Suggested Changes to Increase Raid Meta Flexibility - Page 2 — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Suggested Changes to Increase Raid Meta Flexibility

2>

Comments

  • Sykper.6583Sykper.6583 Member ✭✭✭

    @Grimheart.2853 said:

    So fervor is essentially another might. And why exactly do we need that?

    It's a normalized might that an individual cannot remotely come close to stacking on their own, and is always applied to a group, it is also not able to be corrupted or ripped.

    Might has more oomph, but is subject to all the disadvantages of being a boon.

    Same goes to that "keen" thing.

    I would argue that 'Keen' is definitely different than the comparison between Fervor and Might. Keen applies Precision and Ferocity, so a better form of Fury which again, Keen can't be ripped or corrupted. The low stack number is keeping it's impact in other competitive environments low but still valuable to an organized group.

    We essentially go the alacrity route, just a little bit more inclusive, but still as narrow-minded as said route. There's already a set of boons that work across classes for flexibility in the first place, why make things more stiff by adding more excluding boons?

    The ideas of balance and role/group flexibility should distance themselves from alacrity-style ideas (and try to reduce the fallout od those already inplemented), not expand them.

    Please go into a bit more detail about how this can be both inclusive but close-minded? Honestly it's my opinion that Alacrity as what it is now should never have come into being. But since we've opened this pandora's box, for balance purposes we need to consider that for the exclusive buffs we have, balancing them across a few professions provides both a method for future raid balance to consider all professions, and just enough flexibility to the meta that several raid comps could theoretically get all of them.

    ...Or not. After all these changes simply rework these buffs to be a group effort but with the DPS checks being as they are and Arenanet focusing more on mechanics, some groups could decide not to aim for a full stack of 'Fervor' or 'Keen' or, unlikely, Alacrity.

  • thrag.9740thrag.9740 Member ✭✭✭

    Something people never seem to discuss in these threads, how free do you want raid comps to be? Often we take it for granted that more choices is better. But we never really discuss whether this is true. I'm just going to point out some of the downsides, maybe some of you have something to add.

    The current restrictions of the meta might be making grouping easier. For example, lets consider a world where a perfectly valid alternative (read:equal in dps/heals/etc) to ps/chrono/druid was renegade/firebrand/scourge. A new player decides they want to be a healer for raids. They decided to roll a scourge which is the alternative healer in this scenario. Now, when they look on the lfg, only about half the groups that need healers, are valid choices for them to join (the other half requires a druid instead of a scourge).

    As new players enter raiding, and old players leave it, this will shift populations. Eventually posting an lfg looking for a scourge healer will be appealing to notably fewer players than current lfgs looking for the only healer that is considered meta.

    Although I used lfg in this example, this affects organized groups too, for example I have friends I will ask to fill but they don't all have every build. And when you form a static, you need to find people with these builds too. I don't know. What do you guys think? A meta that requires you to lock 3 classes in or 3 other classes doesn't seem that great to me. Being able to completely swap one class out for another would be nice.

    To me, the top priority should be to ensure that every class besides warrior/mesmer/ranger has a competitive dps build so they can compete for the 4 dps slots. What is competitive? That is certainly a tough question to answer. I guess ill leave it at this, scourge at 30k and weaver,renegade,firebrand,soulbeat at 37k is not competitive. That's a 20% difference. What percentage is acceptable? Id say 5%.

  • OriOri.8724OriOri.8724 Member ✭✭✭✭

    So why was Scourge singled out as getting GoTL? Also why should Rev be allowed to maintain 100% alacrity uptime? Chronomancers are the masters of alacrity, they should be the only class in the game that can single handedly apply 100% alacrity. Other classes getting access should get access in smaller doses. And its still kitten that core rev got alacrity, but core mesmer didn't. So before you give it to anyone else, give some to core mesmer, so that you could get some alacrity off of power/condi mesmers in raid groups as well.

    Eyyyy I unlocked signatures

  • Sykper.6583Sykper.6583 Member ✭✭✭

    @OriOri.8724 said:
    So why was Scourge singled out as getting GoTL? Also why should Rev be allowed to maintain 100% alacrity uptime? Chronomancers are the masters of alacrity, they should be the only class in the game that can single handedly apply 100% alacrity. Other classes getting access should get access in smaller doses. And its still kitten that core rev got alacrity, but core mesmer didn't. So before you give it to anyone else, give some to core mesmer, so that you could get some alacrity off of power/condi mesmers in raid groups as well.

