plz balance patch soon

[Bakeneko.5826]

16 hours ago, Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

We've done the betas.  We know what the new elites can do.  Unless there is some big yet unannounced changes, things will stay the course.  If anet does implement changes, it is because of the very same logic and predictions that I am using

Yes, BETAS, we have no idea how elites will have changed by the time they are released

[Obtena.7952]

This is the point in the thread where people academically apply irrelevant titles and categories to classes to justify how they think the game should work ... still not understanding how meta doesn't care about that stuff.  Meta is not a planned construct; it's not something you can chop up into pieces and put classes into into those individual pieces. Meta it just the result of content from the view that it's a problem to solve and meta is the optimal solution. 

Edited January 26, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[Jski.6180]

3 hours ago, Bakeneko.5826 said:

Yes, BETAS, we have no idea how elites will have changed by the time they are released

What about the existing classes dont they need updates as well? We lost 2 years of updates because of EoD we guess or that just anet excuse. We need a balance patch for every thing BUT the EoD elite spec because the last 2 years seems to be a patch for them (and they still seem week and pve aimed only).

[523462AE-09F2-4A91-BDE5-3D23BFA48EBA]

2 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

This is the point in the thread where people academically apply irrelevant titles and categories to classes to justify how they think the game should work ... still not understanding how meta doesn't care about that stuff.  Meta is not a planned construct; it's not something you can chop up into pieces and put classes into into those individual pieces. Meta it just the result of content from the view that it's a problem to solve and meta is the optimal solution. 

 

Thats not really true in this case, and it comes from there being multiple concepts of what meta is and how its applied. We arent looking at the "whats the best way to approach things" idea of 'most effective tactics available' its meta in the sense of the underlying metagame, where you just want to make a comp that will get you to what you want to do, and to do that, you want as many of: quickness, alacrity, heals and/or defensive boons, swiftness and stability on demand, add control, acceptable consistent dps that has the burst and cc potential to burst and cc when needed.

 

Right now, thats best filled with: Core guardian, Alacrity, core necro.  Firebrand uses core guardian the best, Scourge uses core necro the best, Renegade uses Alacrity the best.  Add 2 dps or 1 and a healer and go.

 

People largely gloss over the WHY these things work the way they do now, which is pretty silly, as that side hasnt really changed.  Chrono didnt have 20% representation to Renegade+FB's 0% just for funsies, it had the best application of Alacrity and Quickness right up until it didnt. And when it didnt? Oh, look, firebrand and renegade started having above 0% played.

 

You can look at representation numbers and go "Oh, theres when staff ele was gutted" and "oh, theres when boon chrono was gutted", and "oh, theres when someone realized a healer that wasnt druid existed", and "oh, theres when condi took over"(the point in time where pSB, DH, War, Engi drop off the face of the earth and Scourge and FB, and to a lesser extent, cSB and cDD gain in popularity)

 

On 1/25/2022 at 5:25 AM, ScottBroChill.3254 said:

the meta never shifts.

 

This entire thread was started because of a graph put out that says the meta shifted to what it is in mid-2021, and that for years:

 

scourge wasnt played

firebrand spent a year being completely unplayed, and then another year being less popular than DH

Renegade spent the entirety of those 2 years not being played

Druid was the only played healer for fractals into 2019

Warrior was a 20% pick rate until mid-2020

 Ele spent years from a 17-27% pick rate

Chrono was incredibly popular right up until it got its boon application changed at which point it fell off a large cliff and died multiple times.

 

The meta appreciably changes 5 or 6 times over the course of post-PoF launch. 

 

As an aside, the graph everyone loves is a bit skewed.  Pick any 5 columns on the left side. They're roughly equivalent in time period as the last 9 on the right are.  2/3 of that graph covers the first 44 months it was tracking info, while the last 1/3 is a whopping ~6 months. 

