The inevitable disappointment of new elite specialisations

[Mell.4873]

Comming off my love of the new specializations I found the glaring issue that you can't satisfy everyone with any new elites. 

The power creap would be a real issue if the new elite specialisations were demonstrably better than the old ones which was the case for many of the PoF elites. 

 

People have already religated most of the new specs to the bin for being weaker than the old ones. I'm not a cynical and see them as another potential solution to a problem with a particular class.

Of coarse if lets say untamed offers rangers more options for aoe you could always play a class like necro that already has strong aoe options, but what if I don't want to.

The same can be said for many of the new elites, they might not be better what another class has to offer but it offer class mains more options without switching. 

 

Im a mesmer main and hate re-sumoning my clones on trash, if virtuoso only solves this problem then I will be happy playing it. 

[Buran.3796]

9 minutes ago, Mell.4873 said:

The same can be said for many of the new elites, they might not be better what another class has to offer but it offer class mains more options without switching. 

   To be honest: some of the new specs do reuse tons of older animations from other professions while providing 0 new mechanics (and with large tradeoffs in exchange); so even if the numbers were amazing the bunch of them still would be felt as rushed and unimaginative. 

[Mell.4873]

55 minutes ago, Buran.3796 said:

   To be honest: some of the new specs do reuse tons of older animations from other professions while providing 0 new mechanics (and with large tradeoffs in exchange); so even if the numbers were amazing the bunch of them still would be felt as rushed and unimaginative. 

I don't see the reusing of animations as a problem, they don't need to provide new mechanics. PoF elite specializations didn't add many new mechanics unlike HoT which introduced healer and buffing classes.

Also EoD does introduce new mechanics like the Mechanist having a sort of boss pet with a defiance bar. We have Specter with single target healing cross with necromancer wells. Catalyst offers a more permanent combo field (even if they are not that strong at the moment). Vindicator offers a new type of dodge.

 

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

Most of the new specs aren't even on par with core though. We'll see on Monday though what changed after the last beta.

[Buran.3796]

1 minute ago, Mell.4873 said:

I don't see the reusing of animations as a problem, they don't need to provide new mechanics. PoF elite specializations didn't add many new mechanics unlike HoT which introduced healer and buffing classes.

Also EoD does introduce new mechanics like the Mechanist having a sort of boss pet with a defiance bar. We have Specter with single target healing cross with necromancer wells. Catalyst offers a more permanent combo field (even if they are not that strong at the moment). Vindicator offers a new type of dodge.

 

   The Specter seems to me the only new class mechanic worth of mention: his potential as healer focused in a single target is different from what we used to have until now (ASoE heals and support).

   I do see problems with the animations and fx,  since ANet work in that regard in PoF was stellar, at least with some classes as Firebrand, Mirage, Weaver...  Whereas here you have the Vindicator with a greatsword with 5 skills with animations from Ranger's gs and Reaper's gs. , and the fx looks just  placeholders. And most of the new specs don't have new mechanics: Vindicator has a single ultraexpensive dodge; removing a dadge is not a new mechanic and anyway was "already done" with the mirage. Not having the ability to swap weapons with the Bladesworn isn't a new mechanic. Having a Guardian with mobility skills sin't a new mechanic. We already had pet classes, etc.

   I do understand the concept of fun: a class or spec can be fun to play and but weak compared to others, so you can use it (mostly in PvE). We already known that most of the new specs aren't competitive vs the previous ones. But if a class is played exactly as before, is less powerful and on top of that has new handicaps that didn't had, why to play it?

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

There's 3 ways to look at the new elite specs: mechanics, performance, and fun.  A lot of these arguments boil down to different perspectives not communicating well.  I'll take Vindicator as an example:

Mechanic: It has a weird but customizeable dodge... with drawbacks.  This makes it the third version after Daredevil and Mirage.  Greatsword has more power cleave and... that's it.  

Performance: It gets self quickness and it does slightly more power damage than power renegade, but it is nothing particularly stellar or noteworthy otherwise.

Fun: A lot of people love the bunny hopping onto enemies for surprise attacks.  It looks and feels cool. 

[Mell.4873]

3 hours ago, Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

There's 3 ways to look at the new elite specs: mechanics, performance, and fun.  A lot of these arguments boil down to different perspectives not communicating well.  I'll take Vindicator as an example:

Mechanic: It has a weird but customizeable dodge... with drawbacks.  This makes it the third version after Daredevil and Mirage.  Greatsword has more power cleave and... that's it.  

