Adds more strategy to the fight than we have today and more balance of risk to reward. A zerg has to better manage their downs then just having more numbers to keep their push alive. I also think it would increase smaller numbers chancing larger groups if they know their death had an impact on the larger force and slowing them down.Errr... "gone" as in what, permadeath?

Because otherwise this is the reality today. You cant res dead people in zerg combat - you can barely res downed people in a clash between two sizable groups, only a blind melee train let downed get back up. If someone dies they are already out, unless its just at the spawn. Few zerg battles last long enough for an extended run, most end in one push.

What you describe what you want seems to instead be no rally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gone as in must respawn. Right now if even one player of the larger side remains after the fight they could fully rez their entire zerg without losing any ground. There should be more of a price for being defeated then just having to wait to be rezzed. I could go with all the other downstate features if getting people to a defeated state had more impact on gameplay.

Edit: phone had auto-spelled most whereas was looking for must.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@TheGrimm.5624 said:Gone as in most respawn. Right now if even one player of the larger side remains after the fight they could fully rez their entire zerg without losing any ground. There should be more of a price for being defeated then just having to wait to be rezzed. I could go with all the other downstate features if getting people to a defeated state had more impact on gameplay.It has an impact on gameplay. A 50 man zerg that dies on a keep... wont cap the keep at the same time. And it take a looooong time to gather a scattered zerg. In your own scenario the zerg with 1 guy left obviously won, or he'd also be dead as a doorknob. Can res without loosing ground? The winning side? What horror that they should hold their ground! Also literally every commander would say all back to spawn. Your scenario is nowhere near any realistic one so I dont really understand any of the arguments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Removing it would force the devs to change or remove over 20 skills and traits . I would rather they concentrate their efforts on far more important issues . Also the stomp achievement would become impossible . Keeping the downed state deflects heals from the fighting group which can also significantly change how well the group sustains it's self . That in it's self can be used as a strategy to defeat certain groups . Downed state is also a buffer against ambush attacks . Take it away and this gives gankers far to much power . Many occasions I've been downed by stealth-ed gankers and turned the situation around because the attackers were so glassy my downed attack killed them. Also shoving a flag up a gankers back side is sooo satisfying . You have to remember as well if you take away the downed state this affects both sides . Another problem is we don't know what effect the new balance changes will have . People might regret not having downed state .Downed state is unique to this game and wouldn't want this game to turn into yet another version of WOW. Besides I payed for or collected a lot of finishers and don't want them to become useless because of the opinions of only a very few people .

What I would like to see is a better balancing to the downed skills between classes. Some classes have an advantage over others because they can move or force movement of the non-downed. Other changes would be that remote stomps and stealthed stomps need to be removed . Another annoyance is the insta-stomp of warclaws . It's really annoying when you get someone downed and doing your victory stomp just to have some ***hat take your glory away with a warclaw.
I voted not to change it because the poll is skewed towards removal or ineffectiveness . By making a skill ineffective would eventually force removal.
KEEP THE DOWNED STATE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@TheGrimm.5624 said:Gone as in most respawn. Right now if even one player of the larger side remains after the fight they could fully rez their entire zerg without losing any ground. There should be more of a price for being defeated then just having to wait to be rezzed. I could go with all the other downstate features if getting people to a defeated state had more impact on gameplay.It has an impact on gameplay. A 50 man zerg that dies on a keep... wont cap the keep at the same time. And it take a looooong time to gather a scattered zerg. In your own scenario the zerg with 1 guy left obviously won, or he'd also be dead as a doorknob. Can res without loosing ground?
The winning side
? What horror that they should hold their ground! Also literally every commander would say all back to spawn. Your scenario is nowhere near any realistic one so I dont really understand any of the arguments.

Let me approach it from another front. Do you favor fights? If so do you not want to see more people encouraged to fight even if they know they will lose? I run more havoc then zerg. I like the no downstate weeks but its not because I run with a burst heavy group but it's more impactful for a smaller force to slow and or take on a larger one. But outside of those weeks there's little incentive for a smaller group to fight a larger or in this case one that is 4-10x your size since its meaningless. Anything you might kill will be gotten back up after the fight. The same does apply when talking warband versus zerg. So the game mechanic itself lends itself to avoiding a fight which to me is bad. Would it mean more people have to run back to the fight, yes. We have that today for any defender, but typically unless they lose the attackers don't have to do the same. Again to me, seems out of balance. So no, one to one rally is fine, but there should be more pressure on the decision to revive a downed player before they are defeated. Else there should be more of a price to pay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@TheGrimm.5624 said:

@TheGrimm.5624 said:Gone as in most respawn. Right now if even one player of the larger side remains after the fight they could fully rez their entire zerg without losing any ground. There should be more of a price for being defeated then just having to wait to be rezzed. I could go with all the other downstate features if getting people to a defeated state had more impact on gameplay.It has an impact on gameplay. A 50 man zerg that dies on a keep... wont cap the keep at the same time. And it take a looooong time to gather a scattered zerg. In your own scenario the zerg with 1 guy left obviously won, or he'd also be dead as a doorknob. Can res without loosing ground?
The winning side
? What horror that they should hold their ground! Also literally every commander would say all back to spawn. Your scenario is nowhere near any realistic one so I dont really understand any of the arguments.

