Mental Gymnastics of Elite Specialisations

[Mell.4873]

I see a lot of posts saying fix "X" Class, since It cant do "X".

Since when did we everyone want every Elite Specialisation to be same, some are good at end-game Instanced content while others are better at Solo Open World or PvP.

I think people need to wake up fact that not every Elite can played in every gamemode, sometimes the best alternative is to just change Class/Elite when you want more out of your Gw2 experience.

[Kalthea.4326]

Except that every elite specialization has three different tiers of trait selections offering up different ways to play them, so you would assume that at least one combination of the several choices you're given is viable in the content that you would want to play it in without having to worry about being restricted to a specific gamemode, especially in a game that advertises being able to play how you want.

 

So, no. People don't need to wake up to this, because they're well aware of it being an issue and wish to see the game flourish with every profession and elite specialization being able to perform, to at least some degree. It's a matter of choice.

[Mell.4873]

17 hours ago, Kalthea.4326 said:

Except that every elite specialization has three different tiers of trait selections offering up different ways to play them, so you would assume that at least one combination of the several choices you're given is viable in the content that you would want to play it in without having to worry about being restricted to a specific gamemode, especially in a game that advertises being able to play how you want.

 

So, no. People don't need to wake up to this, because they're well aware of it being an issue and wish to see the game flourish with every profession and elite specialization being able to perform, to at least some degree. It's a matter of choice.

I just end up in discussions about how bad this elite is at this particular gamemode.

People wanted Untamed to be a carbon copy Soulbeast (pet removed) and by extension replace how they played soulbeast rather than what it truly is which is a different way to play Ranger (especially with Fervent Force).

People want Mechanist to be a DPS spec while It clearly states it is a versatile elite so it should be a jack of all trades. 

Edited October 1, 2022 by Mell.4873

[Ruisenior.6342]

41 minutes ago, Kalthea.4326 said:

Except that every elite specialization has three different tiers of trait selections offering up different ways to play them, so you would assume that at least one combination of the several choices you're given is viable in the content that you would want to play it in without having to worry about being restricted to a specific gamemode, especially in a game that advertises being able to play how you want.

 

So, no. People don't need to wake up to this, because they're well aware of it being an issue and wish to see the game flourish with every profession and elite specialization being able to perform, to at least some degree. It's a matter of choice.

Yes!! Anet pls we need a healer BERSERKER!!!!!!!...... That's going too far

At some point picking a mesmer will feel like playing a guardian 🤣

[Kalthea.4326]

3 minutes ago, Mell.4873 said:

I just end up in discussions about how bad this elite is at this particular gamemode.

People wanted Untamed to be a carbon copy Soulbeast (pet removed) and by extension replace how they played soulbeast rather than what it truly is which is a different way to play Ranger (especially with Fervent Force).

People want Mechanist to be a DPS spec while I clearly states it is a versatile elite so it should be a jack of all trades. 

Elites being bad in particular gamemodes is a problem for a game that advertises playing what you want. However, some specs being better at certain things is expected. Spellbreaker is a good example of my point, as it should still be usable in PvE even if it's strong in sPvP/WvW, but that isn't the case, as it clearly lacks where other specs are able to play around with their options and be usable in most places.

 

As for people expecting Soulbeast and Untamed to be the same, I'll agree that's on them, but that doesn't mean they can't want it to function in all gamemodes. They would need to adapt to the playstyle, however.

 

And Mechanist is a DPS and a Support at the same time. That's just how the spec works, and there's nothing that says that can't be the case, not to mention that the lack of proper roles has been a point of contention since the game launched. I would actually far prefer it if we had defined roles that were easy to select from, but the nature of the elite specialization system currently makes that extremely difficult.

[Kalthea.4326]

8 minutes ago, Ruisenior.6342 said:

Yes!! Anet pls we need a healer BERSERKER!!!!!!!...... That's going too far

At some point picking a mesmer will feel like playing a guardian 🤣

Berserker plus Vigorous Shouts, using tactics banner and Harrier gear. You're welcome.

