When will Mech Wars 2 return to being Guild Wars 2?

[Mell.4873]

40 minutes ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

LoL What?  Complaints about firebrand, renegade, and scourge were constant.    

Hmm I remember it differently then, I also remember the gate keeping in fractals. I mean HB problem still exist there and still no one complains. 

Edited August 30, 2022 by Mell.4873

[Astralporing.1957]

1 hour ago, Mell.4873 said:

Hmm I remember it differently then, I also remember the gate keeping in fractals. I mean HB problem still exist there and still no one complains. 

If you think noone complains about Fb, you're not reading forums or reddit.

[Mell.4873]

1 hour ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

If you think noone complains about Fb, you're not reading forums or reddit.

I count one call for a Firebrand nerf on the Guardian professional forum on the first page. Even then people ask to have other professions buffed rather than nerfing there own which won't really solve the problem. 

[Dadnir.5038]

3 hours ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

LoL What?  Complaints about firebrand, renegade, and scourge were constant.    

Or maybe he/she didn't get the whole "blue and green child are OP/favoured/never nerfed... etc." meme that filled the majority of the threads opened in the forum for a few years.

[Dadnir.5038]

Double post, somehow the chatbox buged.

Edited August 30, 2022 by Dadnir.5038

[Kuma.1503]

1 hour ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

If you think noone complains about Fb, you're not reading forums or reddit.

Guardian doesn't have hoards of non-mains spamming nerf threads about it on its own sub forum. 

 

[Astralporing.1957]

Just now, Kuma.1503 said:

Guardian doesn't have hoards of non-mains spamming nerf threads about it on its own sub forum.

Not anymore, no. People got tired of doing it throughout the years since PoF after all. Given time, the amount of complains about Mechs will fall as well, but it won't mean people will be any better disposed towards it. It would just mean most of what had to be said was said long ago.

Notice also, that Mech currently is far more domineering that Fb ever was.

[Cyninja.2954]

14 minutes ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Not anymore, no. People got tired of doing it throughout the years since PoF after all. Given time, the amount of complains about Mechs will fall as well, but it won't mean people will be any better disposed towards it. It would just mean most of what had to be said was said long ago.

Notice also, that Mech currently is far more domineering that Fb ever was.

This.

Not sure what people are talking about, firebrand has seen calls for nerfs ever since it got implemented in PoF, initially for all game modes. In WvW it remains THE cornerstone of any squad setup due to stab to this day (so much in fact that the developers decided to not touch the stab dominance twice in fear of breaking the game mode without stab alternatives).

In PvE it's clawed its way past all other class nerfs to the mvp spot. Many have been vocal, even guardian "mains" about necessary changes (at least the ones which are in favor of a more diverse meta or for simple fear of anet over-nerfing once they do come to doing changes)..

Yet even with the extreme dominance of FB, with an over-proportionate amount of access to aegis compared to other classes, a near monopoly on stability and insane backed in utility (basically only lacking boon strip), mech has surpassed FB.

The issue with engi (and mostly mech): it's not only bullying away support slots or quickness supports, it's dominating near all roles: support, condi dps and power dps. Yes, that is in part because engi can do everything now (alac support, quickness support, offensive quickness/alac, condi and power dps) which not every class is able to, but it's also due to the pet automation and signet issues (which are very passive gameplay).

Shifting issues from one overpowered class to another is no argument against changes, it's merely an argument that 2 classes might be in need of changes.

Edited August 30, 2022 by Cyninja.2954

[Kuma.1503]

19 minutes ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Not anymore, no. People got tired of doing it throughout the years since PoF after all. Given time, the amount of complains about Mechs will fall as well, but it won't mean people will be any better disposed towards it. It would just mean most of what had to be said was said long ago.

Notice also, that Mech currently is far more domineering that Fb ever was.

Debatable. 

Firebrand has defined the meta for a very long time. 

It was dominant in every game mode before the PvP nerfs, and held that position for a very long time. Now it dominates two. It's so broken in WvW that Anet can't nerf it or the game mode breaks. Power mech is no where NEAR that level of OP. 

Mech, meanwhile, dominates PvE only. It was good in PvP for 2 patches, but immediately saw heavy nerfs, hotfix nerfs, and continued to get nerfed in every patch until it was axed from PvP.  

It's bad in WvW zergs, Is decent as a roamer, but is too glassy vs condis  to be top tier in this Cele infested meta.  

