More Frequent Balance Updates

Illconceived Was Na.9781 · July 5, 2019

@zealex.9410 said:
@"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:I am 99% sure that ANet would like to offer more balance updates, too. The question is: how do they pay for it, given the resource limitations and plans that they already have?

Like with most of the stuff they do for the game its an investent. They invest in faster balance with the hope it will lead to overall better balance and that will bring/retain more players.

"Hoping" for better results isn't an investment plan. How many new paying customers do you think they'd get for instituting this? How many hours of dev time would that cover? How many dev hours would it need to make it work?Without knowing the details, we have to speculate. My back-of-enveloper calculations suggest that the numbers aren't anywhere near reasonable to make this a feasible option.

In contrast, investment into Living World is easier to translate into new spending by players, so easier to invest in.

I wish it weren't so. I'd like the game's PvP & WvW to get more attention, aside from the big ticket projects (like 10v10 and Swiss and Restructuring). I think it's hard to justify, especially in light of NCSOFT breathing down their neck.

Obtena.7952 · July 5, 2019

@Jski.6180 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:The faster you can brake up the meta the better. At best ppl are just asking for one way to play the game for months on end with longer time in-between updates.

This shows a big misunderstanding of the goals of balancing. It's not there to break up meta and meta never goes away either. Also, it is important to maintain so sense of continuity in a class. For the meta to 'break up', you need to smash something pretty hard.

Braking up meta is part of that goal of balancing.

You don't know if that is a goal of Anet's balancing. I can't actually think of a reason Anet would make that a goal of their balancing; just changing meta from one thing to another has really low value. Again, that sounds more like wishful thinking than an actual useful think to do. If you need a reminder of the 'goals' Anet sets for balance, you can check my sig.

@zealex.9410 said:
@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:I am 99% sure that ANet would like to offer more balance updates, too. The question is: how do they pay for it, given the resource limitations and plans that they already have?

Like with most of the stuff they do for the game its an investent. They invest in faster balance with the hope it will lead to overall better balance and that will bring/retain more players.

This is more of that wishful thinking going on.... why would ANYONE at this point in the game think faster balancing efforts would lead to a result different than what we seen for the last 7 years? That doesn't make sense. If anything, if Anet is rushed to more frequent balancing patches ... I would expect WORSE results, not better.

The fact is this: balancing is a low value proposition because balance efforts isn't something players in this game value highly enough to invest in.

zealex.9410 · July 5, 2019

@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:
@zealex.9410 said:
@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:I am 99% sure that ANet would like to offer more balance updates, too. The question is: how do they pay for it, given the resource limitations and plans that they already have?

Like with most of the stuff they do for the game its an investent. They invest in faster balance with the hope it will lead to overall better balance and that will bring/retain more players.

"Hoping" for better results isn't an investment plan. How many new paying customers do you think they'd get for instituting this? How many hours of dev time would that cover? How many dev hours would it need to make it work?Without knowing the details, we have to speculate. My back-of-enveloper calculations suggest that the numbers aren't anywhere near reasonable to make this a feasible option.

In contrast, investment into Living World is easier to translate into new spending by players, so easier to invest in.

I wish it weren't so. I'd like the game's PvP & WvW to get more attention, aside from the big ticket projects (like 10v10 and Swiss and Restructuring). I think it's hard to justify, especially in light of NCSOFT breathing down their neck.

It would bring back and inprove their pvp and wvw scene alot giving gw2 a strong pvp identity and a new wave if possible spenders.Dont know specifics but if you do pls share, i suspect alot which makes sense since im asking for balance patches more often.How many hours would it need depends on what the goal is, is it once a month? a month and a half? 2 months? They need to set a goal and then try to work on it.

Lw and pve in general lives or dies by the content they get and the pace they get it in, that moreso the case for pve than it is in pvp and wvw which care much more about balance, the meta not sticking for too long as to become stale and then some content on the side like new map or mode as long term goals.

Id think Ncsoft would be understanding if anet wanted to invest more in balance to improve pvp in this game. After all, it was the lack of pvp and balance that demolished the pvp player base and killed the esports scene, plus bns is basically a pvp game and ncsoft seems fine enough with it that its getting an UE4 upgrade.

zealex.9410 · July 5, 2019

@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:The faster you can brake up the meta the better. At best ppl are just asking for one way to play the game for months on end with longer time in-between updates.

This shows a big misunderstanding of the goals of balancing. It's not there to break up meta and meta never goes away either. Also, it is important to maintain so sense of continuity in a class. For the meta to 'break up', you need to smash something pretty hard.