Edited January 26, 2022 by 523462AE-09F2-4A91-BDE5-3D23BFA48EBA

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

4 hours ago, Bakeneko.5826 said:

Yes, BETAS, we have no idea how elites will have changed by the time they are released

Yeah we do.  Anet isn't some mysterious eldritch entity that we cannot comprehend.  They're people just like us, and they even have trends and habits.  Taking into account CMCs balance methods, what we're going to see is... very little done, actually.  Mostly bug-fixes.  Aside from a few tweaks to certain skills to bring them in-line, the beta specs are pretty much set by now.  

[Raizel.8175]

20 hours ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

So you think if the high end get better results with classes that are really forgiving and easy to get results with the pug meta won't follow?  

Considering that you apparently don't want to discuss this properly - you refused to read my inital post after all -, I'm not quite sure how and especially what to answer.

Fractals and Raids just work vastly different. You can't just copy your fractal META into raids. It just won't work. Using Teapot as an example for Scourge stacking for easy raiding is just stupid. Teapots group invested a lot of time and effort to make sub 2h with that squad composition possible. Teapots intention wasn't even to prove that Scourge is OP, it was to prove that more defensive compositions can be as successful as the offensive oriented META. Even then, that composition simply won't be suitable for the majority of the raiding community; it's more or less a "meme composition" and I'm pretty certain that most people who actually raid know that. Or do you think that just any Tom, kitten or Harry can reproduce Teapots result? Then be my guest, go into the LFG and reproduce that composition with no or low LI/KP players.

The thing is that the wants and needs in raids are different from those in fractals. While the boon application of Chrono and Druid is perfectly fine in raids, it isn't in fractals due to how fractals work and how fractal mechanics synergize with build mechanics. In raids, you need a dedicated tank, which is also the reason why you'd go for Chrono/Druid (or well... Healer in general) rather than using the Firebrand/Renegade combination which is dominant in fractals. Raids consist of more or less stationary bosses, meaning boon-application through Chrono wells and shatters is perfectly fine. In fractals, you have to clean a lot of trash while moving. Using wells and shatters would thus be rather awkward in fractals. Redesigning wells as pulsing boon-AoEs around the caster, thus moving, would instantly threaten Renegades position in fractals. In raids, you want certain builds for certain Encounters due to their utilities. For Adina, having a Revenants Ventari Tablet is just really, really comfortable. The same goes for - as examples - Entangle  for Gorseval, Samarog pp., Feedback for Matthias, Epidemic for Soulless Horror, etc. Using alternatives to these utilities is quite awkward in most cases. In fractals, Epidemic is quite nice to have for 100 CM and since you need two Epidemics for that particular mechanic to work properly, people just take 2 Scourges. There are countless other examples to prove that point, but I sincerely hope that this will suffice.

In terms of DPS, both Scourge and Renegade are quite fine actually in raids because there is neither Exposed nor NPNG in raids. Scourge is overperforming in fractals mainly due to Exposed and NPNG. Exposed packs a 100% bonus for cDPS builds while NPNG eats up more than Exposed provides for pDPS builds. That leads to strong differences between cDPS and pDPS builds. Taking the Thaumanova boss (who is basically a DPS golem) as example: In your typical T4 PUG, you probably get somewhat around 40k DPS as Scourge if people aren't entirely lost while on Reaper, you probably have issues to even reach 25k DPS. In that regard, the balancing issue in fractals is first and foremost not about certain builds, but about fundamental game and fractal mechanics. If you wan't to balance the fractal META, you have to first and foremost target these mechanics instead of builds. You also have to be careful of aftereffects though! Raids currently feature the best build diversity we've ever had. Major build changes could potentially ruin that diversity. Nerfing Exposed too heavily could lead to cDPS builds becoming irrelevant in fractals again - remember: fractals were first and foremost a playground for pDPS builds. You can't just willy-nilly swing the nerf-bat around. And well... while talking about balance, people also constantly mistake total with target DPS.