    Ultimately I tossed Necro in getting the GotL effect simply because of my own self-interest and theory about what they might fit in thematically and as a role in raids. Scourge doesn't have to bring Fervor, but I think a profession built around conditions (even Reaper which is supposed to be a power spec applies conditions like hotcakes) would favor doing more condition damage.

    My issue with any profession or build being able to apply 100% of a group buff is exactly what is causing the raid meta to stay as is. Chronomancers still bring a lot to the table outside from Alacrity, and I imagine they would be still a major generator of it under my system, they just wouldn't be able to do it on their own, and if a group decides to take an alternative tank and find other weird sources for Alacrity from other builds, those would be options too.

  • Blaeys.3102Blaeys.3102 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 25, 2017

    Alacrity should have never been a stacking buff to begin with. It should have been tied to the Chrono elite - a powerful skill reset with a very long cooldown. So instead of decreasing cooldowns by X percentage for x seconds, maybe (not saying this is the one right solution) it would be a skill that resets everyone in the party's skill bar once every 240 seconds (or whatever felt balanced). It should then apply a debuff similar to revealed that stopped it from being applied again for at least a minute.

    As it is now, it is a profession defining skill that is critical to many raid groups - and there is no good way to fix it without destroying the "master of time" niche of the chrono (pretty much invalidating their role in competitive content).

    Druids suffer from a similar issue - with Warriors and easy might stacking not far behind.

    Every profession should have a niche, but those niches need to be actually useful across the game. Right now, you have three professions that many see as indispensable (or at least much more desired than others) and two professions (engineer, revenant) that almost no one will touch. And those in between are only valuable because of the damage they can bring.

    Not sure there is an answer that doesn't require completely dismantling how combat works in GW2, however.

  • Miellyn.6847Miellyn.6847 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 25, 2017

    @Blaeys.3102 said:
    Alacrity should have never been a stacking buff to begin with. It should have been tied to the Chrono elite - a powerful skill reset with a very long cooldown. So instead of decreasing cooldowns by X percentage for x seconds, maybe (not saying this is the one right solution) it would be a skill that resets everyone in the party's skill bar once every 240 seconds (or whatever felt balanced). It should then apply a debuff similar to revealed that stopped it from being applied again for at least a minute.

    As it is now, it is a profession defining skill that is critical to many raid groups - and there is no good way to fix it without destroying the "master of time" niche of the chrono (pretty much invalidating their role in competitive content).

    Druids suffer from a similar issue - with Warriors and easy might stacking not far behind.

    Every profession should have a niche, but those niches need to be actually useful across the game. Right now, you have three professions that many see as indispensable (or at least much more desired than others) and two professions (engineer, revenant) that almost no one will touch. And those in between are only valuable because of the damage they can bring.

    Not sure there is an answer that doesn't require completely dismantling how combat works in GW2, however.

    The problem with warriors is not the might stack, you can replace them easily. The problem is the complete package with might, banners, some CC and way too much damage for a support build.

  • Sykper.6583Sykper.6583 Member ✭✭✭

    If you apply a unique buff to every profession, aside from the power creep there will still be a meta that forms that excludes other professions. Simply because not all unique buffs are equal in this case. We would be back where we started.

    There needs to be some level of uniformity with a must-have buff across a few professions, and each profession must have access to at least one of these buffs. That's the only method that can allow all the professions to be used viably, and still allow some flexibility on what your raid brings.

  • Sykper.6583Sykper.6583 Member ✭✭✭

    Just had a thought.

    The perfect way my system could be balanced would be Elite Specs. To address flexibility builds and catering around this new three buff system, why not have it so certain Elite Specs actually change the kind of buff you bring?

    Druid brings GotL which applies 'Fervor' but Soulbeast can bring 'Keen' which can alter the raid comp a touch. Maybe some raid comps actively want to stack certain professions out of preference, and I do not want to ultimately take that away I want to normalize the system a bit but still have certain rules for raid comps to play out.

    Does that sound reasonable?

  • TexZero.7910TexZero.7910 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Sykper.6583 said:
    Just had a thought.

    The perfect way my system could be balanced would be Elite Specs. To address flexibility builds and catering around this new three buff system, why not have it so certain Elite Specs actually change the kind of buff you bring?

    Druid brings GotL which applies 'Fervor' but Soulbeast can bring 'Keen' which can alter the raid comp a touch. Maybe some raid comps actively want to stack certain professions out of preference, and I do not want to ultimately take that away I want to normalize the system a bit but still have certain rules for raid comps to play out.

    Does that sound reasonable?

