A PvE Balance Manifesto — Guild Wars 2 Forums

A PvE Balance Manifesto

GammelTier.4875GammelTier.4875 Member
edited August 23, 2018 in Professions

Hello fellow forum dwellers,

Becoming more and more annoyed with the PvE balance situation I have decided to finally write down my proposed changes.

Warning: This is a 15 page document. If you are not willing to read something that long, that is totally fine.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=12Sme_h0aNEsiMZq59Wsa0E1CG-vQEoDL

A quick overview:

This system proposes 3 support roles, leaving 7 DPS spots in raids and 2 in fractals.

The three roles are:

  • Tank
  • Healer
  • Buffer

The following steps are made to achieve this:

  • Step 1 - Remove Alacrity
  • Step 2 - Remove unique Buffs like Empower Allies or Ranger Spirits
  • Step 3 - Limit the Boons a role can share:

Quickness and "Defensive" Boons for Tanks;

Healing and "Supportive" Boons for Healers;

Might and "Offensive" Boons for Buffers

The suggested professions/specializations for each roles are:

  • Chronomancer, Scrapper & Firebrand for Tanks;
  • Tempest, Druid & Herald for Healers;
  • Scourge, Deadeye & Warrior for Buffers.

[Edit: Of course these are suggested specializations, and they should not be limited to these roles]

Lastly we bring the DPS Roles in line and allow every profession to have a DPS build that is within a 10% window.

If you have any questions or constructive feedback feel free to comment. (:
(This is crossposted to the Guild Wars 2 Subreddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/99p09j/a_pve_balance_manifesto/ )

Comments

  • "No, thanks, then. Any system that formalizes any sort of trinity won't make the game more fun to play. (At least not for me nor the people with whom I play.) Especially any system that insists that specific specs have only one role."

    We already are in a situation where this is the case. When was the last time you have raided with a non-chrono tank? I at least cannot remember the day?

    "Within 10% of ? How do you determine the benchmark? "

    See the point i made in the document: "The simplest option of course is to ask the 1% guilds to
    test stuff for them. Heck, pay them for it if need be. It is just another kind of outsourcing
    so why not. But as we all know, people cannot keep their mouth shut so this may be
    tricky. I, of course, do not know if something along these lines ever happened in the past
    or if there are any other reasons for not doing it. Another option could be macros. Think
    about what rotation would be the most optimised one, put it in a macro, compare to
    output to the window."

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

    @GammelTier.4875 said:

    • Step 1 - Remove Alacrity
    • Step 2 - Remove unique Buffs like Empower Allies or Ranger Spirits
    • Step 3 - Limit the Boons a role can share:

    Quickness and "Defensive" Boons for Tanks;

    Healing and "Supportive" Boons for Healers;

    Might and "Offensive" Boons for Buffers

    You had my attention till right here.

    Im okay with changing alacrity. In fact it should be personal only and given strictly to chrono. Not shared.
    Unique buffs shouldn't be removed but enhanced so that the classes that have them are desirable (within reason it should be for more than just the buff)
    Limiting what boons can be shared is good.

    Quickness is offensive by nature. It shouldnt go to tanks. So big nope on this.
    Healing boons ? So regen...and only regen....
    Might and Offensive Boons for Buffers ? So the two offensive boons remaining since you want quickness to go to tanks .... Might and Fury.

    This concept needs more work to be considered.

  • Shikaru.7618Shikaru.7618 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 23, 2018

    You have not provided strong enough arguments for the removal of alacrity as the right solution. All of the issues you cite can be better solved by taking other actions.

    It is weak enough that, without the flashy effect and the green numbers, most players likely will not even notice much of a difference having it or not.

    I'm assuming this is targeted at raiders in which case I wholeheartedly disagree. Most raiders especially weaver and condi warrior players will notice the abscence of alacrity in combat situations almost immediately. Also anyone who has practiced their rotation will immediately notice that their rotation includes way more auto attack chains before their next skill comes up.

    It is powerful enough that is has a huge impact on DPS numbers.

    As does quickness. This isnt an argument for the removal of the boon.

    It does not have the same benefit to every class (Thieves without weapon skill cooldowns!)

    Much like how fury and frost spirit to condi builds or having quickness outside of hitting signet of inspiration is actually detrimental for the chrono's ability to tank. Having less reliance to perform in the absence of alacrity is a strength of the class since it can now pull respectable numbers when only quickness is available. There's no reasoning provided that all classes have to have all boons provide the same amount of power.

