Should each Profession have a more unique role / identity? — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Should each Profession have a more unique role / identity?

I was reading the Wiki Professions Page and they describe the theme/flavor of each class.

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Profession
https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Soldier
https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Adventurer
https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Scholar

Also it seems like there was a form of blueprint for the various classes with Scholar (light armor) being back-line, Adventurer (medium armor) being mid-line and Soldier (heavy armor) being front-line.

However with every elite spec, these distinctions get more and more blur.
There are a lot more overlapping roles and at times, their more efficient build is totally opposite to the roles they were generally designed for.

Everyone can DPS, Support and Control.
Everyone can back-line, mid-line or front-line effectively.
Every class can be built to fill almost any role.

Many weapons and categories of utilities overlap across all the classes.
There isn't much uniqueness separating each class.

Should there be a sharper contrast in terms of role and identity for each class, or are things fine as they are now?

Visit 🏴‍☠️ Eremite's WvW Necromancy Graveyard 🏴‍☠️

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

Should each Profession have a more unique role / identity? 122 votes

No change needed, classes are fine as they are now.
47%
Seera.5916WhatLiesBeneath.9018Cerioth.7062Linken.6345TheGrimm.5624derd.6413Danikat.8537Diabolo.4876DietPepsi.4371BunjiKugashira.9754Einlanzer.1627Skyrum.5483notebene.3190Dragana.1497Warscythes.9307Game of Bones.8975catalyst.1358LucianTheAngelic.7054phokus.8934yoni.7015 58 votes
Yes we should create a more unique role / identity for each class.
37%
Jski.6180dodgerrule.8739Rauderi.8706Khailyn.6248Sirius Lemuria Draconis.7864Zacchary.6183Dante.1763Ashantara.8731SchnapsPeach.6513Lonami.2987Scipion.7548Westenev.5289Justine.6351Chasind.3128sephiroth.4217Radiobiology.6185EremiteAngel.9765Anna.7845Amaranthe.3578DonArkanio.6419 46 votes
Others
14%
Arzurag.7506Stand The Wall.6987MithranArkanere.8957Lily.1935Kylden Ar.3724Erasculio.2914Ben K.6238ZeftheWicked.3076MyPuppy.8970gonzi.7605wickedkae.4980Brother.1504Dezember.1295XenoSpyro.1780BlueJin.4127Thorstienn.1642SexyMofo.8923Vadavim.6409 18 votes

Comments

  • Westenev.5289Westenev.5289 Member ✭✭✭✭
    Yes we should create a more unique role / identity for each class.

    Profession and armour weight descriptions have always been a lie. A Guardian (heavy) is often most useful as a DPS, while a Mesmer (light) handles frontline boon support while facetanking enemy attacks. A thief isn't allowed to stealth and can hardly hold its own in a duel.

    That said, I do think each class/spec should have something different going for it. I don't like the idea that "every class/build should be able to group/self mightstack because Warrior can do it", or that "Glyph of Empowerment is OP because it's a unique buff I can't use on my healing Ele"...

  • VDAC.2137VDAC.2137 Member ✭✭✭
    No change needed, classes are fine as they are now.

    I am always in favor of my variety and player options! =) I don’t think choosing a profession should force you to play a certain role or vice versa. And playing support, for instance, with different professions had different strengths and utility and different feel to it.

  • Jski.6180Jski.6180 Member ✭✭✭✭
    Yes we should create a more unique role / identity for each class.

    O god yes its out right silly to call some of the classes in this game Soldier when most of there attks seem way more magic base then most Scholar. And you have some Scholar base classes more agl then what anet called Adventurer. Armor class is pointless as a defining means to calling what class architect type is and its only getting worst as they add in more elite spec.

    At best the game is base off of animation more then in game effects to define your class mages effect look like mages effect all thought they may have nothing that acts like magic at all (not being able to hit though armor). In this game we have fire that dose not burn we have ice that dose not chill we have lighting that dose not shock and we have earth that dose not impeded or bind. Its all a trick of animation having nothing to do with real uniqueness of a roll.