[Mell.4873]

5 minutes ago, Kalthea.4326 said:

Elites being bad in particular gamemodes is a problem for a game that advertises playing what you want. However, some specs being better at certain things is expected. Spellbreaker is a good example of my point, as it should still be usable in PvE even if it's strong in sPvP/WvW, but that isn't the case, as it clearly lacks where other specs are able to play around with their options and be usable in most places.

 

As for people expecting Soulbeast and Untamed to be the same, I'll agree that's on them, but that doesn't mean they can't want it to function in all gamemodes. They would need to adapt to the playstyle, however.

 

And Mechanist is a DPS and a Support at the same time. That's just how the spec works, and there's nothing that says that can't be the case, not to mention that the lack of proper roles has been a point of contention since the game launched. I would actually far prefer it if we had defined roles that were easy to select from, but the nature of the elite specialization system currently makes that extremely difficult.

I do agree with your statements here and I do would like to see most Specialisation having at least one good option per gamemode.

I'm just got annoyed that everyone ask for a buff on a particular game mode or playstyle without considering the bigger picture. I mean it makes zero sense to ask for a Druid Staff Power damage buffs or asking for DH sustain buffs by sacrificing the burst DPS.

[Kalthea.4326]

1 minute ago, Mell.4873 said:

I do agree with your statements here and I do would like to see most Specialisation having at least one good option per gamemode.

I'm just got annoyed that everyone ask for a buff on a particular game mode or playstyle without considering the bigger picture. I mean it makes zero sense to ask for a Druid Staff Power damage buffs or asking for DH sustain buffs by sacrificing the burst DPS.

Power damage changes are going to largely be based upon weapon design, so yes, if they tried doing that then it wouldn't work out as Druid staff is designed around minor CC and healing. DH sustain I could see some changes being put in for a slightly increased sustain, but it wouldn't make too much of a difference.

 

My recommendation is to offer up different suggestions against what people are recommending, and don't let it rile you up too much. We're all just trying to enjoy the game and want to see it thrive, though we just have different views on how to achieve that.

[Alcatraznc.3869]

6 hours ago, Mell.4873 said:

I think people need to wake up fact that not every Elite can played in every gamemode

 

People have the right to call it when a spec is underwhelming / garbage in a certain gamemode. If a spec doesnt work for a certain gamemode then it is a design flaw and it deserve to receive some fix/compensation in the said gamemode. Every spec should be playable in all gamemode

[Mell.4873]

51 minutes ago, Alcatraznc.3869 said:

 

People have the right to call it when a spec is underwhelming / garbage in a certain gamemode. If a spec doesnt work for a certain gamemode then it is a design flaw and it deserve to receive some fix/compensation in the said gamemode. Every spec should be playable in all gamemode

I agree and I think in general most specialisation are playable In each gamemode but it's normally not the auther define their way of playing. 

The common complaint is this spec doesn't have good benchmarks, does not preform well in high-level PvP or can't be in a WvW organised Zerg. 

I don't think a spec is defined by how the top players can use it, this is how we ended up so bitter after the Mirage nerfs. 

Most of the time you should play the elite for what it is. Mirage is all about spamming clones and using ambush skills via their dodge, in this respect they didn't get nerfed since the rate at which you can ambush never changed (the regen was never nerfed) 

[Kalthea.4326]

1 hour ago, Mell.4873 said:

I agree and I think in general most specialisation are playable In each gamemode but it's normally not the auther define their way of playing. 

The common complaint is this spec doesn't have good benchmarks, does not preform well in high-level PvP or can't be in a WvW organised Zerg. 

I don't think a spec is defined by how the top players can use it, this is how we ended up so bitter after the Mirage nerfs. 

Most of the time you should play the elite for what it is. Mirage is all about spamming clones and using ambush skills via their dodge, in this respect they didn't get nerfed since the rate at which you can ambush never changed (the regen was never nerfed) 

Where's the fun in playing something one way and not trying to play it how you want? Why not spread your talents around and try to get something to work, especially when that something is usable in all of the game modes? If it was meant to be played only one way, you wouldn't have the choice of traits or trait lines, utilities or weapons, and it wouldn't be usable in more then the designated game mode.

