Kodama.6453 Posted September 28, 2021 Share Posted September 28, 2021 Just now, Abyssisis.3971 said: A trade off is when you are actually giving something up, not just replacing it with something better. 🙄 Exactly my point. Holosmith doesn't feel as a trade off because the F5 skill you give up is too weak compared to photon forge. That is not a problem of the system mechanically, but how the system is balanced. So I don't get your problem here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abyssisis.3971 Posted September 28, 2021 Share Posted September 28, 2021 3 minutes ago, Kodama.6453 said: Exactly my point. Holosmith doesn't feel as a trade off because the F5 skill you give up is too weak compared to photon forge. That is not a problem of the system mechanically, but how the system is balanced. So I don't get your problem here. “How I see it: replacing a skill for another skill is classified as a trade off, even if the new skill is an upgrade of the skill it replaces” That’s my problem right there. That’s not a trade off, it’s a trade up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kodama.6453 Posted September 28, 2021 Share Posted September 28, 2021 1 minute ago, Abyssisis.3971 said: “How I see it: replacing a skill for another skill is classified as a trade off, even if the new skill is an upgrade of the skill it replaces” That’s my problem right there. That’s not a trade off, it’s a trade up. So you just want to make a fuzz about semantics, got it. You may call it a trade up, I simply call it a bad trade off. It doesn't really matter for me, though, I can just as well agree with you that we call it a "trade up" now. We still agree on the same thing: you are giving up something, but the something you give up is just so much weaker than the thing you gain that there isn't even a decision tied to it, taking holosmith over core engi F5 is a no brainer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexndrTheGreat.8310 Posted September 28, 2021 Share Posted September 28, 2021 Feels like it’s gotten to the squares and rectangles argument at this point. A square is a rectangle, but a rectangle is not a square. Like a tradeup is a type of tradeoff, but a tradeoff is not always a tradeup. Regardless of whether all the elite specs trade offs are equal to each other, Soulbeast’s tradeoff ended up losing a pet swap. It’s something that is permanent for as long as the elite spec is slotted. Feels like elite spec trade offs being equal to one another discussion would be a different topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lazze.9870 Posted September 29, 2021 Share Posted September 29, 2021 10 hours ago, AlexndrTheGreat.8310 said: Feels like elite spec trade offs being equal to one another discussion would be a different topic. Wouldn't even be a discussion to have if Anet had made designs where the "trade-off" was naturally built into the elite spec instead of an aftertought. That's where the actual problem is. A lot of the specs already had natural "trade-offs" in form a mechanical change, which Anet can balance out as they wish. It works with soulbeast because losing pet swap for pet merge that still trigger the same swap traits and make other traits affect the ranger instead while merged make sense. It feels like a trade-off that could have been part of the initial design. And soulbeast is still fine in all game modes. It gets worse with specs like druid or chrono. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aspirine.6852 Posted September 30, 2021 Share Posted September 30, 2021 I could understand why they did this in wvw/pvp. Not that they also did this in pve too. I dont remember anyone crying about the rangers strength in open world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lazze.9870 Posted October 1, 2021 Share Posted October 1, 2021 (edited) 7 hours ago, aspirine.6852 said: I could understand why they did this in wvw/pvp. Not that they also did this in pve too. I dont remember anyone crying about the rangers strength in open world. No one cried about the druid's pet strength in pve either. Splitting trade-offs between modes is stupid to begin with. They should be a integral part of the design of an elite spec. Ranger is just lucky enough to have the trade-offs in all modes despite that, unlike say Mirage... Edited October 1, 2021 by Lazze.9870 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now