The nerfs over the past few years have really sucked the fun out of this game for me.

[Arolandis.8360]

Especially things like 1 dodge Mirage... It would have been nice to also give more attention to underperforming weapon sets and traits that nobody ever uses. So not only did they nerf effective and fun builds, they left us with the same old underpeforming builds as compensation.

 

I don't know. It's just bugged me for the past year. I ended up dropping my main, Mesmer, and every other class I like, like Thief, feels meh too. Dagger/Pistol still felt okay, but everything else they got dumped with just made it that much harder to enjoy playing.

 

I'm still holding out hope that they'll start adding buffs now that they think they've normalized (read: butchered) everything. I stopped playing for a year and just watched balance patch notes to see if they were going to change much and they actually just ended up nerfing more of my favorite builds. Some I was very proud of and made my first Ascended set for, for WvW.

 

It's just really irritating.

 

Edit: Not the power nerfs. I was okay with that one.

Edited August 29, 2021 by Arolandis.8360

[AliamRationem.5172]

5 minutes ago, Arolandis.8360 said:

Especially things like 1 dodge Mirage... It would have been nice to also give more attention to underperforming weapon sets and traits that nobody ever uses. So not only did they nerf effective and fun builds, they left us with the same old underpeforming builds as compensation.

 

I don't know. It's just bugged me for the past year. I ended up dropping my main, Mesmer, and every other class I like, like Thief, feels meh too. Dagger/Pistol still felt okay, but everything else they got dumped with just made it that much harder to enjoy playing.

 

I'm still holding out hope that they'll start adding buffs now that they think they've normalized (read: butchered) everything. I stopped playing for a year and just watched balance patch notes to see if they were going to change much and they actually just ended up nerfing more of my favorite builds. Some I was very proud of and made my first Ascended set for, for WvW.

 

It's just really irritating.

 

Edit: Not the power nerfs. I was okay with that one.

 

I dislike the one-dodge-mirage solution.  As a mirage player, I don't think it's fair.  But mirage in its un-nerfed state was way too oppressive.

[Rogue.8235]

I personally have no issue with nerfs and buffs.

I play every class and I don't limit myself to any particular build because I'm competitive in PvP.  The meta will always change and I always change with it, creating new builds to counter whatever flavor of the month builds are being run by the kids these days.

 

As far as getting upset over nerfs to the point of walking away from the game:

I'm not sure if the balance team will ever consider emotional responses to game balance decisions.  It is an objective task conducted with objective analysis.   They will always buff/nerf things.

 

It really helps to adopt the mindset that you will always be tweaking builds to adapt to changing times.  Builds are never static.  Even so, just because things are nerfed doesn't mean they are useless.  It means they are no in-line with the rest of the game.  

If your goal is to only play with builds that are performing above the game-wide performance curve, then yes you will always be changing gear with your builds.  

Otherwise you won't always need to be changing the stats of your gear.  If you play a condition build that focuses on damaging conditions, your gear stats will never need to change as you will always be able to play that build. with occasional minor adaptations.  The only reason to change stats is if, for example, you want to focus on boons in addition to conditions, which would need some concentration in the stats spread.  However, this is a major alteration to the build that goes beyond adapting builds to changing metas.  It is a different play style with different objectives.  

 

 

In short, if your sole enjoyment of the game is for developers never to nerf the particular profession, weapons, skills, and traits you use, then I'm not sure the game is ever good for you to come back to.  It is an online game that changes over time.  A single player game with zero changes after development is more your style.

[Telgum.6071]

Celestial buff, not acknowledging how OP Trailblazer stats are...

[ASP.8093]

I used to main Mesmer and I stopped because I don't like the class' current limitations as much(*).