    No, because you're not actually solving the problem. Your just shifting the goalpost.

    This meta is literally stack passivity and profit. The only way to change that is to reward active combat and cross class synergy, only then will we have new more diverse meta's.

  • Sykper.6583Sykper.6583 Member ✭✭✭

    @TexZero.7910 said:

    @Sykper.6583 said:
    Just had a thought.

    The perfect way my system could be balanced would be Elite Specs. To address flexibility builds and catering around this new three buff system, why not have it so certain Elite Specs actually change the kind of buff you bring?

    Druid brings GotL which applies 'Fervor' but Soulbeast can bring 'Keen' which can alter the raid comp a touch. Maybe some raid comps actively want to stack certain professions out of preference, and I do not want to ultimately take that away I want to normalize the system a bit but still have certain rules for raid comps to play out.

    Does that sound reasonable?

    No, because you're not actually solving the problem. Your just shifting the goalpost.

    This meta is literally stack passivity and profit. The only way to change that is to reward active combat and cross class synergy, only then will we have new more diverse meta's.

    Not achievable without deleting Alacrity from the game as it is now.

    We've got to accept that it was a mistake to implement as is, it should have probably been a boon instead. Now that it has been worked into the system and tweaked in, the only method is to revamp it into a stacking effect alongside the other problem children and have elite specs or core abilities or traits grant access to these effects across all professions and give the players a sense of control over min-maxing these effects. If we tried to reverse the effect of Alacrity it would utterly decimate mesmer as a profession and create too much chaos in the meta.

  • TexZero.7910TexZero.7910 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Sykper.6583 said:

    @TexZero.7910 said:

    @Sykper.6583 said:
    Just had a thought.

    The perfect way my system could be balanced would be Elite Specs. To address flexibility builds and catering around this new three buff system, why not have it so certain Elite Specs actually change the kind of buff you bring?

    Druid brings GotL which applies 'Fervor' but Soulbeast can bring 'Keen' which can alter the raid comp a touch. Maybe some raid comps actively want to stack certain professions out of preference, and I do not want to ultimately take that away I want to normalize the system a bit but still have certain rules for raid comps to play out.

    Does that sound reasonable?

    No, because you're not actually solving the problem. Your just shifting the goalpost.

    This meta is literally stack passivity and profit. The only way to change that is to reward active combat and cross class synergy, only then will we have new more diverse meta's.

    Not achievable without deleting Alacrity from the game as it is now.

    We've got to accept that it was a mistake to implement as is, it should have probably been a boon instead. Now that it has been worked into the system and tweaked in, the only method is to revamp it into a stacking effect alongside the other problem children and have elite specs or core abilities or traits grant access to these effects across all professions and give the players a sense of control over min-maxing these effects. If we tried to reverse the effect of Alacrity it would utterly decimate mesmer as a profession and create too much chaos in the meta.

    Not really, alacrity is far from the issue. Especially when it comes to Chrono. Chrono's major benefit over every other class is that it largely can let entire groups of people ignore mechanics and pick up the dead weight by copying/sharing boons. For any other tank to compete it has to have something near comparable as well as lose out on less for traiting as such.

    If another tank or set of classes could do this for minimal sacrifice ex if Druid had Alacrity & Distortion people would take that over Mesmer entirely and you'd mostly see Mesmer and Chrono fade from the meta entirely.

  • Sykper.6583Sykper.6583 Member ✭✭✭

    @TexZero.7910 said:

    Not really, alacrity is far from the issue. Especially when it comes to Chrono. Chrono's major benefit over every other class is that it largely can let entire groups of people ignore mechanics and pick up the dead weight by copying/sharing boons. For any other tank to compete it has to have something near comparable as well as lose out on less for traiting as such.

    If another tank or set of classes could do this for minimal sacrifice ex if Druid had Alacrity & Distortion people would take that over Mesmer entirely and you'd mostly see Mesmer and Chrono fade from the meta entirely.

    I would say that's more of a balance issue than something that can make the meta better. Beside players using Chronotanks aren't doing rockin DPS numbers, their entire prospect is to provide the benefits you've listed, and there's no guarantee Arenanet won't make something to mess with said abilities and force something like a Chronotank out of a future encounter. Remember, they made an ability on Deimos that specifically MUST be blocked, not invuln or dodged. Meaning that if they wanted to, they could make Distortion a non-issue down the road for all future raid hitting mechanics.

