Why the sPvP gear split exists at all?

[Nabbut.7480]

It is so easy now to get to 80 and dress up in exotics - can be done day 1 with boost from xpac and some gems into gold.

Having a severely reduced arsenal of gear negatively impacts the build diversity.

I am not kidding here - I know of removalmongers but should their opinion be even taken into a consideration, least of all implemented?

 

[Caine.8204]

Players tend to migrate towards bunker builds that stay in nodes better than other classes. The problem with "build diversity" in this game stems from the one, single game mode that pvp has to offer, which is conquest. The player that stands in the circle better, wins. Such is why things like Soldier Amulet, Harrier, and Mender's have been removed in pvp. It takes developmental resources to balance PvP, which they have none, so they resort to the blanket removal of amulets in a last-ditch attempt to stop players from a bunker meta that they cannot balance around.

[TheQuickFox.3826]

It exists because ArenaNet wanted to tweak sPvP balance without affecting the rest of the game. But I agree that it hurts build diversity. I love to do some creative build crafting and sPvP has little of this. The nerf and then removal of celestial stats is one of the reasons why I stopped playing sPvP, at least for now.

I play as Ele. High silver to low gold. Fairly casual. I liked the defense and healing that Celestial gives because it allows me to survive the first second of a surprise attack so that I have the possibility to do something instead of looking at my char dead on the floor.

[Stand The Wall.6987]

its cuz the game was designed for pve, then they realized their pve numbers are completely broken for pvp. also its a much lower (well non existant) barrier to entry which a lot of people like.

[Nabbut.7480]

Why do you say bunker as if it is a bad thing? I do remember epic mid fights with me as a support core guardian, going for minutes until someone slipped a skill use.

And bunkers are still countered by glass cannons if the latter play well enough - high risk and high reward.

[Swagg.9236]

46 minutes ago, paShadoWn.5723 said:

Why do you say bunker as if it is a bad thing? I do remember epic mid fights with me as a support core guardian, going for minutes until someone slipped a skill use.

And bunkers are still countered by glass cannons if the latter play well enough - high risk and high reward.

Bunker builds are bad because they're gravity wells which yield far too much impact on the field for the effort that it requires to pilot them.

In GW2, "bunkers" do nothing more than artificially lengthen combat because the "bunker" playstyle generally mimics solitaire even more heavily than the average meta PvP build:  a bunker build is almost entirely reactive and simply exists to stall for time by negating the actions of other players on the field.  Glass counters don't counter bunkers; timing counters bunkers.  The only reason a bunker dies quickly is because it's out of buttons to press (because every bunker's effectiveness is grounded in a series of instant or near-instant negation or area-denial effects which combine with passive/instant healing).  If a bunker has buttons to press, it's generally going to play its own game of solitaire until the buttons run out; it forces the entire field to play passively (by avoiding the trouble of grinding through bunker cooldowns) or unoptimally (ignoring more ideal targets to focus down a single guy who is basically just playing a low-effort game of whack-a-mole with his own HP bar).

 

4 hours ago, paShadoWn.5723 said:

It is so easy now to get to 80 and dress up in exotics - can be done day 1 with boost from xpac and some gems into gold.

Having a severely reduced arsenal of gear negatively impacts the build diversity.

I am not kidding here - I know of removalmongers but should their opinion be even taken into a consideration, least of all implemented?

 

GW2 never had any build diversity to begin with, and that trend has never been addressed.  Even as options expanded, you still see the same two or three build archetypes across every profession (that is, if a given profession can even assemble one or more of those builds out of its respective smattering of trait lines and weapon sets):  damage, boon spam (almost strictly a PvE-only build), and effect/damage-negator (almost strictly a PvP-only build).  The "healer" is so forcibly shoe-horned into this game that its mangled debut almost doesn't deserve to be called a proper archetype; but if you insist, I'll give you a total of four (4) true "roles" in GW2.

Condition Damage is not a role.  You could straight up just make all out-going damage scale off of Power, and then lower the strike damage associated with condi-heavy attacks in order to achieve the same effect as you do now with the currently worthless segregation of "Power Damage" and "Condition Damage."  The only thing that truly separates those two """""damage types""""" is in how every skill bar has an "HP-restore" button slapped to it, but not every bar/build/profession can make room for a consistent, on-demand condition cleanse (which is an entirely arbitrary oversight that has no reason to exist).