    See ELE forms and you will get my views.

  • hugo.4705hugo.4705 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited June 22, 2019
    Yes we should create a more unique role / identity for each class.

    Classes are okay, but those categories are incorrect: for me, elementalist/necromant/mesmer/guardian/revenant and ranger are scholar. Engieneer/thief are explorer. Finally warrior for soldier.
    Imo, if using any kind of magic it's scholar. If nothing apart weapons, soldier.
    Without using magic many classes would be useless, only engie, ranger, thief, soldier would survive.

    The major point is classes balance, it's always the same classes that feel strong or weak. Some need a fix or rework for sure. (dragonhunter bow)

    +++In creative mood. New Engie Elite spec' , Housing , New asuran expansion , Designing a new lounge , New GameMode
    +++NEW: AEP Asuran Expansion Project available on WIKI.
    +++New: GEM GW2 Exploration Map: Discover unusual places around tyria: Here (OSM map)

  • Martnor.1746Martnor.1746 Member ✭✭✭
    Yes we should create a more unique role / identity for each class.

    While it is true that classes can play pretty much every role, they cannot do so at all times. For example, a core ranger will not be able to be a healer unless he has the druid spec on. Different specs give different roles. As far as I know, feel free to correct me, I am not aware of a build that allows you to tank, heal and DPS (all effectively) at the same time. So I think we are exaggerating when we say that there is no diversity.

    Having said that, I do wish that they were more distinction between the classes. Give players a reason to start a new class other than different skills. Then again, the game content does not require specific roles to be played other than raids I guess....

  • Game of Bones.8975Game of Bones.8975 Member ✭✭✭✭
    No change needed, classes are fine as they are now.

    That was one of the problems with GW1, if you weren't playing "the correct" profession you didn't get in a PUG.

    "That's what" -- She

  • BlueJin.4127BlueJin.4127 Member ✭✭✭
    edited June 24, 2019
    Others

    @Game of Bones.8975 said:
    That was one of the problems with GW1, if you weren't playing "the correct" profession you didn't get in a PUG.

    Yeah, that is pretty sad. One of my old alliance members claimed to me that rangers weren’t viable for playing solo with heroes (and he was talking about playing through story :tongue:). I said I completed WoC HM on all professions with only heroes and no cons. He then changed his wording to say rangers weren’t as good as other professions and it’s much harder playing a ranger with heroes. I told him even during WoC HM, it was not harder on my ranger compared to other professions since I played to each profession’s strengths (I actually found ranger easier than some due to their flexibility). He got mad at me. :disappointed:

    Another alliance member said that warriors were the worst profession in the game. This was before, when he needed help with WoC HM, I always helped him on my warrior. :tongue:

    ^^

  • Warkind.6745Warkind.6745 Member ✭✭✭

    Last time thief had a unique role people didn't like it.

    All is vain.

  • Burnfall.9573Burnfall.9573 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited June 23, 2019
    Yes we should create a more unique role / identity for each class.

    Guild Wars

    -Profession roles-
    https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Guide_to_playing_as_a_Primary_Profession

    -Team roles-
    https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Team_roles

    May i also add Pros and Cons of each professions??
    https://guildwars.fandom.com/wiki/Primary_profession_guide

  • Thornwolf.9721Thornwolf.9721 Member ✭✭✭
    Yes we should create a more unique role / identity for each class.

    Should of never tried to remove the trinity, Classes having specific roles to fill makes them easier to balance. (Warrior being a more tanky bruiser means it has little burst but sustained damage with tools to mitigate damage. Ele being damage/support means it has tons of tolls to do damage and support allies; Meaning while being harder to remain in prolonged fights with classes like a warrior it can absolutely dominate with squishy dps targets. Thieves being the mage killer, Necromancer being our light armor bruiser? Yes please.)

