[Poll] Given Half a Chance, How Would You Treat The 2/25/2020 & Subsequent Patches?

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

250% unbiased poll, I assure you.

 

If you didn't already know of it, the 2/25/2020 patch can be found here:

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/topic/67967-game-update-notes-february-25-2020/?tab=comments#comment-1087933

And all subsequent patches since can be found in The Game Update Notes Subforum though you may have to do a bit of digging to find them. Not like PvP gets all the attention.

 

EDIT: I messed up the choice selection of this poll and I am too lazy to remake it properly, skewing the results.

The first two questions are meant to be single choice.

The last, multiple choice.

For the best results; pick 1 from the first 2. Then your most passionate field for the last. Knowing people, they'll probably explain what they want anyway.

Edited March 15, 2022 by Multicolorhipster.9751
RFE: Incompetence

[Stand The Wall.6987]

lower damage with high cds is such an obvious recipe for disaster. i don't like the instant cast damage nerf either (static discharge, mantra of pain).

[Tycura.1982]

Why dwell on it? It's been two years. Was it bad? Yeah. Should just fix the current game.

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

1 hour ago, Tycura.1982 said:

Why dwell on it? It's been two years. Was it bad? Yeah. Should just fix the current game.

I feel like it can't be denied that the 2/25/2020 patch set the groundwork for every other patch since.

Unless it was the skills team reworking skills for PvE and they happened to bleed over into PvP then your winning patch day bingo card for every PvP balance patch since 2/25/2020 should look a little something like this:

-X Skill power coefficient nerf

-X Amulet has been removed from the build pannel.

-The cooldown of X skill has been raised from <insert number here> to <insert longer number here.>

 

If you don't believe me, i've provided a link to the game update notes than can be viewed as far back as 2/25/2020.

And here's the update notes from well... Today! https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/topic/110978-game-update-notes-march-15-2022/

On the PvP side nothing has been done to deviate from the norm presented by the 2/25/2020 patch therefore it is and will continue to be a relevant topic of discussion.

Bias free, namaste 🙂🙏

[Paradoxoglanis.1904]

TTK is fine, sustain is far too high. Classes other than thief, rev, engi, necro need buffs or reworks so they can have viable dps/roamer builds. Rezzing needs a fat nerf.

 

[mortrialus.3062]

1 hour ago, Paradoxoglanis.1904 said:

TTK is fine, sustain is far too high. 

These two are not compatible

[Paradoxoglanis.1904]

18 minutes ago, mortrialus.3062 said:

These two are not compatible

How so? The time it takes to kill someone who doesnt sustain themselves is fine. What isnt fine is when you have to do 100k damage to kill 1 person. Buffing damage will just bring back all the 1 shots everyone complained about before the damage nerfs.

[Azure The Heartless.3261]

Alright. so, I'm not going to list every fix I'd make, because nobody has time for that. If skills you like show up a lot, it was not my intent. Your buttons just make a good example.

I'd ignore 300 sec cds initially, but those are a hot button issue. Before that, a balance pass needs to adjust the core of classes to ensure that they are useful while not filling too many roles per specialization. The skills team doesn't want to have separate skills for PvP, and the current 300-sec skills are useful in their current iterations for PvE. Fine. We can cross that bridge later.

For now though, I'd do something like this:
 

⇧ [Damage Boost] 

On skills that require setup, are slow to cast, have a tiny range requirement, or require a very precise activation condition  to connect. damage based on CC doesn't matter in most cases.  Examples include:

• Churning Earth
• Palm Strike
• Backbreaker
• Banish
• Prime Light Beam
• Executioner's Scythe
• Blowtorch
• Headbutt
• Big Ol' Bomb
• Drop the Hammer
• Vault

⇓ [Damage Reduction] 

On select skills that can be cast in a manner that makes them difficult to evade or hides their telegraph. This does not necessarily have to be the damage coeff. it could be a damage reduction that applies if that skill is used under a certain condition. For example

• True Shot reduction ONLY if the caster is affected by stealth
• Prime Light Beam reduction ONLY if the caster is affected by stealth.
• Vault reduction ONLY if the caster is affected by stealth

⇧ [Utility Boost]