    It has the most obnoxious boon effect in the game.

    Again not an argument for removal. Better solution for this is to fix the visual.

    At best theres a case for removal from chrono specifically, but adding alacrity to other classes accomplish class diversity as well and having a power disparity with boons has yet to be proven as a problem by you.

  • @TexZero.7910 said:
    Im okay with changing alacrity. In fact it should be personal only and given strictly to chrono. Not shared.
    Unique buffs shouldn't be removed but enhanced so that the classes that have them are desirable (within reason it should be for more than just the buff)
    Limiting what boons can be shared is good.

    Quickness is offensive by nature. It shouldnt go to tanks. So big nope on this.
    Healing boons ? So regen...and only regen....
    Might and Offensive Boons for Buffers ? So the two offensive boons remaining since you want quickness to go to tanks .... Might and Fury.

    This concept needs more work to be considered.

    I agree with you that letting tanks share quickness is a bit dumb. I go over this exact problem in my FAQ.

    I would count vigor and swiftness also as a supportive boon. what i meant is healing and "supportive" boons, not healing boons (:

  • DeadlySynz.3471DeadlySynz.3471 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Game shouldn't be balanced around PvE at all; doing so completely eradicates the balance in the competitive game modes. They've proven they can't properly split the balance between the game modes.

    The game had very little balance issues in it's first 2-3 years compared to now. This is due to the introduction of fractals and raids. They are far better off abandoning any semblance of balance when it comes to PvE and fully balance around the competitive modes, then bring raids and fractals in line with the new balance.

  • thrag.9740thrag.9740 Member ✭✭✭

    Your argument to remove alacrity is weak. Lets start with this:

    Seriously, there is no good answer to this question. Because you either:
    • Work around it, taking it into account for balancing and thus create a situation where every party and squad ever will take one of two professions in the game that can >share it (Chronomancer or Renegade).
    • Or you ignore it, refuse to acknowledge it when balancing possibly creating broken builds.

    Same as every other boon. Should an encounter be balanced around dps when we have 25 might or when we have 0? What about quickness? Should the boss do large attacks often enough that you need vigor? Having a dynamic boon system comes with this question, there is nothing unique to alacrity.

    Next:

    • It is weak enough that, without the flashy effect and the green numbers, most players likely will not even notice much of a difference having it or not.
    • It is powerful enough that is has a huge impact on DPS numbers.

    Obvious contradiction is obvious? Is it strong or is it weak? I doubt any player in this discussion would not notice a lack of alacrity?

    Next:

    But you still have the problem that is does not affect all professions to a similar level. A Thief benefits from it far less than a Weaver for example. And in the end, it is just >another problem we have to balance around, and let’s be honest, we already have enough of them.

    This also applies to every other boon in the game. Fury doesn't help necro, because either its a power necro with 100% crit chance without fury, or its a condi necro who has something like at most 5% of its damage come from power? Quickness doesn't help classes with lots of insta cast skills like kitless holo as much as classes without them. Weaver really needs swiftness, Guard really needs retal or aegis, etc. Do you think power warrior cares as much about vigor as a mirage does? Meanwhile vigor can actually hurt power daredevil. Etc.

  • phokus.8934phokus.8934 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:

    @GammelTier.4875 said:
    The three roles are:

    • Tank
    • Healer
    • Buffer

    No, thanks, then. Any system that formalizes any sort of trinity won't make the game more fun to play. (At least not for me nor the people with whom I play.) Especially any system that insists that specific specs have only one role.

    Lastly we bring the DPS Roles in line and allow every profession to have a DPS build that is within a 10% window.

    Within 10% of ? How do you determine the benchmark? Do you use player-established benchmarks in which the top 1% of players use tricks to eek out extra damage? The DPS of the top 20% of players, in which case, there could be (and historically has been) huge variations across players of different skill?

    It's not even theoretically possible to ensure that all DPS builds have roughly similar damage potential.

    ANet's idea of balance is far from ideal, but this oversimplifies the issue.

    My thoughts exactly. Some people reach well beyond the stars and need to realize that such drastic changes across the board will not happen (very unlikely to happen).

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

    @GammelTier.4875 said:
    Lastly we bring the DPS Roles in line and allow every profession to have a DPS build that is within a 10% window.