  • TexZero.7910TexZero.7910 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Sykper.6583 said:

    @TexZero.7910 said:

    Not really, alacrity is far from the issue. Especially when it comes to Chrono. Chrono's major benefit over every other class is that it largely can let entire groups of people ignore mechanics and pick up the dead weight by copying/sharing boons. For any other tank to compete it has to have something near comparable as well as lose out on less for traiting as such.

    If another tank or set of classes could do this for minimal sacrifice ex if Druid had Alacrity & Distortion people would take that over Mesmer entirely and you'd mostly see Mesmer and Chrono fade from the meta entirely.

    I would say that's more of a balance issue than something that can make the meta better. Beside players using Chronotanks aren't doing rockin DPS numbers, their entire prospect is to provide the benefits you've listed, and there's no guarantee Arenanet won't make something to mess with said abilities and force something like a Chronotank out of a future encounter. Remember, they made an ability on Deimos that specifically MUST be blocked, not invuln or dodged. Meaning that if they wanted to, they could make Distortion a non-issue down the road for all future raid hitting mechanics.

    You're missing the point.

    You put the blame for chono's being where they are on Alacrity. That's not the case. Chrono is where it is because of consolidation. If something came along that did it's job even remotely on par with or better we'd still be in a mirror meta with Z class replacing Chrono. It matter's not what you do to alacrity because of this.

    And again the problem is largely status caps and passive effects. If the effects where noticeably weaker but effected 10 targets instead of 5 or had to have significant effort put into to reach a break even point (relative to current) then you'd see a shift away from mirror. Until then we will always have a core 6 slots taken which results in this meta being stagnant.

  • Sykper.6583Sykper.6583 Member ✭✭✭

    @TexZero.7910 said:
    You're missing the point.

    You put the blame for chono's being where they are on Alacrity. That's not the case. Chrono is where it is because of consolidation. If something came along that did it's job even remotely on par with or better we'd still be in a mirror meta with Z class replacing Chrono. It matter's not what you do to alacrity because of this.

    And again the problem is largely status caps and passive effects. If the effects where noticeably weaker but effected 10 targets instead of 5 or had to have significant effort put into to reach a break even point (relative to current) then you'd see a shift away from mirror. Until then we will always have a core 6 slots taken which results in this meta being stagnant.

    And then we would be creating a meta for simply who does the most raw dps rather than having synergy. You can't make passive effects too passive, it defeats the purpose of even making a comp.

    Raid comps need to have two things, they NEED to have synergy with boons and effects that positively impact allies thus making the player actually stronger for grouping up, and then an active component where outside of the passive effects the active abilities and rotations bring out the best possible outcome for an encounter, with slight alterations in abilities based upon what the encounter desires.

    It would be an utterly boring raid meta if everyone could just bring raw DPS and not worry about the small things like the additional crit or condition damage this profession offers. And rather exclusive since about a third of the professions in game would be used to fill 9 slots, with the last slot being the tank.

  • Sykper.6583Sykper.6583 Member ✭✭✭

    I prefer raid metas with depth rather than Destiny Raids tyvm.

  • TexZero.7910TexZero.7910 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Sykper.6583 said:

    @TexZero.7910 said:
    You're missing the point.

    You put the blame for chono's being where they are on Alacrity. That's not the case. Chrono is where it is because of consolidation. If something came along that did it's job even remotely on par with or better we'd still be in a mirror meta with Z class replacing Chrono. It matter's not what you do to alacrity because of this.

    And again the problem is largely status caps and passive effects. If the effects where noticeably weaker but effected 10 targets instead of 5 or had to have significant effort put into to reach a break even point (relative to current) then you'd see a shift away from mirror. Until then we will always have a core 6 slots taken which results in this meta being stagnant.

    And then we would be creating a meta for simply who does the most raw dps rather than having synergy. You can't make passive effects too passive, it defeats the purpose of even making a comp.

    Raid comps need to have two things, they NEED to have synergy with boons and effects that positively impact allies thus making the player actually stronger for grouping up, and then an active component where outside of the passive effects the active abilities and rotations bring out the best possible outcome for an encounter, with slight alterations in abilities based upon what the encounter desires.

    It would be an utterly boring raid meta if everyone could just bring raw DPS and not worry about the small things like the additional crit or condition damage this profession offers. And rather exclusive since about a third of the professions in game would be used to fill 9 slots, with the last slot being the tank.

    We're already at the point where this meta is about passivity. You claim to want to change this but you keep asking for status quo under a different name.

