Jump to content
  • Sign Up

When are the rest of elite spec trade offs?


LaFurion.3167

Recommended Posts

"Trade offs" shouldn't exist at all. Base classes are so boring and every elite spec is so much more interesting, in depth, and better designed(outside of weaver/ druid / scrapper). Base classes shouldn't even be playable in any content due to how boring and outdated they are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Shiyo.3578" said:"Trade offs" shouldn't exist at all. Base classes are so boring and every elite spec is so much more interesting, in depth, and better designed(outside of weaver/ druid / scrapper). Base classes shouldn't even be playable in any content due to how boring and outdated they are.

Then you have the problem with people calling it out to be pay to win, since you just get access to elite spec by buying the associated expansion.Elite specs have been advertised as side progression of the classes. A way for you to specialise in specific tasks, an alternative way to play your character.

And it would force some weird changes if you truly want trade offs to disappear.We would have to rework reaper to get the reaper's shroud on F2 while still having the core death shroud on F1.Scrapper and holosmith would have to get their elite toolbelt skill back and their new mechanics (function gyro and photon forge) on a new F6 button.

I prefer designing every elite spec with a trade off instead, something you have to give away to get access to the new mechanics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"JTGuevara.9018" said:-shakes head-

All this talk about trade-offs and not one mention of gw2's old specialization system from 2012 -2015. Then again, not everyone has played that long. I will explain!

gw2's old specialization system allowed you to use all 5 core trait lines, but only fully spec TWO of them using points. However, in mid-2015, the old specialization system was reworked to the current one we have today. The old system was reworked to allow you to fully use THREE trait lines instead of two, scrapping the point allocation. Back then, I thought -- "this might be a problem". And it was! It was the first stage of powercreep. A third trait line basically meant you were granted 10 extra points to allocate on the spec trees. HoT and elite specs came out later in the fall of that year, which created a mess. Elite specs, though marketed as "trade-offs" were actually direct upgrades to the classes. This ballooned the powercreep of classes to ridiculous levels. You not only had elite specs to deal with, you also had THREE of them.

Frankly, with the way the current specialization system and elite specs work, I don't see how it's even possible to have trade-offs in the first place. I used to think otherwise back then. Elite specs do not change the functionality of the class in any significant way. It just soups up the class. An example...warrior. Berserker and spellbreaker don't fundamentally change how the warrior functions. You still have the adrenaline bar and bursts.

The only possible solution I have to the trade-off question is to go back to the old specialization system and only allowing two trait lines again. Because you're only allowed two trait lines, trade-offs are actually possible.

However, this game is eight years old and I'm 100% sure that this isn't going to happen!

Man, sometimes I miss those days... Remember how you could put adept traits or master traits into the grandmaster slot if they suited you build better than the grandmasters did? The build diversity was so much better then... I also miss the stats gained via the old spec trees.

On topic: Tempest does not have a proper trade-off, so give Ele an F5. Soulbeast still needs stat penalties when merged. FB needs a bigger tradeoff, probably also a stat penalty to be frank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@"JTGuevara.9018" said:-shakes head-

All this talk about trade-offs and not
one
mention of gw2's old specialization system from 2012 -2015. Then again, not everyone has played that long. I will explain!

gw2's old specialization system allowed you to use all 5 core trait lines, but only fully spec TWO of them using points. However, in mid-2015, the old specialization system was reworked to the current one we have today. The old system was reworked to allow you to fully use THREE trait lines instead of two, scrapping the point allocation. Back then, I thought -- "this might be a problem". And it was! It was the first stage of powercreep. A third trait line basically meant you were granted 10 extra points to allocate on the spec trees. HoT and elite specs came out later in the fall of that year, which created a mess. Elite specs, though marketed as "trade-offs" were actually
direct
upgrades to the classes. This ballooned the powercreep of classes to ridiculous levels. You not only had elite specs to deal with, you also had THREE of them.

Frankly, with the way the current specialization system and elite specs work, I don't see how it's even possible to have trade-offs in the first place. I used to think otherwise back then. Elite specs do not change the functionality of the class in any significant way. It just soups up the class. An example...warrior. Berserker and spellbreaker don't fundamentally change how the warrior functions. You still have the adrenaline bar and bursts.

