I recorded the statistics of all my games for Season 14. Here are the results — Guild Wars 2 Forums

I recorded the statistics of all my games for Season 14. Here are the results

One of the things I have wanted to do for the past few seasons is to record the professions of each player in my matches along with the information (damage, healing, % game, % team, etc) displayed post-match. The introduction of specialisation icons to the PvP scoreboard seemed like a good opportunity to start and also enabled more accurate information to be collected on what classes/builds are the most prominent. The numbers have been summarized below and there are also some basic graphs available at https://imgur.com/a/hvBRLnu.
The total number of matches I'd played this season is 166. Unfortunately, I only remembered to start recording the information after I had played the 10 placements and one extra match, so the following data is for the 155 matches from number 11 to 166. All of the matches were played on a power shatter mirage (Sw/T - GS, Domination/Dueling/Mirage, Demo Amulet) on NA servers. The time I was queuing was generally between 8pm - 12pm AEST (UTC +11).

General/Interesting Information:

  • Wins: 91
  • Losses: 75
  • Placement Rating: 1512
  • Lowest Rating: 1377 (Match 152)
  • Highest Rating: 1600 (Match 108)
  • Finishing Rating: 1527
  • Average game duration: 10m4s
  • Average Winning game K:D ratio: 11.9
  • Average Losing game K:D ratio: 2.0
  • Matches finishing with <50 points difference: 16
  • Matches finishing with >50, <100 points difference: 24
  • Matches finishing with >100, <200 points difference: 38
  • Matches finishing with >200, <300 points difference: 46
  • Matches finishing with >300, <400 points difference: 29
  • Matches finishing with >400 points difference: 12

Specialisations:
(Please note that this list is not counting the specialisation i was queuing on, nor does it differentiate between teams. If a player swapped in the pre-match i would record what they had swapped to. Think - "Across 155 games, excluding myself, there are 1,395 players, what were their specialisations?")

  • Elementalist: 6 (0.4%)
  • Tempest: 9 (0.6%)
  • Weaver: 33 (2.4%)
  • Engineer: 3 (0.2%)
  • Scrapper: 16 (1.1%)
  • Holosmith: 95 (6.8%)
  • Guardian: 126 (9.0%)
  • Dragonhunter: 23 (1.6%)
  • Firebrand: 61 (4.4%)
  • Mesmer: 7 (0.5%)
  • Chronomancer: 30 (2.1%)
  • Mirage: 156 (11.2%)
  • Necromancer: 8 (0.6%)
  • Reaper: 133 (9.5%)
  • Scourge: 131 (9.4%)
  • Ranger: 21 (1.5%)
  • Druid: 29 (2.1%)
  • Soulbeast: 142 (10.2%)
  • Revenant: 1 (0.1%)
  • Herald: 61 (4.4%)
  • Renegade: 6 (0.4%)
  • Thief: 59 (4.2%)
  • Daredevil: 93 (6.6%)
  • Deadeye: 34 (2.4%)
  • Warrior: 16 (1.1%)
  • Berserker: 8 (0.6%)
  • Spellbreaker: 92 (6.6%)

Maps:

  • Battle of Kylo: 22 (13%)
  • Eternal Coliseum: 42 (26%)
  • Forest of Niflhel: 38 (23%)
  • Legacy of the Foefire: 36 (22%)
  • Revenge of the Capricorn: 15 (9%)
  • Skyhammer: 3 (2%)
  • Temple of the Silent Storm: 7 (4%)

It would be cool to see other people collect similar information for Season 15 to see how it compares. If anyone is interested in seeing the spreadsheet let me know and I can post a link.

Comments

  • mortrialus.3062mortrialus.3062 Member ✭✭✭✭

    !!!!

    I love stats!

    Best Dressed Memser NA.

  • Pretty interesting statistics. It's also worth noting that mesmer does not stand out in the number of players, even though you queued as a mesmer, which would generally mean higher numbers thanks to the class stacking rules.

  • otto.5684otto.5684 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I think what is telling in these statistics is the game scores. Out of 166 games played, 87 had a score deferential of more than 200 points (52.4%). If we include the games between 100 and 200 point deferential, the number of games goes up to 125 (75.3%).

    Granteed, this is the experience of one player, but my overall experience and is similar and most players I have talked to as well. The match making system rarely works. Or more specifically rarely results in competitive games. You could urge that competitive and match making are not the same, however, undoubtedly they are very strongly correlated. Also, you games with all the players are above 1500 should be fairly competitive, since the odds of under experienced players throwing the game is not likely.

    @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 not basing on you guys, but trying to draw conclusion from input (like the system only matches players within 25 rating together), is not a good way to conclude. You must use the results.

    I know you guys mentioned before there are other factors impacting game outcomes. Beside match making the only 2 large factors is: class balance and lack of individual specific class rating.

    I do not deny I (and honestly any other player), lack sufficient data to be able to precisely analyze and accurately conclude. However, the overwhelmingly player experience is that sPvP games are rarely fun and/or rarely competitive. I can not determine a specific culprit. All I can tell you, it is hard to play fun games. And to be specific, fun does not equal win.

  • AliamRationem.5172AliamRationem.5172 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 7, 2019

    @otto.5684 said:
    I think what is telling in these statistics is the game scores. Out of 166 games played, 87 had a score deferential of more than 200 points (52.4%). If we include the games between 100 and 200 point deferential, the number of games goes up to 125 (75.3%).

