Virtuality.8351

Technically a full Squad we have is about the size of a Platoon already. What I am trying to do is split it into smaller units. And this might actually improve the control the commanders have. Take the following as example: The commander may assign more frontliners into the first squad and lead them, while more backliners in the second squad and have them follow the Lieutenant. ...which is completely irrelevant to the issue we are trying to tackle here, ugh. Maybe you can start a thread on that topic. I think the majority of the people who voted and/or replied here did not even know what this post is all about. Many of them just jumped in trying to fix something I've never said or bringing up things completely irrelevant here. The quality of discussion under this sub seems to differ from the profession sub, sadly. Also, great example there. Please refer to my reply to another person above. Or rather, I'll just paste it here. The idea is that it might reduce the need of proximity calculation, which is necessary when the number of targets of the skill exceeds the number of prioritized allies, by getting even more allies prioritized under the structure I proposed. As for the UI and so on, these are relatively less labor-intensive part of the development, compared to, say, skill design, animation, complex interaction between mechanics, etc. Plus, as you stated, we have something already fine as the base which we can build on top of. Not like it'd be a complete overhaul on everything. Also, I am bringing this up only because there is room for improvement. I agree the Squad function works well, or fine, as you'd prefer, but as stated in the title, this change could give players even better control over distribution of effects to allies, on top of the aforementioned side benefits.

Now, consider the case of Soothing Mist.3-1. Soothing Mist is an effect that does not stack, lasts for 10 seconds and is applied to 5 allies every 3 seconds.3-2. As @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 suggests in the thread, the effect is maximized when the source of the effect (i.e., the Tempest) is assigned to a standalone Subgroup under the 2-layered structure we currently have, in which case a maximum of ~13 allied players may receive the full effect. The reason is that, by not being in a Subgroup with other allies in it, the effect is no longer guaranteed to be prioritized to the same group of allies and thus overlapping on top of the existing effect.3-3. This approach, however, leaves the Tempests more vulnerable, since there is neither a Firebrand nor a Scrapper in each of their Subgroup and thus Stability, Superspeed and other crucial effects are not guaranteed to be shared with them. Furthermore, when there are more than 1 Tempest in the group, the chance of overlapping of Soothing Mist increases. We'll look at one last example, Alacrity provided by Renegade. Here, I don't think further explanation is required. Please let me know how you think about this! There is nothing wrong with the current Target Priority design. Zero purpose to change something that works. There are also way bigger issues that the devs need to use money and time on, as opposed to something that doesn't need any fiddling. This is the priority list btw... Jon Olson- Programmer..."Priority is:1 Party/Subgroup2 Squad3 Allied players4 Your kennel5 Allied players’ kennels6 All other allies" Sorry if my post was not clear. I was not arguing to change the current priority system. Instead, I advocate to build on top of it to achieve better result in terms of both player experience and server load. Plus, I do not think this change would be anyway development-intensive. It's just an enhanced structure of what we already have.

Not exactly relevant here, but yeah I can relate. If I understand correctly, this is exactly how the system currently works. Thanks! <3 Hopefully this structure will make it a bit easier for people.

