How do they decide how much mobility to give a class/spec? — Guild Wars 2 Forums

How do they decide how much mobility to give a class/spec?

EremiteAngel.9765EremiteAngel.9765 Member ✭✭✭✭
edited January 18, 2019 in Professions

In the past I used to think that mobility like leaps, dash, blinks etc. was mainly prioritized for melee builds/weapons.
Hence we see many of the short-ranged melee weapons having mobility gap-closing skills (the only exception is Necro weapons having no mobility skills at all).
Range weapons of 1200+ range and beyond generally had no mobility skill attached to it.
Instead, Range weapons generally had a defensive mechanism to it that is not mobility related, like knockback, chill, push, immobilize etc.

This allowed melee builds to close the gap on range builds.
And it allowed Range builds to defend itself when the melee got close.

Now, we have the longest range class with a Soulbeast spec that is also more mobile than every other classes' melee builds (except for thieves) due to the merge mechanics with Bird pets.
And we have a long-range rifle wielding Deadeye with a spammable mobility skill on the weapon and also happens to already be one of the most mobile thief class.

So I was wondering...like...

  • Why was Soulbeast given so much more mobility on like their 'Owl' pet when they also have the longest range attack? Shouldn't their mobility be kept at core-ranger levels because of their long-range attacks?
  • Why was Deadeye given a spammable mobility skill on a long-range weapon when they already are the most mobile class? Shouldn't there be no mobility skills attached to a long-range weapon?

Do these classes not already have sufficient tools from their core skills/weapons to survive when a melee build gap-closes without being given even more mobility?

Am I wrong to think that mobility design was mainly dependent on the type of builds/weapons if it was melee, mid-range or long-range?
Or do they decide how much mobility to give each spec base on the theme and flavor of the spec?

Edit: This post is from a WvW perspective. Posted there but it was moved here...

Visit 🏴‍☠️ Eremite's WvW Necromancy Graveyard 🏴‍☠️

CD -> TC -> Mag -> GOM -> AR -> JQ

Comments

  • Jack Redline.5379Jack Redline.5379 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Same way all thoughtful people do
    1 Throw a dart on a wall with classes pictures sticked to it twice
    2 First hit nerff (try to aim for Thief)
    3 Second hit buff (try to aim for anything else)
    4 After you have finished first set of update changes repeat the process
    5 ???
    6 Profit

  • Ario.8964Ario.8964 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Anet threw mobility onto all of the elite specs outside of guard and necro (which didn't need it due to being so dominant anyways.) Like someone above said, it's all just powercreep and especs covering for weaknesses in core classes to allow for more powercreep.

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭

    The same reason they > @Ario.8964 said:

    Anet threw mobility onto all of the elite specs outside of guard and necro (which didn't need it due to being so dominant anyways.)

    Necro got sand swell you know, a mobility skill that literally move entire zergs up cliffs that would otherwise force it to move around and unlike portal, is available on 50% of the zerg.

    Selective claims of power creep is funny.

    Dont look a gift Asura in the mouth.
    No seriously, dont. Shark teeth.

  • Ario.8964Ario.8964 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Dawdler.8521 said:
    The same reason they > @Ario.8964 said:

    Anet threw mobility onto all of the elite specs outside of guard and necro (which didn't need it due to being so dominant anyways.)

    Necro got sand swell you know, a mobility skill that literally move entire zergs up cliffs that would otherwise force it to move around and unlike portal, is available on 50% of the zerg.

    Selective claims of power creep is funny.

    That's right, forgot about sand swell. That just adds to my point really. Anet doesn't know what they're doing so they are just throwing out things like cc and mobility to every class with their especs. Sad to see the game go down that route when it could have been one of the best.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 21, 2019

    Call me crazy but ... it's theme based. That's also the reason people don't 'get it' or think Anet doesn't know what they are doing; theme-based determinations are literally Anet deciding what themes get things. People assume if that doesn't line up with their own ideas, Anet has no clue what they are doing. Just look at the post above mine.

    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/

  • Ario.8964Ario.8964 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Call me crazy but ... it's theme based. That's also the reason people don't 'get it' or think Anet doesn't know what they are doing; theme-based determinations are literally Anet deciding what themes get things. People assume if that doesn't line up with their own ideas, Anet has no clue what they are doing. Just look at the post above mine.

    Theme doesn't mean kitten when it destroys the balance of classes in a game. You know part of the reason why soulbeast is broken in ranked is it's nearly unparalleled mobility right? You realize that until every class had mobility that could compete with thief that thief was actually a good choice to bring for comps purely because of it's mobility advantage? You also realise that with this last round of especs EVERYONE got a mobility increase and more cc is present now than at the start of the game? It has nothing to do with "Theme", it has everything to do with anet powercreeping every class through the roof. So as per your invitation: you are crazy.