The only possible solution I have to the trade-off question is to go
back
to the old specialization system and only allowing two trait lines again. Because you're only allowed two trait lines, trade-offs are actually possible.

However, this game is eight years old and I'm 100% sure that this isn't going to happen!

Man, sometimes I miss those days... Remember how you could put adept traits or master traits into the grandmaster slot if they suited you build better than the grandmasters did? The build diversity was so much better then... I also miss the stats gained via the old spec trees.

On topic: Tempest does not have a proper trade-off, so give Ele an F5. Soulbeast still needs stat penalties when merged. FB needs a bigger tradeoff, probably also a stat penalty to be frank.

Still think that the tomes of firebrand should have been a grandmaster trait choice.

What do you mean by stat penalty for soulbeast? While merged, soulbeasts gain stats. Making them lose stats all of a sudden would be kinda weird. Or do you mean that they should reduce the amount of stats they take of their pets?

Agreed that core ele should get something they can trade for tempest and weaver, they already did the same with engineer and revenant, so why not give ele something, too. And tempest is currently the only elite spec with no trade off in Anet's sense.

I get where you are coming from with build diversity from the old system, but this goes both ways. Having the freedom to pick master traits in your grandmaster slot increased the available combinations, but that also means that it is way harder to balance as a system, since you have to consider way more possible combinations when making adjustments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Kodama.6453 said:

@"Shiyo.3578" said:"Trade offs" shouldn't exist at all. Base classes are so boring and every elite spec is so much more interesting, in depth, and better designed(outside of weaver/ druid / scrapper). Base classes shouldn't even be playable in any content due to how boring and outdated they are.

Then you have the problem with people calling it out to be pay to win, since you just get access to elite spec by buying the associated expansion.Elite specs have been advertised as side progression of the classes. A way for you to specialise in specific tasks, an alternative way to play your character.

And it would force some weird changes if you truly want trade offs to disappear.We would have to rework reaper to get the reaper's shroud on F2 while still having the core death shroud on F1.Scrapper and holosmith would have to get their elite toolbelt skill back and their new mechanics (function gyro and photon forge) on a new F6 button.

I prefer designing every elite spec with a trade off instead, something you have to give away to get access to the new mechanics.

That's like calling buying WoW's newest expansion pay to win. Just ignore people who say it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Shiyo.3578 said:

@Shiyo.3578 said:"Trade offs" shouldn't exist at all. Base classes are so boring and every elite spec is so much more interesting, in depth, and better designed(outside of weaver/ druid / scrapper). Base classes shouldn't even be playable in any content due to how boring and outdated they are.

Then you have the problem with people calling it out to be pay to win, since you just get access to elite spec by buying the associated expansion.Elite specs have been advertised as side progression of the classes. A way for you to specialise in specific tasks, an alternative way to play your character.

And it would force some weird changes if you truly want trade offs to disappear.We would have to rework reaper to get the reaper's shroud on F2 while still having the core death shroud on F1.Scrapper and holosmith would have to get their elite toolbelt skill back and their new mechanics (function gyro and photon forge) on a new F6 button.

I prefer designing every elite spec with a trade off instead, something you have to give away to get access to the new mechanics.

That's like calling buying WoW's newest expansion pay to win. Just ignore people who say it.

It would actually be a fair complaint.

Your statement has been:

Base classes shouldn't even be playable in any content due to how boring and outdated they are.

If base classes are "unplayable in any content", then this means this "free to play game" is legit not playable unless you buy an expansion that gives you access to an elite spec, so you finally become playable.

And that is just a terrible suggestion to make. It defeats the whole purpose of Anet making the core game free to play if the core classes are absolutely useless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Kodama.6453 said:

@Shiyo.3578 said:"Trade offs" shouldn't exist at all. Base classes are so boring and every elite spec is so much more interesting, in depth, and better designed(outside of weaver/ druid / scrapper). Base classes shouldn't even be playable in any content due to how boring and outdated they are.