    We saw how well that worked for condi engi. Just as well as it's working for weaver right now. Balancing damage potential ends up in making the easiest, most reliable builds by FAR the best picks.

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

    @GammelTier.4875 said:
    "No, thanks, then. Any system that formalizes any sort of trinity won't make the game more fun to play. (At least not for me nor the people with whom I play.) Especially any system that insists that specific specs have only one role."

    We already are in a situation where this is the case. When was the last time you have raided with a non-chrono tank? I at least cannot remember the day?

    "Within 10% of ? How do you determine the benchmark? "

    See the point i made in the document: "The simplest option of course is to ask the 1% guilds to
    test stuff for them. Heck, pay them for it if need be. It is just another kind of outsourcing
    so why not. But as we all know, people cannot keep their mouth shut so this may be
    tricky. I, of course, do not know if something along these lines ever happened in the past
    or if there are any other reasons for not doing it. Another option could be macros. Think
    about what rotation would be the most optimised one, put it in a macro, compare to
    output to the window."

    I raid every week with a firebrand healer/main tank so every time would be my answer.

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

    @DeadlySynz.3471 said:
    Game shouldn't be balanced around PvE at all; doing so completely eradicates the balance in the competitive game modes. They've proven they can't properly split the balance between the game modes.

    The game had very little balance issues in it's first 2-3 years compared to now. This is due to the introduction of fractals and raids. They are far better off abandoning any semblance of balance when it comes to PvE and fully balance around the competitive modes, then bring raids and fractals in line with the new balance.

    Nostalgia gogles are a bad thing. The game had several glaring balance issues in years 1-3. Core Warrior says hello as being game and meta defining in all modes. Hambow stance dance was a thing for a reason.

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

    @GammelTier.4875 said:
    I would count vigor and swiftness also as a supportive boon. what i meant is healing and "supportive" boons, not healing boons (:

    The problem with this is that all boons are by nature supportive. So you're ending up in a very poor design spot unless you completely redo all boons and how they function. This is unlikely to occur 6 years into the games life.

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 24, 2018

    @GammelTier.4875 said:
    "No, thanks, then. Any system that formalizes any sort of trinity won't make the game more fun to play. (At least not for me nor the people with whom I play.) Especially any system that insists that specific specs have only one role."

    We already are in a situation where this is the case. When was the last time you have raided with a non-chrono tank? I at least cannot remember the day?

    "Within 10% of ? How do you determine the benchmark? "

    See the point i made in the document: "The simplest option of course is to ask the 1% guilds to
    test stuff for them. Heck, pay them for it if need be. It is just another kind of outsourcing
    so why not. But as we all know, people cannot keep their mouth shut so this may be
    tricky. I, of course, do not know if something along these lines ever happened in the past
    or if there are any other reasons for not doing it. Another option could be macros. Think
    about what rotation would be the most optimised one, put it in a macro, compare to
    output to the window."

    I'm sorry, but the fact that a Support-Tank-damage meta developed in raids is how of consequence for the rest of the game?

    How big was the raid population again? Around 10-15%?

    We are NOT in your established meta, not for 95% of the rest of the game. Not for spvp, not for wvw, not for fractals and not for any other pve content. A tiny fraction of the pve game has in some fights an efficiency based meta, that's it (and not even for all the boss fights in this tiny fraction).

    Would I enjoy more alternatives Beside chrono tank? Sure.

    Does this warrant an entire rework of how the game is designed. Not at this point in time.

  • Eramonster.2718Eramonster.2718 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 24, 2018

    It won't solve anything by reshuffling the current system. As long as the system remains, it will allows us players to choose traitline lines, it's just reshuffling the skills and roles distribution. In short changing the META class compositions.

    Possible by streamlining builds, limiting and making it simple eg. If a player pick the role of a tank, he is limited to certain trait line only. Which will push the game to create a 'trinity' or role specifics limitations.

  • Etheri.5406Etheri.5406 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:

    @GammelTier.4875 said:
    "No, thanks, then. Any system that formalizes any sort of trinity won't make the game more fun to play. (At least not for me nor the people with whom I play.) Especially any system that insists that specific specs have only one role."

    We already are in a situation where this is the case. When was the last time you have raided with a non-chrono tank? I at least cannot remember the day?

    But the system isn't insisting on it; we are. That's markedly different from what you propose, in which a build "archetype" has no other role.