The idea comes from the discussion a few of us had across two threads ([1] & [2]) initiated by @JusticeRetroHunter.7684. In these posts, we and primarily JRH explored the potential and limit of a variety of effects of different nature and their application. A quick summary of th relevant part: Several major properties of Positive Effects (or simply, Buffs) are here of our concern: their duration, stack-ability, interval of application, and number of affected allied targets. Take Superspeed and Stability fo example.2-1. Superspeed for example. It's a buff that does not stack, of very limited duration and typically applied to 5 allies.2-2. Stability, on the other hand, is a buff that stacks in intensity, of medium duration and primarily shared to typically 5 but in one case ("Stand Your Ground!", or in short "SYG!")also 10 allies.2-3. In the conventional setup with 5 players in each Subgroup, Superspeed and Stability except in the case provided with "SYG!" would be evenly provided across all members in the Subgroup, provided that they are within the areas of the effect.2-4. Stability provided with "SYG!", however, will be provided first to the 5 Subgroup members, then also 5 other allies in the squad based on the rule of proximity, which potentially leads to uneven distribution of the effect.2-5. Now, instead of the current structure of 2 layers (Squad and its Subgroups), imagine a structure with 3 layers: Platoon, Squad and Party. Say, we have a group of 20 players. A Platoon of 20 players may consist of 2 Squads. Each Squad holds 2 Parties of 5 players. Effects are first prioritized for members in the Party, then other members in the Squad, then other members in the Platoon based on proximity, then to anything else. With this structure, players have better control over the distribution of effects when they are distributed with skills of 10 allied targets.2-6. It would look like this: Now, consider the case of Soothing Mist.3-1. Soothing Mist is an effect that does not stack, lasts for 10 seconds and is applied to 5 allies every 3 seconds.3-2. As @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 suggests in the thread, the effect is maximized when the source of the effect (i.e., the Tempest) is assigned to a standalone Subgroup under the 2-layered structure we currently have, in which case a maximum of ~13 allied players may receive the full effect. The reason is that, by not being in a Subgroup with other allies in it, the effect is no longer guaranteed to be prioritized to the same group of allies and thus overlapping on top of the existing effect.3-3. This approach, however, leaves the Tempests more vulnerable, since there is neither a Firebrand nor a Scrapper in each of their Subgroup and thus Stability, Superspeed and other crucial effects are not guaranteed to be shared with them. Furthermore, when there are more than 1 Tempest in the group, the chance of overlapping of Soothing Mist increases. We'll look at one last example, Alacrity provided by Renegade. Here, I don't think further explanation is required. Please let me know how you think about this! P.S. Regarding the concern about server load, I'll just quote myself here from my reply below: Please refer to my reply to another person above. Or rather, I'll just paste it here. The idea is that it might reduce the need of proximity calculation, which is necessary when the number of targets of the skill exceeds the number of prioritized allies, by getting even more allies prioritized under the structure I proposed. As for the UI and so on, these are relatively less labor-intensive part of the development, compared to, say, skill design, animation, complex interaction between mechanics, etc. Plus, as you stated, we have something already fine as the base which we can build on top of. Not like it'd be a complete overhaul on everything. Also, I am bringing this up only because there is room for improvement. I agree the Squad function works well, or fine, as you'd prefer, but as stated in the title, this change could give players even better control over distribution of effects to allies, on top of the aforementioned side benefits.Regarding the concern that this might just divert the developers from addressing other major issues at hand with their already limited resources: Putting the nonexistent time table aside, maybe you'd agree the proposal is at least something worthy in itself.

...since structures are technically passive pinatas anyway :P A few examples of the functions mentioned in the title: Unsuspecting Foe (Warrior) - Increased critical-hit chance against disabled foes.Merciless Hammer (Warrior) - Hammer skills gain reduced recharge and deal increased damage when striking a disabled foe.Stormsoul (Elementalist) - Deal increased damage to disabled foes.Predator's Onslaught (Ranger) - You and your pet deal increased damage to disabled or movement-impaired foes.The change may lead to: PvE: Players become even better against massive world bosses, such as Tequatl, Claw of Jormag and the Shatterer, whose hitboxes are technically structures.WvW: Rangers and Elementalists become even better at tearing down defensive siege weapons on the wall. Warriors become more efficient at raiding against siege weapons in the field. Thoughts?