    Granteed, this is the experience of one player, but my overall experience and is similar and most players I have talked to as well. The match making system rarely works. Or more specifically rarely results in competitive games. You could urge that competitive and match making are not the same, however, undoubtedly they are very strongly correlated. Also, you games with all the players are above 1500 should be fairly competitive, since the odds of under experienced players throwing the game is not likely.

    @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 not basing on you guys, but trying to draw conclusion from input (like the system only matches players within 25 rating together), is not a good way to conclude. You must use the results.

    I know you guys mentioned before there are other factors impacting game outcomes. Beside match making the only 2 large factors is: class balance and lack of individual specific class rating.

    I do not deny I (and honestly any other player), lack sufficient data to be able to precisely analyze and accurately conclude. However, the overwhelmingly player experience is that sPvP games are rarely fun and/or rarely competitive. I can not determine a specific culprit. All I can tell you, it is hard to play fun games. And to be specific, fun does not equal win.

    "Should be" competitive. But matchmaking is extremely broken at the upper levels due to the small player pool. I haven't check in this season, but if it's the same as it's been then top 250 is basically plat 2, plat 3, and legendary tier. If every player in the top 250 played for an hour every day and the distribution of play times were evenly distributed (of course, they aren't!), you'd have just enough players in plat 2, plat 3, and legendary tier to fill a single match with 5 players on each team at any given time.

    That would still represent a horrible mismatch as players would have no choice but to be matched with players spread across several tiers (not to mention being matched with the same group of players match after match!). Based on my experience with the sensitivity of rating, I don't think it's ideal to have players matched more than +/- 50 points from their current rating. It's obviously impossible to come remotely close to meeting that criteria in matchmaking at 1500+. We simply need a lot more people to make that happen.

    What I'd be curious to know is if matchmaking does any better in terms of outcomes at the middle ratings like gold and silver? Do the majority of matches come at 200+ point differentials? Or does the matchmaking algorithm essentially settle for whatever allows a player to achieve rating equilibrium that accurately represents their performance level over time in this game mode? It can obviously do that without ensuring that all or even a majority of matches are close. Essentially, blowout matches don't count - you're as likely to have a match you can't win as one the opposing team can't win. Thus whether you climb or fall in rating is determined by the minority of matches in which you have a chance to win and make an impact for your team.

  • Doto.6357Doto.6357 Member ✭✭

    @rank eleven monk.9502 said:
    Pretty interesting statistics. It's also worth noting that mesmer does not stand out in the number of players, even though you queued as a mesmer, which would generally mean higher numbers thanks to the class stacking rules.

    Are you sure about that? It looks like mirage was the most common type of player he encountered out of all elite specs, with 156

  • I don't know if its EU vs NA thing, but this season I had plenty of close matches. What I noticed is overall sad state of HoT specs. With exception of Necro where its split with Reaper and Scourge, and maybe with thief where u will see both Daredevils and occasional Deadeye, all other classes are dominated by PoF specs. But I guess balancing 18 specs is really difficult.

  • Imperadordf.2687Imperadordf.2687 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 7, 2019

    @Doto.6357 said:

    @rank eleven monk.9502 said:
    Pretty interesting statistics. It's also worth noting that mesmer does not stand out in the number of players, even though you queued as a mesmer, which would generally mean higher numbers thanks to the class stacking rules.

    Are you sure about that? It looks like mirage was the most common type of player he encountered out of all elite specs, with 156

    I think he meant that the OP queued as Mesmer so the Mesmer statistics would be higher in reality (like, Mirage would be 200 or so) due to class stacking rules.

  • Only 3 games of skyhammer, dam

  • Mbelch.9028Mbelch.9028 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Neat numbers -- thanks for recording all of them.

  • MyPuppy.8970MyPuppy.8970 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I like numbers but it's too much of a pain to record everything. But from my feeling and experiences, It's quite like that. I saw more Druids though.

  • @Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:
    I count 1399 specializations in the list presented by the OP. The top 5 were:

    • Mirage 156 appearances
    • Soulbeast 142
    • Reaper 133
    • Scourge 131
    • Guardian 126

    If we combine specs to look at each class, the top 5 are:

    • Necro 272 appearances
    • Guardian 210
    • Mesmer 193
    • Ranger 192
    • Thief 186

    For the bottom four: Revenant (class) & elementalist (class) combine for 116, which is about the same as Warrior (116) & Engineer (114)


    PS as noted by @Imperadordf.2687, the OP queued as a mesmer, which would skew the class stats due to stacking rules for matchmaking. In other words: this isn't close to enough data to show patterns relevant to everyone.

    I must have done something wrong when counting up all the classes, it shouldn't be 1399 in total. I'll have a look through the data again and edit the OP.

    As has been mentioned, the sample size here is too small to be representative of the general population and the specialisations would be skewed because I queue on mesmer. However it does show how prominent mirage, reaper, scourge, soulbeast and core guard are at the moment.

    It would be interesting to see what influence a players rating and the class they queue on has.

  • @Rumpduree.4360 said:
    I must have done something wrong when counting up all the classes, it shouldn't be 1399 in total. I'll have a look through the data again and edit the OP.

    For this limited sample, it's "close enough" to give people the right idea (well, as long as it was just a minor typo or two, not something fundamental, which seems unlikely).
    Either way, if you do update, let me know & I'll update my summary accordingly.

