do you think balancing for the top 10% of players is a good idea?

[Naxos.2503]

If you run a normal game with a multiplayer element, sure. This is a MMo. If you take into account only 10% of the playerbase, 10% of the playerbase is all you'll have left after a while.

[otto.5684]

I find this question is quite silly. Mostly everyone posting here would probably be invested in the game and invested in PvP. Also, it seems that the sPvP posters think that everyone is in P1 and everyone below that is a noob. Roughly only 10% of the player base make it beyond G3.

In addition, the question does not make sense cuz the balance is based on the class/build optimal usage. Optimal usage is not in G1. There are 2 far more important questions:

1) should balance be based on optimal use of random teams or optimal use of organized. This makes a big difference, since many builds that work great solo do not work as well with an organized group and vice versa.

2) where do you create your measurement break points? 1500, 1600, 1700 or even higher. Or should you consider lower? Is using a bell curve and nerf/buffing a class based on the standard of deviation would work? Or should you focuse on outliers?

[Khalisto.5780]

Taking the top players opinion is important for the competitive gameplay and this ppl also know what is really needs to be nerf, and if you watch their stream they just don't pretend everything is fine so their OP spec doens't get nerfed.

The other nerfs should be centered where the player base is bigger, gold 2 atm.

Balancing for ppl below this I dont think it's a good idea, because there're complaints about everything that kills them, Deadeye killed me, OP, Fresh Air Core Ele killed me, OP.

One thing that's not OP at all in plat 2 and up is Scrapper, this class is absolutely god in gold 2, and it should be nerfed.

I think this is the right direction to take balance.

[Bigpapasmurf.5623]

I believe it should be taken into consideration, however should not be the only factor when balancing. Reason being is that some players are just legit good and dont let their class carry them (which is where it should be balanced)

[Vicariuz.1605]

Yes because balancing for bad players won't stop them from getting facerolled no matter how many excuses they attempt to make for it. If you play badly, it doesn't matter what class or build the opponent is using, you are going to die.

When the people who invest the most into your game aren't your target demographic your game dies, as is shown QUITE well in gw2 history.

[Cobrakon.3108]

on a 1v1 basis... then yes if you mean based on a high level team play then absolutely not.The worst balance is when its optimally balanced around high level TEAM PLAY. .. that is the worst balance ever. However, if its based on a focus for 1v1 , then hot damn.... light of the world beacon of hope, prophecy of encouragement, greatness personified, all that is holy in games, self determination, greatest thing ever, the promise land, the holy grail of gaming.

[Sampson.2403]

Well, what's the goal behind balance? Do you balance this game for high skill level competition or entertainment?

For example, YES, if you invest a lot of time into this game, then "finding the right mesmer in the sea of clones is easy". But for most players, this isn't fun at all.

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

Gw2 already caters to the top% at every turn, including when it comes to balance; despite a minority of that top% being a direct cause in the population dropping.

Double Holo DuoQs in the top 10% were already very common. The top 2 players for most of the current season had been doing that and getting away with 80-90% winrates, and when the balance patch preview finally hits Holo isn't nerfed, but straight up buffed. I'm sure the golds and silvers they often get paired with are going to love that.

For most games, people would be excited to see the meta change up, but in Gw2 a lot of top players seem to enjoy having the easiest and least competitive experience possible.

[Azure The Heartless.3261]

Its No, but with an asterisk.No. all tiers should be included,but only relative to the skill brackets and with other factors that need to be taken into consideration.

Balancing for extreme high level play is important, but so is balance for low level play. You cannot balance only for high level play, because the game isnt only populated by high level players. new blood supports the playerbase, and if the divide between the skill level required for entry and the skill level for high level play is too wide because certain oneshot builds are unbalanced, you're going to have people sooner quit than struggle their way beyond it.

The skill curve and the respective balance for each tier needs to be gradual. Any walls cause player retention to drop. When balancing any class, any trait, or any combination thereof, It is critical that the developers ask themselves the following:

1. How difficult is this (skill/class/playstyle) to fight compared to how easy it is to stay alive while using it? (Classes that are difficult to fight should also die much more easily than classes that are easy to fight/have blatant telegraphs.)
2. How difficult is it to understand that (skill/class/playstyle) killed you because of X,Y,Z?
3. Was there a telegraph you didn't dodge? How much time do you have to react to (skill/class/playstyle) before you die?**
4. was there situational information to let you know that this was going to kill you that you ignored?
5. Would you be able to understand what killed you after 5,10,50,100 encounters?6.If you understand it, is there some playstyle change you can make that doesnt involve changing your entire kit or playing a specific build that would make it easier to fight that (skill/class/playstyle)?