Then you have the problem with people calling it out to be pay to win, since you just get access to elite spec by buying the associated expansion.Elite specs have been advertised as side progression of the classes. A way for you to specialise in specific tasks, an alternative way to play your character.

And it would force some weird changes if you truly want trade offs to disappear.We would have to rework reaper to get the reaper's shroud on F2 while still having the core death shroud on F1.Scrapper and holosmith would have to get their elite toolbelt skill back and their new mechanics (function gyro and photon forge) on a new F6 button.

I prefer designing every elite spec with a trade off instead, something you have to give away to get access to the new mechanics.

That's like calling buying WoW's newest expansion pay to win. Just ignore people who say it.

It would actually be a fair complaint.

Your statement has been:

Base classes shouldn't even be playable in any content due to how boring and outdated they are.

If base classes are "unplayable in any content", then this means this "free to play game" is legit not playable unless you buy an expansion that gives you access to an elite spec, so you finally
become
playable.

And that is just a terrible suggestion to make. It defeats the whole purpose of Anet making the core game free to play if the core classes are absolutely useless.

Just make a set of elite specs for the core game as well. Core e-specs + Cantha e-specs would increase the number to 4 per profession. 4 e-specs would possibly double the amount of builds, whereas now the variety is kinda limited.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Kodama.6453 said:

@"JTGuevara.9018" said:-shakes head-

All this talk about trade-offs and not
one
mention of gw2's old specialization system from 2012 -2015. Then again, not everyone has played that long. I will explain!

gw2's old specialization system allowed you to use all 5 core trait lines, but only fully spec TWO of them using points. However, in mid-2015, the old specialization system was reworked to the current one we have today. The old system was reworked to allow you to fully use THREE trait lines instead of two, scrapping the point allocation. Back then, I thought -- "this might be a problem". And it was! It was the first stage of powercreep. A third trait line basically meant you were granted 10 extra points to allocate on the spec trees. HoT and elite specs came out later in the fall of that year, which created a mess. Elite specs, though marketed as "trade-offs" were actually
direct
upgrades to the classes. This ballooned the powercreep of classes to ridiculous levels. You not only had elite specs to deal with, you also had THREE of them.

Frankly, with the way the current specialization system and elite specs work, I don't see how it's even possible to have trade-offs in the first place. I used to think otherwise back then. Elite specs do not change the functionality of the class in any significant way. It just soups up the class. An example...warrior. Berserker and spellbreaker don't fundamentally change how the warrior functions. You still have the adrenaline bar and bursts.

The only possible solution I have to the trade-off question is to go
back
to the old specialization system and only allowing two trait lines again. Because you're only allowed two trait lines, trade-offs are actually possible.

However, this game is eight years old and I'm 100% sure that this isn't going to happen!

Man, sometimes I miss those days... Remember how you could put adept traits or master traits into the grandmaster slot if they suited you build better than the grandmasters did? The build diversity was so much better then... I also miss the stats gained via the old spec trees.

On topic: Tempest does not have a proper trade-off, so give Ele an F5. Soulbeast still needs stat penalties when merged. FB needs a bigger tradeoff, probably also a stat penalty to be frank.

Still think that the tomes of firebrand should have been a grandmaster trait choice.

What do you mean by stat penalty for soulbeast? While merged, soulbeasts
gain
stats. Making them lose stats all of a sudden would be kinda weird. Or do you mean that they should reduce the amount of stats they take of their pets?I mean like how Berserker gets +300 power/condi -300 Toughness or how Scrapper gets -180 Vitality for the barrier. The pet archetypes give + to two stats, what I am saying is there needs to be a negative stat themed to each pet archetype. Honestly, Holo should get a penalty based on heat level. FB should also get a negative stat on Imbued Haste, whether it is when affected by quickness or all the time is up for debate. That would go a long way to balancing those E-Specs. That or they can do away with the stat penalties altogether :wink:

inb4 Spellbreaker reference on Attacker's Insight. Sure go for it, hit warrior some more while its down. The best thing is just to get rid of the stat penalties on the E-Specs that have them., but if two of them have to deal with that crap then they all should.