    As has been mentioned, the sample size here is too small to be representative of the general population and the specialisations would be skewed because I queue on mesmer. However it does show how prominent mirage, reaper, scourge, soulbeast and core guard are at the moment.

    Yes.

    It would be interesting to see what influence a players rating and the class they queue on has.

    I don't think we'd be able to see that from a half dozen samples or even a dozen. ANet's metrics come from all matches, not just the few any of us would happen to participate in. What we can see is which specs or classes predominate versus not in the current balance.

    What would be interesting is if we had the same data from the same player over the various balance patches. There's always some build that people think is OP. Does the predominate build/spec have roughly the same fraction of participation all the time? Or has there been more even distribution in some seasons?


    I forgot to say above: thanks for taking the time to collect & publish the data. It's a breath of fresh air compared to people basing their reactions on their impressions/memory of what they've experienced.

    Hype is the path to the dark side. Hype leads to unfulfilled expectations. Disappointment leads to anger. Anger leads to disgust. Disgust leads to "oh, new shinies! I'm back!"

  • yanniell.1236yanniell.1236 Member ✭✭✭

    Well, the matchmaking sucks. Who would know...

  • DanAlcedo.3281DanAlcedo.3281 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Holy Moly.
    Average K/D if winning of 12.

    But he plays Mesmer so no wonder.

  • @DanAlcedo.3281 said:
    Holy Moly.
    Average K/D if winning of 12.

    But he plays Mesmer so no wonder.

    I dont think this is a mirage thing necessarily, rather just playing the role of a roamer.

    Generally in these games the rest of the team playing well enough to allow me to pick up easy +1's, swing teamfights and gain further momentum.

    The opposite sort of thing happens for the losses. A k/d of 2 means I'm not really filling the role properly, for whatever reason, and then it just piles the pressure on to the rest of the team.

  • Spartacus.3192Spartacus.3192 Member ✭✭✭

    @otto.5684 said:
    I think what is telling in these statistics is the game scores. Out of 166 games played, 87 had a score deferential of more than 200 points (52.4%). If we include the games between 100 and 200 point deferential, the number of games goes up to 125 (75.3%).

    This is the more interesting stat.

    Thanks OP for creating this thread.

  • Spartacus.3192Spartacus.3192 Member ✭✭✭

    Another interesting fact which i am sure the mesmer mains will jump on.
    If you combine all the elite specs into their respective core class names, so sum core guard, dragonhunter and firebrand as one stat, you get the following results,

    Class Sum of Pct
    Necro 19.5
    Guardian 15.0
    Mesmer 13.8
    Ranger 13.8
    Thief 13.2
    Warrior 8.3
    Engineer 8.1
    Revenant 4.9
    Elementalist 3.4

    Necro (core, reaper, scourge) in all combined version is the most played class. Combined Mirage, Chrono and core Mesmer is only 3rd place.

    ELE and REV needs some kind or buffs/reworks.

  • RedShark.9548RedShark.9548 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Spartacus.3192 said:
    Another interesting fact which i am sure the mesmer mains will jump on.
    If you combine all the elite specs into their respective core class names, so sum core guard, dragonhunter and firebrand as one stat, you get the following results,

    Class Sum of Pct
    Necro 19.5
    Guardian 15.0
    Mesmer 13.8
    Ranger 13.8
    Thief 13.2
    Warrior 8.3
    Engineer 8.1
    Revenant 4.9
    Elementalist 3.4

    Necro (core, reaper, scourge) in all combined version is the most played class. Combined Mirage, Chrono and core Mesmer is only 3rd place.

    ELE and REV needs some kind or buffs/reworks.

    How much a class is played shouldnt effect your balance choices honestly, ppl just might not like playing them.

    What you should look at when trying to balance are ingame stats like as an easy example winrate. Could also look at kill participation, average dmg output etc.

  • Spartacus.3192Spartacus.3192 Member ✭✭✭

    @RedShark.9548 said:

    @Spartacus.3192 said:
    Another interesting fact which i am sure the mesmer mains will jump on.
    If you combine all the elite specs into their respective core class names, so sum core guard, dragonhunter and firebrand as one stat, you get the following results,

    Class Sum of Pct
    Necro 19.5
    Guardian 15.0
    Mesmer 13.8
    Ranger 13.8
    Thief 13.2
    Warrior 8.3
    Engineer 8.1
    Revenant 4.9
    Elementalist 3.4

    Necro (core, reaper, scourge) in all combined version is the most played class. Combined Mirage, Chrono and core Mesmer is only 3rd place.

    ELE and REV needs some kind or buffs/reworks.

    How much a class is played shouldnt effect your balance choices honestly, ppl just might not like playing them.

    What you should look at when trying to balance are ingame stats like as an easy example winrate. Could also look at kill participation, average dmg output etc.

    Agreed i was making a general observation. However if you believe the player base of any given MMO is spread evenly then if a class is disproportiantely under represented then a rework (not necessarily a buff) is probably required to help increase popularity.