 

But, I gotta say: I think Mirage was mostly a victim of its own success. Getting to combine offensive actions with perfect defense is amazingly powerful — back during core, Distortion was one of the mesmer's best abilities because of what you could do with insta-cast invuln, and Mirage Cloak is almost (n.b. I said "almost!") as good as having Distortion. Add to that the Ambush and Mirage Mirror mechanics and the spec ended up with a lot of ways to access this powerful "do whatever you want while nobody can hit you" state, which is way, way cooler and more useful than some other class' channeled blocks/invulns.

 

* - But it's a major improvement over that sad period about five years ago when they simultaneously gutted the mantra condi cleanse and tried to make "spam mantra charge-ups to minorly heal your team" into an entire support spec. That was a true garbage fire.

[yann.1946]

8 hours ago, Rogue.8235 said:

I personally have no issue with nerfs and buffs.

I play every class and I don't limit myself to any particular build because I'm competitive in PvP.  The meta will always change and I always change with it, creating new builds to counter whatever flavor of the month builds are being run by the kids these days.

 

As far as getting upset over nerfs to the point of walking away from the game:

I'm not sure if the balance team will ever consider emotional responses to game balance decisions.  It is an objective task conducted with objective analysis.   They will always buff/nerf things.

 

It really helps to adopt the mindset that you will always be tweaking builds to adapt to changing times.  Builds are never static.  Even so, just because things are nerfed doesn't mean they are useless.  It means they are no in-line with the rest of the game.  

If your goal is to only play with builds that are performing above the game-wide performance curve, then yes you will always be changing gear with your builds.  

Otherwise you won't always need to be changing the stats of your gear.  If you play a condition build that focuses on damaging conditions, your gear stats will never need to change as you will always be able to play that build. with occasional minor adaptations.  The only reason to change stats is if, for example, you want to focus on boons in addition to conditions, which would need some concentration in the stats spread.  However, this is a major alteration to the build that goes beyond adapting builds to changing metas.  It is a different play style with different objectives.  

 

 

In short, if your sole enjoyment of the game is for developers never to nerf the particular profession, weapons, skills, and traits you use, then I'm not sure the game is ever good for you to come back to.  It is an online game that changes over time.  A single player game with zero changes after development is more your style.

A minor correction, but their is an emotional aspect to balance. It's about making the game more fun after all. 

 

So if a class is weak, but feels oppressive then it might need a nerf or a redesign. 

[Rogue.8235]

32 minutes ago, yann.1946 said:

A minor correction, but their is an emotional aspect to balance. It's about making the game more fun after all. 

 

So if a class is weak, but feels oppressive then it might need a nerf or a redesign. 

The problem with balancing based on emotion is that emotions are subjective.

If we base it on this then every class is both oppressively overpowered and depressingly underpowered.  Every class feels weak and strong.  Every class needs to be nerfed and buffed to make it feel in line with the others.

So obviously we're thinking balance is objective with some subjective input (I doubt you are arguing for balance being solely based on feelings).  This begs the question how much weight should be placed on the individual feelings of players?  Feelings are so widely varied that they reach the point of being contradictory among the player base.  What is the usefulness of an inconsistent and self-contradictory  basis for gameplay balance?

In addition, whose feelings are more important?  Which feelings are a better basis for balance?  What percentage of the population is a threshold for consideration as actionable?

 

Edit:

Confusing gameplay is one subjective metric that is useful.  If <insert percentage deemed significant> of the player base is confused about a mechanic, it warrants changing.

But this is more about redesign than nerfing/buffing.  What I was addressing was the emotional response to nerfs and buffs.  Also, the confusion I described is not confusion about why something was nerfed/buffed, but confusion about actually playing the game.

Edited August 29, 2021 by Rogue.8235

[Dante.1763]

58 minutes ago, yann.1946 said:

A minor correction, but their is an emotional aspect to balance. It's about making the game more fun after all. 

 

So if a class is weak, but feels oppressive then it might need a nerf or a redesign. 