Let me approach it from another front. Do you favor fights? If so do you not want to see more people encouraged to fight even if they know they will lose? I run more havoc then zerg. I like the no downstate weeks but its not because I run with a burst heavy group but it's more impactful for a smaller force to slow and or take on a larger one. But outside of those weeks there's little incentive for a smaller group to fight a larger or in this case one that is 4-10x your size since its meaningless. Anything you might kill will be gotten back up after the fight. The same does apply when talking warband versus zerg. So the game mechanic itself lends itself to avoiding a fight which to me is bad. Would it mean more people have to run back to the fight, yes. We have that today for any defender, but typically unless they lose the attackers don't have to do the same. Again to me, seems out of balance. So no, one to one rally is fine, but there should be more pressure on the decision to revive a downed player before they are defeated. Else there should be more of a price to pay.

Welcome to WvW, where amount of players matters.

Once you start balancing the game for 1v10 fights, you might as well close the game mode entirely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@TheGrimm.5624 said:

@TheGrimm.5624 said:Gone as in most respawn. Right now if even one player of the larger side remains after the fight they could fully rez their entire zerg without losing any ground. There should be more of a price for being defeated then just having to wait to be rezzed. I could go with all the other downstate features if getting people to a defeated state had more impact on gameplay.It has an impact on gameplay. A 50 man zerg that dies on a keep... wont cap the keep at the same time. And it take a looooong time to gather a scattered zerg. In your own scenario the zerg with 1 guy left obviously won, or he'd also be dead as a doorknob. Can res without loosing ground?
The winning side
? What horror that they should hold their ground! Also literally every commander would say all back to spawn. Your scenario is nowhere near any realistic one so I dont really understand any of the arguments.

Let me approach it from another front. Do you favor fights? If so do you not want to see more people encouraged to fight even if they know they will lose? I run more havoc then zerg. I like the no downstate weeks but its not because I run with a burst heavy group but it's more impactful for a smaller force to slow and or take on a larger one. But outside of those weeks there's little incentive for a smaller group to fight a larger or in this case one that is 4-10x your size since its meaningless. Anything you might kill will be gotten back up after the fight. The same does apply when talking warband versus zerg. So the game mechanic itself lends itself to avoiding a fight which to me is bad. Would it mean more people have to run back to the fight, yes. We have that today for any defender, but typically unless they lose the attackers don't have to do the same. Again to me, seems out of balance. So no, one to one rally is fine, but there should be more pressure on the decision to revive a downed player before they are defeated. Else there should be more of a price to pay.There is nothing about downstate that lends itself to "avoiding a fight". Quite the contrary, if you start to
punish
people for dying, it's not going to be fun to fight. Because you
will
die. That's how fights work. One guy wins, the other guy looses. And if you happen to be the one loosing... bring more people. That is literally how WvW create fights.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

what shall i say, our server usually pushes three times bigger groups... because there's no other options. on rev i can jump into a group of six people, and without support i die after downing two and damaging the others to 50%ish; with support they're done for, that's why teamwork is that important.

usually people don't stay lying around dead, from my experience only "noobs" tend to do that; even in zerg fights, only 10ish die at a regular push, and they usually just respawn. those that get revived after a zerg clash are like 5 people at best, since reviving full dead just takes too long to be efficient. most servers watch the dead spots and snipe the revivers, that's why it usually is a bad idea to field-revive.

and i honestly don't think "no-downstate" fixes anything. again, the balance patch might make it more interesting, but the main word here is "might". from the curent state, it'd be toxic for the meta - you'd just have to bring a zerg of dps and every attacker needs to bring at least a blob to take keeps, because one push can easily pick up about 5 casulties amongst the attackers, even on rather equal terms of power; in the end it becomes easier to close keeps and the attackers would pretty often fail.

your "lower numbers" only counts if we talk about heavy outnumbering, like 4 against 15. that only works if the 15 are really uncoordinated and a lord of desert border helps the defenders too. it also always depends on the style of the battle. 10 people can cloud off 30 easily, if those spread out too far they're basically dead. one dying rather functions as newbie-bait and pull those in, leading to 3-4 probs dead within seconds while they try to up the one downed etc

... also i've never ever seen zergfights with 1 survivor. that just doesn't happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...