Agreed that core ele should get something they can trade for tempest and weaver, they already did the same with engineer and revenant, so why not give ele something, too. And tempest is currently the only elite spec with no trade off in Anet's sense.I don't think a 5th attunement would happen, although a core only Arcane attunement was a missed boat on their part at release. Perhaps an F5 that grants a single ability based on current attunement, that is independent of weapon choices? I guess a Glyph, whether it is boons/auras for the ele or a targeted spell is up for debate though.I get where you are coming from with build diversity from the old system, but this goes both ways. Having the freedom to pick master traits in your grandmaster slot increased the available combinations, but that also means that it is way harder to balance as a system, since you have to consider way more possible combinations when making adjustments.No, I totally get that it may have been harder to balance, and I am sure its why they moved to the current system, but how much has that really helped them maintain balance eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@"JTGuevara.9018" said:-shakes head-

All this talk about trade-offs and not
one
mention of gw2's old specialization system from 2012 -2015. Then again, not everyone has played that long. I will explain!

gw2's old specialization system allowed you to use all 5 core trait lines, but only fully spec TWO of them using points. However, in mid-2015, the old specialization system was reworked to the current one we have today. The old system was reworked to allow you to fully use THREE trait lines instead of two, scrapping the point allocation. Back then, I thought -- "this might be a problem". And it was! It was the first stage of powercreep. A third trait line basically meant you were granted 10 extra points to allocate on the spec trees. HoT and elite specs came out later in the fall of that year, which created a mess. Elite specs, though marketed as "trade-offs" were actually
direct
upgrades to the classes. This ballooned the powercreep of classes to ridiculous levels. You not only had elite specs to deal with, you also had THREE of them.

Frankly, with the way the current specialization system and elite specs work, I don't see how it's even possible to have trade-offs in the first place. I used to think otherwise back then. Elite specs do not change the functionality of the class in any significant way. It just soups up the class. An example...warrior. Berserker and spellbreaker don't fundamentally change how the warrior functions. You still have the adrenaline bar and bursts.

The only possible solution I have to the trade-off question is to go
back
to the old specialization system and only allowing two trait lines again. Because you're only allowed two trait lines, trade-offs are actually possible.

However, this game is eight years old and I'm 100% sure that this isn't going to happen!

Man, sometimes I miss those days... Remember how you could put adept traits or master traits into the grandmaster slot if they suited you build better than the grandmasters did? The build diversity was so much better then... I also miss the stats gained via the old spec trees.

On topic: Tempest does not have a proper trade-off, so give Ele an F5. Soulbeast still needs stat penalties when merged. FB needs a bigger tradeoff, probably also a stat penalty to be frank.

Still think that the tomes of firebrand should have been a grandmaster trait choice.

What do you mean by stat penalty for soulbeast? While merged, soulbeasts
gain
stats. Making them lose stats all of a sudden would be kinda weird. Or do you mean that they should reduce the amount of stats they take of their pets?I mean like how Berserker gets +300 power/condi -300 Toughness or how Scrapper gets -180 Vitality for the barrier. The pet archetypes give + to two stats, what I am saying is there needs to be a negative stat themed to each pet archetype. Honestly, Holo should get a penalty based on heat level. FB should also get a negative stat on Imbued Haste, whether it is when affected by quickness or all the time is up for debate. That would go a long way to balancing those E-Specs. That or they can do away with the stat penalties altogether :wink:

I'd call "not having the pet" the equivalent to the stat penalty on Berserker - and, honestly, the stat penalty on Berserker makes thematic sense. While berserking, your defenses are compromised (because you're, you know, berserk) but your offensive stats are increased. You also have a trait that allows you to remove the stat penalty, the problem is that it's going up against traits that significantly increase power or condition damage while berserking (and King of Fires you can make use of even when NOT berserking, but you'll be able to detonate more fire auras while berserking).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@draxynnic.3719 said:

@"JTGuevara.9018" said:-shakes head-

All this talk about trade-offs and not
one
mention of gw2's old specialization system from 2012 -2015. Then again, not everyone has played that long. I will explain!

gw2's old specialization system allowed you to use all 5 core trait lines, but only fully spec TWO of them using points. However, in mid-2015, the old specialization system was reworked to the current one we have today. The old system was reworked to allow you to fully use THREE trait lines instead of two, scrapping the point allocation. Back then, I thought -- "this might be a problem". And it was! It was the first stage of powercreep. A third trait line basically meant you were granted 10 extra points to allocate on the spec trees. HoT and elite specs came out later in the fall of that year, which created a mess. Elite specs, though marketed as "trade-offs" were actually
direct
upgrades to the classes. This ballooned the powercreep of classes to ridiculous levels. You not only had elite specs to deal with, you also had THREE of them.