  • Nimon.7840Nimon.7840 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Dawdler.8521 said:
    The same reason they > @Ario.8964 said:

    Anet threw mobility onto all of the elite specs outside of guard and necro (which didn't need it due to being so dominant anyways.)

    Necro got sand swell you know, a mobility skill that literally move entire zergs up cliffs that would otherwise force it to move around and unlike portal, is available on 50% of the zerg.

    Selective claims of power creep is funny.

    You can achieve the same thing by using mesmer blink and portal. You can even do double portal with mesmer, that moves 40 and not just 20 people

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 24, 2019

    @Ario.8964 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Call me crazy but ... it's theme based. That's also the reason people don't 'get it' or think Anet doesn't know what they are doing; theme-based determinations are literally Anet deciding what themes get things. People assume if that doesn't line up with their own ideas, Anet has no clue what they are doing. Just look at the post above mine.

    Theme doesn't mean kitten when it destroys the balance of classes in a game. You know part of the reason why soulbeast is broken in ranked is it's nearly unparalleled mobility right? You realize that until every class had mobility that could compete with thief that thief was actually a good choice to bring for comps purely because of it's mobility advantage? You also realise that with this last round of especs EVERYONE got a mobility increase and more cc is present now than at the start of the game? It has nothing to do with "Theme", it has everything to do with anet powercreeping every class through the roof. So as per your invitation: you are crazy.

    Yet we have lots of examples where theme HAS been more important than class balance ... as well as what most people would say are unbalanced classes. Give that a think.

    If you think what you say is true, you haven't been paying attention to the reasons Anet make some of the changes to the game. Maybe you think I've made up this crazy theory ... that's not the case. Give my sig a read if you don't think theme 'means kitten'.

    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/

  • Ario.8964Ario.8964 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Ario.8964 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Call me crazy but ... it's theme based. That's also the reason people don't 'get it' or think Anet doesn't know what they are doing; theme-based determinations are literally Anet deciding what themes get things. People assume if that doesn't line up with their own ideas, Anet has no clue what they are doing. Just look at the post above mine.

    Theme doesn't mean kitten when it destroys the balance of classes in a game. You know part of the reason why soulbeast is broken in ranked is it's nearly unparalleled mobility right? You realize that until every class had mobility that could compete with thief that thief was actually a good choice to bring for comps purely because of it's mobility advantage? You also realise that with this last round of especs EVERYONE got a mobility increase and more cc is present now than at the start of the game? It has nothing to do with "Theme", it has everything to do with anet powercreeping every class through the roof. So as per your invitation: you are crazy.

    Yet we have lots of examples where theme HAS been more important than class balance ... as well as what most people would say are unbalanced classes. Give that a think.

    If you think what you say is true, you haven't been paying attention to the reasons Anet make some of the changes to the game. Maybe you think I've made up this crazy theory ... that's not the case. Give my sig a read if you don't think theme 'means kitten'.

    Theme helps with the design and intention of skills yes. But creating imbalance for the sake of a theme shows a lack of understanding of game mechanics and proper balancing, meaning they don't know what they are doing which proves my point. What other people on the forum say is unbalanced is also basically just a tossup since players on this forum and just overall in this game will complain anything is op.

    Where has theme been so important it destroys the balance of classes? Where has it been, not due to any lack of understanding or introduction of powercreeped mechanics, the sole reason a class has become/remained game breakingly OP?

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 24, 2019

    @Ario.8964 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Ario.8964 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Call me crazy but ... it's theme based. That's also the reason people don't 'get it' or think Anet doesn't know what they are doing; theme-based determinations are literally Anet deciding what themes get things. People assume if that doesn't line up with their own ideas, Anet has no clue what they are doing. Just look at the post above mine.

    Theme doesn't mean kitten when it destroys the balance of classes in a game. You know part of the reason why soulbeast is broken in ranked is it's nearly unparalleled mobility right? You realize that until every class had mobility that could compete with thief that thief was actually a good choice to bring for comps purely because of it's mobility advantage? You also realise that with this last round of especs EVERYONE got a mobility increase and more cc is present now than at the start of the game? It has nothing to do with "Theme", it has everything to do with anet powercreeping every class through the roof. So as per your invitation: you are crazy.

    Yet we have lots of examples where theme HAS been more important than class balance ... as well as what most people would say are unbalanced classes. Give that a think.

    If you think what you say is true, you haven't been paying attention to the reasons Anet make some of the changes to the game. Maybe you think I've made up this crazy theory ... that's not the case. Give my sig a read if you don't think theme 'means kitten'.

    Theme helps with the design and intention of skills yes. But creating imbalance for the sake of a theme shows a lack of understanding of game mechanics and proper balancing, meaning they don't know what they are doing which proves my point. What other people on the forum say is unbalanced is also basically just a tossup since players on this forum and just overall in this game will complain anything is op.