Performance: It gets self quickness and it does slightly more power damage than power renegade, but it is nothing particularly stellar or noteworthy otherwise.

Fun: A lot of people love the bunny hopping onto enemies for surprise attacks.  It looks and feels cool. 

Yeah again the real problem is constantly trying to out do the old elites. I imagine a lot of the resources that went into the last two specializations are not there since they have not redone animation (or they are delayed). 

With that more negative note I way prefer more elites specializations that less, I want more customization not less. 

Edited February 26, 2022 by Mell.4873

[Zacchary.6183]

All of this is really subjective. In what context are the new elites better or worse? From what I have seen during the betas, each offer a new way to play their respective professions and give plenty of opportunity to buildcraft, some moreso than previous elites. Mesmer with stocked phantasmal daggers instead of clone management.  Engi with a customizable pet rather than kits. Thief with a group friendly non-niche role rather than selfish aggressive glasscannon gameplay. They may not fit the mould of tradition, but they tend to do way better when the player adapts to their playstyle rather than make it fit theirs.

At least in the sense of specter, thief can now tank.

[Asum.4960]

1 hour ago, Mell.4873 said:

I don't see the reusing of animations as a problem

I think what people generally really mean when they criticise reused animations is actually poorly reused animations. 

There is a lot of mileage you can get out of skill effects and animations (as with creature rigs, etc.), if done right, and it's certainly wise to do so for efficiency sake. 

The problem comes though if when you first see the supposedly new skill and instantly recognize the animation, effect or rig, because it's been so poorly used/hidden. 

That's the point where things start to feel cheap and like the new stuff doesn't have it's own identity - and that's unfortunately the case for a lot of EoD, and especially pronounced in the Elite Specs - something you really don't want in animations in the hands of players, to be used very frequently, especially. 

 

For example, I don't think I'll ever see Harbinger's Voracious Arc and not just see Daredevil's Bounding Dodger (and having the exact same sound effects doesn't help either). 

And the question of why a Necromancer is suddenly air flipping around like an acrobat (rather than a more fitting menacing leap and glide or something alike) is something that leads into point two why I think some of these Especs flopped reception wise, and that is theme. 

 

There are so many fantasy staples that players have been looking forward to exploring, adjacent to the Core professions (or "Core Line+'s"), which would be perfect to utilize as Elite Specialisations for almost guaranteed excitement and hype - both from existing players as well as drawing in new ones with recognizable hooks. 

Not only did Anet not do that, in some cases they almost seem devoid of theme altogether (down to the largely completely non descriptive names, evoking no imagination and inspiration in existing nor prospective players), and just a (often partially, or even largely, misunderstood) random collection of mechanical wishes or holes Anet wanted to plug in certain Professions - almost as if designed by via spreadsheet, with a slight coat of paint added on after. 

 

Not to doomsay the especs entirely. A few of them certainly look interesting, and anything remotely new to play with even in the cases where they don't really is still a welcome boon. 

But I do think the criticism is fair, and it's far from entirely rooted in just powerlevels. Big damage numbers and the like certainly help first impressions (to take Harbinger as example again, which would have certainly been utterly slammed in Beta 1 if it had not come out swinging with an obviously inflated 45k DPS), but that only last so long until people start looking behind the curtain. 

 

So I think the greater frustration felt is that even if numbers of various EoD Specs come up, or ideally, some PoF and even HoT era specs come down, making EoD specs more competent and competitive to use in comparison - that won't change a largely still poor mechanically and thematically thrown together pile of specs which in many cases just aren't that fun, interactive or inspiring past the first month of excitement about something new.

[Mell.4873]

46 minutes ago, Asum.4960 said:

I think what people generally really mean when they criticise reused animations is actually poorly reused animations. 

There is a lot of mileage you can get out of skill effects and animations (as with creature rigs, etc.), if done right, and it's certainly wise to do so for efficiency sake. 

The problem comes though if when you first see the supposedly new skill and instantly recognize the animation, effect or rig, because it's been so poorly used/hidden. 

That's the point where things start to feel cheap and like the new stuff doesn't have it's own identity - and that's unfortunately the case for a lot of EoD, and especially pronounced in the Elite Specs - something you really don't want in animations in the hands of players, to be used very frequently, especially. 

 

For example, I don't think I'll ever see Harbinger's Voracious Arc and not just see Daredevil's Bounding Dodger (and having the exact same sound effects doesn't help either). 

And the question of why a Necromancer is suddenly air flipping around like an acrobat (rather than a more fitting menacing leap and glide or something alike) is something that leads into point two why I think some of these Especs flopped reception wise, and that is theme. 