On skills that require setup, are slow to cast, or otherwise do very little damage. Examples:

• Applying a secondary condition if you strike a target affected by another condition, with the scaling high in PvP and low in PvE. For example: Striking an enemy as a Mallyx Revenant with 5 stacks of torment or above puts confusion on the opponent.
• Striking a downed opponent with Executioner's Scythe Finishes them, if traited. (Deathly Chill has a good spot for this).  
• 1 Stack of Stability for starting an overload baseline
• Increased strike damage for scourges that damage someone affected by torment or burning

⇓ [Utility Reduction]

On skills that do multiple things that you generally want in multiple situations. Examples:

• Increase radius of Concussion Shot so it only stuns if connected behind the opponent. Flanking and Facing cause daze. 
• Bleeding decrease on Shortbow Auto. Add this bleed to the follow up attacks for Crippling Shot instead, so landing Crippling shot opens your opponent to bleed burst, instead of [1, 1, 1, 1, 1] being a viable burst option.
• ICD on Silent Scope (increase stealth duration)
• ICD on Power Block. If it would trigger while on CD do damage/mild condi instead.

⇧ [CD Increase]

On skills that provide a lot of utility with very little activation requirement. These cd increases can be minor or major.

• Spectral Wall (Potentially: Fearing an opponent with it refunds some of the cost, but not mandatory.)

⇓ [CD Decrease]

on skills that provide very niche utility or will have very many competitive options on the classes where they are presented.

• Portal Entre/Exunt 
• Ring of Warding
• Drop the Hammer
• Endure Pain
• Berserker Stance
• Shield Stance
• Chronomancer wells that are not Gravity Well
• Haste

⇎ [No  Damage Change]

Some of the skills in the game currently are more fair with the CC reduction. If the skill in question provides a lot of utility or comes out fast, but was originally a CC skill that did damage, I would not adjust damage on them right away/leave them low damage for the time being. Examples:

• Bulls Charge
• Jade Winds
• Chaotic Release
• Point Blank Shot
• Impact Strike
• Rampage

Bonus: ↻  [QOL/adjustments]

• Circle indicator for pet knockdowns on smaller animals.
• Interrupting Lick Wounds puts it on cooldown. 
• Throw Axe rework so it uses the same pathing algorithm as artillery slash

Bonus: ↻  [Balance Passes on utility skills people dont use]

There's a whole bunch of skills that people just plain don't use, either because they're not worth a slot, or because they aren't good enough to fit into existing builds. Once balance is in a reasonably better spot, I'd focus on adjusting a few of these at a time for PvP, starting with CD reductions for utility skills and then damage if CD changes don't get them used. If unexpected synergies cause overperformance, these can be reverted incrementally until those synergies have counterplay.

Examples:

• Distracting Daggers
• Fear Me!
• Spirit Weapons
• Throw Mine
• Kick
• Frenzy
• Elixir B/R
• Utility Goggles
• Berserker Utilities (All)
• Druid Utilities (All)

 

 

Edited March 17, 2022 by Azure The Heartless.3261
((Im sleepy, will add later))

[Ragnar.4257]

None of your poll options really adequately capture my position, and judging from the poll / worded answers the position of  many others. Which is this:

Conceptually, the Feb2020 patch was a step in the right direction. The state of the game in 2019 was far too spammy, and gameplay involved either being permanently invulnerable or being dead, with nothing inbetween. So a 30% trim across the board to damage, boons, healing, cooldowns, cc, was fine as a first step.

The problem was that this should have been the first step, with a series of follow-up steps to fix the problem-items which would inevitably emerge from such a shake-up, and that never properly happened.

Perfect example being the 300s traits. The passive-save traits were bad for PvP, and it was right to look to remove/re-work them. As a temporary fix, setting them to 300s would have been acceptable as a placeholder until a proper rework could be implemented in a few weeks/months. But, of course, that never happened, and here we are more than 2 years later with no re-work even in sight. 

Your position is that the concept was wrong. My position is that the concept was fine, just the execution scuffed.