    Where has theme been so important it destroys the balance of classes? Where has it been, not due to any lack of understanding or introduction of powercreeped mechanics, the sole reason a class has become/remained game breakingly OP?

    That’s a very simplistic and narrowminded interpretation. If Anet decides to use theme as the primary reason to make changes to classes, that’s not wrong, it’s just different than what you expect … and objectively thinking here … there seems to be a number of logical reasons for that shift as well. Several are as follows:

    1. Balancing class performance with all the complexities of all the choices available to players isn’t good return on effort for them or us, so why should they use performance as the primary reason to change the game? That makes no sense.
    2. They’ve designed a game that doesn’t actually require tight performance balancing, so the idea they use performance as the primary reason to change the game isn’t sensible either.
    3. MMO’s have a history of poor class performance balance; that’s an intrinsic problem with the MMO offering. Why would Anet make that the standard to which they change the game?

    Again, if you want to see an example where theme has been used to make changes to classes, refer to my signature. There are also smaller ones like DH Piercing Light trait change and Mesmer phantasm changes. There are more, I’m not in the position to present them all. The point about what they are or how many they are isn't really relevant. The point is that Anet DOES change the game to align with their ideas of what the class theme is and more often than you might think or admit.

    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/

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 25, 2019

    @Nimon.7840 said:

    @Dawdler.8521 said:
    The same reason they > @Ario.8964 said:

    Anet threw mobility onto all of the elite specs outside of guard and necro (which didn't need it due to being so dominant anyways.)

    Necro got sand swell you know, a mobility skill that literally move entire zergs up cliffs that would otherwise force it to move around and unlike portal, is available on 50% of the zerg.

    Selective claims of power creep is funny.

    You can achieve the same thing by using mesmer blink and portal. You can even do double portal with mesmer, that moves 40 and not just 20 people

    Sure you can do double portal, except someone will probably need to relog first because your 50 probably only have like 1 mesmer.

    If all 50 where thieves they wouldnt need any portal either, just sb 5 up there. I mean, 50 man thief zergs arent that uncommon. You just dont see them very often.

    Dont look a gift Asura in the mouth.
    No seriously, dont. Shark teeth.

  • lodjur.1284lodjur.1284 Member ✭✭✭

    @Dawdler.8521 said:
    The same reason they > @Ario.8964 said:

    Anet threw mobility onto all of the elite specs outside of guard and necro (which didn't need it due to being so dominant anyways.)

    Necro got sand swell you know, a mobility skill that literally move entire zergs up cliffs that would otherwise force it to move around and unlike portal, is available on 50% of the zerg.

    Selective claims of power creep is funny.

    Sand Swell is a meme, it's only use is for a bit of out of combat vertical mobility. The skill is almost slower than just running...
    Using Sand Swell as an example of power creep is just very funny

    Ögonen omges av vita och svarta penseldrag som gör att de ser större ut än vad de egentligen är. Baksidan av lodjurets öron kantas av svart päls som slutar i den karaktäristiska tofsen högst upp på örat. Lodjurets svans är kortare än de flesta andra kattdjurs.

  • Ario.8964Ario.8964 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Ario.8964 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Ario.8964 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Call me crazy but ... it's theme based. That's also the reason people don't 'get it' or think Anet doesn't know what they are doing; theme-based determinations are literally Anet deciding what themes get things. People assume if that doesn't line up with their own ideas, Anet has no clue what they are doing. Just look at the post above mine.

    Theme doesn't mean kitten when it destroys the balance of classes in a game. You know part of the reason why soulbeast is broken in ranked is it's nearly unparalleled mobility right? You realize that until every class had mobility that could compete with thief that thief was actually a good choice to bring for comps purely because of it's mobility advantage? You also realise that with this last round of especs EVERYONE got a mobility increase and more cc is present now than at the start of the game? It has nothing to do with "Theme", it has everything to do with anet powercreeping every class through the roof. So as per your invitation: you are crazy.

    Yet we have lots of examples where theme HAS been more important than class balance ... as well as what most people would say are unbalanced classes. Give that a think.

    If you think what you say is true, you haven't been paying attention to the reasons Anet make some of the changes to the game. Maybe you think I've made up this crazy theory ... that's not the case. Give my sig a read if you don't think theme 'means kitten'.

    Theme helps with the design and intention of skills yes. But creating imbalance for the sake of a theme shows a lack of understanding of game mechanics and proper balancing, meaning they don't know what they are doing which proves my point. What other people on the forum say is unbalanced is also basically just a tossup since players on this forum and just overall in this game will complain anything is op.

    Where has theme been so important it destroys the balance of classes? Where has it been, not due to any lack of understanding or introduction of powercreeped mechanics, the sole reason a class has become/remained game breakingly OP?