It's a meme in PvP that gets dunked on by the meta builds like Cata, Tempest, and, Willbender, and Bladesworn. 

Firebrand also still holds a monopoly over aegis/stab. Meaning it can do mechanics for its group. This means running any other quickness dps or quick healer is discouraged because they can't compete with firebrand. Heal Scrapper is a good build, but because firebrand is dominant, it very rarely sees play. We've been holding that L for years now, and non-engi mains didn't make much fuss about it.  

Quick cata is actually still good, but FB invalidates it. It has more dps, more utility, is less punished by mechanics, and has better flexibility with its utility slots. 

FB invalidates every other quickness build. 

Power Mech, strong as it is, still faces competition from Virtuoso, Specter, Scourge, Bladesworn, Harbinger, and condi FB. 

All of these are good builds that can compete with a Power Mech. 

I can't name a single  build that competes with  heal firebrand. Stab, Aegis, and freedom to slot whichever utilities you like. Instant cast quickness that you can pump out as you do your rotation. Plus it dominates WvW as well as PVE?

FB is far more dominant in the meta. It enables every other class, including power Mech. 

 

Edited August 30, 2022 by Kuma.1503

[Cyninja.2954]

26 minutes ago, Kuma.1503 said:

Debatable. 

Firebrand has defined the meta for a very long time. 

It was dominant in every game mode before the PvP nerfs, and held that position for a very long time. Now it dominates two. It's so broken in WvW that Anet can't nerf it or the game mode breaks. Power mech is no where NEAR that level of OP. 

Mech, meanwhile, dominates PvE only. It was good in PvP for 2 patches, but immediately saw heavy nerfs, hotfix nerfs, and continued to get nerfed in every patch until it was axed from PvP.  

It's bad in WvW zergs, Is decent as a roamer, but is too glassy vs condis  to be top tier in this Cele infested meta.  

It's a meme in PvP that gets dunked on by the meta builds like Cata, Tempest, and, Willbender, and Bladesworn. 

Firebrand also still holds a monopoly over aegis/stab. Meaning it can do mechanics for its group. This means running any other quickness dps or quick healer is discouraged because they can't compete with firebrand. Heal Scrapper is a good build, but because firebrand is dominant, it very rarely sees play. We've been holding that L for years now, and non-engi mains didn't make much fuss about it.  

Quick cata is actually still good, but FB invalidates it. It has more dps, more utility, is less punished by mechanics, and has better flexibility with its utility slots. 

FB invalidates every other quickness build. 

Power Mech, strong as it is, still faces competition from Virtuoso, Specter, Scourge, Bladesworn, Harbinger, and condi FB. 

All of these are good builds that can compete with a Power Mech. 

I can't name a single  build that competes with  heal firebrand. Stab, Aegis, and freedom to slot whichever utilities you like. Instant cast quickness that you can pump out as you do your rotation. Plus it dominates WvW as well as PVE?

FB is far more dominant in the meta. It enables every other class, including power Mech. 

 

True, Firebrand is more dominating game mode wise. That's not any justification FOR keeping mech the way it is mind you. It merely means Firebrand needs reworks too.

Also the fact that mech is "only" strong in PvE is even less an argument compared to Firebrand (and players are trying mech in WvW, it's merely not strong enough to keep them on it. Talking WvW, support scrapper is almost as dominating as FB atm, just saying). It's "only" dominating in 1 game mode, yet still is far more over-represented than a class which is strong in 2. That does not seem an issue to you? (when in fact one should assume that classes played retains some stickyness between modes?). It is even more of an argument that mech is to strong in PvE.

Your entire argument can be summed up as:"but look, this class is even more overpowered (which is true, FB is a god among "normal" classes designed and it's issues are very different than mech)" which falls apart the moment one looks at representation, which sees mech take an even unhealthier spot than fb (and both are far over-represented).

Edited August 30, 2022 by Cyninja.2954

[Kuma.1503]

33 minutes ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

 

True, Firebrand is more dominating game mode wise. That's not any justification FOR keeping mech the way it is mind you. It merely means Firebrand needs reworks too.

 

Also the fact that mech is "only" strong in PvE is even less an argument compared to Firebrand. It's "only" dominating in 1 game mode, yet still is far more over-represented than a class which is strong in 2. That does not seem an issue to you? (when in fact one should assume that classes played retains some stickyness between modes?). It is even more of an argument that mech is to strong in PvE.

Mech is an issue, however the argument I'd like to challenge is that is more dominant than firebrand. 