 

There are so many fantasy staples that players have been looking forward to exploring, adjacent to the Core professions (or "Core Line+'s"), which would be perfect to utilize as Elite Specialisations for almost guaranteed excitement and hype - both from existing players as well as drawing in new ones with recognizable hooks. 

Not only did Anet not do that, in some cases they almost seem devoid of theme altogether (down to the largely completely non descriptive names, evoking no imagination and inspiration in existing nor prospective players), and just a (often partially, or even largely, misunderstood) random collection of mechanical wishes or holes Anet wanted to plug in certain Professions - almost as if designed by via spreadsheet, with a slight coat of paint added on after. 

 

Not to doomsay the especs entirely. A few of them certainly look interesting, and anything remotely new to play with even in the cases where they don't really is still a welcome boon. 

But I do think the criticism is fair, and it's far from entirely rooted in just powerlevels. Big damage numbers and the like certainly help first impressions (to take Harbinger as example again, which would have certainly been utterly slammed in Beta 1 if it had not come out swinging with an obviously inflated 45k DPS), but that only last so long until people start looking behind the curtain. 

 

So I think the greater frustration felt is that even if numbers of various EoD Specs come up, or ideally, some PoF and even HoT era specs come down, making EoD specs more competent and competitive to use in comparison - that won't change a largely still poor mechanically and thematically thrown together pile of specs which in many cases just aren't that fun, interactive or inspiring past the first month of excitement about something new.

Okay I see your point, maybe they will redo some of the animations when they have time. I guess there was some internal reason the animations could not be brand new. 

[AliamRationem.5172]

1 hour ago, Zacchary.6183 said:

All of this is really subjective. In what context are the new elites better or worse? From what I have seen during the betas, each offer a new way to play their respective professions and give plenty of opportunity to buildcraft, some moreso than previous elites. Mesmer with stocked phantasmal daggers instead of clone management.  Engi with a customizable pet rather than kits. Thief with a group friendly non-niche role rather than selfish aggressive glasscannon gameplay. They may not fit the mould of tradition, but they tend to do way better when the player adapts to their playstyle rather than make it fit theirs.

At least in the sense of specter, thief can now tank.

I think you're right.  New playstyles are what make the elite specs such an important feature of each expansion.  However, as ANet tacitly admitted in announcing the upcoming nerfs to firebrand, renegade, and scourge, poor balancing can have a serious negative impact upon player perception and practices.  They needed to make these nerfs in order to "make room" for the new specs, which apparently wasn't anything important enough for them to bother with before now. 🤡🎉

Nobody's asking for perfect balance.  I think all we ask is that whatever class we choose we feel like we meaningfully contribute to a group.  It's just hard to really do that with classes like firebrand around.

 

[Obtena.7952]

2 hours ago, Mell.4873 said:

Yeah again the real problem is constantly trying to out do the old elites. I imagine alot of the resources that went into the last two specialisations are not there since they have not redone animation (or they are delayed). 

With that more negative note I way prefer more elites specialisationa that less, I want more customisation not less. 

Actually, I think the real problem is people's perception that they should try to out do the old elites. Especs are intended to be playstyle differences. IF they do anything else, like have a performance boost, that's simply a consequence. 

Edited February 26, 2022 by Obtena.7952

[voltaicbore.8012]

1 hour ago, Asum.4960 said:

So I think the greater frustration felt is that even if numbers of various EoD Specs come up, or ideally, some PoF and even HoT era specs come down, making EoD specs more competent and competitive to use in comparison - that won't change a largely still poor mechanically and thematically thrown together pile of specs which in many cases just aren't that fun, interactive or inspiring past the first month of excitement about something new.

This pretty much sums it up for me. As a ranger main, the untamed numbers would have to be absolutely incredible for me to... actually like the spec (at least how it was as of last beta). But even after that, all we get is weird ambush type skills and no fundamental solution to pet pathing/animation/AI issues. Any high numerical performance would only be a thin veneer hiding a fundamentally uninteresting spec. I felt quite similarly about harbinger and bladesworn, and those did have some nice big numbers during beta.

The one net positive of me feeling so unenthused about new especs is that I no longer include "new elite spec" as one of the things I want out of future content updates. If I'm interested in future content, it'll be stuff like new maps and story.