    That’s a very simplistic and narrowminded interpretation. If Anet decides to use theme as the primary reason to make changes to classes, that’s not wrong, it’s just different than what you expect … and objectively thinking here … there seems to be a number of logical reasons for that shift as well. Several are as follows:

    1. Balancing class performance with all the complexities of all the choices available to players isn’t good return on effort for them or us, so why should they use performance as the primary reason to change the game? That makes no sense.
    2. They’ve designed a game that doesn’t actually require tight performance balancing, so the idea they use performance as the primary reason to change the game isn’t sensible either.
    3. MMO’s have a history of poor class performance balance; that’s an intrinsic problem with the MMO offering. Why would Anet make that the standard to which they change the game?

    Again, if you want to see an example where theme has been used to make changes to classes, refer to my signature. There are also smaller ones like DH Piercing Light trait change and Mesmer phantasm changes. There are more, I’m not in the position to present them all. The point about what they are or how many they are isn't really relevant. The point is that Anet DOES change the game to align with their ideas of what the class theme is and more often than you might think or admit.

    The phantasm change wasn't for the "theme" of mesmer, it was to address the fluidity issues of summoning their phantasms and managing them during fights, which was a balance complaint for many mesmers whose damage was getting hurt by the rampant AoE and lack of phantasm consistency/reliability. Using theme as a basis for change isn't wrong, like you said. However, it is rarely ever the SOLE reason for doing so. My point is that regardless of it being based in a desire to fit a theme or not, anet has done a poor job with managing balance within the game as many classes have become powercreeped for the sake of powercreep. Many of the themes of the classes would still be perfectly intact with the design anet intended them to have if they had a little less mobility, damage, sustain, etc. Now to address your points:
    1) Not right away, but over time having a substantial pvp playerbase (which could be acquired in this game with better class balance and new game modes) opens up the possibility of marketing to the pvp gaming community which can expand the game through streams, competitions, etc. It is a time investment and despite the fact that the game will most likely never go esports again, it could've seen major benefits from utilizing the esport market. (reason it dropped out was bunker meta, a situation created through terrible balancing, was a bore to watch and to play. Nobody enjoyed it and the game has never recovered from that)
    2) I'll be honest I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this (I may just be too tired). Would you mind explaining this a little more?
    3) A history of doing something poorly isn't a free excuse to keep doing something poorly. If you play basketball, and you have a history of missing all your free throws, what team is going to look at you and say "Oh, he's got a history of bad free throws, it's okay"? They will all make you improve or change the way you are doing things because it's obvious that the current way you are doing things is unsatisfactory. Anet ideally would do the same with this game's balance but again, they have no idea how to balance for pvp.

  • Sylosi.6503Sylosi.6503 Member ✭✭✭
    edited January 25, 2019

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    3. MMO’s have a history of poor class performance balance; that’s an intrinsic problem with the MMO offering. Why would Anet make that the standard to which they change the game?

    Actually I'd say originally Anet did go against the typical MMORPG pattern of "balancing".

    Pre-HoT in contrast to pretty much every themepark MMORPG they balanced virtually entirely around one game mode - PvP, rather than the clusterkitten you get in most MMORPGs (and now this one) where they try and balance for PvE & PvP.

    And whilst you had "themes" back then it actually helped balance, because the devs (who now mostly work at Amazon) understood classes should have weaknesses as well as strengths and the "theme" was in part the basis for that. Ironically I'd say the "theme" has actually been watered down with the obnoxious powercreep in this game where every class can do so much, there is less distinction between "themes" than there once was and not just balance has suffered for that, but the quality of the combat / gameplay itself.

  • Brendan.1309Brendan.1309 Member ✭✭✭

    What you might not know about nerfing Owl Swoop is there are alternative pets that can do very similar or for some preferred abilities.
    Fern hound, for example, has an 800 distance leap and it also has knockdown and stun abilities.
    Rock Gazelle also has a 1200 range disengage ability except it has a stun attached to it and again comes with more knockdowns and higher DPS and there are many more.

    Necromancers specialize in AOE abilities, rangers and deadeyes specialize in long range abilities.
    I think it should stay that way, otherwise, just make 1 profession and give it all the abilities then things will be balanced.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Ario.8964 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Ario.8964 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Ario.8964 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Call me crazy but ... it's theme based. That's also the reason people don't 'get it' or think Anet doesn't know what they are doing; theme-based determinations are literally Anet deciding what themes get things. People assume if that doesn't line up with their own ideas, Anet has no clue what they are doing. Just look at the post above mine.

    Theme doesn't mean kitten when it destroys the balance of classes in a game. You know part of the reason why soulbeast is broken in ranked is it's nearly unparalleled mobility right? You realize that until every class had mobility that could compete with thief that thief was actually a good choice to bring for comps purely because of it's mobility advantage? You also realise that with this last round of especs EVERYONE got a mobility increase and more cc is present now than at the start of the game? It has nothing to do with "Theme", it has everything to do with anet powercreeping every class through the roof. So as per your invitation: you are crazy.