That’s actually my pve firebrand LoL... and sometimes spvp XD Same here. And though unknowingly, the deity favored by my toon, which was created way before PoF, happens to be Kormir -- so yeah, a good reason for my toon to go Firebrand despite being while :P

Before I continue, for those who might be reading and out of loop, we had another discussion also on the topic of effect sharing in WvW and its efficiency in another thread under the Revenant sub-forum. In case this interests you, here is the reference. https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/1141540#Comment_1141540 And, yes, I know we are in the sub-forum dedicated to Elementalists. Sorry for derailing :P I am ambivalent about assigning a reduced amount of Boon Revenants into standalone sub-groups. While most of the Boons the class provides stack in duration (Fury, Swiftness, Protection, Regeneration, Alacriy), and therefore their effect can potentially be maximized when assigned standalone, Might stacks in density and its effect thins out across all affected allies. If we go unconventional on this one by assigning a reduced number of Revenants to standalone sub-groups, we just might need additional source of Might just to make up and keep it at 25 stacks, which could take up additional slots in the squad if unable to be incorporated or compressed into other units. There's also another point to consider. Under the current Boon-Stripping/Corruption meta, in terms of Boon management, it is as important to consider how fast one may recover the lost Boons, as to consider the maximum allies one unit is able to provide with continuous Boons. We are running a mix of Tempests and Scrappers, which means that a greater portion of Conditions than convention get cleansed insteand of converted into Boons. Since conditions, particularly Torment and Weakness (which get converts into Might), are spammed under the current Scourge Bomb meta, less conversion means that we are more reliant on conventional Boon generation. This limits how far we can go on cutting and compressing source of Boon support, in this case, Revenants. And last but not least, many guilds run with one Revenant per party just for Rite of the Great Dwarf. The sheer sustain the setup offers is just too much to give up. Also, I just came up with this idea. What we need is actually a new feature: Nested Subgroups. For example, a subgroup may consist of multiple, say, four parties. Two of those hold a Firebrand, a Scrapper, a Scourge and a Spellbreaker, while the rest hold a Tempest and a Revenant respectively. And a squad is composed of multiple subgroups like this. Boons are first prioritized to allies in the party, then the subgroup, and then the squad. And we can actually achieve this by simply creating multiple squads and using them as subgroups. The driver will be off-tag and marked with Green Arrow across all squads, so people know who to follow, while the squad leader marked with Purple Circle. So a medium-sized guild group might just look like this. Squad #1 (Commander Frontliner Squad)Party #1-1: Firebrand (Commander, marked with Green Arrow across squads) , Scrapper, Berserker, SpellbreakerParty #1-2: Firebrand, Scrapper, Reaper, Spellbreaker Party #1-3: TempestParty #1-4: Frontline Herald (Might source #1-1)Squad #2 (Fireteam)Party #2-1: Firebrand (Fireteam leader, marked with Purple Circle within their own squad), Scrapper, Scourge, Scourge Party #2-2: Firebrand, Scrapper, Weaver, Backline Herald (Might Source #2-1), Alacrity Renegade (Might Source #2-2)Party #2-3: TempestTotal: 20 players in 2 squads. We are going asymmetric here in terms of Boon support, prioritizing on the Fire team by assigning double source of Might, so that we have better confidence in Might stacking for our primary source of damage. This is still far from how compressed you'd preferred (15 units per Revenant), though still a 33% improvement (20:3, or 6.67:1) over the convention (5:1). The same goes if you look forward to a 13-unit squad. For example, and of course this is premature and to be further optimized: Squad #1 (Commander Frontliner Squad)Party #1-1: Firebrand (Commander, marked with Green Arrow across squads), Scrapper, SpellbreakerParty #1-2: Firebrand, Scrapper, Berserker (which maintains high stacks of Might itself)Party #1-3: Firebrand, Scrapper, Reaper (which maintains 25 stacks of Might itself)Party #1-4: Firebrand (Marked with Red Heart, which is the designated support for members in the 4th to 7th party and whose position is where the latter should rally to as close as possible.)Party #1-5: Scrapper (Follows the Red Heart marker; designated support for members in the 4th to 7th party.)Party #1-6: Frontline Herald (Might source #1-1)Party #1-7: TempestSquad #2 (Fireteam)Party #1-1: Firebrand (Fireteam leader, marked with Purple Circle within their own squad), Scrapper, Spellbreaker, WeaverParty #1-2: Firebrand, Scrapper, Scourge, Scourge Party #1-3: Firebrand (Marked with Red Heart, which is the designated support for members in the 3th to 7th party and whose position is where the latter should rally to as close as possible.)Party #1-4: Scrapper (Follows the Red Heart marker; designated support for members in the 3th to 7th party.)Party #1-5: Backline Herald (Might Source #2-1)Party #1-6: Alacrity Renegade (Might Source #2-2)Party #1-7: TempestTotal: 26 players in 2 squads. The overall unit-to-Revenant-support ratio is 26: 3, or 8.67:1, which is a step further.