It has a higher playrate than Firebrand, but Firebrand is more game defining than Mech. Even if we ignore WvW. 

There are multiple reasons why I believe this is the case. But the main one is this:

 

Mech is replaceable. It has competition in its role. Firebrand does not. 

Mech's biggest asset is the ease of which it does damage. Make no mistake, this is a massive advantage, especially over builds which both bench 6k+ lower AND have to work harder to deal their damage (RIP Berserker) This is absolutely a problem. 

However. there are builds which are capable of not only performing at the level of a power mech, but also out performing it. This is because once a player's skill increases, the benefit they get from LI decreases. Especially if they play other strong builds which are not heavily punished by mechanics like Virtuoso, Specter, and Scourge. 

These builds can also find themselves more useful than a Power mech because of the utility they provide.  Specter is half a healer even in full dps gear, and has built-in rez power, TONS of breakbar damage thanks to S/P 3, and barriers. It also benches high with a not too difficult rotation on a ranged build. 

Virtuoso has a lower benchmark on paper, but can start to pull ahead once you factor in confusion, is also ranged and has useful mesmer utility like portals which can make it invaluable on certain fights. 

As for support Mech, Alac specter is able to compete with it. This is a very good build which people do not value enough. Perhaps because the way in which it provides value is difficult to wrap your head around at first until you've played it. 

 

Firebrand, specifically heal firebrand doesn't have any builds which can compete with it. Heal Scrapper is its closest competitor, yet no amount of skill will let a Heal Scrapper generate spammable stability and aegis, while not needing to devote its entire utility bar and press it on CD to maintain quickness. Unlike hFB, Heal scrapper also does negative damage since it runs a condi weapon + shield while running harrier stats. 

 

Mech can be replaced with minimal impact on the squad. Provided the person replacing them is competent at their class. Firebrand cannot. Period.

Power Mech is VERY good, but it's not Firebrand good. Which is why it concerns me that the player base has determined that Mech is the biggest issue right now when it definitively is not. And I have a theory for why that is. We've recently seen what the game looks like without power mech, so we can easy FEEL the impact it had on the meta. 

Do we have any idea what the meta would look like without FB? Imagine, builds like Heal Catalyst actually seeing play because the standard of what makes a good heal quickness build is no longer astronomically high. FB doesn't FEEL as bad as Pmech because FB has become our Status Quo. 

Edited August 30, 2022 by Kuma.1503

[Doggie.3184]

18 hours ago, Strider Pj.2193 said:

Considering all the threads about using ‘henchman’ I figured people would love the mechanist.  
😀

kitten, you right. As a GW1 player nowonder I like the spec so much.

[Cyninja.2954]

54 minutes ago, Kuma.1503 said:

Mech is an issue, however the argument I'd like to challenge is that is more dominant than firebrand. 

It has a higher playrate than Firebrand, but Firebrand is more game defining than Mech. Even if we ignore WvW. 

There are multiple reasons why I believe this is the case. But the main one is this:

 

Mech is replaceable. It has competition in its role. Firebrand does not. 

Mech's biggest asset is the ease of which it does damage. Make no mistake, this is a massive advantage, especially over builds which both bench 6k+ lower AND have to work harder to deal their damage (RIP Berserker) This is absolutely a problem. 

However. there are builds which are capable of not only performing at the level of a power mech, but also out performing it. This is because once a player's skill increases, the benefit they get from LI decreases. Especially if they play other strong builds which are not heavily punished by mechanics like Virtuoso, Specter, and Scourge. 

These builds can also find themselves more useful than a Power mech because of the utility they provide.  Specter is half a healer even in full dps gear, and has built-in rez power, TONS of breakbar damage thanks to S/P 3, and barriers. It also benches high with a not too difficult rotation on a ranged build. 

Virtuoso has a lower benchmark on paper, but can start to pull ahead once you factor in confusion, is also ranged and has useful mesmer utility like portals which can make it invaluable on certain fights. 

As for support Mech, Alac specter is able to compete with it. This is a very good build which people do not value enough. Perhaps because the way in which it provides value is difficult to wrap your head around at first until you've played it. 

 

Firebrand, specifically heal firebrand doesn't have any builds which can compete with it. Heal Scrapper is its closest competitor, yet no amount of skill will let a Heal Scrapper generate spammable stability and aegis, while not needing to devote its entire utility bar and press it on CD to maintain quickness. Unlike hFB, Heal scrapper also does negative damage since it runs a condi weapon + shield while running harrier stats. 