    The passivity needs to be changed, it's literally that simple, if 3 people can do currently what 6 do then you've opened 3 slots up for whatever purpose you want be it more personal dps or relative added safety of having extra healing/support. This is why Anet needs to move to 10 people for boons and status. They also need to tone down the always on effects so you don't feel obliged to make a super-comp out of the passive effects like EA/Spotter/PP/etc... if those all lost roughly 30points off the top no one would care as the net difference would be better in the long run.

  • Azoqu.8917Azoqu.8917 Member ✭✭✭

    You could add Alacrity to the trait Quickfire on Firebrand (changing it from how it is currently because it's broken in multiple ways) to give Alacrity equal to the duration of the Quickness give with no cooldown and people would still take Chronomancers over Firebrand. Chrono brings too much to the table beyond just quickness and alacrity that there is no way it'd get replaced even if another class brought 100% uptime on those two effects. Chrono is the best tank by far, no other class can avoid as much stuff as they can. Chrono has distort which should not be shareable. Chrono has so much extra utility that it's not even funny, even if you do a side by side comparison to Firebrand having Alacrity.

    Chrono/Firebrand

    • 600 AoE pull/180 AoE pull
    • Range placement of Quickness and Alacrity on 180 radius/PBAoE Quickness and Alacrity on 120 radius with a kitten cone
    • Distort and Aegis/Aegis
    • Blur Frenzy and Shield block for tanking/Mace 3 and Focus 5. The mesmer's avoids are dodges and timed blocks while the Guardian is both number of blocks and only blocks
    • Able to choose elite skill for CC or patching their quickness/Needing to take FmW in order to patch quickness without hoops
    • SoI/LOL!

    There are more advantages that chrono has over firebrand, about the only things FB wins at is being able to supply some healing and, depending on how much the build gets tweaked, maybe a tiny bit more DPS when having to go full support.

  • Joxer.6024Joxer.6024 Member ✭✭✭

    "Chrono's major benefit over every other class is that it largely can let entire groups of people ignore mechanics "
    That's not a good thing, that's a broken thing. Any time you can cheese a fight its broken in some way and not what was intended, and will surely get fixed. Hate to see the "fix" be Chronos getting nerfed.

  • TexZero.7910TexZero.7910 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 26, 2017

    @Joxer.6024 said:
    "Chrono's major benefit over every other class is that it largely can let entire groups of people ignore mechanics "
    That's not a good thing, that's a broken thing. Any time you can cheese a fight its broken in some way and not what was intended, and will surely get fixed. Hate to see the "fix" be Chronos getting nerfed.

    I mean they tried designing around it, but pre-cog exist for situations where distort can't.

    It's a no-win scenario there that either ends up with Anet creating another super tank or nerfing an already exceptionally weak one trick pony role.

  • thrag.9740thrag.9740 Member ✭✭✭

    @Joxer.6024 said:
    "Chrono's major benefit over every other class is that it largely can let entire groups of people ignore mechanics "
    That's not a good thing, that's a broken thing. Any time you can cheese a fight its broken in some way and not what was intended, and will surely get fixed. Hate to see the "fix" be Chronos getting nerfed.

    No thats called a division of labor, and is generally part of teamwork. Chronos are capable of taking on the role of providing active defenses. That is a core part of gw2. If active defensive are, 'cheesing' then all of gw2 is cheese, and we are all here bc we love cheese.

    Ignoring mechanics is just another way of saying, 'handling mechanics' . When a druid heals you, would you call that ignoring mechanics? When a guard gives stability, is your team ignoring mechanics? I would say no, I would say your handling mechanics. So why is it different when a chrono uses active defense?

  • Feanor.2358Feanor.2358 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @TexZero.7910 said:

    @Sykper.6583 said:

    @TexZero.7910 said:
    You're missing the point.

    You put the blame for chono's being where they are on Alacrity. That's not the case. Chrono is where it is because of consolidation. If something came along that did it's job even remotely on par with or better we'd still be in a mirror meta with Z class replacing Chrono. It matter's not what you do to alacrity because of this.

    And again the problem is largely status caps and passive effects. If the effects where noticeably weaker but effected 10 targets instead of 5 or had to have significant effort put into to reach a break even point (relative to current) then you'd see a shift away from mirror. Until then we will always have a core 6 slots taken which results in this meta being stagnant.

    And then we would be creating a meta for simply who does the most raw dps rather than having synergy. You can't make passive effects too passive, it defeats the purpose of even making a comp.

    Raid comps need to have two things, they NEED to have synergy with boons and effects that positively impact allies thus making the player actually stronger for grouping up, and then an active component where outside of the passive effects the active abilities and rotations bring out the best possible outcome for an encounter, with slight alterations in abilities based upon what the encounter desires.