I could agree that it's worth finding a compromise between the single stat amulet of PvP and the garbage pile of random little boosts associated with the FOURTEEN (ONE-FOUR, 14) stat sources active on any given player with a full set of gear (16 if you count a second weapon set), but you really, ABSOLUTELY, do not need a lot of slots and unique stat combination options to go around in order to give any GW2 player access to exactly what they need for any given activity.  I'd argue that isolating all stats to 3 trinket slots akin to the original PvP amulets with the minor stat option would be enough for every single mode this game has to offer.  You could naturally get away with more if you wanted to throw a fit about it, but 6 sources (3 major and 3 minor respectively) is all you would really need; just adjust the stats provided by each source accordingly to match expectations for specific content.  It's nothing more than a numbers game; GW2 is indeed that simplistic.

Edited October 12, 2021 by Swagg.9236

[DanAlcedo.3281]

So basically Wvw Builds in PvP? 

Imagine full tank minstrel builds.

Imagine 2 of them on both nodes. 

Ahhhh fun. 

[Avatar.3568]

1 hour ago, DanAlcedo.3281 said:

So basically Wvw Builds in PvP? 

Imagine full tank minstrel builds.

Imagine 2 of them on both nodes. 

Ahhhh fun. 

Imagine it would be hot bunker meta

 

Having pve gear would not make higher build diversity it would just shrink it down to ministreal because you can't kill anyone wearing that

[Downstate.4697]

What if they also added two jewelry slots and split the stats between the three? A bit more flexibility in stat building could go a long way.

[Morwath.9817]

2 hours ago, DanAlcedo.3281 said:

So basically Wvw Builds in PvP? 

Imagine full tank minstrel builds.

Imagine 2 of them on both nodes. 

Ahhhh fun. 

 

Imagine, if my suggestion from other topic would be implemented, so 2v1 decaps and caps node with bunker on it due to number advantage (but slower), so nobody would really complain about minstrel stalling.

[Avatar.3568]

46 minutes ago, Morwath.9817 said:

 

Imagine, if my suggestion from other topic would be implemented, so 2v1 decaps and caps node with bunker on it due to number advantage (but slower), so nobody would really complain about minstrel stalling.

Yeah or we just don't let ministreal get used

[Ragnar.4257]

Yes, let's allow full Minstrel and Trailblazer.

 

What could possibly go wrong?

[Crab Fear.1624]

10 hours ago, paShadoWn.5723 said:

It is so easy now to get to 80 and dress up in exotics - can be done day 1 with boost from xpac and some gems into gold.

Having a severely reduced arsenal of gear negatively impacts the build diversity.

I am not kidding here - I know of removalmongers but should their opinion be even taken into a consideration, least of all implemented?

 

Conquest and it's current design does not benefit from excessive build diversity, especially the tankier builds.

 

The pace is an arena and needs to be fast to keep interest.

Some tankiness is acceptable, but most of the ability survive should come from proper dodges, kiting, Los, positioning, jukes, jump puzzles, and team work.

 

Not amulets, runes, and passives. 

 

 

[Morwath.9817]

2 minutes ago, Avatar.3568 said:

Yeah or we just don't let ministreal get used

 

I don't think simple repeative removal of options is helping with balance in long term, as everytime we are left with less and less options whenever that happens. GW1 was amazing, because you could always surprise your enemies with some extraordinary builds or even setups. 

 

It's not that I agree with OP that we should've PvE gear here (with rarity options), but I think balancing went wrong route years ago. Even if you decide to remove Minstrel from Chrono, because he can open himself portal to other node and bunker two nodes at same time, you don't really have to remove it from for example Revenant. I believe each class should be balanced individualy and have different pool of amulets in sPvP. It's not only about bunkers, but in case of glass builds I think Viper can be toxic on some classes, but fine on another giving us more versatile meta with more classes and builds participating.

 

On top of that, balancing bunkers really shouldn't be hard. I mean, if you want them to be less tanky, but still have good group utility you simply shave thier coeficents on self heals that have group utility (like Receive the Light or Celestial Avatar) and at same time give them extra +50-100% outgoing healing to other allies (mechanic that already is in game so takes 0 effort to implement, e.g. Force of Will or Lingering Light, but those are quite underpowered right now compared to other options and probably need buffing for sPvP).

[Avatar.3568]

4 minutes ago, Morwath.9817 said:

 

I don't think simple repeative removal of options is helping with balance in long term, as everytime we are left with less and less options whenever that happens. GW1 was amazing, because you could always surprise your enemies with some extraordinary builds or even setups. 