 

Mech can be replaced with minimal impact on the squad. Provided the person replacing them is competent at their class. Firebrand cannot. Period.

Power Mech is VERY good, but it's not Firebrand good. Which is why it concerns me that the player base has determined that Mech is the biggest issue right now when it definitively is not. And I have a theory for why that is. We've recently seen what the game looks like without power mech, so we can easy FEEL the impact it had on the meta. 

Do we have any idea what the meta would look like without FB? Imagine, builds like Heal Catalyst actually seeing play because the standard of what makes a good heal quickness build is no longer astronomically high. FB doesn't FEEL as bad as Pmech because FB has become our Status Quo. 

 

I agree with everything you are saying, but here is the issue I have:

- Firebrand is strong and with no alternative, as such players are forced into playing it for certain content (mainly WvW, most pve encounters can be solved without FB, yes even fractal CMs). The only real competition is from guardian its self, and that only barely. Firebrand still requires some amount of skill and understanding to play as such players might shun away from taking up the class

 

- mech and especially power mech is not as defining as firebrand in the uniqueness and utility department, but it is so in the output department. While Firebrand bullies out its competition with sheer utility and lack of access to stability/argis on its competition, mech does this at the expense of understanding and player involvement

 

This becomes very evident when looking at balancing the unique advantage either class has:

- The firebrand situation could get remedied by giving other classes access to stab/aegis (with maybe toning down some of firebrands utility if needed). In the end, it requires player engagement accross different classes.

- if mechanist advantage (high automation and passive game play) is copied to other classes, it literally means less player involvement and interaction. It's the equivalent of removing any and all necessity for players to understand or improve while at the same time leading to a very similar game play accross multiple classes: afk to win.

 

I find the later a far large danger and issue than the former. The alacrity specter example is very fitting, players don;t alacrity specter because:"why should they when another build which they need 0 understanding for exists?"

 

TL;DR:

What firebrand has over other classes in terms of utility and ease of access to unique boons, mechanist has in terms of simplification and strait up no interaction/understanding requirement. Both advantages are not healthy for the game and both classes bully other classes out of compositions because of them.

Edited August 30, 2022 by Cyninja.2954

[AliamRationem.5172]

2 hours ago, Kuma.1503 said:

Guardian doesn't have hoards of non-mains spamming nerf threads about it on its own sub forum. 

 

It might be because they finally started making meaningful changes to firebrand to chip away at its dominance.  It is no longer a go-to DPS and while it is still a favored support, it actually does have some competition now.  Mechanist is currently one of the best DPS classes for all content as well as being a favored support.  In raids/strikes and open world squads it has far higher representation than firebrand.  It's only in fractals where firebrand is still problematic.

[Tails.9372]

17 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

You know what, i would check up on those, but...

Ah yes saying that something is a "strait up blatant lie" but then being dismissive and moving the goalpost when proven wrong, can't say I'm surprised.

17 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

Meanwhile, what for?

I already answered this question, it's to make certain content more accessible as the only build the average GW2 player can take into "more demanding content" and do well with rn is rifle mech. One might say but this LI build does... doesn't matter, almost all of these builds will still result in a "hi DPS" form someone who ends up struggling to keep up with the support. Actually failing the mechanics of the encounter aside other games don't have this gameplay based disparity in performance because they have a decent variety of "brain-dead" builds for the masses to use.

17 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

Your position is...

Putting up a blatant straw man never makes for a good argument. My position is that there should be a big variety of good build / gameplay options including "big mech and gun go brrr" for those who only want to bother with the mechanics of the fight and "essentially piano" for those who want things to be as complex as possible on every level (and everything in between).

4 hours ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Notice also, that Mech currently is far more domineering that Fb ever was.

Mech is also the only spec that hits certain checkboxes so ofc. people are drawn to it. Want to play a pet / minion based spec where the pet / minion actually feels impactful? Then mech is currently your only real option. Wanna take a gun and unload on your opponent? Then mech is by far the best way to go as the rest is either rather awkward to use or severely underperforms. All of these things however can be addressed by bringing the other options up to par which would undoubtedly reduce the amount of rifle mechs.

Edited August 30, 2022 by Tails.9372

[Cyninja.2954]

25 minutes ago, Tails.9372 said:

Ah yes saying that something is a "strait up blatant lie" but then being dismissive and moving the goalpost when proven wrong, can't say I'm surprised.