[Mell.4873]

3 hours ago, Zacchary.6183 said:

All of this is really subjective. In what context are the new elites better or worse? From what I have seen during the betas, each offer a new way to play their respective professions and give plenty of opportunity to buildcraft, some moreso than previous elites. Mesmer with stocked phantasmal daggers instead of clone management.  Engi with a customizable pet rather than kits. Thief with a group friendly non-niche role rather than selfish aggressive glasscannon gameplay. They may not fit the mould of tradition, but they tend to do way better when the player adapts to their playstyle rather than make it fit theirs.

At least in the sense of specter, thief can now tank.

My point exactly but I'm more putting ford the idea moving forward that adding more elite specs will obvious disappoint the players who want something specific. Elementalist is the perfect example with no elite specialization that adds to ranged gameplay offered by staff.

I mean this sentiment was felt when druid was introduced but then was amended by soulbeast. Untamed offers some sort of WvW spec but needs lot of refining.

[Puck.3697]

Flavour wise and animationally I think they all look amazing. You don't need a rework on how they look. 

Not everything needs to be unique. It would reach a point of silliness if every ability was animationally unique. 

The problems I have are simply that some of these elites clash with their core design massively aswell as some other things I don't like. 

- virtuoso, it's niche is what cores niche was litterally. It's trying to be the bursty shatter specc something core was susposed to be. 

- bladesworn. Why. It's silly realistically. 

- willbender. Trying to put herald into guardian was fundamentally a bad idea when the core design has very little front loaded damage options. 

- harbinger "let's throw a recreation of weaver into a specc with no active defense". 

[ThrakathNar.4537]

10 hours ago, Asum.4960 said:

There are so many fantasy staples that players have been looking forward to exploring, adjacent to the Core professions (or "Core Line+'s"), which would be perfect to utilize as Elite Specialisations for almost guaranteed excitement and hype - both from existing players as well as drawing in new ones with recognizable hooks. 

Not only did Anet not do that, in some cases they almost seem devoid of theme altogether (down to the largely completely non descriptive names, evoking no imagination and inspiration in existing nor prospective players), and just a (often partially, or even largely, misunderstood) random collection of mechanical wishes or holes Anet wanted to plug in certain Professions - almost as if designed by via spreadsheet, with a slight coat of paint added on after. 

Completely agree about some of them lacking any theme. It honestly feels for some specs, they either didn't have an idea or had too many random ideas and just papered over it by giving the class either quickness or alacrity. Taking Catalyst for instance, it's literally just core ele but you get a button that gives boons. There's no coherent identity behind it like with Chronomancer's time manipulation or with Holosmith's heat control, and as a result the spec just feels flat, even if it is numerically powerful. The "jade tech" lore given to some of the specs feels like an afterthought rather than the idea from which all of the mechanics came.

 

Also, what is with the names of these specs? Sure, there are a couple of them where the name actually describes what the spec does (like mechanist), but most of them the name feels completely unrelated, and in some cases it feels like they got the names the wrong way round. Looking at Harbinger, why is this spec not the one called Catalyst? In the real world, catalysts are something used in chemistry, and with elixirs and alchemy being the closest in-game equivalent to that, it makes perfect sense for the spec getting elixirs to be named Catalyst. Similarly, why isn't Willbender called Bladesworn? I mean, the profession icon literally has two swords on it, if any of the specs were going to have a reference to blades in the name, I would've assumed it would be that one.

 

I don't care about the numbers - they could powercreep the new specs as much as they wanted and it still wouldn't change the fact that they're just... not that interesting. They aren't breaking new ground (except for ally targeting), and they don't explore new themes or underutilised aspects of core.

[Loboling.5293]

12 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Actually, I think the real problem is people's perception that they should try to out do the old elites.

Warrior mains who wanted something other than another damage spec:  *Pikachu Face*

[AliamRationem.5172]

4 hours ago, Loboling.5293 said:

Warrior mains who wanted something other than another damage spec:  *Pikachu Face*

I think they'll be even more disappointed by the impossibility of balancing a spec designed to charge up a big hit while standing still.  Honestly, how are they supposed to make that gimmick pay off in an action combat game?  It's just a terrible idea.

[Mungo Zen.9364]

23 hours ago, Mell.4873 said:

Comming off my love of the new specializations I found the glaring issue that you can't satisfy everyone with any new elites. 

Players tend to forget that Anet has a long history of changing how eSpecs work (and even core professions) alongside specific builds.  What we are being given in the EoD eSpecs is the framework for the design vision the developers had for each Prof.  How many of these will launch on Monday exactly the same as the last Beta?  How many will change before the Summer Profession update, and then change again at that update?