Edited March 16, 2022 by Ragnar.4257

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

2 hours ago, Ragnar.4257 said:

None of your poll options really adequately capture my position, and judging from the poll / worded answers the position of  many others. Which is this:

Conceptually, the Feb2020 patch was a step in the right direction. The state of the game in 2019 was far too spammy, and gameplay involved either being permanently invulnerable or being dead, with nothing inbetween. So a 30% trim across the board to damage, boons, healing, cooldowns, cc, was fine as a first step.

The problem was that this should have been the first step, with a series of follow-up steps to fix the problem-items which would inevitably emerge from such a shake-up, and that never properly happened.

Perfect example being the 300s traits. The passive-save traits were bad for PvP, and it was right to look to remove/re-work them. As a temporary fix, setting them to 300s would have been acceptable as a placeholder until a proper rework could be implemented in a few weeks/months. But, of course, that never happened, and here we are more than 2 years later with no re-work even in sight. 

I disagree. After reviewing your input I found that voting 2, 2, 3/4(By order of choice and question) would fit perfectly fine with your tastes.

You enjoyed the patch and the style of balance? Great. I think it's safe to say you'd keep it going in that direction.

You mentioned you liked damage going down globally by ~30%? I think it would be safe to say you would focus on either keeping it that way, or lowering it further. Balanced Buffs/nerfs are more in line with the prior balance team's style, but you could also do that I suppose.

And 3/4 for the last because I specifically addressed those in the poll. Take your pick.

 

2 hours ago, Ragnar.4257 said:

Your position is that the concept was wrong. My position is that the concept was fine, just the execution scuffed.

My position is entirely neutral. 

I cannot be blamed if the simple act of reading the patch notes simultaneously sounds like kitten-talking them at the same time. 🤷‍♂️

[Ragnar.4257]

47 minutes ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

I disagree. After reviewing your input I found that voting 2, 2, 3/4(By order of choice and question) would fit perfectly fine with your tastes.

You enjoyed the patch and the style of balance? Great. I think it's safe to say you'd keep it going in that direction.

You mentioned you liked damage going down globally by ~30%? I think it would be safe to say you would focus on either keeping it that way, or lowering it further. Balanced Buffs/nerfs are more in line with the prior balance team's style, but you could also do that I suppose.

And 3/4 for the last because I specifically addressed those in the poll. Take your pick.

 

My position is entirely neutral. 

I cannot be blamed if the simple act of reading the patch notes simultaneously sounds like kitten-talking them at the same time. 🤷‍♂️

"I would keep it as is, considering the game better off with my predecessor's righteous work."

"I would work to decrease damage output across the board in general."

"I would keep placeholder, beta-esque 'features' like 300s CD traits, 0 damage CC, etc. until i'm confident I know what i'm doing with them."

No, that is not at all representative of my position. It's infact a total mis-characterisation.

Saying that I'm happy with the temperature in the room being reduced from 30C to 25C, is not the same as saying I want to keep reducing the temperature down to absolute zero. That's a ridiculous extrapolation to draw.

I explicitly stated in my post that the patch required follow-up to fix things which never happened, and that the 300s CDs should have been quickly re-worked, and you strawman that as "I like everything as it is". Nope, not at all. There are many aspects of the current-state which I don't like and would want to fix, such as reinstating most amulets, reducing some cooldowns and adding damage back on some CC skills, nevermind going about fixing up all the non-viable specs. But that doesn't mean I disagree with the concept of fixing the invulnerable/dead dichotomy. Saying "I agree with the aims the patch was trying to achieve" is not at all the same as saying "I am happy with every single thing that was in the patch". Concept =/= implementation.

And no, lol, your position is not neutral. Funnily enough, I've seen you post prior to this thread. Never mind the passive-aggressiveness shown here (and I know you know that I know it, it's in your first line as "250% unbiased poll, I assure you.")

You only gave the options for "keep everything", "revert everything", "mostly keep", "mostly revert", none of which represent my position of "keep some, revert some, depending on the specific thing in question".

Edited March 16, 2022 by Ragnar.4257

[Arheundel.6451]

14 hours ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

250% unbiased poll, I assure you.

 

If you didn't already know of it, the 2/25/2020 patch can be found here:

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/topic/67967-game-update-notes-february-25-2020/?tab=comments#comment-1087933

And all subsequent patches since can be found in The Game Update Notes Subforum though you may have to do a bit of digging to find them. Not like PvP gets all the attention.