Yes, I should have been more clear: I assumed that successful or at least popular MMORPGs as comparison would have been a reasonable given. Yes, you can find every type of abomination in regards to failed designs in the gaming industry, I apologize to assume this in regards to examples give.

Quote

I already answered this question, it's to make certain content more accessible as the only build the average GW2 player can take into "more demanding content" and do well with rn is rifle mech. One might say but this LI build does... doesn't matter, almost all of these builds will still result in a "hi DPS" form someone who ends up struggling to keep up with the support. Actually failing the mechanics of the encounter aside other games don't have this gameplay based disparity in performance because they have a decent variety of "brain-dead" builds for the masses to use.

Which is the main differing opinion we have: you believe all content should be accessible to everyone, I do not. I do believe that having what the developers called "aspirational content" should be just that: something to aspire to, not afk through it without any class knowledge required. We have enough of that in easier content already.

LI builds, which you simply dismiss as "I don't care", are perfectly sufficient to bridge this gap while introducing players to a class and its mechanics on a superficial enough level.

I agree on encounter mechanics, but not in the way you'd do. In fact, encounter mechanics in this game have been very easy due to the more complex combat design. Making them more difficult, which the developers have done with recent strikes, puts even more pressure on players to pick the easiest possible class with minimum mechanics so they can "focus" on the boss mechanics only. As such, class diversity currently knows only 1 way: homogenization.

Quote

Putting up a blatant straw man never makes for a good argument. My position is that there should be a big variety of good build / gameplay options including "big mech and gun go brrr" for those who only want to bother with the mechanics of the fight and "essentially piano" for those who want things to be as complex as possible on every level (and everything in between).

Ah yes, you say 1 thing but don't care that the actual results in game are something completely different. Also please stop using the old "piano" trope, that does not apply in the least here nor to most modern builds and even less to LI builds, some of which are as low as 10-20 actions per minute. You seem to not have any idea what "piano" play actually implies in the context of GW2. There have been maybe 2-3 top tier builds which required "piano" type of interaction over the last few years and none of them were on widely spread classes. Piano rotations have been a thing of the past mostly, especially with more recent elite specs (with eli being the major exception, a class which sees nearly no play at all any more).

Fine let me then: I am perfectly happy with mech being amazing as 0 interaction build, if the developers re-balance the game so that other classes see play too without making all classes feel the same with 0 input required, which ultimately they would if no interaction with any type of class mechanic is required.

That is without even remotely talking about what a horrible meme mech has become while it is bullying out any and all other specs in all PvE content, currently sitting at 32-34% of overall class representation for instanced content (and still growing, probably to 35 or 40% eventually). Then again what do you care, your presence for instanced content is pretty much 0, which makes it so much easier to just assume everything is fine.

Edited August 30, 2022 by Cyninja.2954

[Tails.9372]

2 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

I assumed that successful or at least popular MMORPGs as comparison would have been a reasonable given.

Which ofc. there are more than enough, the "spin2win" meme exists for a reason but as you already alluded to you will always be dismissive on the grounds that it somehow doesn't apply to GW2.

2 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

Which is the main differing opinion we have: you believe all content should be accessible to everyone, I do not.

Wrong, I don't believe that "all content should be a cakewalk for everyone" I do think however that the difficulty level of the content should be the deciding factor here.

2 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

Making them more difficult, which the developers have done with recent strikes, puts even more pressure on players to pick the easiest possible class with minimum mechanics so they can "focus" on the boss mechanics only.

It puts more pressure on players to use a build that fits their actual skill level which currently doesn't leave most of the player base with many builds to choose from. Good players however would naturally have more options available to them.

2 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

Ah yes, you say 1 thing but don't care that the actual results in game are something completely different.

That's quite the baseless assumption right here, sorry that my actual opinion doesn't match your made up version of it in any way, shape or form.

2 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

I am perfectly happy with mech being amazing as 0 interaction build, if the developers re-balance the game so that other classes see play too without making all classes feel the same with 0 input required

This can be solved by bringing up other things in the way I alluded to earlier (especially on the support side of things) which is what A-Net already said they want to do.

2 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

Then again what do you care, your presence for instanced content is pretty much 0, which makes it so much easier to just assume everything is fine.

You really seem to love making baseless assumptions.

Edited August 30, 2022 by Tails.9372

[Cyninja.2954]

47 minutes ago, Tails.9372 said:

Which ofc. there are more than enough, the "spin2win" meme exists for a reason but as you already alluded to you will always be dismissive on the grounds that it somehow doesn't apply to GW2.