    Really all the classes are the same with different colors/flavors; No reason to play more than one outside of simply wanting X theme over X theme. Necromancer is an embarrassment to the entire mythos/Idea of being a necromancer. It has little to no curses, hexes, blood magic where? Minions are trash. Yet it players like a slower warrior, especially with reaper? All this was done to shave corners and make it so they didn't have to design things in unique ways; prime example is how elite specs just closes the distance between classes. Eventually they will all be the same, Everyone is a dps and everyone can support but when it comes to tanks we have ONE real tank designed for tanking which is chrono.

    Kinda wish they would just make everything 100% like warrior because its the one class that never has sucked, its always been good at least in functionality and performance while other classes have suffered. And when said classes shine just a bit the community explodes into rage and demands nerfs, despite the fact that ONE build from ONE spec and specific set up actually functions well. (Rev power herald with either sword/sword + Staff or Hammer. Without that build Rev would fall off of any competitive pvp because its just too good not to use. It has nothing else to really work well in those environments and its easy to avoid, easy to fight against and if you know anything from fighting it you know once it uses sword five +Mist assault and you burn through glints utilities you can basically bum rush it. A good warrior will kitten stomp a rev, same with necro.)

    Game is watered down, the sooner you appreciate what little we have the better. It won't change and hasn't changed since the game came out, only has grown more and more apparent over time. Thats why this game is a theme-park mmo just like wow; You come back for the expansions to see whats new and then you dip out and wait for the next release. There is no need to devote large amounts of time to it, the story while decent now was horrible back then and will only hold you as long as it has something (Like skyscale) To work toward. Play the game like this and it gets 100% more enjoyable, its not meant to be played like an rpg by any means.

  • Sobx.1758Sobx.1758 Member ✭✭✭✭
    No change needed, classes are fine as they are now.

    No.

    7charNo

  • otto.5684otto.5684 Member ✭✭✭✭
    No change needed, classes are fine as they are now.

    The game is designed that every class should fill every role. It is the signifier design of Guild Wars as a whole. That would not, and should not change.

  • XYLO.7031XYLO.7031 Member ✭✭✭
    No change needed, classes are fine as they are now.

    @EremiteAngel.9765 said:
    However with every elite spec, these distinctions get more and more blur.
    There are a lot more overlapping roles and at times, their more efficient build is totally opposite to the roles they were generally designed for.

    Everyone can DPS, Support and Control.
    Everyone can back-line, mid-line or front-line effectively.
    Every class can be built to fill almost any role.

    Many weapons and categories of utilities overlap across all the classes.
    There isn't much uniqueness separating each class.

    Should there be a sharper contrast in terms of role and identity for each class, or are things fine as they are now?

    What you are criticizing is the very structure of the game design. It has always been flexible save for closed content which actually falls back on the "Holy Trinity" in builds, not classes per se.

    You will need a healer build, a tank build, and a dps/condi damage build for specific content. Because of this need, there are classes that cover these roles better than others.

    With that said, I think there should be more options for flexibility, not less. That's just one of the many things we lost from the pre-expac days: flexibility. Now everyone must have a Mesmer for something. That's the dev's favorite class. It is arguably the most flexible of all classes.

    What we need is for all the classes to be as flexible as that class. Long story short, you want a Holy Trinity of classes, you picked the wrong game.

    Beetle Gymkhana @ Post Reset Crimson TT
    Add me if you love to drift endlessly and grab big sky off of ramps.
    If you use the "drift button" or "handbrake" to drift, don't.
    "Speedy Runner" by King & Queen

  • ZDragon.3046ZDragon.3046 Member ✭✭✭✭
    Yes we should create a more unique role / identity for each class.

    There certainly is more room for flexibility and viable improvement at end game for some classes. IF every class was as flexible and effective as for example mesmer is currently in the roles it can play then the game would be ideally perfect as far as this particular subject goes.