Frankly, with the way the current specialization system and elite specs work, I don't see how it's even possible to have trade-offs in the first place. I used to think otherwise back then. Elite specs do not change the functionality of the class in any significant way. It just soups up the class. An example...warrior. Berserker and spellbreaker don't fundamentally change how the warrior functions. You still have the adrenaline bar and bursts.

The only possible solution I have to the trade-off question is to go
back
to the old specialization system and only allowing two trait lines again. Because you're only allowed two trait lines, trade-offs are actually possible.

However, this game is eight years old and I'm 100% sure that this isn't going to happen!

Man, sometimes I miss those days... Remember how you could put adept traits or master traits into the grandmaster slot if they suited you build better than the grandmasters did? The build diversity was so much better then... I also miss the stats gained via the old spec trees.

On topic: Tempest does not have a proper trade-off, so give Ele an F5. Soulbeast still needs stat penalties when merged. FB needs a bigger tradeoff, probably also a stat penalty to be frank.

Still think that the tomes of firebrand should have been a grandmaster trait choice.

What do you mean by stat penalty for soulbeast? While merged, soulbeasts
gain
stats. Making them lose stats all of a sudden would be kinda weird. Or do you mean that they should reduce the amount of stats they take of their pets?I mean like how Berserker gets +300 power/condi -300 Toughness or how Scrapper gets -180 Vitality for the barrier. The pet archetypes give + to two stats, what I am saying is there needs to be a negative stat themed to each pet archetype. Honestly, Holo should get a penalty based on heat level. FB should also get a negative stat on Imbued Haste, whether it is when affected by quickness or all the time is up for debate. That would go a long way to balancing those E-Specs. That or they can do away with the stat penalties altogether :wink:

I'd call "not having the pet" the equivalent to the stat penalty on Berserker - and, honestly, the stat penalty on Berserker makes thematic sense. While
berserking,
your defenses are compromised (because you're, you know,
berserk
) but your offensive stats are increased. You also have a trait that allows you to remove the stat penalty, the problem is that it's going up against traits that significantly increase power or condition damage while berserking (and King of Fires you can make use of even when NOT berserking, but you'll be able to detonate more fire auras while berserking).

Except Beast mode gives stats, and many traits/skills that benefit the pet then benefit the Soulbeast so no losing a pet is not equivalent to a stat penalty, or even the lose of core F1 in their entirety.

Eternal champion is meh for the other benefits it provides.

I stand by my statement, either give every espec stat penalties, or remove the penalties altogether.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

@"JTGuevara.9018" said:-shakes head-

All this talk about trade-offs and not
one
mention of gw2's old specialization system from 2012 -2015. Then again, not everyone has played that long. I will explain!

gw2's old specialization system allowed you to use all 5 core trait lines, but only fully spec TWO of them using points. However, in mid-2015, the old specialization system was reworked to the current one we have today. The old system was reworked to allow you to fully use THREE trait lines instead of two, scrapping the point allocation. Back then, I thought -- "this might be a problem". And it was! It was the first stage of powercreep. A third trait line basically meant you were granted 10 extra points to allocate on the spec trees. HoT and elite specs came out later in the fall of that year, which created a mess. Elite specs, though marketed as "trade-offs" were actually
direct
upgrades to the classes. This ballooned the powercreep of classes to ridiculous levels. You not only had elite specs to deal with, you also had THREE of them.

Frankly, with the way the current specialization system and elite specs work, I don't see how it's even possible to have trade-offs in the first place. I used to think otherwise back then. Elite specs do not change the functionality of the class in any significant way. It just soups up the class. An example...warrior. Berserker and spellbreaker don't fundamentally change how the warrior functions. You still have the adrenaline bar and bursts.