    "Within 10% of ? How do you determine the benchmark? "

    See the point i made in the document: "The simplest option of course is to ask the 1% guilds to
    test stuff for them. Heck, pay them for it if need be. It is just another kind of outsourcing
    so why not. But as we all know, people cannot keep their mouth shut so this may be
    tricky. I, of course, do not know if something along these lines ever happened in the past
    or if there are any other reasons for not doing it. Another option could be macros. Think
    about what rotation would be the most optimised one, put it in a macro, compare to
    output to the window."

    The reason everyone seems to think there's only one way to do raids is that we have decided to self-select the top 1%'s idea of builds/comp and apply it to every group. ANet's job isn't to balance for just 1% of the community; it's to balance for everyone.

    Players showing they have no clue what balance is or why it's important only to then rant about the effects of perpetually having awful balance states and the downsides that they bring is a local sport.

  • maddoctor.2738maddoctor.2738 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @GammelTier.4875 said:
    The following steps are made to achieve this:

    Step 1 - Remove Alacrity
    Step 2 - Remove unique Buffs like Empower Allies or Ranger Spirits
    Step 3 - Limit the Boons a role can share:

    Your "solution" is to remove unique buffs like Alacrity and Spirits... why not do the opposite and give more of those buffs to other professions (that do not stack)?

  • Glider.5792Glider.5792 Member ✭✭✭

    @thrag.9740 said:

    But you still have the problem that is does not affect all professions to a similar level. A Thief benefits from it far less than a Weaver for example. And in the end, it is just >another problem we have to balance around, and let’s be honest, we already have enough of them.

    This also applies to every other boon in the game. Fury doesn't help necro, because either its a power necro with 100% crit chance without fury, or its a condi necro who has something like at most 5% of its damage come from power? Quickness doesn't help classes with lots of insta cast skills like kitless holo as much as classes without them. Weaver really needs swiftness, Guard really needs retal or aegis, etc. Do you think power warrior cares as much about vigor as a mirage does? Meanwhile vigor can actually hurt power daredevil. Etc.

    There is a different case here with thief. Thief litteraly does not have cooldowns on weapons skills, so alacrity does not affect those at all. It not build related, its class related in this case. Every other example you gave here is build related.
    However, this also has an opposite. Chill will not decrease the weapon cds on thief, while on every other class it will.

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeFWMeskOJhk8N-SvOFCJXA
    Fractal speed kills, raids, Black Lion Chest Openings, random.

  • Oglaf.1074Oglaf.1074 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 24, 2018

    @Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:

    @GammelTier.4875 said:
    The three roles are:

    • Tank
    • Healer
    • Buffer

    No, thanks, then. Any system that formalizes any sort of trinity won't make the game more fun to play. (At least not for me nor the people with whom I play.) Especially any system that insists that specific specs have only one role.

    Agreed 110%.

    I say that as a raider. Raids are OK but I very much feel like falling back to the trinity was an enormous mistake on Anet’s part. I would’ve loved to have seen them make a truly unique form of raiding that (like the rest of the game) didn’t rely on it.

    Please Anet give us a hide Chest Armour-option. Tattoo-clad Norns everywhere beg of you.

  • Etheri.5406Etheri.5406 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @nsleep.7839 said:

    @Etheri.5406 said:

    @Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:

    @GammelTier.4875 said:
    "No, thanks, then. Any system that formalizes any sort of trinity won't make the game more fun to play. (At least not for me nor the people with whom I play.) Especially any system that insists that specific specs have only one role."

    We already are in a situation where this is the case. When was the last time you have raided with a non-chrono tank? I at least cannot remember the day?

    But the system isn't insisting on it; we are. That's markedly different from what you propose, in which a build "archetype" has no other role.

    "Within 10% of ? How do you determine the benchmark? "

    See the point i made in the document: "The simplest option of course is to ask the 1% guilds to
    test stuff for them. Heck, pay them for it if need be. It is just another kind of outsourcing
    so why not. But as we all know, people cannot keep their mouth shut so this may be
    tricky. I, of course, do not know if something along these lines ever happened in the past
    or if there are any other reasons for not doing it. Another option could be macros. Think
    about what rotation would be the most optimised one, put it in a macro, compare to
    output to the window."

    The reason everyone seems to think there's only one way to do raids is that we have decided to self-select the top 1%'s idea of builds/comp and apply it to every group. ANet's job isn't to balance for just 1% of the community; it's to balance for everyone.