[Mell.4873]

1 hour ago, Kalthea.4326 said:

Where's the fun in playing something one way and not trying to play it how you want? Why not spread your talents around and try to get something to work, especially when that something is usable in all of the game modes? If it was meant to be played only one way, you wouldn't have the choice of traits or trait lines, utilities or weapons, and it wouldn't be usable in more then the designated game mode.

True which is why I would like the Mirage second dodge back to play it the way I used which was a tank with all the Signets constantly giving me distortion. 

Anyway the point is rather than asking for the game to conform to you, people should play around with the mechanics rather than asking for buffs. 

[Ruisenior.6342]

8 hours ago, Kalthea.4326 said:

Berserker plus Vigorous Shouts, using tactics banner and Harrier gear. You're welcome.

I missed that we got already to that point...

I mean then why boder using those names to call especs. When i see something that says 'berserker' i think on a wild warrior that fights with uncontrolled ferocity, charging forward without any hesitation, not a pasive class that just stays unmobile while healing others and throwing a banner to his feet...while dealing 0 damage

[Kalthea.4326]

56 minutes ago, Mell.4873 said:

True which is why I would like the Mirage second dodge back to play it the way I used which was a tank with all the Signets constantly giving me distortion. 

Anyway the point is rather than asking for the game to conform to you, people should play around with the mechanics rather than asking for buffs. 

Without asking for changes to the game to make things be on-par with other specs, the game will stagnate and get to a point where only specific load outs are used for specific scenarios. You asking for the second dodge back onto Mirage also contradicts this statement, so I don't know what you want. Do you want Mirage to change, or do you want to conform to what the game state currently is? (I also believe that they're are looking into adding the second dodge back to Mirage, but they also added Distortion back in for the October 4th patch, so that may help with your build as well.)

17 minutes ago, Ruisenior.6342 said:

I missed that we got already to that point...

I mean then why boder using those names to call especs. When i see something that says 'berserker' i think on a wild warrior that fights with uncontrolled ferocity, charging forward without any hesitation, not a pasive class that just stays unmobile while healing others and throwing a banner to his feet...while dealing 0 damage

Elite Specializations are a delivery mechanism that changes how your F-skills work, and adds in new utility skills to play with. It's just another way for them to add more class options while keeping things themed. Also, the joy of choice is that you don't have to play the healer berserker.  You can also do more than 0 damage if you just use axe/axe, and you're providing boons and healing as well.

[Lynx.9058]

Every  class should have at least a viable DPS build (as that is the role most commonly needed), and at least be good at one other type of gameplay.  Some should be tankier, some should be good at healing, some should be good at support, but at minimum there should be two options for every elite.  I think for the most part we're there, though balance needs a lot of work still as some of those options are overly complicated and underperforming compared to the others.

I don't think I've ever seen someone seriously suggest that every spec should be good at every role, though.

[the krytan assassin.9235]

The majority of the forum posts are either complaining about the designphilosophy of an Espec not working in practise or complaining about bad designphilosophy by the devs. There are barely any posts that ask for an overpowered class to be buffed. 

90% is either some QoL updates or about bringing an Espec up to par so its able to fulfil its intended usage. 

[Diktator.8927]

There should be a clear distinction imo. All professions should be able to have access to almost all roles.

One elite spec however, shouldn't have access to all roles. Now the question of which roles, it depends on the espec.
Berserker should mainly be a dps spec, be it condi or power.
Druid, for example, is clearly a healer/support spec, it shouldn't be able to do DPS as well (if we're talking group content, in open-world PvE it should have enough tools and damage to make it viable for solo play).
 

Now especs like Firebrand cover too many roles, while being good at all of them. While some specs that are a jack of all trades could/should exist, they shouldn't be the top mandatory picks that are simply too strong. Firebrand does great as a quickness provider, it's a great condi dps, it also offers a lot of defensive boons, even heals, all at the same time.