    Yet we have lots of examples where theme HAS been more important than class balance ... as well as what most people would say are unbalanced classes. Give that a think.

    If you think what you say is true, you haven't been paying attention to the reasons Anet make some of the changes to the game. Maybe you think I've made up this crazy theory ... that's not the case. Give my sig a read if you don't think theme 'means kitten'.

    Theme helps with the design and intention of skills yes. But creating imbalance for the sake of a theme shows a lack of understanding of game mechanics and proper balancing, meaning they don't know what they are doing which proves my point. What other people on the forum say is unbalanced is also basically just a tossup since players on this forum and just overall in this game will complain anything is op.

    Where has theme been so important it destroys the balance of classes? Where has it been, not due to any lack of understanding or introduction of powercreeped mechanics, the sole reason a class has become/remained game breakingly OP?

    That’s a very simplistic and narrowminded interpretation. If Anet decides to use theme as the primary reason to make changes to classes, that’s not wrong, it’s just different than what you expect … and objectively thinking here … there seems to be a number of logical reasons for that shift as well. Several are as follows:

    1. Balancing class performance with all the complexities of all the choices available to players isn’t good return on effort for them or us, so why should they use performance as the primary reason to change the game? That makes no sense.
    2. They’ve designed a game that doesn’t actually require tight performance balancing, so the idea they use performance as the primary reason to change the game isn’t sensible either.
    3. MMO’s have a history of poor class performance balance; that’s an intrinsic problem with the MMO offering. Why would Anet make that the standard to which they change the game?

    Again, if you want to see an example where theme has been used to make changes to classes, refer to my signature. There are also smaller ones like DH Piercing Light trait change and Mesmer phantasm changes. There are more, I’m not in the position to present them all. The point about what they are or how many they are isn't really relevant. The point is that Anet DOES change the game to align with their ideas of what the class theme is and more often than you might think or admit.

    The phantasm change wasn't for the "theme" of mesmer, it was to address the fluidity issues of summoning their phantasms and managing them during fights, which was a balance complaint for many mesmers whose damage was getting hurt by the rampant AoE and lack of phantasm consistency/reliability. Using theme as a basis for change isn't wrong, like you said. However, it is rarely ever the SOLE reason for doing so. My point is that regardless of it being based in a desire to fit a theme or not, anet has done a poor job with managing balance within the game as many classes have become powercreeped for the sake of powercreep. Many of the themes of the classes would still be perfectly intact with the design anet intended them to have if they had a little less mobility, damage, sustain, etc. Now to address your points:
    1) Not right away, but over time having a substantial pvp playerbase (which could be acquired in this game with better class balance and new game modes) opens up the possibility of marketing to the pvp gaming community which can expand the game through streams, competitions, etc. It is a time investment and despite the fact that the game will most likely never go esports again, it could've seen major benefits from utilizing the esport market. (reason it dropped out was bunker meta, a situation created through terrible balancing, was a bore to watch and to play. Nobody enjoyed it and the game has never recovered from that)
    2) I'll be honest I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this (I may just be too tired). Would you mind explaining this a little more?
    3) A history of doing something poorly isn't a free excuse to keep doing something poorly. If you play basketball, and you have a history of missing all your free throws, what team is going to look at you and say "Oh, he's got a history of bad free throws, it's okay"? They will all make you improve or change the way you are doing things because it's obvious that the current way you are doing things is unsatisfactory. Anet ideally would do the same with this game's balance but again, they have no idea how to balance for pvp.

    This doesn't change my point really. See, the problem is that you have come here and imposed your ideas about what is right or wrong on Anet's concept of an MMO. That doesn't make sense. It's not wrong that Anet has decided to use their own ideas to design the game and for the devs to work within that framework to deliver the game as they see fit. The debate over whatever those factors are is moot; I'm simply suggesting Anet placed strong emphasis on theme when they decide to change classes in the game. Whether or not you agree with that doesn't change the fact that it's irrelevant what we think the game SHOULD be based on. The only difference here is that my ideas are based on observing the game. Yours are based on some rules you imagined that you think Anet is breaking.

    In otherwords, the idea that the game is primarily balanced on 'theme' is WAY more realistic than the idea the game is primarily balanced on performance. You should give some thought to that.

    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/

  • Ario.8964Ario.8964 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Ario.8964 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Ario.8964 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Ario.8964 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Call me crazy but ... it's theme based. That's also the reason people don't 'get it' or think Anet doesn't know what they are doing; theme-based determinations are literally Anet deciding what themes get things. People assume if that doesn't line up with their own ideas, Anet has no clue what they are doing. Just look at the post above mine.