I see your point on this, though I'd still disagree. First, on min/maxing. I'd argue that min/maxing, as long as ones does not take it as far as building a glass cannon and so on, still to some extend helps. To me the discussion we had in this thread makes sense and only makes sense if the OP has already attained a certain degree of survivability, etc, that is, being hybrid to some extend. And we can always take the latter as the foundation and min/max on top of that to achieve desired result. Secondarily, I do not agree that functions with a guaranteed effect always overweigh functions with situational conditions. Let's just take the case posed in this thread for example. The prerequisite of Sigil of Impact is successful movement-inhibiting CC, and when it comes to attrition, movement inhibition is in my opinion the single most important factor, because it isolates the target from its allies and prevents it from receiving stunbreaks and cleansing. And thus, exploiting on the opportunity seems to me crucial, because of course with a constant, guaranteed effect one may eventually end up outputting more overall damage, while downing and killing fewer, while maximizing (within a certain scope of trade-off) the chance of downing and even killing a target already hampered might actually create an advantage in sheer number. Damage, eventually, must translate into kills. If the way it is applied does not generate downed enemies, there's no point of such, and it must be taking into account while accessing loss and gain. So, yeah, during the flux of an engagement, there are of course full of factors that we cannot control. That being said, it does not mean the the soundness of min/maxing or other approaches of theorycrafting is completely negated. There's still plenty that we can do to engineer for the best result under the given circumstances.

Ya, I’m almost always the stand-alone ele. It’s not easy to convince people that running this way is the most optimal for the groups sake, that’s why the other ele’s are in their 5 man sub-squads...holding onto beliefs perpetuated since the beginning of the game That for me brings up another point though. Since Soothing Mist does not stack in either density or duration, there is always a loss of of healing potential due to overlapping Soothing Mist on allies already with the effect on them, and even more of such with multiple Tempests as healers in the squad. What would your take on this be?It seems to me that either we resize the sub-groups somewhere between 5 to 13 and place one Tempest healer in each of those, so that at least only overlapping from the same source occurs instead of from multiple sources, or we embrace the randomness, keep the conventional 5-unit structure while assigning each Tempest healers to their own standalone squad, hoping the effect more or less saturates (literally and figuratively hehe :P) the entire squad. After reading through this thread, I am more toward the latter.

Thanks for the analysis. This is gold.A question if I may. Does assigning the Tempest to a sub-group with less than 10 people really reduce the number of targets of Soothing Mist? That seems rather counter-intuitive to me. And, if it is confirmed true, where should Healing Tempests go in the Squad panel? I see in your screenshots that sometimes the Tempest(s) are assigned to a 5 to 8 unit squad, while sometimes standalone. And, do you still get proper Stability and all other benefits for personal survival without anyone else in your sub-group?Also, where does the number '13' come from? Well that turned out to be more than just one, but anyway. Thanks in advance :)