Edited October 1, 2022 by Diktator.8927

[KryTiKaL.3125]

19 hours ago, Mell.4873 said:

I just end up in discussions about how bad this elite is at this particular gamemode.

People wanted Untamed to be a carbon copy Soulbeast (pet removed) and by extension replace how they played soulbeast rather than what it truly is which is a different way to play Ranger (especially with Fervent Force).

People want Mechanist to be a DPS spec while It clearly states it is a versatile elite so it should be a jack of all trades. 

Any time ANet has tried to balance around "flavor" or "theme" it has gone very, very, very poorly. The Berserker rework is an example of this. There is a reason why Berserk mode itself, and other things, are getting reverted. Its also why they are reverting their "trade offs" stuff that they did not commit to and therefore it just lead to more balance issues.

With how ANet has shifted gameplay towards more and more boon applications and uptime maintenance in all gamemodes, the classes that cannot do that fall off pretty hard and see irrelevancy. Its why Quickness Warrior is not quite there yet and needs more adjustments because while it can achieve good Quickness uptime in PvE, it still doesn't compare to Firebrand in either that or damage so why bring a Quickness Warrior when you can just bring a Firebrand? Thats what it comes down to.

[Mell.4873]

46 minutes ago, KryTiKaL.3125 said:

Any time ANet has tried to balance around "flavor" or "theme" it has gone very, very, very poorly. The Berserker rework is an example of this. There is a reason why Berserk mode itself, and other things, are getting reverted. Its also why they are reverting their "trade offs" stuff that they did not commit to and therefore it just lead to more balance issues.

With how ANet has shifted gameplay towards more and more boon applications and uptime maintenance in all gamemodes, the classes that cannot do that fall off pretty hard and see irrelevancy. Its why Quickness Warrior is not quite there yet and needs more adjustments because while it can achieve good Quickness uptime in PvE, it still doesn't compare to Firebrand in either that or damage so why bring a Quickness Warrior when you can just bring a Firebrand? Thats what it comes down to.

I agree but I think this whole problem was created by having certain elite specialisations having them exclusively; Chronomancer and Firebrand come to mind.

I do think there is room for the Ranger (Alacrity) and Warrior (Quickness) having a class wide boon. This means they can easily slot in their class specific boon as a backup which does fit into the Meta quite nicely. 

In both cases the Class dps drop is very minimal and would allow any Specialisation to take up that role so more choice.

Untamed plus Fervent Force comes to mind as a great synergy with Spirits. The result is a crazy tanky healer that has endless CC, resurrections and so much more. I have yet to play around with Warrior's Banners but I'm sure there is some good class synergies. 

Edited October 1, 2022 by Mell.4873

[Kalthea.4326]

45 minutes ago, Mell.4873 said:

I agree but I think this whole problem was created by having certain elite specialisations having them exclusively; Chronomancer and Firebrand come to mind.

I do think there is room for the Ranger (Alacrity) and Warrior (Quickness) having a class wide boon. This means they can easily slot in their class specific boon as a backup which does fit into the Meta quite nicely. 

In both cases the Class dps drop is very minimal and would allow any Specialisation to take up that role so more choice.

Untamed plus Fervent Force comes to mind as a great synergy with Spirits. The result is a crazy tanky healer that has endless CC, resurrections and so much more. I have yet to play around with Warrior's Banners but I'm sure there is some good class synergies. 

Banners are a trouble spot due to their immobility, now reduced range, and having only one or two that are worth taking. That's not to mention Warrior's severe lack of support weaponry, as they only have the Warhorn for that, and that has seen some utility falloff.

[Mell.4873]

1 hour ago, Kalthea.4326 said:

Banners are a trouble spot due to their immobility, now reduced range, and having only one or two that are worth taking. That's not to mention Warrior's severe lack of support weaponry, as they only have the Warhorn for that, and that has seen some utility falloff.

Yeah I would like to see a buff to them but again I have not truly tried to play a banner Warrior yet so I can't tell.