    Theme doesn't mean kitten when it destroys the balance of classes in a game. You know part of the reason why soulbeast is broken in ranked is it's nearly unparalleled mobility right? You realize that until every class had mobility that could compete with thief that thief was actually a good choice to bring for comps purely because of it's mobility advantage? You also realise that with this last round of especs EVERYONE got a mobility increase and more cc is present now than at the start of the game? It has nothing to do with "Theme", it has everything to do with anet powercreeping every class through the roof. So as per your invitation: you are crazy.

    Yet we have lots of examples where theme HAS been more important than class balance ... as well as what most people would say are unbalanced classes. Give that a think.

    If you think what you say is true, you haven't been paying attention to the reasons Anet make some of the changes to the game. Maybe you think I've made up this crazy theory ... that's not the case. Give my sig a read if you don't think theme 'means kitten'.

    Theme helps with the design and intention of skills yes. But creating imbalance for the sake of a theme shows a lack of understanding of game mechanics and proper balancing, meaning they don't know what they are doing which proves my point. What other people on the forum say is unbalanced is also basically just a tossup since players on this forum and just overall in this game will complain anything is op.

    Where has theme been so important it destroys the balance of classes? Where has it been, not due to any lack of understanding or introduction of powercreeped mechanics, the sole reason a class has become/remained game breakingly OP?

    That’s a very simplistic and narrowminded interpretation. If Anet decides to use theme as the primary reason to make changes to classes, that’s not wrong, it’s just different than what you expect … and objectively thinking here … there seems to be a number of logical reasons for that shift as well. Several are as follows:

    1. Balancing class performance with all the complexities of all the choices available to players isn’t good return on effort for them or us, so why should they use performance as the primary reason to change the game? That makes no sense.
    2. They’ve designed a game that doesn’t actually require tight performance balancing, so the idea they use performance as the primary reason to change the game isn’t sensible either.
    3. MMO’s have a history of poor class performance balance; that’s an intrinsic problem with the MMO offering. Why would Anet make that the standard to which they change the game?

    Again, if you want to see an example where theme has been used to make changes to classes, refer to my signature. There are also smaller ones like DH Piercing Light trait change and Mesmer phantasm changes. There are more, I’m not in the position to present them all. The point about what they are or how many they are isn't really relevant. The point is that Anet DOES change the game to align with their ideas of what the class theme is and more often than you might think or admit.

    The phantasm change wasn't for the "theme" of mesmer, it was to address the fluidity issues of summoning their phantasms and managing them during fights, which was a balance complaint for many mesmers whose damage was getting hurt by the rampant AoE and lack of phantasm consistency/reliability. Using theme as a basis for change isn't wrong, like you said. However, it is rarely ever the SOLE reason for doing so. My point is that regardless of it being based in a desire to fit a theme or not, anet has done a poor job with managing balance within the game as many classes have become powercreeped for the sake of powercreep. Many of the themes of the classes would still be perfectly intact with the design anet intended them to have if they had a little less mobility, damage, sustain, etc. Now to address your points:
    1) Not right away, but over time having a substantial pvp playerbase (which could be acquired in this game with better class balance and new game modes) opens up the possibility of marketing to the pvp gaming community which can expand the game through streams, competitions, etc. It is a time investment and despite the fact that the game will most likely never go esports again, it could've seen major benefits from utilizing the esport market. (reason it dropped out was bunker meta, a situation created through terrible balancing, was a bore to watch and to play. Nobody enjoyed it and the game has never recovered from that)
    2) I'll be honest I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this (I may just be too tired). Would you mind explaining this a little more?
    3) A history of doing something poorly isn't a free excuse to keep doing something poorly. If you play basketball, and you have a history of missing all your free throws, what team is going to look at you and say "Oh, he's got a history of bad free throws, it's okay"? They will all make you improve or change the way you are doing things because it's obvious that the current way you are doing things is unsatisfactory. Anet ideally would do the same with this game's balance but again, they have no idea how to balance for pvp.

    This doesn't change my point really. See, the problem is that you have come here and imposed your ideas about what is right or wrong on Anet's concept of an MMO. That doesn't make sense. It's not wrong that Anet has decided to use their own ideas to design the game and for the devs to work within that framework to deliver the game as they see fit. The debate over whatever those factors are is moot; I'm simply suggesting Anet placed strong emphasis on theme when they decide to change classes in the game. Whether or not you agree with that doesn't change the fact that it's irrelevant what we think the game SHOULD be based on. The only difference here is that my ideas are based on observing the game. Yours are based on some rules you imagined that you think Anet is breaking.

    In otherwords, the idea that the game is primarily balanced on 'theme' is WAY more realistic than the idea the game is primarily balanced on performance. You should give some thought to that.