 

It's not that I agree with OP that we should've PvE gear here (with rarity options), but I think balancing went wrong route years ago. Even if you decide to remove Minstrel from Chrono, because he can open himself portal to other node and bunker two nodes at same time, you don't really have to remove it from for example Revenant. I believe each class should be balanced individualy and have different pool of amulets in sPvP. It's not only about bunkers, but in case of glass builds I think Viper can be toxic on some classes, but fine on another giving us more versatile meta with more classes and builds participating.

 

On top of that, balancing bunkers really shouldn't be hard. I mean, if you want them to be less tanky, but still have good group utility you simply shave thier coeficents on self heals that have group utility (like Receive the Light or Celestial Avatar) and at same time give them extra +50-100% outgoing healing to other allies (mechanic that already is in game so takes 0 effort to implement, e.g. Force of Will or Lingering Light, but those are quite underpowered right now compared to other options and probably need buffing for sPvP).

You can bunker with every class on minstrel, in hot release I was running ministrel druid with 400 ping and was able to facetank 5 people. Just don't do it

[Morwath.9817]

Just now, Avatar.3568 said:

You can bunker with every class on minstrel, in hot release I was running ministrel druid with 400 ping and was able to facetank 5 people. Just don't do it

Imagine I played Druid during HoT and Fireband right after PoF (close to 70-80% win rate first post PoF season if I remember right) and I never was able to facetank multiple people who had clues how to play. Even ROM on his Druid (certainly the best player on class during that time) would rather disengage from 3v1 fight as face tanking on point wouldn't work (and face tanking outside of point gives you nothing) vs decent players regardless of amulet. Your only option is kiting people who want to waste time chasing you on staff+GS is way better time investment since you live longer as you may not die at all this way due to leaps, swiftness combined Quick Draw, but if they don't follow carrot you achieve nothing. Yes, you could "face tank" 1v2, but that mostly because one of those 2 was bunker himself with 0 damage and their entire +1 rotation was pointless in this case.

 

Also, if you read what I've wrote, that I'd change how nodes are decapped and capped when outnumbered, if I would let more bunkerish amulets to be used on some classes. Keep in mind, that simple bunkering on class that has no group utility and couldn't then take node back fast enough in 1v1 would be rather pointless.

[Buran.3796]

   After 9 years of ANet trying to not make a specific PvP skill balances, taking instead the lazy route of removing entire amulets, runes, and sigils (and even nerfing stats in the Crusader amulet, which is a sort of aknowledge that the combo stats is too strong but also too valauble to delete it) is absolutely impossible to run "normal" (PvE/WvW) stats in PvP.

  Bunker builds would absolutely dominate the landscape if that were allowed: even with the current stat comps with no Nomad, Minstrel, Trailblazer or Celestial stats pure dps berserker and viper builds are unable to kill people without +1 fights and heavy cc focus.

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

If that gear split were removed, you'd also have to undo at least some of the skill/trait splits in order to also allow for builds to bust the bunkers for the reasons stated above.

Thinks like unsplitting Warrior's Cunning.

Ask yourself if you want to get hit by a Gunflame with an extra 25% to 50% damage modifier attached to it?

It would probably bring Scourge back in line, but how would a Weaver feel about that?

[Sereath.1428]

Minstrels and Trailblazer weren't that much of a problem back then because the power damage (the overall pace of the combat) wasn't as bad as it is today.
Nowdays those prefixes are indeed very obnoxious.

I'm all for build diversity, but the reason they keep removing amulets in the first place is because they can't balance their game properly. Prefixes like that in todays sPvP would just worsen the state of it.

Edited October 12, 2021 by XxsdgxX.8109

[Disney.7826]

23 hours ago, paShadoWn.5723 said:

It is so easy now to get to 80 and dress up in exotics - can be done day 1 with boost from xpac and some gems into gold.

Having a severely reduced arsenal of gear negatively impacts the build diversity.

I am not kidding here - I know of removalmongers but should their opinion be even taken into a consideration, least of all implemented?

 

Because u cant ban single pieces of gear - like trailblazer boots. But u can ban amulets easier

[Genesis.5169]

On 10/11/2021 at 4:09 PM, paShadoWn.5723 said:

It is so easy now to get to 80 and dress up in exotics - can be done day 1 with boost from xpac and some gems into gold.

Having a severely reduced arsenal of gear negatively impacts the build diversity.

I am not kidding here - I know of removalmongers but should their opinion be even taken into a consideration, least of all implemented?

 

I have been saying this for years even put it in my sig, nine years of removing stuff and they want more it won't end its upto anet to stand up to them.