Braking up meta is part of that goal of balancing.

You don't know if that is a goal of Anet's balancing. I can't actually think of a reason Anet would make that a goal of their balancing; just changing meta from one thing to another has really low value. Again, that sounds more like wishful thinking than an actual useful think to do. If you need a reminder of the 'goals' Anet sets for balance, you can check my sig.

@zealex.9410 said:
@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:I am 99% sure that ANet would like to offer more balance updates, too. The question is: how do they pay for it, given the resource limitations and plans that they already have?

Like with most of the stuff they do for the game its an investent. They invest in faster balance with the hope it will lead to overall better balance and that will bring/retain more players.

This is more of that wishful thinking going on.... why would ANYONE at this point in the game think faster balancing efforts would lead to a result different than what we seen for the last 7 years? That doesn't make sense. If anything, if Anet is rushed to more frequent balancing patches ... I would expect WORSE results, not better.

The fact is this: balancing is a low value proposition because balance efforts isn't something players in this game value highly enough to invest in.

More often balancing counters one of the major issues gw2 has had in a long time which is classes becoming overpowered or trash by a patch and then staying lile that for 2+ months, also the meta never changes which also bores ppl away from the game.

You thinking that it will lead to a worse balance is your not so wishful thinking, imo and in the opinions of ppl that regarded gw1 as a pvp game i think more balancing more often would be healthier for the game.

Also, do you really think that ppl value balance lowly? Have you not seen all the balance related threads over the years in wvw, pvp and pve?

Etterwyn.5263 · July 5, 2019

One nice thing about the staleness of the game is that I've finally put GW2 aside to work on my single-player Steam backlog. I donate 5 minutes a day to get my daily rewards chest and 4 attempts for Silver Doubloons at Sharkmaw's, but that's it. If the next balance update gets me excited about the classes I love to play, then I'll invest more time. Otherwise I'll wait for the next one. :P

Blude.6812 · July 5, 2019

@Mil.3562 said:But 90% of all Balance Updates are nerfs, so more frequent nerf updates? Nope.

THIS^ . I wish they would work on fixing things that are really annoying like the vet kraits spawning in the ground (or sea bottom in these cases) and the targeting system. like at the flax farm in tangled depths, and wyverns are directly in front of the player and the game targets frogs in the next level down- (they are many more btw like scaling down)--- that is just basic stuff that should have fixed long ago, that they seem to be completely ignoring or are unable to.

Obtena.7952 · July 5, 2019

@zealex.9410 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:The faster you can brake up the meta the better. At best ppl are just asking for one way to play the game for months on end with longer time in-between updates.

This shows a big misunderstanding of the goals of balancing. It's not there to break up meta and meta never goes away either. Also, it is important to maintain so sense of continuity in a class. For the meta to 'break up', you need to smash something pretty hard.

Braking up meta is part of that goal of balancing.

You don't know if that is a goal of Anet's balancing. I can't actually think of a reason Anet would make that a goal of their balancing; just changing meta from one thing to another has really low value. Again, that sounds more like wishful thinking than an actual useful think to do. If you need a reminder of the 'goals' Anet sets for balance, you can check my sig.

@zealex.9410 said:
@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:I am 99% sure that ANet would like to offer more balance updates, too. The question is: how do they pay for it, given the resource limitations and plans that they already have?

Like with most of the stuff they do for the game its an investent. They invest in faster balance with the hope it will lead to overall better balance and that will bring/retain more players.

This is more of that wishful thinking going on.... why would ANYONE at this point in the game think faster balancing efforts would lead to a result different than what we seen for the last 7 years? That doesn't make sense. If anything, if Anet is rushed to more frequent balancing patches ... I would expect WORSE results, not better.

The fact is this: balancing is a low value proposition because balance efforts isn't something players in this game value highly enough to invest in.

More often balancing counters one of the major issues gw2 has had in a long time which is classes becoming overpowered or trash by a patch and then staying lile that for 2+ months, also the meta never changes which also bores ppl away from the game.

No it doesn't. You can't assume that more frequent balance patches are going to address that. You can wish that, but more frequent balance patches aren't a guarantee that changes.

Bladestrom.6425 · July 5, 2019

@Obtena.7952 said:
@zealex.9410 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:The faster you can brake up the meta the better. At best ppl are just asking for one way to play the game for months on end with longer time in-between updates.