    It has nothing to do with my view of what is "right and wrong", it's just simple common sense that literally every game designer in the world (except apparently the ones at anet) will tell you is the truth. Your simple suggestion, as you put it, is wrong. Class DESIGN, of course, is created around a theme. The idea that BALANCE of that specific class is because of theme is ludicrous. There is no theme that would justify making classes more and more powerful with every expansion. Anet even said the intention of the system wasn't to serve as upgrades to current specs so if we are going based off of theme, it looks to me like they still have no idea what they're doing since they can't even fit into their own theme of elite specs in general.

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

    @Dawdler.8521 said:
    The same reason they > @Ario.8964 said:

    Anet threw mobility onto all of the elite specs outside of guard and necro (which didn't need it due to being so dominant anyways.)

    Necro got sand swell you know, a mobility skill that literally move entire zergs up cliffs that would otherwise force it to move around and unlike portal, is available on 50% of the zerg.

    Selective claims of power creep is funny.

    But the scourge lost the base mobility in shroud as a trade off for this utility skill. Which basically mean that the scourge don't have more mobility than the core necromancer or the reaper. Sand swell isn't the best example ever to use as a mobility powercreep for a profession. On anpther hand, rangers gaining access to their pet's mobility skill can be seen as mobility powercreep because this new mobility isn't a mobility moved from one place to another. If for a reason or another a necromancer elite spec ended up with new mobility skills in both weapon skills and shroud skill then you could say that there is mobility power creep.

  • Obtena.7952Obtena.7952 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 28, 2019

    @Ario.8964 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Ario.8964 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Ario.8964 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:

    @Ario.8964 said:

    @Obtena.7952 said:
    Call me crazy but ... it's theme based. That's also the reason people don't 'get it' or think Anet doesn't know what they are doing; theme-based determinations are literally Anet deciding what themes get things. People assume if that doesn't line up with their own ideas, Anet has no clue what they are doing. Just look at the post above mine.

    Theme doesn't mean kitten when it destroys the balance of classes in a game. You know part of the reason why soulbeast is broken in ranked is it's nearly unparalleled mobility right? You realize that until every class had mobility that could compete with thief that thief was actually a good choice to bring for comps purely because of it's mobility advantage? You also realise that with this last round of especs EVERYONE got a mobility increase and more cc is present now than at the start of the game? It has nothing to do with "Theme", it has everything to do with anet powercreeping every class through the roof. So as per your invitation: you are crazy.

    Yet we have lots of examples where theme HAS been more important than class balance ... as well as what most people would say are unbalanced classes. Give that a think.

    If you think what you say is true, you haven't been paying attention to the reasons Anet make some of the changes to the game. Maybe you think I've made up this crazy theory ... that's not the case. Give my sig a read if you don't think theme 'means kitten'.

    Theme helps with the design and intention of skills yes. But creating imbalance for the sake of a theme shows a lack of understanding of game mechanics and proper balancing, meaning they don't know what they are doing which proves my point. What other people on the forum say is unbalanced is also basically just a tossup since players on this forum and just overall in this game will complain anything is op.

    Where has theme been so important it destroys the balance of classes? Where has it been, not due to any lack of understanding or introduction of powercreeped mechanics, the sole reason a class has become/remained game breakingly OP?

    That’s a very simplistic and narrowminded interpretation. If Anet decides to use theme as the primary reason to make changes to classes, that’s not wrong, it’s just different than what you expect … and objectively thinking here … there seems to be a number of logical reasons for that shift as well. Several are as follows:

    1. Balancing class performance with all the complexities of all the choices available to players isn’t good return on effort for them or us, so why should they use performance as the primary reason to change the game? That makes no sense.
    2. They’ve designed a game that doesn’t actually require tight performance balancing, so the idea they use performance as the primary reason to change the game isn’t sensible either.
    3. MMO’s have a history of poor class performance balance; that’s an intrinsic problem with the MMO offering. Why would Anet make that the standard to which they change the game?

    Again, if you want to see an example where theme has been used to make changes to classes, refer to my signature. There are also smaller ones like DH Piercing Light trait change and Mesmer phantasm changes. There are more, I’m not in the position to present them all. The point about what they are or how many they are isn't really relevant. The point is that Anet DOES change the game to align with their ideas of what the class theme is and more often than you might think or admit.

    The phantasm change wasn't for the "theme" of mesmer, it was to address the fluidity issues of summoning their phantasms and managing them during fights, which was a balance complaint for many mesmers whose damage was getting hurt by the rampant AoE and lack of phantasm consistency/reliability. Using theme as a basis for change isn't wrong, like you said. However, it is rarely ever the SOLE reason for doing so. My point is that regardless of it being based in a desire to fit a theme or not, anet has done a poor job with managing balance within the game as many classes have become powercreeped for the sake of powercreep. Many of the themes of the classes would still be perfectly intact with the design anet intended them to have if they had a little less mobility, damage, sustain, etc. Now to address your points:
    1) Not right away, but over time having a substantial pvp playerbase (which could be acquired in this game with better class balance and new game modes) opens up the possibility of marketing to the pvp gaming community which can expand the game through streams, competitions, etc. It is a time investment and despite the fact that the game will most likely never go esports again, it could've seen major benefits from utilizing the esport market. (reason it dropped out was bunker meta, a situation created through terrible balancing, was a bore to watch and to play. Nobody enjoyed it and the game has never recovered from that)
    2) I'll be honest I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this (I may just be too tired). Would you mind explaining this a little more?
    3) A history of doing something poorly isn't a free excuse to keep doing something poorly. If you play basketball, and you have a history of missing all your free throws, what team is going to look at you and say "Oh, he's got a history of bad free throws, it's okay"? They will all make you improve or change the way you are doing things because it's obvious that the current way you are doing things is unsatisfactory. Anet ideally would do the same with this game's balance but again, they have no idea how to balance for pvp.