As @steki.1478 suggests, depending on your current critChance and critDamage values, it is possible that Sigil of Accuracy yields higher and more consistent damage output. Although, I'd speak against the application of Sigil of Blood, for that, if my memory serves, it is single target. Instead of calculating the general damage potential over an extended period of time, which simulates your output in a prolonged engagement as @JusticeRetroHunter.7684 demonstrated, I'd like to shift your focus toward short term damage potential.Meteor Shower, which is your major source of large scale burst damage, lasts for only 9 s, which means Sigil of Fire would proc only twice during its span, which really does not seem a lot to me. On the other hand, Sigil of Impact adds to all offensive spells you cast during the time frame, including everything you throw at your enemy, after finishing casting Meteor Shower and before the Shower ends. If you are running a Weaver build, that might be, for example, Lava Font, Pyroclastic Blast, Unsteady Ground, Eruption, and, depending on whether your allies require healing, Stone Tide or Earthen Synergy. I'd suggest a 3% to 10% damage bonus for all the skills enumerated above would easily outweigh the damage a five-target AoE unable to critically hit enemies could provide. That being said, Sigil of Impact requires a well coordinated squad that can strip off Stability and CC at a designated spot (which is also where you land your Meteor Shower) to perform at its maximum potential. So you might also want to take the squad composition and organization into calculation.

Ascalonian Human with Spirit Weapons.

How exactly?

I've updated the OP with your proposal. Also, on Warrior's Banner Healing skill, how about we keep the Tactics theme in the Utility slot, rename the Precision and Ferocity one with Arms, while assigning Discipline to the Healing skill instead? I'm thinking about something as the following:

I'm more toward having this proposal included in the next skill changes myself, but yeah. :P

This post is to advocate for new skills for the core professions, specifically for completing the missing Healing and Elite skills for several slot skill sets. Since we are not expecting another expansion in the near future, and many of us are a bit tired of existing builds and combinations, maybe this is not a bad idea! (Particularly regarding that the rework of Traps skills of Thief into Preparation was very well received.) At least it should not be as much work as creating a new and complete elite specialization! So, here is a list of slot skill sets with Healing and/or Elite skills missing. Proposals are welcome, and I'll update the post from time to time accordingly. See if we can develop on this idea. GuardianConsecration: Missing Healing and Elite.Also, Shelter has been long plead for to be added to this skill set. Maybe this could be achieved with some modification?Say, it also provides a Light field that pulses Aegis periodically for a short span. This is how I personally imagine it to be: Spirit Weapon: Missing Healing and Elite.How about, say, Staff or Focus as the theme for Healing (and maybe another Spirit Weapon skin as well) and Greatsword for Elite? For the latter, I am thinking something like the picture of the tarot card, Ten of Swords. Also, maybe change the primary function of Bow of Truth. My suggestion as the following: WarriorBanner: Missing Healing.This could also potentially make up for the lack of group healing skills for Warrior! Maybe rename Banner of Discipline to Banner of Arms so we can take the relieved name for the healing skill. My suggestion: Shout: Missing Elite.My proposal last year might be of interest here. Stance: Missing Elite.With the existing Stance skills already covering a great variety of defensive and even offensive features, it is indeed difficult to come up a new idea for the missing elite skill. On the side note, before Rampage was included into the Physical set, I always thought it would fit the Stance set well. Maybe move Rampage to Stance and create a new Elite for Physical? RevenantNo missing slot skills. EngineerGadget: Missing Elite.Something gimmick yet strong when it comes into play. Oh, and don't forget to include its corresponding Toolbelt skill if you are proposing!RangerSignet: Missing Healing and Elite.Post your proposal in the comment! Trap: Missing Elite.I've always thought that Entangle would go to the Trap category. Since the skills in this set have been pretty centered around condition damage and soft CC, maybe we can instead have something with Torment, Cripple, etc.ThiefPreparation: Missing Healing and Elite.It was a rework well received in terms of both function and visual effect. Would really like to see a complete set for this category.Signet: Missing Elite.Post your proposal in the comment! ElementalistArcane: Missing Elite.Something with good damage potential and short-to-none cast span would fit the theme. Also, it should not relate to any of the four elements, of course! Conjure: Missing Healing.This could become the Med Kit for Eementalist!Signet: Missing Elite.Per suggestion by Stallic.2397, NecromancerSpectral: Missing Healing.My suggestion: Signet: Missing Elite.Post your proposal in the comment! Well: Missing Elite.Drawing inspiration from the original Well Spell in Guild Wars 1: MesmerMantra: Missing Elite.NEED MORE YOGA! There are a great variety of yoga poses that may serve as inspiration here.Glamour: Missing Healing.Something that heals, and perhaps provides some other effect, with a field of Light or Ethereal which lasts for several seconds, while not overlapping the function of Well of Eternity.Clone and Phantasm: Missing Healing and Elite.Maybe merge these two categories into one named 'Illusion'. Also, modify and move Ether Feast into this category since its clone related? Also, it would be nice if we get another Phantasm for Elite.