    To say "No" nothing should change and everything is good as is in my opinion a way of saying one of the following more than likely.

    1 i dont want something to stand on equal ground as me because the thing i like to play has been best at it for a while
    2 i dont want the thing i like the most to change for better or worse because there is a good chance it will get worse while other things get better
    3 i dont play any end game content or don't understand that some classes are not as flexible and viable as they could/should be
    4 i dont play other classes in general so it does not matter because what i do play is already perfect and viable

    As far as identities go they are already there but some identities shine more than others in certain game modes.
    Ideally more flexibility that is viable at end game and accepted by the community would be ideal ;)

    With that said yes i think alot of things could change for the better. Not saying that everything should change but most certainly not going to say No nothing should change and that each profession is fine as it is.

  • Edge.8724Edge.8724 Member ✭✭✭
    Yes we should create a more unique role / identity for each class.

    First, armor weight was always a joke. It's only 7% dammage reduction between each weight.

    Alright, Yes, professions need to have a more defined identity and to a certain extend, role.

    Right now, everyone is DPS.

    Different class? You'll just be another DPS with different appearance and sometimes, animations.

    Everyone are the same, except in raid whic mesmer is a tank (which is extremely absurd anyway)

    The game should allow people to make more^^effective^^ builds that goes in line with the identity of their class.

    Soldiers => more physical dammage and defense/sustain

    Adventurer => more speed

    Scholar => more physical dammage and conditions.

    You should not be forced to represent your identity, but have the possibility to be effective at it (Ex: Warrior can't tank, Thief aren't allowed to stealth, Elementalist lacks conditions.)

  • Einlanzer.1627Einlanzer.1627 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited June 24, 2019
    No change needed, classes are fine as they are now.

    I'm a big believer that classes should be built around themes that can do a lot of things and not around specific, restrictive mechanics. I enjoy when classes have overlap in roles and can't stand when you get pigeonholed into a very specific role based on your class choice. This is one of the major reasons I like GW2 over other MMOs.

    An example of how stupid this gets is how hunter melee kept getting nerfed in WoW to make hunters "the ranged class" even though the concept of a hunter can (and should) easily incorporate proficiency with melee weapons (because the theme of the hunter is "wilderness survivalist" not "archer"). People became too preocuppied with trying to define the class through restrictive mechanics to make it feel unique instead of through a broader theme that still makes it feel unique but also allows for a lot of freedom in how it's played.

    They finally realized that trying to define hunters in this way was silly and retrofitted Survival to turn it back into a melee spec. Cue the "oh nooo hunters are too close to warriors now" melodrama. Who cares? The two classes are still very, very different in both immersion factors and play styles.

    So, no, I don't think any major changes are needed.

  • Lexi.1398Lexi.1398 Member ✭✭✭
    No change needed, classes are fine as they are now.

    Classes don't need "identity" in the sense of role IMO- actually one of the things i hate about a lot of MMOs is that i'd have to spend forever leveling a second character if i ever wanted to play more than one role.
    That every class is a viable dps makes this game great, and they've made a lot of progress in making more and more classes able to take a viable support role- which is fantastic! To my knowledge all professions have good builds for condition and power, there's a few that need help to make them not useless at ranged, but it's pretty good.

    They do have identity in theme both in aesthetic and easy access to some element of combat. This "easy access" gives them things each profession should
    master lest they struggle.

    For example, if a guardian doesn't make use of their aegis and does not know their sources of aegis, they will die quickly because of the low hp pool- yet guardian is praised for it's ability to bring group aegis which when used correctly can allow groups to get past some mechanics easier. Thief is quite squishy as a class, but if a theif can use their stealth and mobility correctly they should not find themselves recieving too much damage anyway- this is why theif is claimed to be both an easy class and a hard class- it is simple to use, but a theif cannot be lax in terms of their dodges and if they do not utilise their mobility they will be finding fights much harder. Elementalist gets little in terms of defence if they're trying to deal damage- notably it's defences lie in water and for some weapons earth and air, attached to the weapon skills, where it is difficult to get a given defence on demand (reflects, regen, CC come to mind immediately) as few utlities will provide anything for it- so an elementalist must be absolutely on point in combat but get a big payoff in damage (this has gone down recently with nerfs though....) if they succeed.