How i feel about ele in PVE. Not weaver, or Tempest, but core ele. Weaver and tempest are strong, cool, great. But core ele? oof. Staff ele? double oof. I love staff ele, but its not fun to play after the nerfs 😞

 

[Spook.5847]

The nerfs to the already very limited classes in this game - and here I include the stupid skill "flow charts" now, as they are not true "trees" - are indeed annoying and make it seriously unfun, but the nerfs to even petty things (like the candy corn gobbler), the imposition of that absolutely horrid, community-destroying "megaserver", and more nerfs to gameplay routines the players create (e.g. champ trains) are what really makes it to where I simply do not want to support this company in any way.  I dislike the "us v. them" attitude that is behind so many game changes and philosophies in GW2, and the focus on creating and selling junk in the store instead of fixing broken stuff, creating fun loot, and making more interesting gaming mechanisms or content.  Now, in the constant quest to save a few more pennies, they are killing support for the XP client (instead of just leaving it in as legacy like other games do), and that really is the kicker for me, since I simply won't bother setting up one of my Win7 computers in my office just to log on for the small amount of time each day I do dailies and tend to guild stuff (I am not interested in their expansion, so don't need DX11).

[Dante.1763]

3 minutes ago, Spook.5847 said:

community-destroying "megaserver",

The mega server was needed, sorry. Having existed on a server that was on perma low population it was terrible, and even if they merged low servers together, it would have eventually ended up being the megaserver we have now.

 

The champ trains, especially in low level areas also where needed. Nothing like getting screamed at by a whole kittening squad because you triggered an event. So good for the newer players to be exposed to.

Edited August 29, 2021 by Dante.1763

[Spook.5847]

You sound like a youngster without much game experience.  In my experience of playing different online games since 1995, servers (in all online games) each develop their own community and "flavor" over time, which is fun in the way that having other countries you can travel to is IRL.  TI also dislike the constant map closures and nagging.  This was done just to save money on power, etc, and was totally for Anet's benefit - not the players'.

 

And nobody can scream at you in GW2, but more likely the smarter folks get on the train anyway - like I did at the time :D

 

If this game wasnt so stingy with loot and farming (once again to benefit Anet), then people would just go off and farm on their own - like they do in other games.

[Vayne.8563]

23 minutes ago, Spook.5847 said:

The nerfs to the already very limited classes in this game - and here I include the stupid skill "flow charts" now, as they are not true "trees" - are indeed annoying and make it seriously unfun, but the nerfs to even petty things (like the candy corn gobbler), the imposition of that absolutely horrid, community-destroying "megaserver", and more nerfs to gameplay routines the players create (e.g. champ trains) are what really makes it to where I simply do not want to support this company in any way.  I dislike the "us v. them" attitude that is behind so many game changes and philosophies in GW2, and the focus on creating and selling junk in the store instead of fixing broken stuff, creating fun loot, and making more interesting gaming mechanisms or content.  Now, in the constant quest to save a few more pennies, they are killing support for the XP client (instead of just leaving it in as legacy like other games do), and that really is the kicker for me, since I simply won't bother setting up one of my Win7 computers in my office just to log on for the small amount of time each day I do dailies and tend to guild stuff (I am not interested in their expansion, so don't need DX11).

The mega server and getting rid of the Queensdale Tramp Chain (pun intended) is absolutely two of the best decisions Anet has made for the health of the game.  If a few people leave over those types of decisions, it doesn't hurt the game, because ultimately far more will stay.  The Queensdale champ train causes a ton of drama and fights in map chat, and new people weren't learning the game, they were learning to run around in circles. Some people leveled to 80 with that thing and it was no better than using a level 80 boost.

 

Mega servers are the future. They make sense. They're smart.  I've been on Tarnished Coast since launch and yeah, I felt some server identification, but the benefits of the megaserver far outweigh anything that I lost.

 

[Dante.1763]

35 minutes ago, Spook.5847 said:

You sound like a youngster without much game experience.  In my experience of playing different online games since 1995, servers (in all online games) each develop their own community and "flavor" over time, which is fun in the way that having other countries you can travel to is IRL.  TI also dislike the constant map closures and nagging.  This was done just to save money on power, etc, and was totally for Anet's benefit - not the players'.