Well that is true to a certain degree, since we will no longer have a fixed 'World'. Though I believe the experience will be the same, if not better, and thus still merits its name?

My idea so far would be as the following: A guild may create a 'WvW-Specific Squad' (similar to Raid Specific Squad; guild members only; 10 members at the minimum) to rally up members who are going to participate. Then 10 minutes before the match starts, the squad leader of the guild may 'sign up' for it. Say, if a map is capped at 100 vs 100 vs 100. The guilds that have signed up for the match with the longest roaster of participating members will be taken in to the World/Team roaster first. Similar sized guilds will be distributed across different World/Team for the match as evenly as possible. Maybe something as below: Team A Squad 1: 40Squad 2: 15Squad 3: 10Team B Squad 1: 50Squad 2: 20Team C Squad 1: 35Squad 2: 30The system will stop filling guilds any team with new guilds at ~70% capacity to save spots for roamers and party-sized groups to hot-join. There will be no map queue. If more guilds have signed up at the same period than one map could hold, a new map will be created. This will certainly happen during prime time. The matchmaker will try at is best throughout the 10 minutes before the match starts to find the best distribution for the most equal matches. What do you think?

I think add-ons like arcdps (or potentially similar function to be implemented officially by ArenaNet developers) have already met your demand. People can see their on output as well as other people in the same group/vicinity and have their own evaluation. If there must be something, this is what I have been thinking so far. There will be 2 different system. Scoreboard, which is related to completing certain objectives, such as successfully capturing or defending territory. It may also determine material rewards or titles and other things as rewards. Rating, which is related to combat efficiency, such as K/D rate, damage output, healing output, boon uptime maintenance, and so on. It may also serve as a balance factor for the new matchmaking system.Both guilds and individual players will have their own Scoreboard and Rating. If people still feel like having a global Scoreboard and Rating as what we currently have for each World/Team, they can have that too. And if people feel like some fame would be nice, a leaderboard similar to what we currently have in PvP may be presented.

Well then yes and no. Straegen's plan is still based on Servers as Worlds, while in my proposal I prefer the new matchmaking mechanics the developers are working on. Also a match that lasts for 6 or 8 hours to me still seems way too impractical. Typically a guild can only run so long through the evening, maybe 3 to 4 hours at the maximum, before the squad starts to lose people. Skimming through the linked thread, I consider my proposal more similar to Edge of the Mist, as KeyOrion suggested, with an improved matchmaking system and scoreboard/rating system.

Sorry I have not been consistently following this forum. May I have a link to said idea for reference please?