Wrong, I don't believe that "all content should be a cakewalk for everyone" I do think however that the difficulty level of the content should be the deciding factor here.

Exactly, you see 0 value in any type of distinction in regards to class uniqueness or diversity or game play elements.

47 minutes ago, Tails.9372 said:

It puts more pressure on players to use a build that fits their actual skill level which currently doesn't leave most of the player base with many builds to choose from. Good players however would naturally have more options available to them.

When all builds play the same, it makes no difference which build or class a player chooses.

This paired with the earlier points makes for a disastrous design concept for a game which should pride its self for its class uniqueness and diversity.

47 minutes ago, Tails.9372 said:

That's quite the baseless assumption right here ,sorry that my actual opinion doesn't match your made up version of it in any way shape or form.

Just going by what you claim you want, and the reality in game we face based around your ideas.

47 minutes ago, Tails.9372 said:

This can be solved by bringing up other things in the way I alluded to earlier (especially on the support side of things) which is what A-Net already said they want to do.

The support side of things already was brought up, and has brought with it a very own set of issues. That has nothing to do with removing any and all game play elements in regards to class mechanics which is the core issue with mech (and puts it apart from LI builds).

47 minutes ago, Tails.9372 said:

You really seem to love making baseless assumptions.

 

Not baseless. Just observed by what you state, which is in complete contradiction to anything I have seen from just about any player I have encountered no matter the skill level, and your complete absence in any sort of group content metric or data sites (there are 0 logs on GW2wingman, which is an accomplishment when literally only 1 person would have to upload a log at any point in time for years worth of data collection. You have no kp.me, meaning you have nearly 0 interaction with the LFG on a regular basis, etc.). Honest question: have you done any raid, strike or even T4 fractal in this game? Not even asking about multiple times, once is fine.

Edited August 30, 2022 by Cyninja.2954

[TheAgedGnome.7520]

13 hours ago, HnRkLnXqZ.1870 said:

This data is not reliable and should not be used to show the overall class distribution. It only shows how many people are using wingman and what they have played while using it.

It is perhaps imperfect, but it does substantiate the subjective experiences of group play where mechs appear to be an excessively large percentage of the group. 

[Kyon.9735]

11 hours ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

So, all we have to do is wait a few years for it to hit the dev radar?  Well, that's reassuring.

Unless it's Elementalist of course, it must stay in its natural habitat which is downstate. Catalyst got blasted into oblivion even before it became widespread as it was going to be "meta defining" also while ignoring the 2 classes dominating 40% of the raid playerbase (pre-balance).

 

I accepted my fate and rolled Mechanist. All I can say is "Praise the Sun".

[Tails.9372]

1 hour ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

Exactly, you see 0 value in any type of distinction in regards to class uniqueness or diversity or game play elements.

You, just assume that because you seem to think that diversity and gameplay elements have no meaning unless they are somehow forced onto the player instead of being chosen by their own preference.

1 hour ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

That has nothing to do with...

It has however to do with your point about "class diversity" as its blatantly obvious that the X% of mechanists is not just referring to rifle mechs. That getting players to play other things requires "removing any and all game play elements in regards to class mechanics" is also just a baseless assumption.

1 hour ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

your complete absence in any sort of group content metric or data site

These sides only have what people upload, I never bothered to do so and apparently neither did anyone else I played with.

1 hour ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

Honest question: have you done any raid, strike or even T4 fractal in this game?

I did.

Edited August 30, 2022 by Tails.9372

[Kuma.1503]

8 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

 

I agree with everything you are saying, but here is the issue I have:

- Firebrand is strong and with no alternative, as such players are forced into playing it for certain content (mainly WvW, most pve encounters can be solved without FB, yes even fractal CMs). The only real competition is from guardian its self, and that only barely. Firebrand still requires some amount of skill and understanding to play as such players might shun away from taking up the class

 

- mech and especially power mech is not as defining as firebrand in the uniqueness and utility department, but it is so in the output department. While Firebrand bullies out its competition with sheer utility and lack of access to stability/argis on its competition, mech does this at the expense of understanding and player involvement

 

This becomes very evident when looking at balancing the unique advantage either class has:

- The firebrand situation could get remedied by giving other classes access to stab/aegis (with maybe toning down some of firebrands utility if needed). In the end, it requires player engagement accross different classes.