 

EDIT: I messed up the choice selection of this poll and I am too lazy to remake it properly, skewing the results.

The first two questions are meant to be single choice.

The last, multiple choice.

For the best results; pick 1 from the first 2. Then your most passionate field for the last. Knowing people, they'll probably explain what they want anyway.

One thing I'd like to add to my choice :  ZERO consideration for player's feedback, every balance decision should be taken ONLY and EXCLUSIVELY considering win/loss ratio of builds/professions in every single game mode , while putting emphasy on high/experienced gameplay.

1. As always 99.9% of forum feedback is biased and should be taken with a grain of salt, it's mostly wishful thinking from selfish individuals to remove any form of counterplay from their chosen profession

2. Effort=reward relaltion must take priority always

[Lethion.8745]

I mean, those questions have mostly obvious answers but I believe the foremost problem that needs to be addressed IMO is the placeholder traits/skills. Especially my main class, Mesmer suffers a lot from this problem. We have so many traits that are not good in any given situation. One of the main strenghts of GW2 was that you were able to adjust your build to the situation anytime you want. But over the years, with certain traits getting nerfed to the ground and completely forgetten about, build diversity has been reduced so much that this feature has no meaning anymore. You have only 1, at max 2 optimal builds for every game mode. I remember having a total of almost 100 lines notebook file for my build links for my all alts (build templates wasn't a thing back then). Now I have 6 template+6 build storage slot and I have spare slots. 

[UNOwen.7132]

The february megapatch was an unmitigated disaster, and a step in the wrong direction. Any change made should start by reverting everything and going from there.

[Kuma.1503]

I like that people don't explode the moment you look at them, and I'm glad evade/invuln chaining was addressed. 

That's where my praises end however. 

300 sec CD traits should have a priority to rework. Instead we got more nerfs. 

Damage back on (some) CC's should have happened years ago. Instead, more nerfs

Removing amulets was a mistake. Expertise and Boon Duration were not problematic. They were potential tuning knobs that you could have used to balance condi and support builds. These are stat-based investments that present a trade-off to these types of builds. 

You're going to feel the vitality loss if you try to play a Harrier Tempest v.s. a Mender Tempest. They just needed to balance base boon durations around the inclusion of said stats. 

Toughness based amulets made side-noders like Ranger tanky, but they also presented an opportunity to create high-durabilty low-sustain builds.

As Weaver, Necro, Mechanist, Tempest, pre-nerf FB, ect. have proven, forcing a player to run Avatar/Sage just created problems where naturally durable builds have too much sustain while also doing  damage (because they're running a hybrid amulet. Shocker)

The population drop speaks for itself. I've personally witnessed most of my guilds and friends quit due to having each of their builds butchered in one way or another. 

The highest praise I could possibly afford this balance direction is that, more often than not, problematic builds were addressed (with collateral damage to weaker ones but i digress). 

If I had to grade Anet on their balance decisions, I'd give them a 4/10

Edited March 16, 2022 by Kuma.1503

[coro.3176]

I don't really like the poll options. Here are my changes in brief + explanation

• TTK: Higher. A CC + damage combo landed on a player at full health should almost kill, but not fully down them. This gives the game more back-and-forth gameplay.
• Conditions: Fully split damaging + nondamaging cleanse. Nondamaging cleanse can be plentiful. Damaging cleanse should be on heal skills only. Nerf damaging condi as needed to balance the new cleanse availability. The idea here is to make condi builds fulfill their role of sustained damage over time rather than relying on condi spam or condi burst.
• Balance Patches: Frequent. Minimum one at the end of every season. Please normalize skills to whatever the current power level is. Many old skills have been left to rot in favour of newer ones. Be ambitious with patches. It's okay to revert things if they don't work out.

Edited March 16, 2022 by coro.3176

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

8 hours ago, Ragnar.4257 said:

And no, lol, your position is not neutral. Funnily enough, I've seen you post prior to this thread. Never mind the passive-aggressiveness shown here (and I know you know that I know it, it's in your first line as "250% unbiased poll, I assure you.")