 

And nobody can scream at you in GW2, but more likely the smarter folks get on the train anyway - like I did at the time 😄

 

If this game wasnt so stingy with loot and farming (once again to benefit Anet), then people would just go off and farm on their own - like they do in other games.

Ive got over 20k hours in the guild wars universe alone, not to mention the 100k+ hours in other games, jumping to "YoU MuSt Be YoUnG" says alot more about you than it does me, no experience? Lol.

A server with no population does not have an identity, not being able to do events was also frustrating, Orr was abandoned, WVW? hah, we couldnt even rally a decent amount of folks to own our own borderlands. Mega server was a massive boon to players like me on low population servers, servers that practically where dead.

Folks absolutely can scream at you, you must have missed the fights/death threats/insults in map chat that happened during the trains i bet. Smart players realize that a STARTER ZONE is not where farming should be going on.

 

[Farohna.6247]

31 minutes ago, Spook.5847 said:

You sound like a youngster without much game experience.  In my experience of playing different online games since 1995, servers (in all online games) each develop their own community and "flavor" over time, which is fun in the way that having other countries you can travel to is IRL.  TI also dislike the constant map closures and nagging.  This was done just to save money on power, etc, and was totally for Anet's benefit - not the players'.

 

And nobody can scream at you in GW2, but more likely the smarter folks get on the train anyway - like I did at the time 😄

 

If this game wasnt so stingy with loot and farming (once again to benefit Anet), then people would just go off and farm on their own - like they do in other games

As a seasoned vet of other games who doesn't look down on the youngsters and values their input since they sometimes see with fresh eyes, I concur that if you have ever been stuck on a low pop server on any game it can be really lonely and hard to find players for events/raids/etc.  The mega server system here is great, not without it's faults but overall it's a wonderful way to play.  

Servers develop their own character, yes.  When they're almost empty it's mostly holdouts who are unwilling or can't afford a transfer and just hope for a server to be combined.  Isn't it better to have GW2 system than a few bitter, bored players who sitting in a town because there is no one to play with?  

Not sure what game you're playing, but the loot and farming are more than adequate, on par with other mmos, and people can still yell lol.

OP, nerfs and changes occur in all games, especially mmos.  It's frustrating, it makes you try new things, sometimes you lose interest.  It's ok, maybe it's time for a change.  Or if you haven't rolled another profession, try yet another

 

[Gehenna.3625]

2 hours ago, yann.1946 said:

A minor correction, but their is an emotional aspect to balance. It's about making the game more fun after all. 

 

So if a class is weak, but feels oppressive then it might need a nerf or a redesign. 

It's unusual to use the term oppressive. I suspect you mean over-powered?

[Tails.9372]

25 minutes ago, Gehenna.3625 said:

I suspect you mean over-powered?

 

In which case it wouldn't be the class that needs a "nerf or a redesign" but instead be a typical case of "l2p" for the player complaining about it.

[Dante.1763]

4 minutes ago, Tails.9372 said:

 

In which case it wouldn't be the class that needs a "nerf or a redesign" but instead be a typical case of "l2p" for the player complaining about it.

That would depend on if it was truly broken though, wouldnt it?

[Tails.9372]

2 minutes ago, Dante.1763 said:

That would depend on if it was truly broken though, wouldnt it?

 

The context was "if something is weak".

[yann.1946]

1 hour ago, Gehenna.3625 said:

It's unusual to use the term oppressive. I suspect you mean over-powered?

No I specifically meant oppressive, as overpowered is a relatively objective metric. Is it above the general power curve of the game. 

While oppressive relates more to the feeling you get when playing against it. 

[yann.1946]

4 hours ago, Rogue.8235 said:

The problem with balancing based on emotion is that emotions are subjective.