    Players showing they have no clue what balance is or why it's important only to then rant about the effects of perpetually having awful balance states and the downsides that they bring is a local sport.

    As Mark Rosewater said once in a presentation about game design: players are very good at finding problems with the game, but they are bad at solving those.

    We actually know for sure that balance, at least for PvE, is in a not very desirable spot and it brings a lot of issues when it causes a very polarizing meta that's practically enforced perpetually by the community. We're not talking about small imbalances here, there are classes that are dominating at every fight (every raid squad needing two Chronos, one Druid, one Warrior, every meta fractal party having a Chrono and a Warrior) and the difference in performance between a meta comp and a non-meta comp being pretty significant.

    While true, these differences are also MUCH SMALLER than they were in the past. At least between DPS. Do you think DPS in the past was as close as they are now? Even for "bad classes"? I don't think DPS has ever been as balanced as since we've gotten raids, fractals, dps meters and benchmarks. The real difference is we now have NUMBERS to prove how big these differences really are.

    Sorry but in vanilla GW2, the inbalance was WAY bigger. But players just literally said "I don't believe you, this does X Y Z" and outside of manual benchmarking on dungeon mobs testing comps and measuring results was pretty difficult. I think entire PvE becomes far more balanced because of rigorous high-end balancing.

    In fact, there is an obsession that if you need to bring a second healer it needs to be a Druid because... they only know Druid as a healer class because it's the only one actually listed on sites like SC? Spotter alone isn't enough of a reason if you're trading a dps slot to have the additional safety of another healer, you might as well go for something with more sustain as a single Druid is enough for might and other buffs.

    We also have the specific boss dps stacking, even if there are a bunch of dps viable builds for multiple specializations, some perform so well on certain bosses that there's no reason to not stack them because when played at an average level they can easily outperform other professions played even at the highest level, this also polarizes the choices of dps you can bring to some fights to an extreme narrow sample.

    Specific boss DPS stacking is definitely a thing, because these dps perform best for this boss. I don't think it's bad, because the other classes are viable and often perform pretty closely. When it comes to pugs, unless the classes enable eachother (e.g. more necros for more epis, or more weavers so you can burst phases instantly which puts more value into the high burst of weaver - an aspect of raids which most anti-meta snowflakes happily ignore) most DPS that perform reasonably well are accepted. The value of having higher burst phases for the high-end really cannot be understated enough.

    And when it comes to players playing with TWO healers, sorry but most high-end groups that run with 2 healers don't mind alternative healers as long as they PERFORM WELL FOR THE BOSS. I agree some new groups that don't know what these specs / classes can do will often refuse them but that's their lack of knowledge / understanding of the game and frankly that's OK. It's OK to not know everything and prefer to stick to an option that you know works.

    I'm a big fan of heal FB and I'm not going to join any random boss forcing players to let me play it because it can heal. But I do not struggle with playing it, both in statics with most players having 500+ if not 1k+ li and in random pugs. Groups ask for druids, and I'll just pm lead / join and ask if I can replace one druid as alternative healer. Maybe 30% of the groups at best says no. Helps if you have LI / killproof / titles. I'm at a point where if friends are redoing SH cm or sama CM they'll ask for a FB because of how easily it can rectify mistakes that players make. But I'll also tell them fairly if i think it doesn't work.

    For monday clears, we do the majority of bosses with 1 healer. Among the bosses where we want 2 healers for safety / smoothness, we'll swap a dps to a second healer. And frankly, outside dhuum (where I think double druid is actually pretty kitten good over most alternative healers, given how the druids can alternate mechanics leaving you with one on stack); almost all of them we'll use alternative healers. As for pugs... I see EVERYTHING in pugs except replacements for chrono. I see scourges. I see scourges outdps'ing everyone. I see weavers outdps'ing everyone. I see a lot of holos and DH's. I see every off-healer in the game... altho half of them are worse than GF druids. I see pugs who manage to run with 1 druid. I see the wonkiest DPS in the game including kitten tempest and 3x signet power reaper. Ok I admit I suggested kicking the power reaper.