    A few classes could do with more identity, but this is only for those that don't really get a niche. I never understood what's unique about revenant, and i dunno what warrior has aside easy access to CC....
    Warriors appeal is usally something along the lines of "bulky" so maybe it's lack of a niche IS it's niche? And i know revenant has the whole legends thing going, but i'm not sure what makes it different aside in flavour from other professions. Maybe at a stretch, it's stances allow for multiple niches when used?????

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

    @hugo.4705 said:
    The major point is classes balance, it's always the same classes that feel strong or weak.

    Mostly because they are designed with different roles in mind and are strong or weak at different things.

    Ironic in regards to the topic I guess.

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

  • ZeftheWicked.3076ZeftheWicked.3076 Member ✭✭✭✭
    Others

    Roles should not be hogged by a certain profession. Like the famous chrono tank or gtfo in raids.

    Identity on the other hand should be very unique for each role a profession performs.

    Like scourges being healers not by pumping out huge green numbers, but by providing strong barriers, epic resses, rather then high healing value.
    That is definitely unique and builds a strong identity for a support necro.
    Not to mention Rev that has three legends that can be healers (Kalla, Glint, Ventari) each not only with own strengths and weaknesses but also playstyle.
    Those are examples of how it should be done.

  • Auburner.6945Auburner.6945 Member ✭✭✭
    edited June 26, 2019

    This will result in the Trinity in other games. It works fine for MOBAs because the roles are 5, the characters just fill in, but for a game with 9 classes, anything out of the Trinity would get denied, and players will always look for the best... A prime example is Firebrand in WvW and PvP - try knocking it out with any other support... you just can't.

    However, more unique in a term of something like Warrior Banners, in which no other class can give and thus certain encounters will require that uniqueness regardless the game mode, then absolutely yes, this will make even out of meta classes fit in for some stuff.

    Pull the strings. Watch them dance.

  • MithranArkanere.8957MithranArkanere.8957 Member ✭✭✭✭
    Others

    We have specializations for that.

    Elite specializations specialize even more.

    If anything they should just get rid of armor restrictions and let people mix and match all 3 armor classes, just giving bonuses to health and armor, and penalties to resource and skill recharges the more pieces of heavier armor one equips.

  • Lily.1935Lily.1935 Member ✭✭✭✭
    Others

    There just isn't as much too the game's identity that would allow for entirely unique spaces for each profession to fill without the favoritism of the past that plagued a lot of professions. I think there is an inherent issue with the game's design that really prevents their identity from shining in order to give each profession the ability to be whatever it is they like. Tank? healer? DPS? And those can be broken down into sub categories within themselves, even in GW. Which is perfectly fine.

    I'm not really going to say they should have more unique roles, or that they shouldn't because I feel its really the wrong question to ask. At least that's my opinion. Some of the conflicts are the fact that armor type has very little impact on the class itself and if every class had access to heavy armor it honestly wouldn't change much of anything. I feel this is a bit of a failure of design. Heavy armor doesn't feel any more important than light for defense. I know there is a minor difference, but when taking into account the game's mechanics, I have an easier time surviving on an engineer than, say, a guardian or Revenant. That for myself isn't always true, it highly depends on the enemies i'm facing, but the fact that how well you survive has nothing to do with your armor being light, medium or heavy is undesirable.

    Now, just because I'm criticizing the armor classes of GW2 doesn't mean that I feel that it is all bad. Stats are fun to use and give some interesting ways to build. I just recognize the importance of stats vs armor class. This is the first area I feel the game falls far too short.