The only possible solution I have to the trade-off question is to go
back
to the old specialization system and only allowing two trait lines again. Because you're only allowed two trait lines, trade-offs are actually possible.

However, this game is eight years old and I'm 100% sure that this isn't going to happen!

Man, sometimes I miss those days... Remember how you could put adept traits or master traits into the grandmaster slot if they suited you build better than the grandmasters did? The build diversity was so much better then... I also miss the stats gained via the old spec trees.

On topic: Tempest does not have a proper trade-off, so give Ele an F5. Soulbeast still needs stat penalties when merged. FB needs a bigger tradeoff, probably also a stat penalty to be frank.

Still think that the tomes of firebrand should have been a grandmaster trait choice.

What do you mean by stat penalty for soulbeast? While merged, soulbeasts
gain
stats. Making them lose stats all of a sudden would be kinda weird. Or do you mean that they should reduce the amount of stats they take of their pets?I mean like how Berserker gets +300 power/condi -300 Toughness or how Scrapper gets -180 Vitality for the barrier. The pet archetypes give + to two stats, what I am saying is there needs to be a negative stat themed to each pet archetype. Honestly, Holo should get a penalty based on heat level. FB should also get a negative stat on Imbued Haste, whether it is when affected by quickness or all the time is up for debate. That would go a long way to balancing those E-Specs. That or they can do away with the stat penalties altogether :wink:

I'd call "not having the pet" the equivalent to the stat penalty on Berserker - and, honestly, the stat penalty on Berserker makes thematic sense. While
berserking,
your defenses are compromised (because you're, you know,
berserk
) but your offensive stats are increased. You also have a trait that allows you to remove the stat penalty, the problem is that it's going up against traits that significantly increase power or condition damage while berserking (and King of Fires you can make use of even when NOT berserking, but you'll be able to detonate more fire auras while berserking).

Except Beast mode gives stats, and many traits/skills that benefit the pet then benefit the Soulbeast so no losing a pet is not equivalent to a stat penalty, or even the lose of core F1 in their entirety.

Eternal champion is meh for the other benefits it provides.

I stand by my statement, either give every espec stat penalties, or remove the penalties altogether.

Eh, it gains stats, but loses the pet by merging. It also permanently loses the incombat pet swap which affects its versatility. Classes have different mechanics, you'll never have 1:1 gained/lost mechanics/stats for their especs.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ganathar.4956 said:

@Shiyo.3578 said:"Trade offs" shouldn't exist at all. Base classes are so boring and every elite spec is so much more interesting, in depth, and better designed(outside of weaver/ druid / scrapper). Base classes shouldn't even be playable in any content due to how boring and outdated they are.

Then you have the problem with people calling it out to be pay to win, since you just get access to elite spec by buying the associated expansion.Elite specs have been advertised as side progression of the classes. A way for you to specialise in specific tasks, an alternative way to play your character.

And it would force some weird changes if you truly want trade offs to disappear.We would have to rework reaper to get the reaper's shroud on F2 while still having the core death shroud on F1.Scrapper and holosmith would have to get their elite toolbelt skill back and their new mechanics (function gyro and photon forge) on a new F6 button.

I prefer designing every elite spec with a trade off instead, something you have to give away to get access to the new mechanics.

That's like calling buying WoW's newest expansion pay to win. Just ignore people who say it.

It would actually be a fair complaint.

Your statement has been:

Base classes shouldn't even be playable in any content due to how boring and outdated they are.

If base classes are "unplayable in any content", then this means this "free to play game" is legit not playable unless you buy an expansion that gives you access to an elite spec, so you finally
become
playable.

And that is just a terrible suggestion to make. It defeats the whole purpose of Anet making the core game free to play if the core classes are absolutely useless.

Just make a set of elite specs for the core game as well. Core e-specs + Cantha e-specs would increase the number to 4 per profession. 4 e-specs would possibly double the amount of builds, whereas now the variety is kinda limited.

I highly doubt anet have the time or money to make 2 expansions, I do believe this next expansion will be their last since everything is becoming stale.

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...