    It would be an utterly boring raid meta if everyone could just bring raw DPS and not worry about the small things like the additional crit or condition damage this profession offers. And rather exclusive since about a third of the professions in game would be used to fill 9 slots, with the last slot being the tank.

    We're already at the point where this meta is about passivity. You claim to want to change this but you keep asking for status quo under a different name.

    The passivity needs to be changed, it's literally that simple, if 3 people can do currently what 6 do then you've opened 3 slots up for whatever purpose you want be it more personal dps or relative added safety of having extra healing/support. This is why Anet needs to move to 10 people for boons and status. They also need to tone down the always on effects so you don't feel obliged to make a super-comp out of the passive effects like EA/Spotter/PP/etc... if those all lost roughly 30points off the top no one would care as the net difference would be better in the long run.

    Nobody would go for "relative added safety" because it is simply not needed. However, if you tone down the effects in half, people will still get a second support of the same type just to have the same effect as now. Either that or support becomes irrelevant and meta becomes all about dps and there's no such thing as teamwork in the game any more. The latter happens in 5-man instances in any case, as you don't get the option to double-up on supports there. In principle I like the idea of scaling the buff applications to 10 people, however it either wrecks the 5-man content meta or requires complete rebalancing of the 10-man instances because it will end up being a huge power-creep.

  • Joxer.6024Joxer.6024 Member ✭✭✭

    @thrag.9740 said:

    @Joxer.6024 said:
    "Chrono's major benefit over every other class is that it largely can let entire groups of people ignore mechanics "
    That's not a good thing, that's a broken thing. Any time you can cheese a fight its broken in some way and not what was intended, and will surely get fixed. Hate to see the "fix" be Chronos getting nerfed.

    No thats called a division of labor, and is generally part of teamwork. Chronos are capable of taking on the role of providing active defenses. That is a core part of gw2. If active defensive are, 'cheesing' then all of gw2 is cheese, and we are all here bc we love cheese.

    Ignoring mechanics is just another way of saying, 'handling mechanics' . When a druid heals you, would you call that ignoring mechanics? When a guard gives stability, is your team ignoring mechanics? I would say no, I would say your handling mechanics. So why is it different when a chrono uses active defense?

    I would say active defense is what the game intended, i.e. dodging, blocking, cc'ing and the like. Anytime you ignore a mechanic it leads to bad things, as I can recall many a fight in WOW where we all figured out that if the group stood on "x" we wouldn't cop a certain mechanic and thus win, only to come back 2 weeks later and find that said safe spot was now "fixed"...bummer. Also, I once pointed out that on the Chak Egg HP in TD that if you stood up on the big rock you wouldn't get hit at all by the Boss, easy kill. I was told by several folks it was a reportable offense and I was exploiting the game. Is this not the same as what a Chrono does perhaps? That's where my concern comes from, not wanting to hurt the core of the game is all.

  • Ertrak.9506Ertrak.9506 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 26, 2017

    @thrag.9740 said:

    @Joxer.6024 said:
    "Chrono's major benefit over every other class is that it largely can let entire groups of people ignore mechanics "
    That's not a good thing, that's a broken thing. Any time you can cheese a fight its broken in some way and not what was intended, and will surely get fixed. Hate to see the "fix" be Chronos getting nerfed.

    No thats called a division of labor, and is generally part of teamwork. Chronos are capable of taking on the role of providing active defenses. That is a core part of gw2. If active defensive are, 'cheesing' then all of gw2 is cheese, and we are all here bc we love cheese.

    Ignoring mechanics is just another way of saying, 'handling mechanics' . When a druid heals you, would you call that ignoring mechanics? When a guard gives stability, is your team ignoring mechanics? I would say no, I would say your handling mechanics. So why is it different when a chrono uses active defense?

    I'd say i love cheese but then i don't think we'd be taking about the same thing :)

    On a serious note, what if you keep distortion share exclusive to f4, increase its cool down (so its only usable maybe 1-2 times a boss pull) and changed distortion on signets to share aegis instead. Would this help anything, or still make chronos mandatory?

    Edit: autocorrects

  • Dadnir.5038Dadnir.5038 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Mikeskies.1536 said:
    Allow Scourge to replace 1 Druid and 1 Warrior. Allow Renegade and Firebrand to replace 1 Chrono.