    The Next area I feel the game fails at when it comes to unique roles is the removal of a universal energy mechanic when transferring from GW1 to GW2. Much of the Identity of specific classes has been lost because of this. Mesmer being hit the absolute hardest, but this isn't to say the Elementalist and necromancer hadn't also been negatively impacted by this removal. Much of the Mesmer's Identity was in its use of energy and how it could manipulate it. Because this element is removed it closes the door on a large amount of design. The Same is true for Elementalist, especially, with the lack of the exhaustion mechanic. A very potent debuff that could ruin an elementalist's energy regeneration. But the push back was built into its identity as the elementalist was the most powerful raw destructive mage in the game, and this burn out mechanic was an element that helped to define it as a class. Necromancer has been both hit the hardest by this and also the least by it. Depending on the time period of the game. Necromancer in GW1, its identity was built on life sacrifice to minimize its energy use, gain energy from deaths and to convert that access energy into Minions or powerful hexes. At the launch of the game the necromancer's glass cannon debuff support style of gameplay was completely lost in part due to the energy system being converted into death shroud which was a 180 on what defined them in the first game. Now, with Scourge, The necromancer is the only class to really recapture some of its old identity with its difficult energy mechanic. But the Elementalist hasn't gain back exhaustion for over powered spells, and the mesmer can't manipulate energy like it once did.

    This for me take a lot of the challenge away from playing these classes. It makes each of them less interesting and less unique in their execution. However, I must point out this isn't entirely a bad thing. I have my preferences to the old way of doing things, but not everyone feels the same way. They like that these professions are much easier to pick up and use. They're far more shallow, yes, but that does lower the barrier to entry.

    If I personally was going to redesign GW2, especially the combat, I'd make it so every single class could use all 3 tiers of armor and give them an energy mechanic. The current attributes system would need to be reworked and heavy armor wouldn't be a little bit better than light, it would be the difference between wearing Soldiers vs Berserkers in terms of toughness. But the trade off would be slower cast time for channel spells and far less energy for the user. I don't have the entire logistics behind that but I'd build it in a similar idea to how Dungeons and dragons works with armor.

    Professions like the Mesmer would regain their energy manipulation and I'd add a new boon and conition which influences energy regeneration. Necromancer would be the best at granting the boon to allies while Mesmer would be best at applying the new condition.

    But this is really just a part of my fantasy. Much of it might not even work. As GW2 is now, I absolutely would not push for such a change since it wasn't designed from the ground up in the game's data. Enemies don't have energy like they did in GW1. Armor is defined differently than it is in most games. And that's perfectly fine. I'm not going to say the game should be changed. I don't think it should. I will say that if Arena Net plans to release a new MMO, whether that be GW3 or a new series, they should strongly consider the mistakes they've made with GW2 and the strengths of both GW2 and GW1 because both games have some very different strengths and weaknesses.

    The major thing that I want from GW2, the most realistic thing I want is more skills. More skill diversity and new elite specializations. They only need to fill a unique role for that profession. They only need to feel different enough from the other elite specs and other professions that it makes us want to experiment and try new things.

    Sorry if this is a bit ranty, I have a lot to say about GW2 design. I love some of it and dislike other aspects of its design.

  • XenoSpyro.1780XenoSpyro.1780 Member ✭✭✭
    Others

    It's not just classes. This entire game needs the depth of an actual RPG. This is what happens when you somehow manage to design a game to be ultra casual. Like, frighteningly casual and stunningly simple.

  • Jheuloh.4109Jheuloh.4109 Member
    edited June 26, 2019
    Yes we should create a more unique role / identity for each class.

    Guild Wars 2 has always felt lacking the R in MMORPG.

    Every class feels less like a tapestry and more like a patchwork of design decisions. They seem to be designed in a vacuum, and then balanced based on what happens when they're taken out of the vacuum and their relationship to other classes is realized. "The meta" is basically an accident of ability-interaction.