So, this is something I come up with while doing my dishes. Everything is about to be proposed here is still very premature and all inputs and critics are welcome. For TL;DL, skip 'Premise' and straight to the 'Deconstructing WvW' and 'Introducing Mega-Server' section. PremiseThe game mode has been long plagued with two major issues related to the server-based matchmaking system and the score system. First of all, it is indeed technically impossible to balance population and time zone difference among different servers. Speaking from a player's perspective, we hardly log in and just get an equal match, and when we do, it slips away the next match comes up, if not just next weekend for some major guild decides to black out, or even just next hour due to off time and prime time. Next, the score system simply does not reflect the effort players and guild/communities commits. You maybe having a great time and some successful result tonight, sure. But then, the next evening you log in and find your server scoring the third, and all objectives you spent time to hold and tier up yesterday lost, simply due to lack of coverage by and organization of players from different time zone during your daytime. The developers aim to tackle these issues with the upcoming restructuring. We will be distributed into different 'Worlds' no longer based on the server we are in. Instead, a new system, Alliance, will become the new standard. [1] Now, I am not going into every single detail about the new system. In case anyone is still new or out of loop, please refer to the link above. What I intend to propose here is that, the new system still kinda misses the point. You see, we will still be getting 'Seasonal Matches', some fixed, non-dynamic distribution of the playerbase for an extensive period of time (based on the info at hand, 8 weeks, or a 'Season'). But, say, what if during the span some guild just for any reason decides to take a time off or restructure or simply dissolve? What if a new episode of living story comes up and some players just get diverted? Equal matches will never be created for an extensive period of time like this, and a World-based score system will never truly reflect the effort individual guilds/communities and players put in. To put a score on a real-time world persisting through 24-7 is way too demanding for the community overall, and overestimating the organizational power of the latter. The only server we've ever seen to have been consistently achieving such is Blackgate, and none. No more fixed 'World'. No more Seasons. No more expectation of cross-timezone organization. No more obligatory participation throughout the match and the stress comes with it. No more non sense score system that does not reflect the performance of you and your community. What the playerbase of the game mode need is something different, something real-time. A match-making system that is based on the population at the moment, and distribute the players accordingly for the moment. Deconstructing WvWWhat is fundamental to this game mode? Not for scores. Not for material rewards. People play WvW to fight, together with other people, against other people. This is what constitutes the core of the experience. The entire game mode is centered around communities, however the size of which may be. We need a system built around it. The Alliance system proposed by the developers is a good step forward to the right direction, but we need an even more radical approach. Matchups should be consistently more or less equal at any given moment, and scores should reflect the performance of the guilds/communities so that they can finally become meaningful. Introducing Mega-ServerImagine this. A system that does not create 'World', that is, a fixed distribution of the playerbase over an extensive period of time, but rather, a system that creates matches based on more or less real-time population. A system without a global, 'World-wide' scoreboard, but scoreboard for individual players and guilds. How may this be achieved? We already have the tool at hand: the Mega-Server system. A system that creates maps according to the real-time population at hand. Instead of 'Worlds' and 'Seasons' that last over weeks and 24-7, we will be getting far shorter match-ups -- each lasting for only 2 or 3 hours max with a new map generated for its duration. A guild may 'Sign Up' for a match within 10 minutes before the match starts with a roaster of participating members, and the system will create matches accordingly, similar to how the developers currently plan. Several similar sized guilds will be pitched against each other, in addition to individual roamers and party-sized groups, which may participate without signing and just hot-join to be automatically distributed to a random match. During the 2 or 3 hour match, a score system will record the performance of you as individual, as well as your guild, and put a score/rating and perhaps even game-mode specific rewards accordingly. Say, guilds may earn special rewards for completing objectives in a match. Heck, maybe even new guild missions to provide goals and step up the competition! Plus, only a necessary amount of maps will be created at any given moment, so the chance of dead, empty maps should be minimized, and ArenaNet can power off some of its servers during off-time to save the planet. <3 (and perhaps their electricity bill :P) This way, we get far better match-ups, far better experience, far more true score system to your performance, far better community building. This is the WvW as players want it to be. (Some tweaking will certainly have to be implemented though, such as lower amount of delivery per tier required to tier up an objective and such, new, smaller maps for matches during off-time, guild-based-only squad system in the game mode. But those will be easy to solve.)