I'm neutral while i'm here at least.

8 hours ago, Ragnar.4257 said:

You only gave the options for "keep everything", "revert everything", "mostly keep", "mostly revert", none of which represent my position of "keep some, revert some, depending on the specific thing in question".

I apologize that my poll has failed to cater to your specific needs.

Instead of generalizing any options next time, I will be sure to stay up all night and to add another few thousand characters just to include every specific trivial detail that anyone can think of, even going as far to account for people saying the same thing, just in a different way.

I'm sure that will provide a very useful, unambiguous data set.

7 hours ago, Arheundel.6451 said:

One thing I'd like to add to my choice :  ZERO consideration for player's feedback, every balance decision should be taken ONLY and EXCLUSIVELY considering win/loss ratio of builds/professions in every single game mode , while putting emphasy on high/experienced gameplay.

1. As always 99.9% of forum feedback is biased and should be taken with a grain of salt, it's mostly wishful thinking from selfish individuals to remove any form of counterplay from their chosen profession

2. Effort=reward relaltion must take priority always

That's fair. Some people don't have the most agreeable ideas, and that's important to consider when taking feedback.

At least by analyzing data collected from matches there'd be 0 bias, so long as there isn't any dev bias towards certain professions/playstyles. Unlikely though, as long as they don't accept any of us rando players to the balance team- Oh.

45 minutes ago, coro.3176 said:

I don't really like the poll options. Here are my changes in brief + explanation

• Balance Patches: Frequent. Minimum one at the end of every season. Please normalize skills to whatever the current power level is. Many old skills have been left to rot in favour of newer ones. Be ambitious with patches. It's okay to revert things if they don't work out.

That's a good point actually. I think frequency would actually be a big facet of  balance in general, but that was one topic I didn't include.

Believe me when I said that I thought about it, but ultimately didn't include it as an option because of the lack of choice in the past. In terms of frequency Gw2 PvP has always been about every 2-4 months you get a balance patch, save the rare emergency patch like the one yesterday. 

I appreciate your input. If I ever make a less scuffed poll, bet that'l be on there.

16 hours ago, Azure The Heartless.3261 said:

 

• Interrupting Lick Wounds puts it on cooldown. 

More later ((Im sleepy, will add later))

I like what i've read so far, but this change. This specific change.

I want this.

You can probably guess why.

[Ragnar.4257]

1 hour ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

Instead of generalizing any options next time, I will be sure to stay up all night and to add another few thousand characters just to include every specific trivial detail that anyone can think of, even going as far to account for people saying the same thing, just in a different way.

Yes, because putting a neutral / 50/50 option in between "keep" and "revert" is such a wildly specific demand. It's not like strongly-agree / slightly-agree / neither-agree-or-disagree / slightly-disagree / strongly-disagree is the standard pattern for every poll ever.

Edited March 16, 2022 by Ragnar.4257

[Azure The Heartless.3261]

1 hour ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

I want this.

You can probably guess why.

It's so strange that this hasnt had someone tweak it yet, given how comparatively impotent all the other downstates are.

Also fleshed out original post a bit. There's a whole bunch of skills that need work but hopefully I conveyed the general direction I would like things to go per patch.

Quote

• Balance Patches: Frequent. Minimum one at the end of every season.
• . Be ambitious with patches. It's okay to revert things if they don't work out.

Also this. spectate some tournaments in the season and make notes of what you see, how people deal with it, and what it would take to deal with it comp wise if the answer to "how are people dealing with this?" is "They arent." 

If "what would it take to deal with this?" 's answer is *shrug* then adjust that strategy for next season through patches. 

Also make notes of what you -DONT- see. A tournament with no warriors/eles/mesmers is just as much a red flag as a tournament with all necros/vindicators. 

Especially that last part. If you make a mistake and something doesn't meet your expectations, have the balls to revert it. We don't care, and people who would chide you for that are of no consequence. The goal is to make interactions we'd enjoy so we stay and play the game, not to convince us that your balance idea was actually amazing. If it takes years of suffering for us to accept it you've lost as a game designer. We arent all unpleasable. 

Edited March 17, 2022 by Azure The Heartless.3261