Those questions should be asked on every single skill tier of PVP. Being skilled doesn't entitle you to any playstyle or build that gives the opponent no reasonable chance to counter/kill you.

There's always going to be people that complain, there's always going to be people that run into a brick wall skillwise and would sooner blame the wall than their own actions. what matters is how much preparation or training it takes to understand that you're running into a brick wall. If you can make that clearer to the players so they can find a way around that without necessarily removing the wall, you should always do that.

@"Sampson.2403" said:For example, YES, if you invest a lot of time into this game, then "finding the right mesmer in the sea of clones is easy". But for most players, this isn't fun at all.

Lets take this as an example. Is finding a mesmer/telling it apart from a clone easy for a new player? no. That doesnt necessarily mean you should remove clones from the game, but you might want to consider how often that mesmer can apply disabling/harassing conditions or how quickly that mesmer can kill unless it sacrifices most of its defense to do so, and even then there should be clear indicators that you are about to be hit by big damage if you're paying attention. Otherwise the people who want to learn how to fight mesmer are going to find themselves frustrated before they find any progress.

[JTGuevara.9018]

I picked no, but I think there should've been a third option for neither. I say neither because in game-after-game, if the balancing input is left to players, they will naturally benefit themselves at the expense of the game. They'll f-- it up! It's player psychology. Players don't like to lose. The skill level doesn't even matter. Whether it's bad players not wanting to adapt, or top players protecting their spots...the result is the same, the game suffers. Honestly, player-enforced "metas" are the worst thing about this pvp mess. Especially from the top e-peen strokers in ranked. I used to buy into it...but not anymore. That's what happens when developers can't decide what they want pvp to be. Instead, the devs balance patterns as I see them are pretty much: "Change stuff around and let the players decide!"

In gw1, on the other hand, devs knew right away what they wanted. (Warrs = frontline smash, Monks = heal/ Eles = make it rain) There were obvious strategies. Still, there were variations like the second professions to make those roles interesting. It was also actually competitive, unlike this mess.

[Vancho.8750]

Most of the so called top players play only one profession, 2 at best, and they are not really that objective about what is good or bad outside their preferred build. Some are quite malicious and want to keep their place at leaderboard any means necessary. I remember a thread where one was blowing a gasket cause his OP build couldn't beat another guy's OP build at the AT. Not all "top" players are good at judging the broader impact of some builds and many are quite selfish and would wan't changes to accommodate their preferred game style. I'm not saying that there aren't any great players that know what's up and areana net should probably ask them some questions.By reading some posts about plebs and noobs i can see that my point makes perfect sense and to them they need to know that everyone from the top 250 is playing in goldwith the so called plebs and noobs.

[sephiroth.4217]

I only say no because the top 10% in this game lack integrity.They abuse the systems, fill boards with alts, sell top spots, match manipulate, removed anet from esl and further pvp development whey embarrassed the game on a world stage and continue with thier shannanigans till this day.If Anet was my company, I would have scrapped the cash tournies too after that. Anet rubbed the backs of these players and these players spat back.

Ontop of that, these players want to win more than most and in the past I have seen top players get beaten by nobodies then proceed to ask for nerfs against the class that beat them.They are just as bias as the rest of us "low tier plebs".

For most other games on the market, balancing for top 10% makes complete sense.

Edit: Just going to clarify I have nothing against the few top ten percent that still have thier integrity, you have been unfairly lumped in with the rest)

[DeadlySynz.3471]

Nope! That's like buffing the game around raids (which they primarily do), and look where it gets us.

[Crab Fear.1624]

I guess to make sure feelings don't get hurt, what is the top ten percent?

I mean do 10% of the players make it into basic plat and higher?

If it is only plat 2 and higher, holy shit we have a small player base.

If we are targeting only the top 50 players, gg bros. No one cares. (assuming you think this is the top 10%)

What is the rating threshold of 10%?

[NICENIKESHOE.7128]

Though to be fair I think there's a bit of mixup in terms of skill ceiling and skill floor. Ideally balance should happen so that each profession has viable skill floor, where new/majority of players can enjoy their class. And then it should also balance skill ceiling, where player skill differences plays much larger aspect than class builds. A classic example is dragonhunter where it used to abuse low end players but struggled (even now) significantly in higher end.