    But hey... I can actually do the bosses. And I don't need them. And I can play whatever I want, and if I don't wanna play what is needed I can leave. You know, game's kinda easy but everyone's kitten spoilt. OMAGOD THEY WON'T LET ME PLAY WHAT I WANNA PLAY??? :tantrum:

    Do we know how to solve these? Probably not. We can make suggestions, but these will probably be too biased and won't be accurate. Yet, you don't need to be a game design genius to see that the current meta is very rigid and that things like the Weaver and Deadeye changes in the last balance patch were poorly thought out.

    I think they tested weaver WITH the bug; and the moment it turned out meteo damage was completely out of wack they didn't wanna hot-fix because that's not how anet rolls. I think the changes were in a great direction : it's the FIRST TIME we have a meta that isn't dominated by weaver and epi since HoT. That's a full year. Frankly, I want them to do the same to chrono and BS and to some extent druid.

    However; I also expect them to slightly buff / adapt both next balance patch. And would I like them to come sooner? Of course. But frankly - weaver is VERY MUCH viable and balance between DPS in the game is better than its ever been. Because people care, we have the numbers and they finally realise that it matters...Even if you're not a speedrunner.

    Of course there's forever increasing conflict between the snowflakes who believe meta is some sort of conspiracy theory against them, and there's a lot of those... But even they benefit from having improved balance ;)

  • thrag.9740thrag.9740 Member ✭✭✭

    @Glider.5792 said:

    @thrag.9740 said:

    But you still have the problem that is does not affect all professions to a similar level. A Thief benefits from it far less than a Weaver for example. And in the end, it is just >another problem we have to balance around, and let’s be honest, we already have enough of them.

    This also applies to every other boon in the game. Fury doesn't help necro, because either its a power necro with 100% crit chance without fury, or its a condi necro who has something like at most 5% of its damage come from power? Quickness doesn't help classes with lots of insta cast skills like kitless holo as much as classes without them. Weaver really needs swiftness, Guard really needs retal or aegis, etc. Do you think power warrior cares as much about vigor as a mirage does? Meanwhile vigor can actually hurt power daredevil. Etc.

    There is a different case here with thief. Thief litteraly does not have cooldowns on weapons skills, so alacrity does not affect those at all. It not build related, its class related in this case. Every other example you gave here is build related.

    Yeah, but alacrity does still affect steal plus 5 utility skills, several of which are used off cool down. Additionally it affects your allies who in turn give you boons or put conditions on your target, which effect your damage modifiers. You know why thief gets to do benchmarks under conditions where they have 9 boons and the enemy has 10 conditions? Its because alacrity affects your allies too.

    You can't approach balance by looking at the modular parts, you need to look at the whole picture.

  • InsaneQR.7412InsaneQR.7412 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 24, 2018

    For alacrity:
    First: it could stay IMO
    Second: Chrono shouldn't be able to put out alacrity and quickness
    Boonshare should be limited by a huge amount and it shouldnt be on 1 spec only.

    For the roles:
    I think the idea behind that is good. Problem is that you would restrict all professions in their own cappabbilities regarding boons.

    For removing Unique Buffs:
    These should be compensated for boon ofc and a subsequent spirit and banner rework would be needed.

    On everything elsr i will answer later. (i have to read 15 pages first)

  • starlinvf.1358starlinvf.1358 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @GammelTier.4875 said:
    The following steps are made to achieve this:

    Step 1 - Remove Alacrity
    Step 2 - Remove unique Buffs like Empower Allies or Ranger Spirits
    Step 3 - Limit the Boons a role can share:

    Your "solution" is to remove unique buffs like Alacrity and Spirits... why not do the opposite and give more of those buffs to other professions (that do not stack)?

    Well... for one, builds are not equal, and as a result of this change, you go with whatever combination best hits the cap. Thats basically whats happening with Druid. Before Druid used to be taken for GotL unique buff being stackable, and Might was handled by a PS warrior. When GotL was converted to might, Druid was now the top Might stacking pick for ease of use, still had the spirits. This kicked warrior out of comp for Might stack, but held on because of Banners. So they effectively switched places.

    In theory, making everything Boons would solve the larger problem of Comps trying to stack unique buffs for Max gains. But at the same time, you're then shifting the problem toward "who stacks boons better"; which is now stiff competition since most classes can now self-stack Might, and 3 classes are built around a Boon share concept.