This shows a big misunderstanding of the goals of balancing. It's not there to break up meta and meta never goes away either. Also, it is important to maintain so sense of continuity in a class. For the meta to 'break up', you need to smash something pretty hard.

Braking up meta is part of that goal of balancing.

You don't know if that is a goal of Anet's balancing. I can't actually think of a reason Anet would make that a goal of their balancing; just changing meta from one thing to another has really low value. Again, that sounds more like wishful thinking than an actual useful think to do. If you need a reminder of the 'goals' Anet sets for balance, you can check my sig.

@zealex.9410 said:
@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:I am 99% sure that ANet would like to offer more balance updates, too. The question is: how do they pay for it, given the resource limitations and plans that they already have?

Like with most of the stuff they do for the game its an investent. They invest in faster balance with the hope it will lead to overall better balance and that will bring/retain more players.

This is more of that wishful thinking going on.... why would ANYONE at this point in the game think faster balancing efforts would lead to a result different than what we seen for the last 7 years? That doesn't make sense. If anything, if Anet is rushed to more frequent balancing patches ... I would expect WORSE results, not better.

The fact is this: balancing is a low value proposition because balance efforts isn't something players in this game value highly enough to invest in.

More often balancing counters one of the major issues gw2 has had in a long time which is classes becoming overpowered or trash by a patch and then staying lile that for 2+ months, also the meta never changes which also bores ppl away from the game.

No it doesn't. You can't assume that more frequent balance patches are going to address that. You can wish that, but more frequent balance patches aren't a guarantee that changes.

If you were a software developer you would understand how critical it is that you deliver fast and often, evolve fast or procrastinate and stagnate.

zealex.9410 · July 5, 2019

@Obtena.7952 said:
@zealex.9410 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:The faster you can brake up the meta the better. At best ppl are just asking for one way to play the game for months on end with longer time in-between updates.

This shows a big misunderstanding of the goals of balancing. It's not there to break up meta and meta never goes away either. Also, it is important to maintain so sense of continuity in a class. For the meta to 'break up', you need to smash something pretty hard.

Braking up meta is part of that goal of balancing.

You don't know if that is a goal of Anet's balancing. I can't actually think of a reason Anet would make that a goal of their balancing; just changing meta from one thing to another has really low value. Again, that sounds more like wishful thinking than an actual useful think to do. If you need a reminder of the 'goals' Anet sets for balance, you can check my sig.

@zealex.9410 said:
@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:I am 99% sure that ANet would like to offer more balance updates, too. The question is: how do they pay for it, given the resource limitations and plans that they already have?

Like with most of the stuff they do for the game its an investent. They invest in faster balance with the hope it will lead to overall better balance and that will bring/retain more players.

This is more of that wishful thinking going on.... why would ANYONE at this point in the game think faster balancing efforts would lead to a result different than what we seen for the last 7 years? That doesn't make sense. If anything, if Anet is rushed to more frequent balancing patches ... I would expect WORSE results, not better.

The fact is this: balancing is a low value proposition because balance efforts isn't something players in this game value highly enough to invest in.

More often balancing counters one of the major issues gw2 has had in a long time which is classes becoming overpowered or trash by a patch and then staying lile that for 2+ months, also the meta never changes which also bores ppl away from the game.

No it doesn't. You can't assume that more frequent balance patches are going to address that. You can wish that, but more frequent balance patches aren't a guarantee that changes.

I mean i guess but that goes both ways, u cant guarantee less balance patches are gonna be better and hit the nail in the head either. What you can guarantee with frequent balance patches is that the game doesnt get as stale as it would with 4 or 5 patches per year.

Lets say they rework thief and change their innitiative to be more interactive as a resource but the rework somewhere falls short and thief becomes way weaker than they intented to be, the community are in uproar having the class gutted but with the current aproach it wont be touched for at least 2+ months.

What would be better for the game, having the ability to tackle a problem sooner from when it apears or later? Granded good and solid feedback doesnt need 2 months, usually after the first 2 or 3 weeks players have a good idea of the issue.

zealex.9410 · July 5, 2019

@Blude.6812 said:
@Mil.3562 said:But 90% of all Balance Updates are nerfs, so more frequent nerf updates? Nope.

THIS^ . I wish they would work on fixing things that are really annoying like the vet kraits spawning in the ground (or sea bottom in these cases) and the targeting system. like at the flax farm in tangled depths, and wyverns are directly in front of the player and the game targets frogs in the next level down- (they are many more btw like scaling down)--- that is just basic stuff that should have fixed long ago, that they seem to be completely ignoring or are unable to.