I doubt the new eSpecs will be given different weapons, but I am betting more than one of them will have key changes to the mechanics.  Many Traits will be reworked, and a lot of value tweaking along the way.

Players will complain about the things they do not like.  Even if you give them what they ask for, they will find something new to complain about.  Shut out the noise, and enjoy the eSpecs you enjoy until they get changed, as is likely to happen within the next 12 months.

Edited February 26, 2022 by Mungo Zen.9364

[Stx.4857]

I don't dislike the new elite specs for their number tuning.  I dislike them for playstyle and theme.  There isn't a single elite spec i am looking forward to playing except maybe Harbinger.  Willbender looks kind of cool, maybe I'll try that for a bit.

[Mell.4873]

2 minutes ago, Stx.4857 said:

I don't dislike the new elite specs for their number tuning.  I dislike them for playstyle and theme.  There isn't a single elite spec i am looking forward to playing except maybe Harbinger.  Willbender looks kind of cool, maybe I'll try that for a bit.

Again exactly my point you can't please everyone, I like both untamed and virtouso both probably the most hated of the new specs. 

[Stx.4857]

Just now, Mell.4873 said:

Again exactly my point you can't please everyone, I like both untamed and virtouso both probably the most hated of the new specs. 

Of course you can't please everyone.  The goal is to please as many people as you can.  Not sure they did very good with these new elite specs, but i have no idea.  I'm still going to enjoy the new maps and take my time playing the specs I currently enjoy.  

[HotDelirium.7984]

20 hours ago, Blood Red Arachnid.2493 said:

There's 3 ways to look at the new elite specs: mechanics, performance, and fun.  A lot of these arguments boil down to different perspectives not communicating well.  I'll take Vindicator as an example:

Mechanic: It has a weird but customizeable dodge... with drawbacks.  This makes it the third version after Daredevil and Mirage.  Greatsword has more power cleave and... that's it.  

Performance: It gets self quickness and it does slightly more power damage than power renegade, but it is nothing particularly stellar or noteworthy otherwise.

Fun: A lot of people love the bunny hopping onto enemies for surprise attacks.  It looks and feels cool. 

-In addendum to your comment, the other half of the spec, the sacrificial healer spec- its brings questions of viability and need. Do we need another healer and if we are given another option if it doesn't compete with established healers then its a pointless endeavor. This is why balance is so crucial in both numbers and variability of the elites theme/concept. I know they try not to homogenize professions in this game but I think right now its almost too sandbox and I think they are at least trying to rectify this.

-In the grand scheme of things if they wanted to they could redue skills and traits and give many professions access to a viable healer and/or support. This does start inching its way to the holy trinity model but as we see those games are incredibly streamlined while sacrificing a bit of creativity.

[HotDelirium.7984]

16 minutes ago, Mungo Zen.9364 said:

Players tend to forget that Anet has a long history of changing how eSpecs work (and even core professions) alongside specific builds.  What we are being given in the EoD eSpecs is the framework for the design vision the developers had for each Prof.  How many of these will launch on Monday exactly the same as the last Beta?  How many will change before the Summer Profession update, and then change again at that update?

I doubt the new eSpecs will be given different weapons, but I am betting more than one of them will have key changes to the mechanics.  Many Traits will be reworked, and a lot of value tweaking along the way.

Players will complain about the things they do not like.  Even if you give them what they ask for, they will find something new to complain about.  Shut out the noise, and enjoy the eSpecs you enjoy until they get changed, as is likely to happen within the next 12 months.

The time from the 1st beta to the second was not incredibly long so it wouldn't surprise me if the changes in the second beta weren't based on our feedback (but from internal testing feedback), so maybe it just confirmed some of the directions they were going. I think the version being released Monday is more of a reflection of our feedback but as we know sometimes they take years to get back to tuning elite specs due to priorities. If many of the specs are never played that certainly will be even more greater feedback for them to keep optimizing their viability.....within a reasonable time frame.

[Mell.4873]

55 minutes ago, HotDelirium.7984 said:

The time from the 1st beta to the second was not incredibly long so it wouldn't surprise me if the changes in the second beta weren't based on our feedback (but from internal testing feedback), so maybe it just confirmed some of the directions they were going. I think the version being released Monday is more of a reflection of our feedback but as we know sometimes they take years to get back to tuning elite specs due to priorities. If many of the specs are never played that certainly will be even more greater feedback for them to keep optimizing their viability.....within a reasonable time frame.

Yeah we shall wait and see if there are any massive changes.