Profession, Elite-spec, Skill, & Trait Reworks? — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Profession, Elite-spec, Skill, & Trait Reworks?

One of the devs at some point said that future reworks are on the board but also said as for when they could come... well he obviously couldn't give an answer because he likely didn't know himself and thats understandable.

My questions are...

1:
If the teams are merged now and one of the pros is more communication so that things get balanced without totally killing one part of the game or another for 3 months or more does this also mean the potential for reworks where they are needed will be much higher or achieved sooner? (be it on a profession form the ground up ie mesmer or simply for an elite spec ie deadeye)

I wont point out any specific professions here to avoid conflict of who should get what first but there is no denying that quite a few professions or especs in general could use some fine tuning or out right reworks to bring them more into line with the way the game has changed over the years.

2:
Will the team consider looking at skills and traits that have not changed over the course of the games life? For example traits and skills that have not changed or had an update since 2014 that are practically unviable / getting by as the bare minimum for viable for any game mode (accord to devs i would guess sense the skills/ traits have not changed) but generally not accepted as viable by that particular professions community.

I for one would love to have more options opened up to me but I sit in the group of players that wants to play something that can be considered viable/optimal or at least semi optimal.

Tagged:

Comments

  • Does this mean there is hope that we will get a rework of the pets and the pet system on Ranger?

    1. We're going to make changes and push on re-works whenever possible. They do take more time by their very nature of having to account for a more moving pieces. Getting the extra feedback within the team means that for re-works we'll be more able to do things like have them split with different mode adjustments from the get-go and have more potential re-works based on the wants and needs of different player groups.

    2. We're absolutely looking at the ones that haven't changed in ages and those are often the ones that have fallen furthest from the modern standards.

  • coro.3176coro.3176 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 21, 2018

    @Irenio CalmonHuang.2048 said:
    2. We're absolutely looking at the ones that haven't changed in ages and those are often the ones that have fallen furthest from the modern standards.

    cough cough power creep :) :) :)

    I don't know how you could ever hope to balance core with the elite specs given how much the elite specs get "for free". (eg. core engineer vs Holosmith - holosmith gets a ridiculously good damage kit + sustain + cc and gives up basically nothing to get it)

    .. unless the overperforming elite specs are due for some nerfs, which I'd be all for! .. but it sounds like you intend to buff the underperforming specs instead? I'm not sure how that will work when the overperforming elite specs can and do also benefit from core buffs.

  • @Irenio CalmonHuang.2048 said:

    1. We're absolutely looking at the ones that haven't changed in ages and those are often the ones that have fallen furthest from the modern standards.

    This is huge and could go a long way if you guys can pull it off.

  • @coro.3176 said:

    @Irenio CalmonHuang.2048 said:
    2. We're absolutely looking at the ones that haven't changed in ages and those are often the ones that have fallen furthest from the modern standards.

    cough cough power creep :) :) :)

    I don't know how you could ever hope to balance core with the elite specs given how much the elite specs get "for free". (eg. core engineer vs Holosmith - holosmith gets a ridiculously good damage kit + sustain + cc and gives up basically nothing to get it)

    .. unless the overperforming elite specs are due for some nerfs, which I'd be all for! .. but it sounds like you intend to buff the underperforming specs instead? I'm not sure how that will work when the overperforming elite specs can and do also benefit from core buffs.

    This is a delicate and difficult line to tread. We try to avoid power creep as much as possible while still providing solid gameplay through updates to parts like animations, creating additional potential synergy and the like.

    And yes, we'll nerf outliers.

  • ZDragon.3046ZDragon.3046 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Irenio CalmonHuang.2048 said:
    2. We're absolutely looking at the ones that haven't changed in ages and those are often the ones that have fallen furthest from the modern standards.

    Lovely news indeed. I can only think of the possibilities with my fingers tapping together rapidly. :+1:

  • A while back Mesmers were given Illusionary Persona ( a grandmaster trait) as baseline. Would it be possible for Rangers to get something like Fortifying Bond as baseline? I mean we are supposed to have this wonderful and great bond with our pets thematically not like Empathic Bond. :)

  • kharmin.7683kharmin.7683 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Sai Locke.7193 said:
    Does this mean there is hope that we will get a rework of the pets and the pet system on Ranger?