  • RedShark.9548RedShark.9548 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Spartacus.3192 said:

    @RedShark.9548 said:

    @Spartacus.3192 said:
    Another interesting fact which i am sure the mesmer mains will jump on.
    If you combine all the elite specs into their respective core class names, so sum core guard, dragonhunter and firebrand as one stat, you get the following results,

    Class Sum of Pct
    Necro 19.5
    Guardian 15.0
    Mesmer 13.8
    Ranger 13.8
    Thief 13.2
    Warrior 8.3
    Engineer 8.1
    Revenant 4.9
    Elementalist 3.4

    Necro (core, reaper, scourge) in all combined version is the most played class. Combined Mirage, Chrono and core Mesmer is only 3rd place.

    ELE and REV needs some kind or buffs/reworks.

    How much a class is played shouldnt effect your balance choices honestly, ppl just might not like playing them.

    What you should look at when trying to balance are ingame stats like as an easy example winrate. Could also look at kill participation, average dmg output etc.

    Agreed i was making a general observation. However if you believe the player base of any given MMO is spread evenly then if a class is disproportiantely under represented then a rework (not necessarily a buff) is probably required to help increase popularity.

    Well if we just look at ele, wether or not it needs a buff doesnt matter rn, its mechanics are rather complicated compared to other classes (all those attunements and even mixes with weaver are rly scaring alot of player off, and also increase the difficulty of mastering the class)
    This will always lead to less ppl playing ele than other classes imo.
    But would i change the design of the class to make it less complicated? No, because there has to be a class thats more complicated than others.

    Would you change the design of ele because of that?

  • Spartacus.3192Spartacus.3192 Member ✭✭✭

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    Well if we just look at ele, wether or not it needs a buff doesnt matter rn, its mechanics are rather complicated compared to other classes (all those attunements and even mixes with weaver are rly scaring alot of player off, and also increase the difficulty of mastering the class)
    This will always lead to less ppl playing ele than other classes imo.
    But would i change the design of the class to make it less complicated? No, because there has to be a class thats more complicated than others.

    Would you change the design of ele because of that?

    If something is difficult to master by a majority of players doesnt that make it high skill floor? In which case should those combos be buffed so that the person who can execute those combos/rotations/whatever is rewarded for it? Not make them easier but make it higher reward for the higher skill needed? Just thinking aloud here.

  • RedShark.9548RedShark.9548 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Spartacus.3192 said:

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    Well if we just look at ele, wether or not it needs a buff doesnt matter rn, its mechanics are rather complicated compared to other classes (all those attunements and even mixes with weaver are rly scaring alot of player off, and also increase the difficulty of mastering the class)
    This will always lead to less ppl playing ele than other classes imo.
    But would i change the design of the class to make it less complicated? No, because there has to be a class thats more complicated than others.

    Would you change the design of ele because of that?

    If something is difficult to master by a majority of players doesnt that make it high skill floor? In which case should those combos be buffed so that the person who can execute those combos/rotations/whatever is rewarded for it? Not make them easier but make it higher reward for the higher skill needed? Just thinking aloud here.

    Like i said, my example was about the complexity in general and how it affects playtime of a class, not looking at the state of it right now.

    I agree that ele is rather weak right now, and that player that master complex classes should be rewarded for it, but that wasnt rly what i was talking about.

    I was just talking abouut why you shouldnt balance around playtime of a class.

  • Fortus.6175Fortus.6175 Member ✭✭✭

    3.4% eles overall

    yup, seems about right.

  • @RedShark.9548 said:
    How much a class is played shouldnt effect your balance choices honestly, ppl just might not like playing them.

    Yes, it should effect balance choice! In competitive modes people play classes that are effective at achieving the goals of the PvP match. So any massive underrepresentation of any class like we see with ele (48 out of 1399) and revenant (68 out of 1399) is proof that they are not effective and don't contribute enough to the PvP match.
    It is a massive red flag!!!

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    No, because there has to be a class thats more complicated than others.

    >
    Wrong.

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    Would you change the design of ele because of that?

    >
    Yes, I would. I would like every class to be played roughly by the same percentage of the player base, if possible. I particularly would like to have people that WANT to play an elementalist to be able to do that and not scare them of with kitten unnecessary complexity!

  • RedShark.9548RedShark.9548 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 9, 2019

    @Kashrlyyk.5364 said:

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    How much a class is played shouldnt effect your balance choices honestly, ppl just might not like playing them.

    Yes, it should effect balance choice! In competitive modes people play classes that are effective at achieving the goals of the PvP match. So any massive underrepresentation of any class like we see with ele (48 out of 1399) and revenant (68 out of 1399) is proof that they are not effective and don't contribute enough to the PvP match.
    It is a massive red flag!!!

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    No, because there has to be a class thats more complicated than others.

    >
    Wrong.

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    Would you change the design of ele because of that?

    >
    Yes, I would. I would like every class to be played roughly by the same percentage of the player base, if possible. I particularly would like to have people that WANT to play an elementalist to be able to do that and not scare them of with kitten unnecessary complexity!

    Your "unnecessary complexity" is called a higher skill ceiling, which means that a class is hard to master, but IF mastered it outshines easier to play classes... Which is reasonable and desired by many competetive players.
    They want to learn and perfect their class, to have an edge over easier and straight forward classes.
    complex classes tend to be harder to play but also reward you when you fully understand their mechanics.

    Why do you want every class to be the exact same thing? Its boring and not pleasing to everyone. If you dont want to put time and effort into learning a more complex class you can just stick to easier classes, its simple.

    I, for example, would love for warrior to get alot more depth to it to. Meaning that a warrior main that has alot of experience with it can easily outplay mediocre warriors that just play the flavor of the month class.