If we base it on this then every class is both oppressively overpowered and depressingly underpowered.  Every class feels weak and strong.  Every class needs to be nerfed and buffed to make it feel in line with the others.

So obviously we're thinking balance is objective with some subjective input (I doubt you are arguing for balance being solely based on feelings).  This begs the question how much weight should be placed on the individual feelings of players?  Feelings are so widely varied that they reach the point of being contradictory among the player base.  What is the usefulness of an inconsistent and self-contradictory  basis for gameplay balance?

In addition, whose feelings are more important?  Which feelings are a better basis for balance?  What percentage of the population is a threshold for consideration as actionable?

 

Edit:

Confusing gameplay is one subjective metric that is useful.  If <insert percentage deemed significant> of the player base is confused about a mechanic, it warrants changing.

But this is more about redesign than nerfing/buffing.  What I was addressing was the emotional response to nerfs and buffs.  Also, the confusion I described is not confusion about why something was nerfed/buffed, but confusion about actually playing the game.

I'm not saying we should base balance on the whims of any random player. But that how fun something is perceived to play against matters. 

 

For example imagine a class with a one shot mechanic on a decent tell. It might be perfectly balanced but not fun to play against as to good players it's boring as they can dodge it and then it's free game. While the weak just get oneshotted and feel likes their no interaction. 

[Apolo.5942]

I dont play mesmer, but DO play WARRIOR, and the disconnect between player's expectation and the actual balance implementation is actually atrocious.

Think about this, how gross the disregard for Q&A has to be for the developers to resort to removing something as core to this game as a dodge bar. How many red flags did this throw during testing?. Because it is not like players wernt screaming to the winds that Mirage was broken as F on its release state. Hell i remember picking it up with out ever playing mesmer before for the easy kills.

 

Balance can not be perfect. This game is way to complex for that, but it is a sliding scale. If balance were a 5 on a scale from 1 to 10, while 3 to 7 might be the edges of acceptable parameters, this game is in a constant state of -10 or 20.

Edited August 29, 2021 by Apolo.5942

[Tseison.4659]

I’m gonna chip in for a second and agree that the Mirage 1 Dodge nerf was not handled fairly and I hope that gets revised as well as the ambushes so they aren’t that oppressive. I also don’t want anyone telling me otherwise in saying that “the Mirage dodge nerf was a balanced decision,” when you have thieves running around keeping their 3 (DD) dodges + more with the added sigil of energy, mobility skills etc.. 

 

If ‘Infinite Horizon’ was such a big problem for people then maybe they should have looked into reducing damage or whatever if it’s so “unbearable,” because you know, people forget Mirage is not exactly a “shatter” spec.

 

Again, I should be able to enjoy whatever elite spec I use in both WvW/PvP and shouldn’t have to feel “crippled,” when I enter those modes. 

Edited August 29, 2021 by Tseison.4659

[ASP.8093]

3 hours ago, Spook.5847 said:

The nerfs to the already very limited classes in this game - and here I include the stupid skill "flow charts" now, as they are not true "trees" -

Those "flow charts" give you more choices than many games' "trees," specifically because they are not trees, and do not hand-hold you and pigeonhole you as much as path-dependent ability unlocks in trees do.

 

3 hours ago, Spook.5847 said:

the imposition of that absolutely horrid, community-destroying "megaserver", and more nerfs to gameplay routines the players create (e.g. champ trains)

There's absolutely nothing wrong with one big community as the default. Only a handful of servers had distinct "culture" and that was the result of purposeful stacking by guilds.

 

Queensdale has been massively improved by forcing "champ train" people to go do something else instead of crying about normal players breaking their sequencing in map chat. There are dozens of other maps with complex and lucrative metas designed to give people who want to do this kind of open-world farming actual challenges and actual rewards. And, for people who just desperate to level quickly, the game just *GIVES YOU* tons of free Tomes for your alts now.