14 hours ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

Other specs aren't necessarily undertuned (of course some of them are) and firebrand, renegade, and scourge should not be the standard to which they are elevated.  These specs need the nerf bat.  Support needs to be pared down to the point where the expectation is not that you have full uptime on every boon in existence but that you have to pick and choose.  Bringing this comp or that comp should have pros and cons.  But with firebrand, renegade, and scourge it's either you get all your boons or you slum it with inferior specs that only do part of what these classes can do.

That's not how GW2 works. The main problem also isn't 100% boon uptime. The main problem is that boons are generally as potent as they are in GW2. If they weren't and if boon application wouldn't be as abysmal as it is in GW2, you could finally properly play around with ranged and melee builds in Encounters since you don't need to rely that heavily on stacking for boons anymore.

In that regard though: Yeah, you could probably tone down both the DPS of Scourge and Renegade, but only for a very minor amount if you don't want to kill these builds off (especially Scourge as DPS in raids) and even then, I don't think that that's really the problem which should be tackled. The main problem is Firebrand and the role compression it offers especially for fractal content. Firebrand basically makes Renegade and Scourge viable in the first place since these fill up what Firebrand is missing. Firebrand in the first place leads to the Firebrand/Renegade/Scourge combination being as strong as it is in fractals in the first place. I'd rather bring up other builds instead of nerfing Scourge and Renegade; the only build that really needs a redesign though is Firebrand.

13 hours ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

I just think we get too much out of support roles in this game to the point where we've basically introduced a shittier version of trinity gameplay.  I also think it's more fun when we force choices. 

For instance, right now we don't have much choice.  If you want the good support, you're bringing firebrand.  But would it be better if bringing any class spec'd for support provided what firebrand does?  Not really.  Yeah, more classes get to have a turn, but they all bring the same things and feel interchangeable.  Wouldn't it be better if nobody could bring everything but each class were distinctly useful to the group for different reasons?

I feel like FFXIV does a much better job of this.  Am I wrong?

Like I've said: The problem isn't too much support, it's boons being too potent. What we need are interchangeable alternatives, which perform more or less the same. Splitting up roles too much will only lead to very strict squad compositions in raids and fractals. I dare say that nobody truly wants that.

[Obtena.7952]

19 minutes ago, 523462AE-09F2-4A91-BDE5-3D23BFA48EBA said:

 

Thats not really true in this case, and it comes from there being multiple concepts of what meta is and how its applied.

I think truly the problem here is that people have continuously looked at meta as a balancing point. The REAL balancing point is not the top end which is what is optimal to be successful, it's the bottom ... the boundary between builds that 'barely' provide and those that don't. That's the point where Anet's game philosophy of playing how you want is actually realized ... so that MUST be the point where the game is balanced around if they want to achieve that.  

Edited January 26, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[Obtena.7952]

Just now, Raizel.8175 said:

Like I've said: The problem isn't too much support, it's boons being too potent. What we need are interchangeable alternatives, which perform more or less the same. Splitting up roles too much will only lead to very strict squad compositions in raids and fractals. I dare say that nobody truly wants that.

Exactly ... people QQ about meta ... then 'solve' that by trying to promote their favoured classes to be meta. Again, people do not understand what they are asking for and what the result will be. The sad part is that we already know what this looks like because it's already happened a few times in the game, for example Alac shift from Chrono to Renegade. 

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

9 hours ago, Mungo Zen.9364 said:

I do not have any idea how you have drawn this conclusion based upon my posts in this thread.

 

That would be this line here:

 

18 hours ago, Mungo Zen.9364 said:

Was the Raid meta for a few months just 10 Chrono?  Not at all, it was very diverse, even though there was a 'Most Effective" way to clear content.

This violates the law of non-contradiction.  Something is what it is and it is not what it is not.  If the most effective way of clearing content is chronostacking, then it means things that are not chronostacking are not the most effective way of clearing content.  Other lines include:

 

18 hours ago, Mungo Zen.9364 said:

You do not have to take the Big 3, but you do need to be competent enough with your profession and game mechanics in order to figure out a different way of completing it. 