If the changes are nerfs then theres a point behind it, wvw, pvp and even pve to an extend have all complained multiple times over the years that the powercreep has damaged the game.

MithranArkanere.8957 · July 6, 2019

What we want, what we need and what we can realistically get aren't always the same thing.

Obtena.7952 · July 6, 2019

@vesica tempestas.1563 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@zealex.9410 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:The faster you can brake up the meta the better. At best ppl are just asking for one way to play the game for months on end with longer time in-between updates.

This shows a big misunderstanding of the goals of balancing. It's not there to break up meta and meta never goes away either. Also, it is important to maintain so sense of continuity in a class. For the meta to 'break up', you need to smash something pretty hard.

Braking up meta is part of that goal of balancing.

You don't know if that is a goal of Anet's balancing. I can't actually think of a reason Anet would make that a goal of their balancing; just changing meta from one thing to another has really low value. Again, that sounds more like wishful thinking than an actual useful think to do. If you need a reminder of the 'goals' Anet sets for balance, you can check my sig.

@zealex.9410 said:
@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:I am 99% sure that ANet would like to offer more balance updates, too. The question is: how do they pay for it, given the resource limitations and plans that they already have?

Like with most of the stuff they do for the game its an investent. They invest in faster balance with the hope it will lead to overall better balance and that will bring/retain more players.

This is more of that wishful thinking going on.... why would ANYONE at this point in the game think faster balancing efforts would lead to a result different than what we seen for the last 7 years? That doesn't make sense. If anything, if Anet is rushed to more frequent balancing patches ... I would expect WORSE results, not better.

The fact is this: balancing is a low value proposition because balance efforts isn't something players in this game value highly enough to invest in.

More often balancing counters one of the major issues gw2 has had in a long time which is classes becoming overpowered or trash by a patch and then staying lile that for 2+ months, also the meta never changes which also bores ppl away from the game.

No it doesn't. You can't assume that more frequent balance patches are going to address that. You can wish that, but more frequent balance patches aren't a guarantee that changes.

If you were a software developer you would understand how critical it is that you deliver fast and often, evolve fast or procrastinate and stagnate.

OK .. but that doesn't change what I said ...

@zealex.9410 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@zealex.9410 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:The faster you can brake up the meta the better. At best ppl are just asking for one way to play the game for months on end with longer time in-between updates.

This shows a big misunderstanding of the goals of balancing. It's not there to break up meta and meta never goes away either. Also, it is important to maintain so sense of continuity in a class. For the meta to 'break up', you need to smash something pretty hard.

Braking up meta is part of that goal of balancing.

You don't know if that is a goal of Anet's balancing. I can't actually think of a reason Anet would make that a goal of their balancing; just changing meta from one thing to another has really low value. Again, that sounds more like wishful thinking than an actual useful think to do. If you need a reminder of the 'goals' Anet sets for balance, you can check my sig.

@zealex.9410 said:
@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:I am 99% sure that ANet would like to offer more balance updates, too. The question is: how do they pay for it, given the resource limitations and plans that they already have?

Like with most of the stuff they do for the game its an investent. They invest in faster balance with the hope it will lead to overall better balance and that will bring/retain more players.

This is more of that wishful thinking going on.... why would ANYONE at this point in the game think faster balancing efforts would lead to a result different than what we seen for the last 7 years? That doesn't make sense. If anything, if Anet is rushed to more frequent balancing patches ... I would expect WORSE results, not better.

The fact is this: balancing is a low value proposition because balance efforts isn't something players in this game value highly enough to invest in.

More often balancing counters one of the major issues gw2 has had in a long time which is classes becoming overpowered or trash by a patch and then staying lile that for 2+ months, also the meta never changes which also bores ppl away from the game.

No it doesn't. You can't assume that more frequent balance patches are going to address that. You can wish that, but more frequent balance patches aren't a guarantee that changes.

I mean i guess but that goes both ways, u cant guarantee less balance patches are gonna be better and hit the nail in the head either.

Except I'm not claiming that either. The bottomline here is that no reasonable person at this point should be thinking that Anet changing their balancing schedule is going to result in game changes they want to see. That's just bad assumptions. Anet could put out a balance patch every day and you still likely won't see the balance you are after ... we already KNOW what kind of balance they are delivering; faster patches isn't going to change that direction. It's just going to add more technical problems like bugs, etc...