    This doesn't change my point really. See, the problem is that you have come here and imposed your ideas about what is right or wrong on Anet's concept of an MMO. That doesn't make sense. It's not wrong that Anet has decided to use their own ideas to design the game and for the devs to work within that framework to deliver the game as they see fit. The debate over whatever those factors are is moot; I'm simply suggesting Anet placed strong emphasis on theme when they decide to change classes in the game. Whether or not you agree with that doesn't change the fact that it's irrelevant what we think the game SHOULD be based on. The only difference here is that my ideas are based on observing the game. Yours are based on some rules you imagined that you think Anet is breaking.

    In otherwords, the idea that the game is primarily balanced on 'theme' is WAY more realistic than the idea the game is primarily balanced on performance. You should give some thought to that.

    It has nothing to do with my view of what is "right and wrong", it's just simple common sense that literally every game designer in the world (except apparently the ones at anet) will tell you is the truth. Your simple suggestion, as you put it, is wrong. Class DESIGN, of course, is created around a theme. The idea that BALANCE of that specific class is because of theme is ludicrous. There is no theme that would justify making classes more and more powerful with every expansion. Anet even said the intention of the system wasn't to serve as upgrades to current specs so if we are going based off of theme, it looks to me like they still have no idea what they're doing since they can't even fit into their own theme of elite specs in general.

    You didn't understood my response. Again, you are coming in with this discussion with the concept that there is only one fundamental approach for how Anet should change classes in the game, based on some how MMO's do it (poorly as well, as I already mentioned). Anet has designed the game to so that there is no need for them to conform to what you are describing, within reason. It's not right or wrong, it's just different ... and despite the negative spin you put on it, at worst, it doesn't impact most players so negatively that they decide they won't support the game financially to make this a sustainable business. The business works, even with Anet's approach to class changes, so arguing that the way they do it is 'ludicrious' isn't compelling to change it or a relevant frame of mind to discuss it. If you can't think beyond the narrow approach that you have adopted from other MMO's, you don't get what this game delivers to it's players or why.

    You should try looking at the game for what it is, not for what you want it to be.

    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/

  • I agree in part with Obtena (above). There is no essential rhyme or reason w/r/t balancing other than an ambiguous "theme" that only the developers really have access to. We can sort of guess at what their intent may have been on a per profession basis (with some evidence from interviews, etc.), and we'll never know exactly how that theme has changed over time, other than the obvious "moar powah!!" we have seen.

    The balance (as such) really only matters in competitive modes anyway--or pseudo-competitive modes, such as raiding--because these modes test you against other players (in raiding, you are "tested" for a spot on the roster against other players before the actual contest begins). Unfortunately, since theme > balance, people will experience these modes as inherently unfair experiences, and slowly become jaded/cynical/toxic. The players running the more "overtuned" specs will believe that their superior game knowledge, skill, and inherent greatness entitle them to run oppressive builds, and they respond to any negative comments with something that, at the core, is equivalent to "git gud". The other saps--like me--enjoy the artistic/aesthetic experience that the devs probably intended, but eventually get pwned by one or more of the aforementioned "git gud" fellows, and the fun is instantly perverted to fury. And then the cycle just repeats with the "balance" patches.

  • Dahkeus.8243Dahkeus.8243 Member ✭✭✭

    @Yannir.4132 said:
    You've fallen into a Logic Trap. One of Mesmers lesser known abilities.
    Ranger and Thief always had lots of mobility.
    I don't think that initial design was 100% intentional, it probably just made sense.

    Yup, and considering how mobile mesmer has always been with greatsword, it's never really been a perfect correlation between melee and mobility anyways.

  • Lilyanna.9361Lilyanna.9361 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I'm still trying to figure out where Rangers was mobile at any point in time on Core.

    The only mobility that they got was training into shouts and using their heal skill. And they took that out in PvP because that was TOTALLY the problem with a perma-swiftness owl Soulbeast running around.

    ?????

    I mean I understand strip away power from the spec, but take it away FROM THE SPEC, not the whole Ranger class like Core or Druid -_-

©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.