    Higher skill ceiling also means that you often can adept to different situations by playing different or using different combos (which ele has alot of). Warrior or holo always uses the same combo and thus are very predictable in what they are going to do - >easier to outplay

    Balancing around playtime is just wrong. Buffing a class that is not liked because its harder will maybe increase the playtime overall, but also shift the balance heavily in favor of said class.
    If a class that is hard to master gets buffed to a point where every mediocre player can play it on the same level as the easy to play classes, what do you think will happen to those that actually mastered the class? Those ppl will profit aswell from those buffs, resulting in them just roflestomping everyone else.

    Ofc such low playtimes are a red flag, which should make the ppl in charge take a closer look, but if the win/lose rate of those ppl that play it is in line with others (or often higher than those of other classes, because those few ppl that play it mastered it, and thus have an edge over simpler classes, because of higher skill ceiling etc.) than its fine.

    Now again im not saying that ele in pvp doesnt need buffs, i dont have the data for that, but its not the point anyways right now.

  • Ganathar.4956Ganathar.4956 Member ✭✭✭

    @RedShark.9548 said:

    @Kashrlyyk.5364 said:

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    How much a class is played shouldnt effect your balance choices honestly, ppl just might not like playing them.

    Yes, it should effect balance choice! In competitive modes people play classes that are effective at achieving the goals of the PvP match. So any massive underrepresentation of any class like we see with ele (48 out of 1399) and revenant (68 out of 1399) is proof that they are not effective and don't contribute enough to the PvP match.
    It is a massive red flag!!!

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    No, because there has to be a class thats more complicated than others.

    >
    Wrong.

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    Would you change the design of ele because of that?

    >
    Yes, I would. I would like every class to be played roughly by the same percentage of the player base, if possible. I particularly would like to have people that WANT to play an elementalist to be able to do that and not scare them of with kitten unnecessary complexity!

    Your "unnecessary complexity" is called a higher skill ceiling, which means that a class is hard to master, but IF mastered it outshines easier to play classes... Which is reasonable and desired by many competetive players.
    They want to learn and perfect their class, to have an edge over easier and straight forward classes.
    complex classes tend to be harder to play but also reward you when you fully understand their mechanics.

    Why do you want every class to be the exact same thing? Its boring and not pleasing to everyone. If you dont want to put time and effort into learning a more complex class you can just stick to easier classes, its simple.

    I, for example, would love for warrior to get alot more depth to it to. Meaning that a warrior main that has alot of experience with it can easily outplay mediocre warriors that just play the flavor of the month class.

    Higher skill ceiling also means that you often can adept to different situations by playing different or using different combos (which ele has alot of). Warrior or holo always uses the same combo and thus are very predictable in what they are going to do - >easier to outplay

    Balancing around playtime is just wrong. Buffing a class that is not liked because its harder will maybe increase the playtime overall, but also shift the balance heavily in favor of said class.
    If a class that is hard to master gets buffed to a point where every mediocre player can play it on the same level as the easy to play classes, what do you think will happen to those that actually mastered the class? Those ppl will profit aswell from those buffs, resulting in them just roflestomping everyone else.

    Ofc such low playtimes are a red flag, which should make the ppl in charge take a closer look, but if the win/lose rate of those ppl that play it is in line with others (or often higher than those of other classes, because those few ppl that play it mastered it, and thus have an edge over simpler classes, because of higher skill ceiling etc.) than its fine.

    Now again im not saying that ele in pvp doesnt need buffs, i dont have the data for that, but its not the point anyways right now.

    Just because weaver is the latest elementalist elite spec, that doesn't mean that the entire profession was designed to be as complex as weaver. Weaver is the latest elite spec of ele and nothing more. What about tempest? Is that played so little because it's insanely difficult to play? This is why we have elite specs. So that professions get access to a variety of play styles. I am sure that Anet will do a 180 and the next ele spec will be more simplified. I just don't know if they will overdo it and reach holosmith levels of simplification.

    I won't comment on how weaver itself performs, despite the skill requirements. It's clearly visible for everyone to see.

  • RedShark.9548RedShark.9548 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Ganathar.4956 said:

    @RedShark.9548 said:

    @Kashrlyyk.5364 said:

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    How much a class is played shouldnt effect your balance choices honestly, ppl just might not like playing them.

    Yes, it should effect balance choice! In competitive modes people play classes that are effective at achieving the goals of the PvP match. So any massive underrepresentation of any class like we see with ele (48 out of 1399) and revenant (68 out of 1399) is proof that they are not effective and don't contribute enough to the PvP match.
    It is a massive red flag!!!

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    No, because there has to be a class thats more complicated than others.

    >
    Wrong.

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    Would you change the design of ele because of that?

    >
    Yes, I would. I would like every class to be played roughly by the same percentage of the player base, if possible. I particularly would like to have people that WANT to play an elementalist to be able to do that and not scare them of with kitten unnecessary complexity!

    Your "unnecessary complexity" is called a higher skill ceiling, which means that a class is hard to master, but IF mastered it outshines easier to play classes... Which is reasonable and desired by many competetive players.
    They want to learn and perfect their class, to have an edge over easier and straight forward classes.
    complex classes tend to be harder to play but also reward you when you fully understand their mechanics.