This is viability.

18 hours ago, Mungo Zen.9364 said:

Any profession you can bring to a raid is part of the Raid Meta.  Where 10 Chrono was becoming the 'Most Efficient" the actual Meta included any profession build that could contribute to the 10 man comp.

This is effectiveness.  Again, I must reiterate that if the meta is literally every profession, then that means the term is meaningless.  

18 hours ago, Mungo Zen.9364 said:

I don't look at the Big 3 in Fractals as being Meta Breaking, just the easiest way for the most players to work together. 

This is popularity.  

[AliamRationem.5172]

1 hour ago, Raizel.8175 said:

Considering that you apparently don't want to discuss this properly - you refused to read my inital post after all -, I'm not quite sure how and especially what to answer.

Fractals and Raids just work vastly different. You can't just copy your fractal META into raids. It just won't work. Using Teapot as an example for Scourge stacking for easy raiding is just stupid. Teapots group invested a lot of time and effort to make sub 2h with that squad composition possible. Teapots intention wasn't even to prove that Scourge is OP, it was to prove that more defensive compositions can be as successful as the offensive oriented META. Even then, that composition simply won't be suitable for the majority of the raiding community; it's more or less a "meme composition" and I'm pretty certain that most people who actually raid know that. Or do you think that just any Tom, kitten or Harry can reproduce Teapots result? Then be my guest, go into the LFG and reproduce that composition with no or low LI/KP players.

The thing is that the wants and needs in raids are different from those in fractals. While the boon application of Chrono and Druid is perfectly fine in raids, it isn't in fractals due to how fractals work and how fractal mechanics synergize with build mechanics. In raids, you need a dedicated tank, which is also the reason why you'd go for Chrono/Druid (or well... Healer in general) rather than using the Firebrand/Renegade combination which is dominant in fractals. Raids consist of more or less stationary bosses, meaning boon-application through Chrono wells and shatters is perfectly fine. In fractals, you have to clean a lot of trash while moving. Using wells and shatters would thus be rather awkward in fractals. Redesigning wells as pulsing boon-AoEs around the caster, thus moving, would instantly threaten Renegades position in fractals. In raids, you want certain builds for certain Encounters due to their utilities. For Adina, having a Revenants Ventari Tablet is just really, really comfortable. The same goes for - as examples - Entangle  for Gorseval, Samarog pp., Feedback for Matthias, Epidemic for Soulless Horror, etc. Using alternatives to these utilities is quite awkward in most cases. In fractals, Epidemic is quite nice to have for 100 CM and since you need two Epidemics for that particular mechanic to work properly, people just take 2 Scourges. There are countless other examples to prove that point, but I sincerely hope that this will suffice.

In terms of DPS, both Scourge and Renegade are quite fine actually in raids because there is neither Exposed nor NPNG in raids. Scourge is overperforming in fractals mainly due to Exposed and NPNG. Exposed packs a 100% bonus for cDPS builds while NPNG eats up more than Exposed provides for pDPS builds. That leads to strong differences between cDPS and pDPS builds. Taking the Thaumanova boss (who is basically a DPS golem) as example: In your typical T4 PUG, you probably get somewhat around 40k DPS as Scourge if people aren't entirely lost while on Reaper, you probably have issues to even reach 25k DPS. In that regard, the balancing issue in fractals is first and foremost not about certain builds, but about fundamental game and fractal mechanics. If you wan't to balance the fractal META, you have to first and foremost target these mechanics instead of builds. You also have to be careful of aftereffects though! Raids currently feature the best build diversity we've ever had. Major build changes could potentially ruin that diversity. Nerfing Exposed too heavily could lead to cDPS builds becoming irrelevant in fractals again - remember: fractals were first and foremost a playground for pDPS builds. You can't just willy-nilly swing the nerf-bat around. And well... while talking about balance, people also constantly mistake total with target DPS.