    Did this get ignored? Because this has been something that has needed work since forever.

    I am a very casual player.
    Very.
    Casual.

  • You mean our pets aren't supposed to be meat bags that body block for us and take damage until they are dead and be woefully useless in medium/large scale WvW skirmishes?? Pets being used as a weapon instead of dumb AI? That's inconceivable....

  • I don't think it did @kharmin.7683 ... at least I hope it didn't. I assume the two part reply @Irenio CalmonHuang.2048 made was directed towards comments like mine.> @Irenio CalmonHuang.2048 said:

    1. We're going to make changes and push on re-works whenever possible. They do take more time by their very nature of having to account for a more moving pieces. Getting the extra feedback within the team means that for re-works we'll be more able to do things like have them split with different mode adjustments from the get-go and have more potential re-works based on the wants and needs of different player groups.

    2. We're absolutely looking at the ones that haven't changed in ages and those are often the ones that have fallen furthest from the modern standards.

  • archmagus.7249archmagus.7249 Member ✭✭✭

    @Irenio CalmonHuang.2048 said:
    1. We're going to make changes and push on re-works whenever possible. They do take more time by their very nature of having to account for a more moving pieces. Getting the extra feedback within the team means that for re-works we'll be more able to do things like have them split with different mode adjustments from the get-go and have more potential re-works based on the wants and needs of different player groups.

    1. We're absolutely looking at the ones that haven't changed in ages and those are often the ones that have fallen furthest from the modern standards.

    Like an elite gadget for engineer.

  • @kharmin.7683 said:

    @Sai Locke.7193 said:
    Does this mean there is hope that we will get a rework of the pets and the pet system on Ranger?

    Did this get ignored? Because this has been something that has needed work since forever.

    There is hope for that, and many other re-works, but as someone who has wanted to do a re-work to a lot of pets and their system - this type of task has a lot more in the background to do than is expected. Like, a LOT. No, really.

    That said, I'd like to keep this AFC to the Systems team, please. As per the initial post. Getting into specifics on a per-profession basis isn't the purpose of this AFC.

  • The two things I would like to see addressed most are:

    1) Automatic procs - Most notably for me are evasions and invulns sprinkled throughout various builds. In a game whose fundamental combat concept is active gameplay there are a shocking number of actions that require no player input to activate. This was best illustrated for me in WvW not to long ago where a single AFK warrior made an entire EBG blob pause because almost everyone froze to wait out the automatic endure pain. To reiterate I don't object to that level of survival - I object to that level of survival while the player does absolutely nothing.

    2) Risk versus reward - there are far too many builds that fall into the low risk/high reward category - especially on the ranged side of things. The lock-on chain hits from range especially need better counter play. Stealth also needs to be reexamined.

    Finally, I'm well aware the game isn't balanced for 1v1, but there are too many builds floating around where the only smart move one of the two players has is not to fight at all. That's fine when you know you're opponent is just better than you. It's not fine when you look at their build icon and immediately know they are going to have to be incompetent for you to have any chance to win.

  • kharmin.7683kharmin.7683 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Irenio CalmonHuang.2048 said:

    @kharmin.7683 said:

    @Sai Locke.7193 said:
    Does this mean there is hope that we will get a rework of the pets and the pet system on Ranger?

    Did this get ignored? Because this has been something that has needed work since forever.

    There is hope for that, and many other re-works, but as someone who has wanted to do a re-work to a lot of pets and their system - this type of task has a lot more in the background to do than is expected. Like, a LOT. No, really.

    That said, I'd like to keep this AFC to the Systems team, please. As per the initial post. Getting into specifics on a per-profession basis isn't the purpose of this AFC.

    Thanks for the response. It's more than I recall having on this topic in a long time, even if it's out of the scope of the AFC.

    I am a very casual player.
    Very.
    Casual.

©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.