    But there is a common source to all of these problems...... Raids put too much emphasis on, and benefit too much from raw DPS. This is a problem across most of PvE, as fighting mobs doesn't take advantage of all the PvP aspects the classes were largely built around in concept. Quickness/Alacrity doubles the effective DPS of a player, which automatically makes Chrono the single strongest support slot in game. But what allowed it to be a ChronoTank is an AI and Encounter design that enables Mesmer's "untouchable" defense as a duelist to completely stymie bosses in 1v1. And since most boss fights without split-phases are designed this way to easily establish a "tank" requirement, its giving the high role compression Chrono manages to have universal value to the Raid scene.

    I'm curious to see what a Raid comp would do in a 10v10 situation against doppelgangers, with each one fixating on their own counterpart. And could they solve this problem if they weren't given the opportunity to swap builds when the fight switches between normal big boss and 1v1 fights. I think I just came up with an idea for a new Raid Wing.

  • InsaneQR.7412InsaneQR.7412 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 24, 2018

    Well i red the stuff and i have to say i can agree to some extend.

    Buffers should have retal, might and fury.
    Support regen, vigor, swiftness and resistance (swiftness is pretty weak so resistance is qziet right here)
    Tank protection, stab, aegis and quickness.

    And id say scrapper should be high CC and dmg.
    Chrono should be more power DPS and some CC.

    Everything else seems fine IMO.

    All your work is futile because i doubt it will ever happen, but i write such stuff too sooooo.... Keep it up man.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 24, 2018

    @GammelTier.4875 said:
    "No, thanks, then. Any system that formalizes any sort of trinity won't make the game more fun to play. (At least not for me nor the people with whom I play.) Especially any system that insists that specific specs have only one role."

    We already are in a situation where this is the case. When was the last time you have raided with a non-chrono tank? I at least cannot remember the day?

    No we aren't at all. There is a difference between Anet formalizing classes for specific roles and players recognizing specific classes as optimized for those roles. In fact, EVEN if Anet were to formalize them, there would STILL be optimal classes/builds for roles that meta teams would want. While I couldn't be bothered to read a 15 page document, not even formalization will change how meta players want to play the game. Therefore, I see little reason for any to formalize roles at all.

    If you think balancing is only driven by performance and justified by comparisons to other classes then prepare to be educated:

    https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/balance-updates-the-heralds-near-future-and-pvp-league-season-13/

  • DeceiverX.8361DeceiverX.8361 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @polvere.2805 said:
    TBH if i wanted to play WoW then i would be playing it instead of trying to make gw2 more like WoW.

    Right now the only role that is (almost) totally locked in place is the chrono (The fb/ren combo works even if FB is not really the top rn) so the argument of already having an unspoken trinity is invalid. The problem here is the chrono and the fact that no other class can do what the chrono can achieve.

    If we are talking about viability then you should know that a lot of classes are already viable in the healer spot, almost all dps classes are viable (maybe just reaper is the black sheep), the only real problem is the chrono spot that is hard to replace cause he does A LOT.

    You are trying to address in the game what is a community problem, in PuG everybody wants druid heal cause they are used to it. Everybody wants chrono cause they are used to it and they know the tactics with chrono.
    If you find yourself a static you will see that things are not so much set in stone as you claim they are, you can try to experiment new things

    If we are talking about META then...there will always be the meta, it will never exist a meta where everyone is ok. It's against the core idea of meta

    Bingo.

    There was a meta for dungeons that consisted of stacking berserker gs warriors, because the roles were designed to be optional and everyone got good at the game, and there's a meta for raids because the underlying flaws of the PvE in this game were not solved; things are a DPS/effect stacking race.

    There will always be a single mathematical optimum, and that's all PvE in this game measures. As soon as one tank does slightly higher DPS than others, or just tanks a little bit better, or one of the DPS classes a prove a bit too selfish, there will always be one best configuration, because an optimum is singular by nature.

    The absolute maximum potential unlocked by the players eeking out the most of the game's classes is always going to set precedents and elitists will always enforce them blindly even if they are not applicable to their environments, player skillsets, groups, guilds, etc.

    Because most of the time, the optimum is not relevant to actually completing the content, as we've seen demonstrated a ton by many off-meta/fun-themed raid groups.

    Profession design should be based on the PvP formats first and then tweaked numerically for PvE only if it's wildly over-performing.
    Then PvE needs to be made more like PvP encounters, where PvE builds are hilariously bad and damage is almost totally meaningless so that these micro-optimizations are worthless.