So, maybe we can conclude that: while countermeasure as a mean to balance, to truly achieve diversity, players' decision-making based on opportunity cost must be taken into consideration. Providing attractive or even mandatory alternatives alone will not solve the problem; the developers must also reduce the opportunity cost by, in this case, making sure that no class can alone serve different roles effectively at the same time (i.e., Scourge must not be effective on both offense and defense/support at the same time).

I agree. Though until the release of the next lineup of elite specialization, I do not think we'd see its support aspect decoupling its offensive one. Well, at least not per elite specialization. In practice, I do think there are means to make sure that, while packing both offense and defense, the specialization can only be good at either one, instead of both, at the same time. One mean we had seen as the developers originally proposed, was to scale down the base value of all crucial functions that make Scourge fulfill its two different roles, only allowing them to shine if associated traits are selected or gears providing relevant attributes are equipped. In this case, we had reduction of the base value of its Barrier skills, at the same time increase in scaling on Healing Power (which was added in the later announcement after my suggestion <3; glad to know the developers do collect feedbacks), so that Power/Condition DPS Scourges can no longer provide as much Barrier support as before, while a spot is retained for dedicated Healer/Support Scourge. And I believe the same approach is viable as well for other support features and even offensive features of this class. This is also probably the only way we get this issue properly addressed, before the release of next expansion and with it a new elite specialization that can maybe take one of Scourge's two major functions away from it.

I do not think rarity alone would ever justify design decisions. It is precisely how people react to design decisions, and one does not justify with such for two reasons: a), years of experience have shown that players do not always react to balance changes as the developers intend them to, and b) even if players react as the developers intend, why on earth would the developers intend to get poor reception from their player base? Wouldn't that already suggest a huge sign of failure for them to make something desirable and practical? Plus, I do not think Barrier spam would ever be successfully dissuaded, since its excess has been more often than not unintentional. In WvW, few Scourge players gear up for Barrier support, yet we still regularly witness overabundance of Barrier. (In an earlier announcement on Sept. 13, a plan was proposed to reduce base Barrier value while increase its scaling with Healing Power. Later in the Oct. 1 announcement, the plan was scrapped and instead we get this Anti-Barrier specialist.) At the very least, as long as there are several people in the group playing Scourge, one would inevitably end up with some shared Barrier on them. And since Scourge is apparently too good an asset to give up upon, there will always be a spot for dedicated Anti-Barrier role. Would people actually take it though? In other threads you and several others have come up with new tactics, with a few warriors coordinating with each other and focus firing at the same time on the same target, etc. To get the best result, these Warriors will most likely stick with Strength, so either Defense or Discipline will be dropped. Or maybe, the elite specialization. In any case, they'd be more vulnerable and more dependent on support provided by allied Firebrands and Scrappers than what people have been running, only to be made up with Whirlwind Attack with the new Martial Cadence. To make the most out of the 6 s Unblockable effect duration with Signet of Might, They also have to time well and target well, preferably aiming at those close to or within reach of your Scourges, in order for them to follow up after you break through the Barrier and to out-damage the healing, which could be aided with Leg Specialist with Aimed Shot. That seems to me a great lot of effort required than what we currently have. Only in actual combat one could tell if it is worth all these effort. When it comes to balancing something unique and thus having nothing else directly comparable, I think one needs to look at what countermeasures is available at hand to us. Either people double down on group Barrier, which to me seems unlikely since the relevant skills generally do not scale so well with Healing Power (though we will have to wait until Tuesday to see the numbers on Warhorn skills), or seek to get more group damage reduction. And for the latter we have our good old Frontline Herald with Rite of the Great Dwarf, which requires no investment in attribute points, and, if timed well (when the Barrier is decaying or close to be depleted), could preemptively minimize the threat of being one-shot by opponents with the trait. That, of course, requires coordination, though not as much as the Anti-Barrier Warrior required.