- if mechanist advantage (high automation and passive game play) is copied to other classes, it literally means less player involvement and interaction. It's the equivalent of removing any and all necessity for players to understand or improve while at the same time leading to a very similar game play accross multiple classes: afk to win.

 

I find the later a far large danger and issue than the former. The alacrity specter example is very fitting, players don;t alacrity specter because:"why should they when another build which they need 0 understanding for exists?"

 

TL;DR:

What firebrand has over other classes in terms of utility and ease of access to unique boons, mechanist has in terms of simplification and strait up no interaction/understanding requirement. Both advantages are not healthy for the game and both classes bully other classes out of compositions because of them.

From what I'm gathering our stances aren't far off. We recognize that both builds pose problems, and the only contention seems to be which problem is bigger. 

I believe FB is a much bigger issue due to it's overwhelming utility, and you believe that mech is a bigger issue because bringing other classes in line with mechanist would allow AFK/automation style gameplay for all and trivialize content. Both unhealthy, but mech is more unhealthy.

I don't think that's entierly correct. I believe that BOTH allow for afk gameplay, but in different ways. Mech allows you to AFK your rotation. Firebrand allows you to AFK mechanics. 

Im going to imagine a world where everyone is at Mech level and one where everyone is at FB level. 

The Mechanists would still need to do mechanics, but rotations would be simple enough that everyone can focus on them with greater ease. DPS Uptime issues are a thing of the past on any fight without reflects. 

The concept of rotations would be undervalued. While you could still gain more value by putting in the extra effort, putting in that effort becomes optional because the skill floor has been reduced so much. The satisfaction of seeing your DPS increase tenfold as you master your class becomes a thing of the past. Something old vets talk about to the newbies over camp fires as they ramble on about how "things were so much different back in the day".

Also ANET would need to increase the minimum specs of this game due to the sheer amount of pet spam. 

In  Firebrand world , we just laugh at the idea of doing any mechanic that does not ignore aegis/stab and ignore them. There's be no need to time stab because every class would have so much in their kit "perma uptime stability" would become as commonplace as perma uptime quickness/alac. 

Healers become obsolete. We all have minor healing, cleansing, boon conversion in our kits so once we stack together we can just time our healing together and top ourselves up. Or take passive healing on our AoEs to have it happen as we do our normal rotation. Esentially, auto healing. We would also block so much damage from aegis that damage would be signifcantly cut. Not even mentioning the huge uptime of prot and resolution for when damage actually gets through. I don't even think we'd need fractal pots anymore. 

We'd pull mobs together constantly and vommit Aoes on them while aegis/stabbing through their attacks. Trash mobs become even more of a joke than they already are. 

Enemy projectiles become a thing of the past since we can dedicate two FBs to reflect duty as the rest deal their dps. 

I suppose it comes down to which you view is worse. Non existant rotations or non existent mechanics and non existant damage due to all the aegis and reflect spam. As well as the death of healers. 

I believe the later is more damaging because the gap between a LI build and Mech isn't that large. PMech isn't far off already from Scourge, Specter or Virtuoso wheras the gap between other supports/ dps hybrids and firebrand is massive. 

I don't think hard nerfing PMech does as much good to make the game harder as people think because once these other builds replace it, the game would arguably get even easier. Not from a rotation standpoint, but from a mechanics standpoint. With mech gone, we'd still have all the FB utility plus the easy (but not entirely AFK) rotations from the other classes, plus scourge/specter barriers and revives, with virtuoso dealing easy ranged dps. 

Wheras hard nerfing FB literally makes 90% of mechanics in this game harder over night. The entire game gets harder with FB gone, and unlike mech, nothing can fill that void.

That's without considering the ramifications it would have on WvW as well

 

Edited August 30, 2022 by Kuma.1503

[Cyninja.2954]

1 hour ago, Tails.9372 said:

You, just assume that because you seem to think that diversity and gameplay elements have no meaning unless they are somehow forced onto the player instead of being chosen by their own preference.

It has however to do with your point about "class diversity" as its blatantly obvious that the X% of mechanists is not just referring to rifle mechs. That getting players to play other things requires "removing any and all game play elements in regards to class mechanics" is also just a baseless assumption.

Pressing 1 and then being afk is not game play and it certainly has nothing to do with class mechanics or being any solution to "forcing" players to play their class.

 

This amount of output at given interaction breaks the game and even worse: removes multiple reasons to engage with any class mechanics.

1 hour ago, Tails.9372 said:

These sides only have what people upload, I never bothered to do so and apparently neither did anyone else I played with.