[Cyninja.2954]

Balance should be done based on realistically achievable maximum performance for competative modes. Not sure if top 10% qualifies, but maybe top 20%. It depends on how big a sample size we have.

@DeadlySynz.3471 said:Nope! That's like buffing the game around raids (which they primarily do), and look where it gets us.

Exactly, class performance is closer than ever compared to before. Utility and abilities have been adjusted for multiple classes to be able to fullfill multiple roles. From a pure balance perspective, the decision to balance around raids was the best approach they could have ever taken for PvE. That is IF you actually take a realistic approach to how things were pre HoT balance and how unbalanced different classes were against each other in PvE.

[PierPiero.9142]

great idea, so in few monthes only 10% of the pvp players play the game .

[Carnifex.3275]

@"BadMed.3846" said:Absolutely not. It's minority and should be treated like one. For majority, we need Mirage nerfs. Condi mirage still pathetically broken and spammable. Even bots use it now.

and that's why we got a broken game. cuz anet catered and listened to "majority". some average guy that played 1-2 weeks in pvp that was rekt by a thief goes to forums and cries how OP the class is. (literally happened everyday since pre-HoT days)

4 years later..

that's what we have now. anet listened to majority. thing is.. when u balance classes around pro players even for an average player it will feel like he did have opportunities to avoid his death. he had room to avoid it and he felt like "okey.. i messed up but i know i can do that and that and that now to avoid it in the future. i got room to learn and rotations to consider". but when u just nerf classes just like that.. without real in-depth nerfing.. that's what we get. most of the classes feel really limited. and when u die u r rly like "well i did everythin right. there was nothing more i could've done differently". in other words.. classes become stale and lackluster when u balance em based on average players opinions.

[MyPuppy.8970]

Balancing should not be done only around what an elite can do, but done coldly, logically and mathematically with a multitude of factors like skill floor (what a newcomer clicker can do) and theoretical skill ceiling (what a pro with macros could potentially do) which should never be too low and too high; risk VS reward, global efficiency, clear trade-offs and return on investments, etc. If some people can take a build to its utmost limit with sheer skill, it wouldn't mean the build is OP, just that they're that good.

A game where everyone can play and the best can shine is what makes a popular game.

[TinkTinkPOOF.9201]

All games should be balanced based on the highest skill levels.

The reason for this is that lower skill level fights can be very random, as someone doesn't understand a mechanic of another class, so they always lose to it, even though they have a skill that can counter it. This is something you don't see in higher level of play. When you look at top end players, the out comes are very easy to see, where they are going. But lower skilled someone can be on a better class/build and still lose due to lack of skill/knowledge, which has NOTHING to do with the class/build or what it can do.

When you balance based on the average player, you end up with broken builds that are ungodly in the hands of skilled, top level players, and you end up with those being the only builds or classes played. This is also a competitive PvP mode, higher skill should be rewarded, as my signature says...

[Raizel.1839]

Big NO!Balance should be aimed for the majority of players, not for top.

[Flying.6509]

At this point I don't think they listen to anybody, but I'd rather they listen to someone who actually understands what's broken and (more importantly) WHY is it broken. Not me though, I'm just a casual.

[Falan.1839]

Yes, because anything else means you don't balance classes and builds around their full potential and will only hit the dedicated noobstomper builds that are easy to play and effective against inexperienced players but actually have a lot of counterplay.

[derd.6413]

the only thing low to mid skill players could help with is if something is fun to play with or against. and really this shouldn't be a polll since that's pretty much standard practice for most competitive games

[ZhouX.8742]

It's an ironic question, because right now they don't, and is the prime reason we're in this situation to begin with. They don't make these spammy builds for top players, because top players can micro and understand classes and are able to player harder classes. They force simplistic builds into becoming metas to cater to casuals in an attempt to allow newcomers to come in. This is an obvious thing... They just simply don't balance around top players.

I mean for people talking about driving population away... LoL balances around the competitive scene not around casuals. This is why champions are drastically different between divisions. While I know you can't compare to the 2 games, you can compare balance as a mindset around the objective.

Either way though people get it confused though and a lot of people in here are saying the population is down because of balance... the matchmaking is where it drives the people away and taking away essential things that PvP used to have that kept the population here are gone now. These were more general directions the developers took in trying to form a route for THEIR vision of PvP as a whole (and not the playerbase's vision, essentially ignoring them) in this game that drove a lot of people away, not just balance. It's just one small part of the problem and I would say they focus too much on that instead of fixing those core issues.