Similar things could be said about Spirits especially around them having health but what is a negative can be a positive like with Druid getting CA back much faster with Spirits out. 

[draxynnic.3719]

I tend to specifically object to the 'it's good in sPvP so it doesn't need to be good in PvE' argument that gets thrown around.

Mostly because we've seen with spellbreaker that this doesn't last. Any build that outperforms the others in sPvP inevitably gets nerfed, or the competition gets buffed to match - it might not happen as quickly as players might like, but it always happens. As a result, there's not really anything you can call a PvP specialisation, because everything ultimately gets balanced back into the pack. And with that the case, you simply can't justify the idea that it's fine for a specialisation to be weak in PvE because it's strong in PvP - because nobody's going to accept the corollary that it would be okay for a specialisation to be overpowered in PvP since that's justified by it being underpowered in PvE.

[SoftFootpaws.9134]

7 minutes ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

I tend to specifically object to the 'it's good in sPvP so it doesn't need to be good in PvE' argument that gets thrown around.

Mostly because we've seen with spellbreaker that this doesn't last. Any build that outperforms the others in sPvP inevitably gets nerfed, or the competition gets buffed to match - it might not happen as quickly as players might like, but it always happens. As a result, there's not really anything you can call a PvP specialisation, because everything ultimately gets balanced back into the pack. And with that the case, you simply can't justify the idea that it's fine for a specialisation to be weak in PvE because it's strong in PvP - because nobody's going to accept the corollary that it would be okay for a specialisation to be overpowered in PvP since that's justified by it being underpowered in PvE.

I think Spellbreaker is the worst example because I remember looking forward to this specialisation more than any others at Path of Fire release only to find out it was tailored specifically for PvP.

 

To this day I still haven't really played it in PvE as a result. What am I going to boonstrip, Dredge?

Edited October 3, 2022 by Mariyuuna.6508

[draxynnic.3719]

6 minutes ago, Mariyuuna.6508 said:

I think Spellbreaker is the worst example because I remember looking forward to this specialisation more than any others at Path of Fire release only to find out it was tailored specifically for PvP.

 

To this day I still haven't really played it in PvE as a result. What am I going to boonstrip, Dredge?

There are open-world builds for it. Generally doesn't make much use of spellbreaker utilities (but it doesn't in PvP either...), but it's a specialisation well suited for surviving situations a solo player wasn't expected to survive.

But it could still REALLY use a boost.

Edited October 3, 2022 by draxynnic.3719

[SoftFootpaws.9134]

2 hours ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

There are open-world builds for it. Generally doesn't make much use of spellbreaker utilities (but it doesn't in PvP either...), but it's a specialisation well suited for surviving situations a solo player wasn't expected to survive.

But it could still REALLY use a boost.

I think the reason I found it so confusing , is that spellbreakers are traditionally a central focus in PvE in many online games, including MMOs I've played in the past, where having tools like the ability to silence enemies  (spell control) could change the entire outcome of most encounters.

 

Then this game comes along with its version of the class which.. strips boons, in a game mode where boons are almost never used, or reveals stealth.. in a game mode where stealth is almost never used, and so on.

 

I'm not blaming the class or any other "PvP-focused" class, afterall the only reason PvP-only classes, skills, traits, etc. exist to begin with is due to the poor encounter design in this game and how far it goes to avoid being something players would naturally expect, like how finishing (an entire mechanic central to the game) basically has no purpose outside of a few specific scenarios despite the presence of intelligent enemies. We have a game built around downstate and finishing with a game mode where players finish themselves (/gg) more than they finish enemies.

 

Its that the competitive modes are designed in a natural way while PvE is this hodgepodge of anti-mechanics just for the sake of giving players huge masses of enemies to mow down with the biggest numbers possible. Technically everything is useful in PvP on some level which can't be said for PvE by a long shot.

 

I'd be surprised if even 30% of the game's content is viable in this mode, and its all by design.

Edited October 3, 2022 by Mariyuuna.6508