I did.

Fair enough.

[Sunchaser.9854]

Mechanist takes 4-9 slots as alac dps, ranged dps, healing alac dps, as well as barrier, self healing, survives one shots with 20% hp remaining while auto healing through it in raid encounter fight videos that mash the eles to smush, and I can't recall the last time I saw a bladesworn pubically pass 25-30k in a strike, but I'd need 85+ fingers to count the times I've seen a afk mechanist or someone get the top 5-10 dpses with a 28-35k mech gap to the first non mech dps in a squad of 50 being 17-26k and then dropping off a cliff to 1-10k. 

 

Mechanist fights for all roles, firebrand is A group support that does one job and from what I hear can have a fairly revolved rotation. If 4-8 mechanists are used a fight but only 1-2 firebrands, I don't see them as much a population problem as take that role away, will they alac dps like mechanist? Will they afk or outdps 98% of non 25k+ benchers or 0.1% of over 30k benchers. Idk. But their role is about as oppressive as a 9 class game having a 1/10 slot for a 1/9 class banner warrior. I don't think a class that takes 1/10 of the spots that aren't 8-10 mechanists is bad.

One spec that should be 3-11% of the population is 7-20x more represented than it should be which means other classes are just given all risk, no reward, no boons or range identical or lower dps gameplay.

Can you name one thing that Thief provides that engineer cannot?

Actually, lets go one step further. Can anyone even name me a single trait that thief or warrior can even provide that engineer can't?   At all I guess, even? They even removed the shiro's presence from rev. They literally removed near every 'unique' buff except the buffs firebrand and mech provided, which made it all a stacking fest with less point to bring warriors, revs, thiefs and eles and mesmers and rangers.

Pretty much every class in the game that's not mechanist brings nothing to the table they can't do better. And if they did, had it deleted war banner/rev shiro's presence style. 

Edited August 30, 2022 by Sunchaser.9854

[Cyninja.2954]

52 minutes ago, Kuma.1503 said:

From what I'm gathering our stances aren't far off. We recognize that both builds pose problems, and the only contention seems to be which problem is bigger. 

I believe FB is a much bigger issue due to it's overwhelming utility, and you believe that mech is a bigger issue because bringing other classes in line with mechanist would allow AFK/automation style gameplay for all and trivialize content. Both unhealthy, but mech is more unhealthy.

I don't think that's entierly correct. I believe that BOTH allow for afk gameplay, but in different ways. Mech allows you to AFK your rotation. Firebrand allows you to AFK mechanics. 

I think you are over-representing firebrands effect on groups. At the very least, there is a huge difference between a good firebrand and a bad one, and a weak firebrand does none of those things.

 

Meanwhile, something else which enables skipping mechanics? High dps and as such, a power mech even if on a weak player will vastly outperform any other class and lead to easier encounters.

52 minutes ago, Kuma.1503 said:

While the Mechanists would still need to respect mechanics like Soo Won Shockwave, the boneskinner leap that constantly downs people, or tentacle pulls on Junkyard CM, (unless they like getting YOINKED into one shot AoEs), the firebrands would just laugh at the idea of doing mechanics and ignore them. 

I suppose it comes down to which you view is worse. Non existant rotations or non existent mechanics and non existant damage due to all the aegis spam. 

I believe the later is more damaging because the gap between a LI build and Mech isn't that large. PMech isn't far off already from Scourge, Specter or Virtuoso wheras the gap between other supports/ dps hybrids and firebrand is massive. 

Pmech is literally at 35k with LI build rotation. Most LI builds are 3-4k lower under golem conditions AND golem conditions versus actual fights benefit pmech since most of its damage comes from auto casts, even more so with auto cast active on mech. The build literally can't drop below 26-27k dps as long as one keeps the boss in target.

52 minutes ago, Kuma.1503 said:

I don't think hard nerfing PMech does as much good to make the game harder as people think because once these other builds replace it, the game would arguably get even easier. Not from a rotation standpoint, but from a mechanics standpoint. 

 

That is not reflected in the current logs. The higher access to boons has made content overall easier and pushed average damage. Pmech has done the rest and that's clearly visible in overall damage output.

 

There is no other build with as little interaction as power mech or even mech in general, that's the issue here but even "if" it got replaced by scourge, virtouso and specter, that's already 3 classes versus 1.

 

The alternative is to make even more classes afk performance as high as mech, which I find undesirable.