    • General: Make all class-specific stat bonuses effect 10 targets, up from 5 targets
    • Druid: Make Frost Spirit and Sun Spirt effect 10 targets, up from 5 targets
    • Scourge: Add Grace of the Land to GM Trait - Sand Savant, modified appropriately
    • Scourge: Oppressive Collapse - Decrease CD to 20 seconds; Increase Might radius to 600
    • Revenant: Redesign Ventari/Renegade to upkeep 100% alacrity

    Honnestly, theses change would end up kicking druids out of raids since a Soulbeast can take thoses spirit and have a good dps, while Scourge will easily outdps the druid. You don't make things "better" by giving gotl to the necromancer.

    As for renegade/firebrand replacing chrono, why would you take 2 professions builds for support when you have one that can do the job of the 2? In an era like ours where compagny make sure to pile up the workload on the least possible workers so that they can reduce to the minimum the number of people they have to pay at the end of the month, this is some pretty odd thinking you got here.

    I understand the will but, it's not gonna do any good for the game at all.

  • zealex.9410zealex.9410 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Would be better to flat out remove alacrity.

  • Feanor.2358Feanor.2358 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @zealex.9410 said:
    Would be better to flat out remove alacrity.

    To what end? The chronos will still be the best tanks out there, thanks the the combination of Quickness, Distortion and high number of personal evades and blocks.
    In much the same way removing GotL won't change the status of the druid.

  • TexZero.7910TexZero.7910 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Feanor.2358 said:
    Nobody would go for "relative added safety" because it is simply not needed. However, if you tone down the effects in half, people will still get a second support of the same type just to have the same effect as now. Either that or support becomes irrelevant and meta becomes all about dps and there's no such thing as teamwork in the game any more. The latter happens in 5-man instances in any case, as you don't get the option to double-up on supports there. In principle I like the idea of scaling the buff applications to 10 people, however it either wrecks the 5-man content meta or requires complete rebalancing of the 10-man instances because it will end up being a huge power-creep.

    The effect cap would be 10, the bonuses would be shaved to compensate. That means the effective power is the same. You're not stacking anything because the class specific mechanics don't work that way. Sure you could stack them and be inefficient if you want though, no one stopping you from doing that. Just like there's no one stopping you from using those 3 extra slots for DPS/Support/Back up tank(mechanic handler). It just opens up the choice and opening up choices is what changes meta's.

  • thrag.9740thrag.9740 Member ✭✭✭

    @Joxer.6024 said:

    @thrag.9740 said:

    @Joxer.6024 said:
    "Chrono's major benefit over every other class is that it largely can let entire groups of people ignore mechanics "
    That's not a good thing, that's a broken thing. Any time you can cheese a fight its broken in some way and not what was intended, and will surely get fixed. Hate to see the "fix" be Chronos getting nerfed.

    No thats called a division of labor, and is generally part of teamwork. Chronos are capable of taking on the role of providing active defenses. That is a core part of gw2. If active defensive are, 'cheesing' then all of gw2 is cheese, and we are all here bc we love cheese.

    Ignoring mechanics is just another way of saying, 'handling mechanics' . When a druid heals you, would you call that ignoring mechanics? When a guard gives stability, is your team ignoring mechanics? I would say no, I would say your handling mechanics. So why is it different when a chrono uses active defense?

    I would say active defense is what the game intended, i.e. dodging, blocking, cc'ing and the like. Anytime you ignore a mechanic it leads to bad things, as I can recall many a fight in WOW where we all figured out that if the group stood on "x" we wouldn't cop a certain mechanic and thus win, only to come back 2 weeks later and find that said safe spot was now "fixed"...bummer. Also, I once pointed out that on the Chak Egg HP in TD that if you stood up on the big rock you wouldn't get hit at all by the Boss, easy kill. I was told by several folks it was a reportable offense and I was exploiting the game. Is this not the same as what a Chrono does perhaps? That's where my concern comes from, not wanting to hurt the core of the game is all.

    No it isn't the same at all. I take it you have never played chrono, so let me explain. Chrono doesn't give permanent invulnerability like a safe spot in an environment. Chrono shares invulnerability to its group, this invulnerability is called distortion. This invulnerability lasts for 1 second, has a cast time that varies based on the skills you can use to give it, and has an internal cool down of around 5 seconds. I.e. a Chrono has to know exactly when the damage is coming, and use the skills at the correct time to allow the group to avoid it.

    The problem is, the skills that provide distortion are also skills a chrono must use to upkeep quickness. So, in practice, most chronos you find dont even try to distort important attacks, and occasionally do it by luck, they only focus on upkeeping quickness. The chronos who can taylor their rotation to the specific boss to provide quickness and distortion, are rare and usually found in good organized groups, not common lfg groups.