Xanadrine.4352 · July 6, 2019

In a game without gear progression im shocked you would need many balance patches. I mean combat damage is static pretty much. In games where gear changes and upgrades frequently yes you have to constantly tinker with numbers and spells. This game should be rather simple to balance, only time balancing should be needed is the addition of new items or spells that change the numbers. I hear people say x class is broken and needs to be balanced, but it seems to me its always the same ones. Looking back over the old gw2 forums these classes were always broken. Same with the meta, its as if they are meant to be that way by design, and if thats the plan it will never change.

b k.1648 · July 6, 2019

@vesica tempestas.1563 said:
@"Ben K.6238" said:Indeed. "Fail fast, fail often" should be applied to internal testing only. Doing it on live servers is a good way to earn a bad reputation.
For computer games in particular, players take some time to adapt to new balance values. Making further adjustments before the meta has time to adjust can easily result in compounding error, so the only time that should be done is if something has gone horribly wrong (e.g. some unusual interaction between skills that makes a player permanently invulnerable).

Reducing or increasing dmg by half a percent each week is zero risk,whereas 2 monthly drops (at best)is MUCH MUCH more damaging than making an error in judgement that u fix a couple of days later. This kind of stuff is well established theory now. Example - ele uncompetitive in spvp in all but 1 build that requires 1k heal. Its taken 2 years with many many stale patches and they STILL haven't sorted it. Now imagine they incrementally tweaked ele every so slighty per week and they monitored trends. This is balancing. That is sustainable.

Yeah, it could quite easily be zero reward too though. Repeated adjustments like that would work if there was no latency between the number change and the resultant meta shift, but when the player base isn't infinitely large with perfect communication, there's always a delay until players figure out whether the updates justify changing their builds. In some games it can take months for players to discover a build that's not just viable but really overpowered if the gearing process takes long enough and there are enough viable alternatives, even with a million active players.

GW2's gearing process is very short, but the discovery principle still applies. Therefore, if they kept adjusting numbers until the metrics were roughly where they wanted them, those metrics would continue to change for weeks or months afterwards even with no further balance changes. So weekly adjustments wouldn't actually provide very much value.

zealex.9410 · July 6, 2019

@Obtena.7952 said:
@vesica tempestas.1563 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@zealex.9410 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:The faster you can brake up the meta the better. At best ppl are just asking for one way to play the game for months on end with longer time in-between updates.

This shows a big misunderstanding of the goals of balancing. It's not there to break up meta and meta never goes away either. Also, it is important to maintain so sense of continuity in a class. For the meta to 'break up', you need to smash something pretty hard.

Braking up meta is part of that goal of balancing.

You don't know if that is a goal of Anet's balancing. I can't actually think of a reason Anet would make that a goal of their balancing; just changing meta from one thing to another has really low value. Again, that sounds more like wishful thinking than an actual useful think to do. If you need a reminder of the 'goals' Anet sets for balance, you can check my sig.

@zealex.9410 said:
@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:I am 99% sure that ANet would like to offer more balance updates, too. The question is: how do they pay for it, given the resource limitations and plans that they already have?

Like with most of the stuff they do for the game its an investent. They invest in faster balance with the hope it will lead to overall better balance and that will bring/retain more players.

This is more of that wishful thinking going on.... why would ANYONE at this point in the game think faster balancing efforts would lead to a result different than what we seen for the last 7 years? That doesn't make sense. If anything, if Anet is rushed to more frequent balancing patches ... I would expect WORSE results, not better.

The fact is this: balancing is a low value proposition because balance efforts isn't something players in this game value highly enough to invest in.

More often balancing counters one of the major issues gw2 has had in a long time which is classes becoming overpowered or trash by a patch and then staying lile that for 2+ months, also the meta never changes which also bores ppl away from the game.

No it doesn't. You can't assume that more frequent balance patches are going to address that. You can wish that, but more frequent balance patches aren't a guarantee that changes.

If you were a software developer you would understand how critical it is that you deliver fast and often, evolve fast or procrastinate and stagnate.

OK .. but that doesn't change what I said ...

No, but you keep ignoring it and its obvious value.

@zealex.9410 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@zealex.9410 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:The faster you can brake up the meta the better. At best ppl are just asking for one way to play the game for months on end with longer time in-between updates.

This shows a big misunderstanding of the goals of balancing. It's not there to break up meta and meta never goes away either. Also, it is important to maintain so sense of continuity in a class. For the meta to 'break up', you need to smash something pretty hard.

Braking up meta is part of that goal of balancing.