    Why do you want every class to be the exact same thing? Its boring and not pleasing to everyone. If you dont want to put time and effort into learning a more complex class you can just stick to easier classes, its simple.

    I, for example, would love for warrior to get alot more depth to it to. Meaning that a warrior main that has alot of experience with it can easily outplay mediocre warriors that just play the flavor of the month class.

    Higher skill ceiling also means that you often can adept to different situations by playing different or using different combos (which ele has alot of). Warrior or holo always uses the same combo and thus are very predictable in what they are going to do - >easier to outplay

    Balancing around playtime is just wrong. Buffing a class that is not liked because its harder will maybe increase the playtime overall, but also shift the balance heavily in favor of said class.
    If a class that is hard to master gets buffed to a point where every mediocre player can play it on the same level as the easy to play classes, what do you think will happen to those that actually mastered the class? Those ppl will profit aswell from those buffs, resulting in them just roflestomping everyone else.

    Ofc such low playtimes are a red flag, which should make the ppl in charge take a closer look, but if the win/lose rate of those ppl that play it is in line with others (or often higher than those of other classes, because those few ppl that play it mastered it, and thus have an edge over simpler classes, because of higher skill ceiling etc.) than its fine.

    Now again im not saying that ele in pvp doesnt need buffs, i dont have the data for that, but its not the point anyways right now.

    Just because weaver is the latest elementalist elite spec, that doesn't mean that the entire profession was designed to be as complex as weaver. Weaver is the latest elite spec of ele and nothing more. What about tempest? Is that played so little because it's insanely difficult to play? This is why we have elite specs. So that professions get access to a variety of play styles. I am sure that Anet will do a 180 and the next ele spec will be more simplified. I just don't know if they will overdo it and reach holosmith levels of simplification.

    I won't comment on how weaver itself performs, despite the skill requirements. It's clearly visible for everyone to see.

    Imo even core ele is more complex than most other classes, sure weaver even more so, but doesnt change the fact that it has alot more combos it can finish itself than other classes, different things it can chain together and so on.

    And again, its not even about the class you can generalize it to no class at all. My point is that you SHOULDNT balance purely around playtime. Doesnt matter if ele mesmer, thief, warrior or whatever the f.
    Low playtime is a red flag, but only to make you look at other stats that actually tell you something about its combat abillities and what it actually is capable of.

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 9, 2019

    @Arheundel.6451 said:
    Mesmer
    Necromancer
    Guardian

    The most spammed classes in PvP with ele being the lowest....no surprise here

    Let me fix that for you:
    Necromancer: 8 (0.6%)
    Reaper: 133 (9.5%)
    Scourge: 131 (9.4%)
    Total: 272

    Guardian: 126 (9.0%)
    Dragonhunter: 23 (1.6%)
    Firebrand: 61 (4.4%)
    Total: 210

    Mesmer: 7 (0.5%)
    Chronomancer: 30 (2.1%)
    Mirage: 156 (11.2%)
    Total: 193

    Ranger: 21 (1.5%)
    Druid: 29 (2.1%)
    Soulbeast: 142 (10.2%)
    Total: 192

    Thief: 59 (4.2%)
    Daredevil: 93 (6.6%)
    Deadeye: 34 (2.4%)
    Total: 186

    You forgot ranger and thief in your complaint. With 1 far outlier and 4 classes quite close together, that makes 5 out of 9 classes with similar representation (again, necromancer being far off). Not that bad.

    The huge disparity in points on over 50% of the games is of way bigger concern, but was already addressed by people here. To few players in the pool.

  • mortrialus.3062mortrialus.3062 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 10, 2019

    @DanAlcedo.3281 said:
    Holy Moly.
    Average K/D if winning of 12.

    But he plays Mesmer so no wonder.

    ???

    Players generally don't die a lot if they're winning, otherwise it's unlikely they'd be winning. In a comfortable winning game 12 kills for each death sounds fairly average whether I'm playing Mirage, Reaper, Scourge, CoreGuard or thief.

    @RedShark.9548 said:

    @Spartacus.3192 said:

    @RedShark.9548 said:

    @Spartacus.3192 said:
    Another interesting fact which i am sure the mesmer mains will jump on.
    If you combine all the elite specs into their respective core class names, so sum core guard, dragonhunter and firebrand as one stat, you get the following results,

    Class Sum of Pct
    Necro 19.5
    Guardian 15.0
    Mesmer 13.8
    Ranger 13.8
    Thief 13.2
    Warrior 8.3
    Engineer 8.1
    Revenant 4.9
    Elementalist 3.4

    Necro (core, reaper, scourge) in all combined version is the most played class. Combined Mirage, Chrono and core Mesmer is only 3rd place.

    ELE and REV needs some kind or buffs/reworks.

    How much a class is played shouldnt effect your balance choices honestly, ppl just might not like playing them.

    What you should look at when trying to balance are ingame stats like as an easy example winrate. Could also look at kill participation, average dmg output etc.

    Agreed i was making a general observation. However if you believe the player base of any given MMO is spread evenly then if a class is disproportiantely under represented then a rework (not necessarily a buff) is probably required to help increase popularity.

    Well if we just look at ele, wether or not it needs a buff doesnt matter rn, its mechanics are rather complicated compared to other classes (all those attunements and even mixes with weaver are rly scaring alot of player off, and also increase the difficulty of mastering the class)
    This will always lead to less ppl playing ele than other classes imo.
    But would i change the design of the class to make it less complicated? No, because there has to be a class thats more complicated than others.