That's not how GW2 works. The main problem also isn't 100% boon uptime. The main problem is that boons are generally as potent as they are in GW2. If they weren't and if boon application wouldn't be as abysmal as it is in GW2, you could finally properly play around with ranged and melee builds in Encounters since you don't need to rely that heavily on stacking for boons anymore.

In that regard though: Yeah, you could probably tone down both the DPS of Scourge and Renegade, but only for a very minor amount if you don't want to kill these builds off (especially Scourge as DPS in raids) and even then, I don't think that that's really the problem which should be tackled. The main problem is Firebrand and the role compression it offers especially for fractal content. Firebrand basically makes Renegade and Scourge viable in the first place since these fill up what Firebrand is missing. Firebrand in the first place leads to the Firebrand/Renegade/Scourge combination being as strong as it is in fractals in the first place. I'd rather bring up other builds instead of nerfing Scourge and Renegade; the only build that really needs a redesign though is Firebrand.

Like I've said: The problem isn't too much support, it's boons being too potent. What we need are interchangeable alternatives, which perform more or less the same. Splitting up roles too much will only lead to very strict squad compositions in raids and fractals. I dare say that nobody truly wants that.

To get a sub 2hr raid clear they had to practice, yes.  But if you listen to what he's saying the reason the comp works better than other comps they practice that are better on paper (dps) is due to the fact that scourge is so strong for how easy and forgiving it is to play.  That's why they stacked 6 of them in the raid.

If your argument is that such a class will not also produce results for less skilled raids, I think you're very wrong about that.

Edited January 26, 2022 by AliamRationem.5172

[AliamRationem.5172]

1 hour ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Exactly ... people QQ about meta ... then 'solve' that by trying to promote their favoured classes to be meta. Again, people do not understand what they are asking for and what the result will be. The sad part is that we already know what this looks like because it's already happened a few times in the game, for example Alac shift from Chrono to Renegade. 

You see in monochrome.  Does it not occur to you that what people are asking for is not to replace kitten like firebrand with more kitten by a different name but to reduce the disparity and introduce better reasons to play other classes?

[Obtena.7952]

9 minutes ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

You see in monochrome.  Does it not occur to you that what people are asking for is not to replace kitten like firebrand with more kitten by a different name but to reduce the disparity and introduce better reasons to play other classes?

And that already exists ... because alternatives to the meta DO exist and can be played successfully. Again, the Alacrity shift from Chrono to Renegade is a good example of that ... and it's NOT the only example. 

Better reasons aren't a requirement for people to play other classes. People ALREADY do that with the reasons they have to do so. Giving you more reasons isn't going to change the fact that meta is an artificial point of balance. It doesn't mean anything. If Anet wants to allow people to play how they want, then the balancing point is not going to be meta.

What better reason could you think of to play other classes other than "because I like to play how I want and be succesful doing so?" That's the best reason there is. 

Edited January 26, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[AliamRationem.5172]

Just now, Obtena.7952 said:

And that already exists ... because alternatives to the meta DO exist and can be played successfully. Again, the ALacrity shift from lChrono to Renegade is a good example of that ... and it's NOT the only example.

Better reasons aren't a requirement for people to play other classes. People ALREADY do that with the reasons they have to do so. Giving you more reasons isn't going to change the fact that meta is an artificial point of balance. It doesn't mean anything. 

Yes, the meta is artificial.  It is the reaction of the player base to the underlying design.  I'm suggesting we change that underlying design so that players are more inclined to play differently than they do now. That is why we discuss balance, no?

[kharmin.7683]

I think the point is that balance and changing the meta aren't necessarily tied together.

Edited January 26, 2022 by kharmin.7683

[Mungo Zen.9364]

29 minutes ago, Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

This violates the law of non-contradiction.  Something is what it is and it is not what it is not.  If the most effective way of clearing content is chronostacking, then it means things that are not chronostacking are not the most effective way of clearing content.  Other lines include:

You seem to have omitted the part where I was using this as an example of Meta-Breaking.