You don't know if that is a goal of Anet's balancing. I can't actually think of a reason Anet would make that a goal of their balancing; just changing meta from one thing to another has really low value. Again, that sounds more like wishful thinking than an actual useful think to do. If you need a reminder of the 'goals' Anet sets for balance, you can check my sig.

@zealex.9410 said:
@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:I am 99% sure that ANet would like to offer more balance updates, too. The question is: how do they pay for it, given the resource limitations and plans that they already have?

Like with most of the stuff they do for the game its an investent. They invest in faster balance with the hope it will lead to overall better balance and that will bring/retain more players.

This is more of that wishful thinking going on.... why would ANYONE at this point in the game think faster balancing efforts would lead to a result different than what we seen for the last 7 years? That doesn't make sense. If anything, if Anet is rushed to more frequent balancing patches ... I would expect WORSE results, not better.

The fact is this: balancing is a low value proposition because balance efforts isn't something players in this game value highly enough to invest in.

More often balancing counters one of the major issues gw2 has had in a long time which is classes becoming overpowered or trash by a patch and then staying lile that for 2+ months, also the meta never changes which also bores ppl away from the game.

No it doesn't. You can't assume that more frequent balance patches are going to address that. You can wish that, but more frequent balance patches aren't a guarantee that changes.

I mean i guess but that goes both ways, u cant guarantee less balance patches are gonna be better and hit the nail in the head either.

Except I'm not claiming that either. The bottomline here is that no reasonable person at this point should be thinking that Anet changing their balancing schedule is going to result in game changes they want to see. That's just bad assumptions. Anet could put out a balance patch every day and you still likely won't see the balance you are after ... we already KNOW what kind of balance they are delivering; faster patches isn't going to change that direction. It's just going to add more technical problems like bugs, etc...

The problem, isnt what kind of balance they are delivering, the problem, is that its been delivered rather slowly and that hurts the game. I dont expect them balancing faster to mean that they will suddenly balance smarter but they will be able to at least act upon feedback much faster.

If say your car broke down and you couldnt use or it performed way bellow what it did would u rather have mechanics have their car repair open once a week? twice a week? every day of the week minus sunday or once a month?

zealex.9410 · July 6, 2019

@Zuldari.3940 said:In a game without gear progression im shocked you would need many balance patches. I mean combat damage is static pretty much. In games where gear changes and upgrades frequently yes you have to constantly tinker with numbers and spells. This game should be rather simple to balance, only time balancing should be needed is the addition of new items or spells that change the numbers. I hear people say x class is broken and needs to be balanced, but it seems to me its always the same ones. Looking back over the old gw2 forums these classes were always broken. Same with the meta, its as if they are meant to be that way by design, and if thats the plan it will never change.

Gear prog only creates any real issues for an mmo if it includes items that alter gameplay, such as leggies, gear sets or trinkets otherwise it doesnt do much to fuck with the balance of the game.

Its also worth mentioning that what gw2 lacks in gear prog it makes up with build diversity and build making capabilities. When u can have multiple builds for each class across multiple modes with diff balance rules then no, balance isnt simple.

The problem isnt that classes will be broken, thats a given, iirc anet had an aproach of always having smth be stronger than the rest which to be fair isnt that bad. The issues starts when from flavour of the month it becomes flavour of the 3 months or flavour of the 4-6 months. If your class or build is shit after a patch its certain it will remain so for 2 or 3 months then u hope it will be looked at. If it doesnt, well... enjoy your garbage flavour of the 4 to 6 months.

zealex.9410 · July 6, 2019

@Ben K.6238 said:
@vesica tempestas.1563 said:
@Ben K.6238 said:Indeed. "Fail fast, fail often" should be applied to internal testing only. Doing it on live servers is a good way to earn a bad reputation.
For computer games in particular, players take some time to adapt to new balance values. Making further adjustments before the meta has time to adjust can easily result in compounding error, so the only time that should be done is if something has gone horribly wrong (e.g. some unusual interaction between skills that makes a player permanently invulnerable).

Reducing or increasing dmg by half a percent each week is zero risk,whereas 2 monthly drops (at best)is MUCH MUCH more damaging than making an error in judgement that u fix a couple of days later. This kind of stuff is well established theory now. Example - ele uncompetitive in spvp in all but 1 build that requires 1k heal. Its taken 2 years with many many stale patches and they STILL haven't sorted it. Now imagine they incrementally tweaked ele every so slighty per week and they monitored trends. This is balancing. That is sustainable.