    Would you change the design of ele because of that?

    Ele has always had high level of complexity compared to other classes. That hasn't stopped it from being highly represented in past metas where it had dominant builds.

    I'm not sure how much is a result of balance and win ratios, and how much is flavor of the month bandwagoning. Maybe there were more holosmiths before the Elixir S nerf just because Holo averaged a higher win ratio putting more of them in platinum tier and after the Auto S nerf the win ratio went down leading to more Mirages and Soulbeasts naturally. But to a certain extent, people do bandwagon onto popular builds. Not just noobs but genuinely good and even top tier players too. Do you think it's a coincidence that Helio and his two alts made it to top 1,2, and 3 on NA's leaderboard with him maining boonbeast on all of them when he used to main Warrior and Rev before?

    Do you think Soulbeast shot up in representation just because of the druid nerfs back in the beginning of the year? Or that everyone realized they loooooooved the flavor of it?

    Best Dressed Memser NA.

  • Kashrlyyk.5364Kashrlyyk.5364 Member ✭✭
    edited January 10, 2019

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    Which is reasonable and desired by many competetive players.

    The numbers I mentioned in my first post here directly contradict your claim! When only 3,4% of the PvP players use the elementalist then obviously it means they DO NOT desire that. They don't care for the complexity of the class, they care for it's performance in a match. If it's kitten they don't play the class, no matter how complex it is.

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    Why do you want every class to be the exact same thing? Its boring and not pleasing to everyone. If you dont want to put time and effort into learning a more complex class you can just stick to easier classes, its simple.

    No, I want it because it makes balancing possible in the first place!!
    To get rid of this problem:

    @Don Vega Van Kain.9842 said:
    Buffing Elem (Weaver) at the moment gonna just make Averages/bads weavers good and Good Weavers.... GODS.

    Because of it's complexity the ele is either too weak for most players and strong enough for a tiny little group or it it strong enough for most players but then too strong for that tiny little group who will dominate the matches. Get rid of it's complexity and then start actually balancing the game.

  • RedShark.9548RedShark.9548 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @mortrialus.3062 said:

    @DanAlcedo.3281 said:
    Holy Moly.
    Average K/D if winning of 12.

    But he plays Mesmer so no wonder.

    ???

    Players generally don't die a lot if they're winning, otherwise it's unlikely they'd be winning. In a comfortable winning game 12 kills for each death sounds fairly average whether I'm playing Mirage, Reaper, Scourge, CoreGuard or thief.

    @RedShark.9548 said:

    @Spartacus.3192 said:

    @RedShark.9548 said:

    @Spartacus.3192 said:
    Another interesting fact which i am sure the mesmer mains will jump on.
    If you combine all the elite specs into their respective core class names, so sum core guard, dragonhunter and firebrand as one stat, you get the following results,

    Class Sum of Pct
    Necro 19.5
    Guardian 15.0
    Mesmer 13.8
    Ranger 13.8
    Thief 13.2
    Warrior 8.3
    Engineer 8.1
    Revenant 4.9
    Elementalist 3.4

    Necro (core, reaper, scourge) in all combined version is the most played class. Combined Mirage, Chrono and core Mesmer is only 3rd place.

    ELE and REV needs some kind or buffs/reworks.

    How much a class is played shouldnt effect your balance choices honestly, ppl just might not like playing them.

    What you should look at when trying to balance are ingame stats like as an easy example winrate. Could also look at kill participation, average dmg output etc.

    Agreed i was making a general observation. However if you believe the player base of any given MMO is spread evenly then if a class is disproportiantely under represented then a rework (not necessarily a buff) is probably required to help increase popularity.

    Well if we just look at ele, wether or not it needs a buff doesnt matter rn, its mechanics are rather complicated compared to other classes (all those attunements and even mixes with weaver are rly scaring alot of player off, and also increase the difficulty of mastering the class)
    This will always lead to less ppl playing ele than other classes imo.
    But would i change the design of the class to make it less complicated? No, because there has to be a class thats more complicated than others.

    Would you change the design of ele because of that?

    Ele has always had high level of complexity compared to other classes. That hasn't stopped it from being highly represented in past metas where it had dominant builds.

    I'm not sure how much is a result of balance and win ratios, and how much is flavor of the month bandwagoning. Maybe there were more holosmiths before the Elixir S nerf just because Holo averaged a higher win ratio putting more of them in platinum tier and after the Auto S nerf the win ratio went down leading to more Mirages and Soulbeasts naturally. But to a certain extent, people do bandwagon onto popular builds. Not just noobs but genuinely good and even top tier players too. Do you think it's a coincidence that Helio and his two alts made it to top 1,2, and 3 on NA's leaderboard with him maining boonbeast on all of them when he used to main Warrior and Rev before?

    Do you think Soulbeast shot up in representation just because of the druid nerfs back in the beginning of the year? Or that everyone realized they loooooooved the flavor of it?

    Im not sure what you are talking about. I stated severl times that my argument has NOTHING to do with ele, ele was just my example for a more complicated class. Again: you can generalize my statement about complicated classes.

    And secondly i also said, that i wouldnt deny that ele probably should be looked into because it may be to weak.

    Are ppl not reading the whole post?