    If people want to be elitists about raids, then they should be barred behind outright difficult content where builds won't carry them by solving a very simple puzzle of "who fills the roles and stacks bonuses."

    That was how the game originally released, and when we had to do dungeons in blues and greens, it was awesome, because outside of ressing you, nobody intrinsically had your back, and you died with simple misplays. Good players took advantage of combo fields and finishers as they arose. They were fast to react and went in with a strategy rather than spamming powerups. Sometimes, one lone dude carried the last 10% himself.

    You sure that Sniper idea is as good as you thought it was gonna be?
    Because I think my original idea is better.
    Quit/Inactive. No, you can't have my stuff.

  • Rhyse.8179Rhyse.8179 Member ✭✭✭

    @GammelTier.4875 said:
    Trinity

    No.

    GW2 does need more specialized roles - I highly agree. But the Trinity system is lazy and stupid. I'd expect GW2 to do better then that.

  • the only reason I brought gw2 in first place was NO trinity. it nice that any profession can fill a role. but it up to balance to do a good job of that duty.
    I read to the part where it said RAID then stopped caring like the 90% of the community that never wanted anet to add raids because it a casual game and raids breed toxicity.

  • Oglaf.1074Oglaf.1074 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Nightmare.1234 said:
    I read to the part where it said RAID then stopped caring like the 90% of the community that never wanted anet to add raids because it a casual game and raids breed toxicity.

    Raiding by default doesn’t breed toxicity. The problem is, sadly, that Anet (unintentionally) made Raids an optimal breeding ground for it.

    • Timers leading to highest DPS meta or bust.
    • “One mistake = wipe”-mechanics laying blame on a single player.

    Stuff like that which can easily focus the anger and frustration of a wipe onto a single player. It didn’t have to be like that.

    Please Anet give us a hide Chest Armour-option. Tattoo-clad Norns everywhere beg of you.

  • Blocki.4931Blocki.4931 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Oglaf.1074 said:

    @Nightmare.1234 said:
    I read to the part where it said RAID then stopped caring like the 90% of the community that never wanted anet to add raids because it a casual game and raids breed toxicity.

    Raiding by default doesn’t breed toxicity. The problem is, sadly, that Anet (unintentionally) made Raids an optimal breeding ground for it.

    • Timers leading to highest DPS meta or bust.
    • “One mistake = wipe”-mechanics laying blame on a single player.

    Stuff like that which can easily focus the anger and frustration of a wipe onto a single player. It didn’t have to be like that.

    To be fair... is there a better way to do it? Mistakes need harsh punishment to add the difficulty. Maybe a few more individual deaths that don't directly lead to a wipe would be cool, but idk

    Bite me.

  • Oglaf.1074Oglaf.1074 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Blocki.4931 said:

    @Oglaf.1074 said:

    @Nightmare.1234 said:
    I read to the part where it said RAID then stopped caring like the 90% of the community that never wanted anet to add raids because it a casual game and raids breed toxicity.

    Raiding by default doesn’t breed toxicity. The problem is, sadly, that Anet (unintentionally) made Raids an optimal breeding ground for it.

    • Timers leading to highest DPS meta or bust.
    • “One mistake = wipe”-mechanics laying blame on a single player.

    Stuff like that which can easily focus the anger and frustration of a wipe onto a single player. It didn’t have to be like that.

    To be fair... is there a better way to do it? Mistakes need harsh punishment to add the difficulty. Maybe a few more individual deaths that don't directly lead to a wipe would be cool, but idk

    Well, as you say, less emphasis on a single player causing the entire thing to fail and make both failing and winning more dependent on the group.

    Please Anet give us a hide Chest Armour-option. Tattoo-clad Norns everywhere beg of you.

  • Rhyse.8179Rhyse.8179 Member ✭✭✭

    @Blocki.4931 said:
    To be fair... is there a better way to do it? Mistakes need harsh punishment to add the difficulty. Maybe a few more individual deaths that don't directly lead to a wipe would be cool, but idk

    Multiple difficulty modes. GW1 had "hard mode" which was much more punishing. Guideline is that in Normal it should be possible to recover from a mistake with excellent play, but multiple mistakes or poor play is fatal. In Hard mistakes are terminal, period. Current raid mechanics are pass/fail and thus what I consider closer to Hard Mode.

    I theory this would let people do raid content without having to deal with the toxic elitist tier of players much.

©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.