Yeah, it could quite easily be zero reward too though. Repeated adjustments like that would work if there was no latency between the number change and the resultant meta shift, but when the player base isn't infinitely large with perfect communication, there's always a delay until players figure out whether the updates justify changing their builds. In some games it can take months for players to discover a build that's not just viable but really overpowered if the gearing process takes long enough and there are enough viable alternatives, even with a million active players.

Pls do share those mmos, the ones ive seen are pretty set on their balance and if smth takes months to discover its value then theres a high chance its a bug or some out there interaction.

Furthermore the builds that are discovered way later in a patch's lifecircle are not really any diff, if the balance takes less time they will be adressed faster or take longer to discover.

GW2's gearing process is very short, but the discovery principle still applies. Therefore, if they kept adjusting numbers until the metrics were roughly where they wanted them, those metrics would continue to change for weeks or months afterwards even with no further balance changes. So weekly adjustments wouldn't actually provide very much value.

It doesnt take ppl that long to see whether smth is good or bad u can safely say if smth is really solid or trash a couple weeks from a balance patch. Plus, gear is the least of gw2's balance issues.

Bladestrom.6425 · July 6, 2019

@Obtena.7952 said:
@vesica tempestas.1563 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@zealex.9410 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:The faster you can brake up the meta the better. At best ppl are just asking for one way to play the game for months on end with longer time in-between updates.

This shows a big misunderstanding of the goals of balancing. It's not there to break up meta and meta never goes away either. Also, it is important to maintain so sense of continuity in a class. For the meta to 'break up', you need to smash something pretty hard.

Braking up meta is part of that goal of balancing.

You don't know if that is a goal of Anet's balancing. I can't actually think of a reason Anet would make that a goal of their balancing; just changing meta from one thing to another has really low value. Again, that sounds more like wishful thinking than an actual useful think to do. If you need a reminder of the 'goals' Anet sets for balance, you can check my sig.

@zealex.9410 said:
@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:I am 99% sure that ANet would like to offer more balance updates, too. The question is: how do they pay for it, given the resource limitations and plans that they already have?

Like with most of the stuff they do for the game its an investent. They invest in faster balance with the hope it will lead to overall better balance and that will bring/retain more players.

This is more of that wishful thinking going on.... why would ANYONE at this point in the game think faster balancing efforts would lead to a result different than what we seen for the last 7 years? That doesn't make sense. If anything, if Anet is rushed to more frequent balancing patches ... I would expect WORSE results, not better.

The fact is this: balancing is a low value proposition because balance efforts isn't something players in this game value highly enough to invest in.

More often balancing counters one of the major issues gw2 has had in a long time which is classes becoming overpowered or trash by a patch and then staying lile that for 2+ months, also the meta never changes which also bores ppl away from the game.

No it doesn't. You can't assume that more frequent balance patches are going to address that. You can wish that, but more frequent balance patches aren't a guarantee that changes.

If you were a software developer you would understand how critical it is that you deliver fast and often, evolve fast or procrastinate and stagnate.

OK .. but that doesn't change what I said ...

@zealex.9410 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@zealex.9410 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:The faster you can brake up the meta the better. At best ppl are just asking for one way to play the game for months on end with longer time in-between updates.

This shows a big misunderstanding of the goals of balancing. It's not there to break up meta and meta never goes away either. Also, it is important to maintain so sense of continuity in a class. For the meta to 'break up', you need to smash something pretty hard.

Braking up meta is part of that goal of balancing.

You don't know if that is a goal of Anet's balancing. I can't actually think of a reason Anet would make that a goal of their balancing; just changing meta from one thing to another has really low value. Again, that sounds more like wishful thinking than an actual useful think to do. If you need a reminder of the 'goals' Anet sets for balance, you can check my sig.

@zealex.9410 said:
@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:I am 99% sure that ANet would like to offer more balance updates, too. The question is: how do they pay for it, given the resource limitations and plans that they already have?

Like with most of the stuff they do for the game its an investent. They invest in faster balance with the hope it will lead to overall better balance and that will bring/retain more players.

This is more of that wishful thinking going on.... why would ANYONE at this point in the game think faster balancing efforts would lead to a result different than what we seen for the last 7 years? That doesn't make sense. If anything, if Anet is rushed to more frequent balancing patches ... I would expect WORSE results, not better.

The fact is this: balancing is a low value proposition because balance efforts isn't something players in this game value highly enough to invest in.

More often balancing counters one of the major issues gw2 has had in a long time which is classes becoming overpowered or trash by a patch and then staying lile that for 2+ months, also the meta never changes which also bores ppl away from the game.