    @Kashrlyyk.5364 said:

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    Which is reasonable and desired by many competetive players.

    The numbers I mentioned in my first post here directly contradict your claim! When only 3,4% of the PvP players use the elementalist then obviously it means they DO NOT desire that. They don't care for the complexity of the class, they care for it's performance in a match. If it's kitten they don't play the class, no matter how complex it is.

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    Why do you want every class to be the exact same thing? Its boring and not pleasing to everyone. If you dont want to put time and effort into learning a more complex class you can just stick to easier classes, its simple.

    No, I want it because it makes balancing possible in the first place!!
    To get rid of this problem:

    @Don Vega Van Kain.9842 said:
    Buffing Elem (Weaver) at the moment gonna just make Averages/bads weavers good and Good Weavers.... GODS.

    Because of it's complexity the ele is either too weak for most players and strong enough for a tiny little group or it it strong enough for most players but then too strong for that tiny little group who will dominate the matches. Get rid of it's complexity and then start actually balancing the game.

    Look at what ive wrote above. I never said that ele doesnt need a buff.

    The low percentage of ele still doesnt necessary mean that ele needs a buff, the bandwaggoning of mesmer soulbeast and holo atm is just so ridiculous that even the ele players swapped to that kitten. AGAIN the low playpercentage is a WARNING that devs should look into it, look at why its so rarely played. Is it underperforming? Are other classes just waaay too oppressive? Etc. Never should a class just be buffed until its numbers of playtime rise...

  • Spartacus.3192Spartacus.3192 Member ✭✭✭

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    The low percentage of ele still doesnt necessary mean that ele needs a buff, the bandwaggoning of mesmer soulbeast and holo atm is just so ridiculous that even the ele players swapped to that kitten. AGAIN the low playpercentage is a WARNING that devs should look into it, look at why its so rarely played. Is it underperforming? Are other classes just waaay too oppressive? Etc. Never should a class just be buffed until its numbers of playtime rise...

    Exactly a class can be buffed by nerfing other classes. As you said nerfing the most popular classes plus some potential reworks of ele could bring the player percentages more in line.

  • mortrialus.3062mortrialus.3062 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Spartacus.3192 said:

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    The low percentage of ele still doesnt necessary mean that ele needs a buff, the bandwaggoning of mesmer soulbeast and holo atm is just so ridiculous that even the ele players swapped to that kitten. AGAIN the low playpercentage is a WARNING that devs should look into it, look at why its so rarely played. Is it underperforming? Are other classes just waaay too oppressive? Etc. Never should a class just be buffed until its numbers of playtime rise...

    Exactly a class can be buffed by nerfing other classes. As you said nerfing the most popular classes plus some potential reworks of ele could bring the player percentages more in line.

    "Ele should be buffed" doesn't necessarily mean that closest elementalist build to being meta, SD Weaver, should be buffed. If you nerfed the other 1vx builds to the point where SD weaver is the best among them that would be a terrible meta as SD weaver is a boring build to fight, where all of it's skills feel low impact, and it's ability to resustain to full very easily make it especially unfun to fight against. It's a weaker version of pre-nerf druid that just stalls and stalls and stalls and stalls while having no kill potential and I don't want to see side noding devolve into just that.

    The problem with Elementalist is two fold. Not only is it underperforming across the board and yes even it's strongest build is generally low impact, especially in comparison to other 1vX builds like Boonbeast, Mirage, Spellbreaker, even Holosmith, but all the things that are potentially exciting about playing elementalist are almost completely nonviable.

    Elementalist is the Guild Wars equivalent of that classic fireball throwing mage nuking people with big AoE damage from a distance.

    You look at other classes that are doing good right now: Core Guardian gives you that feeling of being a smiting paladin that obliterates people with holy powers while also having good sustain options. Firebrand gives you that feeling of being a support paladin who heals allies, protects them, and removes negative conditions.

    Spellbreaker gives you that feeling of being this highly trained master of arms who can parry and counter attack while also being a resilient and study and having high impact damage capabilities.

    Sic Em Soulbeast gives you the feeling of being an amazing archer. Boonbeast gives you that feeling of being a resilient wildernest survivalist.

    Scourge gives you the feeling of being a plague master, corrupting large areas of ground and everyone in it. Reaper gives you that feeling of being a death knight. The only area it doesn't really live up to the feeling of being a necromancer is minion swarms.

    Thief and daredevil give you that feeling of being a highly skilled, fast, untouchable ninja. Deadeye gives you that feeling of being a deadly sniper.

    Elementalist isn't just struggling in terms of effectiveness, it struggles with part of it's core identity. Both healing supporting hydromancers that heal their allies is underperforming. Like even Firebrand, the best support, has a massively reduced presence in ranked queues this season compared to previous ones. And if you nerf it further you're just not going to see anyone bring support into ranked period rather than bring a heal tempest so it absolutely needs buffs.

    And Elementalist should have some sort of viable high impact team DPS carry that can compete with Scourge, Holosmith, and Revenant so you can actually get that feeling of being a mage and raining death on people and yeah that'll take buffs. Fresh Air Weaver was the closest it's gotten to that particular appeal and that got nerfed to the point where I literally only see one person ever running it in ranked and almost completely abandoned.

    People talk about how underpowered elementalists are right now, but they don't talk about how unfulfilling elementalist as a class ideal is right now.

    Best Dressed Memser NA.

©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.