 

3 hours ago, Spook.5847 said:

You sound like a youngster without much game experience.  In my experience of playing different online games since 1995, servers (in all online games) each develop their own community and "flavor" over time, which is fun in the way that having other countries you can travel to is IRL.

Love to play the "I'm older than you!" card while arguing with other veterans of a nine-year-old game.

 

The previous generations of MMOGs had very different designs, including a ton of player-hostile design. And a lot of player base internalized that stuff as the one true way to build a game like this, even when it kinda sucked. I remember playing early GW1 and seeing a good number of players demanding the ability to "rest" between encounters (sometimes called "sitting" back in the day)… even though the game completely removed the need to spend 30-seconds-to-a-minute doing nothing — truly nothing — between fights by just putting you into quick auto-recovery mode as soon as combat ended. If you look at these forums you'll see people complaining that GW2 doesn't have endless "vertical" progression even though that's a major cause of burnout and content obsolescence in so many other games.

[ASP.8093]

25 minutes ago, Tseison.4659 said:

I’m gonna chip in for a second and agree that the Mirage 1 Dodge nerf was not handled fairly and I hope that gets revised as well as the ambushes so they aren’t that oppressive. I also don’t want anyone telling me otherwise in saying that “the Mirage dodge nerf was a balanced decision,” when you have thieves running around keeping their 3 (DD) dodges + more with the added sigil of energy, mobility skills etc.. 

 

If ‘Infinite Horizon’ was such a big problem for people then maybe they should have looked into reducing damage or whatever if it’s so “unbearable,” because you know, people forget Mirage is not exactly a “shatter” spec.

 

Again, I should be able to enjoy whatever elite spec I use in both WvW/PvP and shouldn’t have to feel “crippled,” when I enter those modes. 

The problem isn't just Infinite Horizon, it's that Mirage Cloak itself isn't just a dodge, it's the absolute best possible alternative to a dodge: just as good at evading attacks as regular dodging, but you have completely freedom of movement and interaction (with superspeed so you can run about as far as you'd dodge normally, if that's what you need), and it doesn't even cancel actions when you activate it. No other spec can use a dodge to stomp someone, to make a healing skill uninterruptible, to counter-burst you while effortless absorbing your own burst attempt.

 

That's a really cool design, and really fun to play — but it's also quite a mess to balance and the reason we've ended up with "one dodge" is that just being able to do two in a row is amazingly, amazingly good.

 

I really hate playing "One-Dodge Mirage" but tbh I feel like the alternative is probably a kind of "No-Dodge Mirage" where you get normal dodges and only get Mirage Cloak by fussing around with Mirrors.

Edited August 29, 2021 by ASP.8093

[Rogue.8235]

3 hours ago, yann.1946 said:

I'm not saying we should base balance on the whims of any random player. But that how fun something is perceived to play against matters. 

 

For example imagine a class with a one shot mechanic on a decent tell. It might be perfectly balanced but not fun to play against as to good players it's boring as they can dodge it and then it's free game. While the weak just get oneshotted and feel likes their no interaction. 

 

The problem is that you're assuming everyone shares the same subjective opinion.  How a class feels to play against is no different from any other subjective whim already discussed.

Some players feel that jumping puzzles are horrible to play.  Others feel that they are enjoyable to play.  This is similar to opinions on playing against any given profession and build.

The point is that there is no universal subjective opinion.  This is because opinions are based on personal biases  and/or emotions.  It is a biological fact that all humans cannot share the exact same personal bias and emotions at any given moment. 

 

So we're back at the questions:

Whose opinions are more important than all others

At what percentage of the  player base (sharing the same subjective opinion) will the information be deemed actionable?

How do you reconcile the inconsistency and self-contradictory nature of personal opinions of the player community?  

Without answering these questions we are stuck at the following:

Every class is both oppressive and fun to play against, per opinions of the community.

Edited August 29, 2021 by Rogue.8235
stupid typo