The developers in games (I am speaking generally, not specific to GW2) create tools for players to use to overcome content (PvE or PvP).  While developers provide the tools, players will generally try to find the best way to use them, or even break them.

In PvE, a developer will create , for example, a Boss that has millions of health, and then give the tools to players to see if they can overcome it.  The first question to ask is "do the players know how to use the tools we have provided them". The second is "do the tools provide enough for the players to meet the minimum requirements to defeat this boss". 

If the above two questions are satisfactorily answered by the developer, then they have set the Meta framework for the players.

What ends up happening though is players, over time, find more efficient ways to use the tools.  They find ways to bypass mechanics or complete content in unintended ways.  In some cases the players go so far as to break the meta.  10 Chrono was Meta-Breaking and was nerfed because it was too efficient.  It allowed players to play content in an unintended way.

I think it important to re-iterate that developers focus on the minimum requirements of content design in PvE games.  It is the players who take this and try to find the most effective ways of using them.

As an aside...

I recognize now that, coming from PvP games where Meta is constantly evolving based upon multiple factors, it is hard to compare this against PvE where there is always a static goal.

In PvP games we see counterplay for Meta comps, assuming that the game is relatively balanced.  The Meta for M:tG was anywhere from 3-7 decks in a healthy environment.  As a player, knowing that at any given tourney you would be facing a selection of potential decks, you would tailor your own deck for that Meta to create counterplay to popular deck choices.  As different decks rose in popularity, it was more likely that players would find strong counterplay to combat popular decks.  This in turn would push players to a different deck composition, shifting the Meta.

In a PvE environment, there is never a shift unless A - the developers update the tools or B - someone finds a new way to do something that gains popularity.  The goal of PvE ends up being how fast and how easily can the group clear content.

As another aside....

I see a lot of people who are arguing the nuances of language and missing the common ground we share.  It sounds like many posters are tired of feeling like in order to be successful, you have to take the popular choice.  Rather, we want to take our preferred choice and feel success.

and I agree with this feeling.  I would be happier if there were 3-4 equally interchangeable options for Alac and Quickness in Fractals so, as I said in my first post, it becomes 'bring the player' not 'bring the profession'

[AliamRationem.5172]

3 minutes ago, kharmin.7683 said:

I think the point is that balance and changing the meta aren't necessarily tied together.

The meta is a response to balance.  Individuals may ignore the meta and not care about balance, but I don't see how it's possible to change balance without changing the meta, which is not something any 1 player determines.

[Obtena.7952]

42 minutes ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

Yes, the meta is artificial.  It is the reaction of the player base to the underlying design.  I'm suggesting we change that underlying design so that players are more inclined to play differently than they do now. That is why we discuss balance, no?

Except people that play meta do it because they want optimal play. Since there is always an optimal solution, that can't be addressed with balance. 

Again, the goal here is to change the meta? OK ... but the meta isn't the result of Anet deciding what meta is ... it's a result of the encounter content. So you aren't balancing anything ... your just juggling classes at the top of the performance pile. 

Edited January 26, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[AliamRationem.5172]

Just now, Obtena.7952 said:

Except people that play meta do it because they want optimal play. Since there is always an optimal solution, that can't be addressed with balance. 

Who said that was the problem we were addressing? Not me!

[Obtena.7952]

1 hour ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

Who said that was the problem we were addressing? Not me!

OK ... you stated you want to 'Inclining' people to play differently ... except people can already do that if they choose to for whatever reason they have to do so. Why do we need to 'incline' people to play differently and have more reasons if they can ALREADY play how they want with any reason they have?  It's a nice thick layer people are putting on here but ... it's still easy to see through this layer that the main goal here isn't any sort of balance ... it's just people wanting their favoured classes to be meta. 