    Banner-slave warriors? Heal-bot rangers? Tank mesmers? Fine builds unto themselves, but I don't fancy playing any of those 3 classes for those roles. Ranger at least has a clear-cut DPS alternative with Soulbeast.

    Traitlines, especially Elite Traitlines, often feel to have just been materialized out of thin air with barely any internal consistency just to hit a quota.

    Guild Wars 1 is similarly shallow as an RPG and with an even bigger, blobbier, and more incoherent ability list. I'm more partial to its style of character development anyway; even if the class's ability list on their own weren't that coherent you could organize them into something specific. Ability-types like Stance, Signet, Shout, etc, were more meaningful and ironically your base class was a more unique property as they always had 1 undeniable and intentionally somewhat overpowered attribute. Your class also sort of doubled up as your "race" since each class had mostly unique cosmetic choices during character creation.

  • Stand The Wall.6987Stand The Wall.6987 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited June 26, 2019
    Others

    I strongly disagree that certain professions have exclusive access to certain boons/ condis. it creates a stale and restrictive meta.

    choices over requirements. basic.

    Te lazla otstra.
    nerf list

  • Yasai.3549Yasai.3549 Member ✭✭✭
    No change needed, classes are fine as they are now.

    People need to understand that Profession =/= Role and there is no need for Role locked classes in this game.

    If I play a stupid build, I deserve to die.
    If I beat people on a stupid build, I deserve to get away with it.

  • Sobx.1758Sobx.1758 Member ✭✭✭✭
    No change needed, classes are fine as they are now.

    @Jheuloh.4109 said:
    Guild Wars 2 has always felt lacking the R in MMORPG.

    Every class feels less like a tapestry and more like a patchwork of design decisions. They seem to be designed in a vacuum, and then balanced based on what happens when they're taken out of the vacuum and their relationship to other classes is realized. "The meta" is basically an accident of ability-interaction.

    Banner-slave warriors? Heal-bot rangers? Tank mesmers? Fine builds unto themselves, but I don't fancy playing any of those 3 classes for those roles. Ranger at least has a clear-cut DPS alternative with Soulbeast.

    So what exactly are you complaining about? Meta builds/squads being formed? That's normal and happens pretty much everywhere. And it's not like you can't find a party unless you play meta builds, but it seems you'd like to get optimal party with you playing anything you want? I'm honestly not sure what point you'rer trying to make here.

    Traitlines, especially Elite Traitlines, often feel to have just been materialized out of thin air with barely any internal consistency just to hit a quota.

    espec are supposed to change the way the class is played, if it feels like a new-er, different class then... job's done, I guess? Can you elaborate on the "internal consistency" you're talking about here?

    Guild Wars 1 is similarly shallow as an RPG and with an even bigger, blobbier, and more incoherent ability list. I'm more partial to its style of character development anyway; even if the class's ability list on their own weren't that coherent you could organize them into something specific. Ability-types like Stance, Signet, Shout, etc, were more meaningful and ironically your base class was a more unique property as they always had 1 undeniable and intentionally somewhat overpowered attribute. Your class also sort of doubled up as your "race" since each class had mostly unique cosmetic choices during character creation.

    Pretty sure one of the goals of GW(2) was not using the classic 'holy trinity' with classes blindly locked into set roles. If you're trying to complain about it, maybe you should try playing pretty much ANY other mmorpg.

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

    Each prof has its own unique flavor and can arguably play the role it wants to some extent, and I think that is a good thing. However, the powercreep introduced with elite specs doesn't justify the stats discrepancies between classes anymore.
    Let's say Warriors have ++vitality and ++toughness by default, thief could have ++precision and +ferocity (having already +toughness), necros could have +condition damage +expertise (having already ++vitality), Guards could have +concentration +healing power, Mes +precision ++expertise, Eles +power +concentration +expertise +healing power by default. Those are arbitrary of course, but you see my point. I think having a particular innate benefit for playing a profession would give it a more defined identity apart from their profession mechanic/build.

©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.