No it doesn't. You can't assume that more frequent balance patches are going to address that. You can wish that, but more frequent balance patches aren't a guarantee that changes.

I mean i guess but that goes both ways, u cant guarantee less balance patches are gonna be better and hit the nail in the head either.

Except I'm not claiming that either. The bottomline here is that no reasonable person at this point should be thinking that Anet changing their balancing schedule is going to result in game changes they want to see. That's just bad assumptions. Anet could put out a balance patch every day and you still likely won't see the balance you are after ... we already KNOW what kind of balance they are delivering; faster patches isn't going to change that direction. It's just going to add more technical problems like bugs, etc...

Ofc You will see positive improvement. Its why agile has taken over Waterfall and fast deployment is the holy grail of responsive design.

Its a simple analagy. Imagine you could only tweak your build and gear only once every 2 months, how likely are you to get that right? Think about how awful that would be - right? In reality we constantly tweak, because we learn as we go. Same principle

Emberheart.8426 · July 6, 2019

@zealex.9410 said:
@Zuldari.3940 said:In a game without gear progression im shocked you would need many balance patches. I mean combat damage is static pretty much. In games where gear changes and upgrades frequently yes you have to constantly tinker with numbers and spells. This game should be rather simple to balance, only time balancing should be needed is the addition of new items or spells that change the numbers. I hear people say x class is broken and needs to be balanced, but it seems to me its always the same ones. Looking back over the old gw2 forums these classes were always broken. Same with the meta, its as if they are meant to be that way by design, and if thats the plan it will never change.

Gear prog only creates any real issues for an mmo if it includes items that alter gameplay, such as leggies, gear sets or trinkets otherwise it doesnt do much to kitten with the balance of the game.

Its also worth mentioning that what gw2 lacks in gear prog it makes up with build diversity and build making capabilities. When u can have multiple builds for each class across multiple modes with diff balance rules then no, balance isnt simple.

The problem isnt that classes will be broken, thats a given, iirc anet had an aproach of always having smth be stronger than the rest which to be fair isnt that bad. The issues starts when from flavour of the month it becomes flavour of the 3 months or flavour of the 4-6 months. If your class or build is kitten after a patch its certain it will remain so for 2 or 3 months then u hope it will be looked at. If it doesnt, well... enjoy your garbage flavour of the 4 to 6 months.

Would be quite nice if it was flavour of the 4-6 months. In WvW and PvP to a lesser extent it has been flavor of the year and it's still going. Soon to be 2 years.

zealex.9410 · July 6, 2019

@Ganathar.4956 said:
@zealex.9410 said:
@Zuldari.3940 said:In a game without gear progression im shocked you would need many balance patches. I mean combat damage is static pretty much. In games where gear changes and upgrades frequently yes you have to constantly tinker with numbers and spells. This game should be rather simple to balance, only time balancing should be needed is the addition of new items or spells that change the numbers. I hear people say x class is broken and needs to be balanced, but it seems to me its always the same ones. Looking back over the old gw2 forums these classes were always broken. Same with the meta, its as if they are meant to be that way by design, and if thats the plan it will never change.

Gear prog only creates any real issues for an mmo if it includes items that alter gameplay, such as leggies, gear sets or trinkets otherwise it doesnt do much to kitten with the balance of the game.

Its also worth mentioning that what gw2 lacks in gear prog it makes up with build diversity and build making capabilities. When u can have multiple builds for each class across multiple modes with diff balance rules then no, balance isnt simple.

The problem isnt that classes will be broken, thats a given, iirc anet had an aproach of always having smth be stronger than the rest which to be fair isnt that bad. The issues starts when from flavour of the month it becomes flavour of the 3 months or flavour of the 4-6 months. If your class or build is kitten after a patch its certain it will remain so for 2 or 3 months then u hope it will be looked at. If it doesnt, well... enjoy your garbage flavour of the 4 to 6 months.

Would be quite nice if it was flavour of the 4-6 months. In WvW and PvP to a lesser extent it has been flavor of the year and it's still going. Soon to be 2 years.

Was refering worthwhile modes. Jk jk

Feelsbadman.

Obtena.7952 · July 6, 2019

@vesica tempestas.1563 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@vesica tempestas.1563 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@zealex.9410 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:
@Obtena.7952 said:
@Jski.6180 said:The faster you can brake up the meta the better. At best ppl are just asking for one way to play the game for months on end with longer time in-between updates.