I can assure you that whatever problem you are trying to solve, meta isn't related to balancing the game. By it's very nature, the fact that an optimal solution to content exists, that optimal solution can't be a balancing target. It's just nonsensical to think Anet is going to be able to create all these variations of optimal comps ... for no reason other than to have them because people aren't satisfied with just one optimal solution. 

The balancing point CAN NOT be meta if the goal is to allow people to play how they want. 

Edited January 26, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[Raizel.8175]

1 hour ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

To get a sub 2hr raid clear they had to practice, yes.  But if you listen to what he's saying the reason the comp works better than other comps they practice that are better on paper (dps) is due to the fact that scourge is so strong for how easy and forgiving it is to play.  That's why they stacked 6 of them in the raid.

If your argument is that such a class will not also produce results for less skilled raids, I think you're very wrong about that.

There are several more or less easy and forgiving DPS builds for raids like pDPS/cDPS Soulbeast, pDPS Holosmith, pDPS Reaper, cDPS Tempest, cDPS Daredevil, etc. Some of these builds are even stronger than cDPS Scourge. Easy and forgiving builds aren't really an argument here.

[AliamRationem.5172]

1 hour ago, Raizel.8175 said:

There are several more or less easy and forgiving DPS builds for raids like pDPS/cDPS Soulbeast, pDPS Holosmith, pDPS Reaper, cDPS Tempest, cDPS Daredevil, etc. Some of these builds are even stronger than cDPS Scourge. Easy and forgiving builds aren't really an argument here.

Gosh I don't know.  Maybe it's the other stuff scourge can do to make things easier both for themselves and the raid as a whole that results in better performance where if you tried to do the same with any of the classes you listed the result would be worse performance? 

[AliamRationem.5172]

2 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

OK ... you stated you want to 'Inclining' people to play differently ... except people can already do that if they choose to for whatever reason they have to do so. Why do we need to 'incline' people to play differently and have more reasons if they can ALREADY play how they want with any reason they have?  It's a nice thick layer people are putting on here but ... it's still easy to see through this layer that the main goal here isn't any sort of balance ... it's just people wanting their favoured classes to be meta. 

I can assure you that whatever problem you are trying to solve, meta isn't related to balancing the game. By it's very nature, the fact that an optimal solution to content exists, that optimal solution can't be a balancing target. It's just nonsensical to think Anet is going to be able to create all these variations of optimal comps ... for no reason other than to have them because people aren't satisfied with just one optimal solution. 

The balancing point CAN NOT be meta if the goal is to allow people to play how they want. 

You could just read the notes the developers leave explaining their reasoning for balance patches to see how you're wrong, but you've been told this before.

[Obtena.7952]

36 minutes ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

You could just read the notes the developers leave explaining their reasoning for balance patches to see how you're wrong, but you've been told this before.

I've read them all. NEVER has Anet said they balance anything because of what is meta. So no, I'm not wrong if you are going to use Anet's own patch notes as a reference. 

Edited January 26, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[AliamRationem.5172]

30 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

I've read them all. NEVER has Anet said they balance anything because of what is meta. So no, I'm not wrong if you are going to use Anet's own patch notes as a reference. 

Obtena.  Master of semantics.  You know what? Forget I replied.  Moving on.

[Obtena.7952]

1 hour ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

Obtena.  Master of semantics.  You know what? Forget I replied.  Moving on.

There is no semantics here ... Did Anet say they balance to meta in the patch notes or not? If they didn't say that, I'm NOT WRONG when I say it was never said. I'm probably also not wrong when I speculate they aren't balancing classes to meta even if they don't say so ... because the game certainly isn't evidence they do. Nothing in the patch notes is going to contradict that either (because I know exactly where you are going with this 'didn't read patch notes' nonsense)

I get it's really important to you to advocate balancing to a meta standard ... it just doesn't happen, t doesn't need to happen and it shouldn't happen for lots of good reasons. 

Edited January 27, 2022 by Obtena.7952