    Now, you might wonder why is it so hard to provide both quickness and distortion? Well, it is because the attacks which provide both quickness and distortion have a catch. They only provide quickness if you already have quickness. So lets say a boss attack is coming in 7 seconds. But you only have 3 seconds of quickness remaining on your character. You can provide quickness, or you can distort the attack, you can not do both because the distortion share has an internal cool down. A great chrono never puts themselves in this position, they taylor their rotation to the specific boss they are fighting, to make everything line up (at least well enough).

  • Grimheart.2853Grimheart.2853 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 29, 2018

    @Sykper.6583 said:

    @Grimheart.2853 said:

    So fervor is essentially another might. And why exactly do we need that?

    It's a normalized might that an individual cannot remotely come close to stacking on their own, and is always applied to a group, it is also not able to be corrupted or ripped.

    Might has more oomph, but is subject to all the disadvantages of being a boon.

    Same goes to that "keen" thing.

    I would argue that 'Keen' is definitely different than the comparison between Fervor and Might. Keen applies Precision and Ferocity, so a better form of Fury which again, Keen can't be ripped or corrupted. The low stack number is keeping it's impact in other competitive environments low but still valuable to an organized group.

    We essentially go the alacrity route, just a little bit more inclusive, but still as narrow-minded as said route. There's already a set of boons that work across classes for flexibility in the first place, why make things more stiff by adding more excluding boons?

    The ideas of balance and role/group flexibility should distance themselves from alacrity-style ideas (and try to reduce the fallout od those already inplemented), not expand them.

    Please go into a bit more detail about how this can be both inclusive but close-minded? Honestly it's my opinion that Alacrity as what it is now should never have come into being. But since we've opened this pandora's box, for balance purposes we need to consider that for the exclusive buffs we have, balancing them across a few professions provides both a method for future raid balance to consider all professions, and just enough flexibility to the meta that several raid comps could theoretically get all of them.

    ...Or not. After all these changes simply rework these buffs to be a group effort but with the DPS checks being as they are and Arenanet focusing more on mechanics, some groups could decide not to aim for a full stack of 'Fervor' or 'Keen' or, unlikely, Alacrity.

    What exacly do you have trouble understanding in the "close minded yet less exclusive than the more extreme example" argument?

    It's dumb, but not as dumb as it could be.

    We're building on the idea of unique buffs, restricting flexibility even more than it already is, while we should be working more with the system that was designed for flexibility.

    It doesn't matter that keen works for a different stat. Both keen and fervor are essentially another form of a raw damage boosting boon that is might. We have might. We don't need another might.

    I completely and totally agree that alacrity should never have existed to begin with. But just because a mistake was made, there is no reason to build upon it. It should either be made into a non-sharable buff to preserve chronomancer's mechanic flavor, or streamlined to be as flexible and accessible as boons. Maybe even made into a boon. Those would be serious design decisions, but they should be made if we are to get away from the primitive philosophies of class-exclusive buffs.

    Why should we rework flawed mechanics into the same form of flawed mechanics and then try to share them? Why can't we use our current flexible boon system? Make frost spirit/strength banner pulse might, make tactics banner pulse fury, make GotL pulse might or protection, etc. What will those other buffs you suggest bring to the table? We have quotas right now, and what I see in your suggestion are the same quotas, but with a few more checkboxes to fill. And quotas are never a rational choise.

  • Draco.9480Draco.9480 Member ✭✭✭

    I've no idea why people are against ideas to bring usefulness for other class and still support that garbage double chrono, double cps and double druid as optimal in raids. this just looks bad and sad how people can't get out of their caves and be more open to other possibilities.

  • Joxer.6024Joxer.6024 Member ✭✭✭

    @Draco.9480 said:
    I've no idea why people are against ideas to bring usefulness for other class and still support that garbage double chrono, double cps and double druid as optimal in raids. this just looks bad and sad how people can't get out of their caves and be more open to other possibilities.

    I agree....don't kill Chrono or the other "support" classes but just open it up to other classes as well. Same applies for dps, somehow give at least Chrono (cPS is fine) a little bump up in the damage department. Just so that every class can perform a any role and not be pigeon-holed into doing just one thing. If you are 100% happy being a Chrono tank then go nuts but maybe you wanna do a tad more pew-pewing so having OPTIONS for your class is always a good thing, no? ;)

©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.