Guild Wars 2 Balance Philosophy

[Sadistic.1572]

As a necro main it would be nice to see a buff to reaper. It does like no power dps compared to other power DPS classes. Power mech can crush it's DPS just by auto attacking.

 

[Caephire.5238]

Not sure how everyone else felt, but I love their transparency and approach to balance changes. I'd like for Tempest to provide Alacrity at the beginning of the Overload, but other than that, it's been an amazing 10 years playing this game with very little complaints from me about balance changes.

This is an interesting post. It's informative and brings into focus the philosophies they're following. I was confused when they gutted my poor StM Chrono but brought out the Alac Mech. It seemed like they wanted to bring diversity into the pool, but somehow managed to create 1 Go-To class for Alacrity, and of course we already know about the other Go-To class for Quickness. 

I'm really curious to see how this game progresses over the coming years. 

[pallas.8150]

Lots was said with nothing of inherent worth, tbh. Overall disappointed.

[Lithril Ashwalker.6230]

One profession shouldnt be able to do it all...so incorporate a weakness and a specialty for end game boons per ESPEC not profession...if it makes sense do it. there are 1 core profession and 3 elite specs for each, plenty of room to have each do a specific role without having them being overpowered and you only get...either or situations when running an espec. one thing i would recommend as far as mechanically is that the elite specs can buff the professions not through especs associated but rather buff each trait line thats able to be chosen in a unique way...make the espec excel in each trait line but impossible to have specific things CORE can do...for example each core has a fundamental base mechanic like thief has basic steal, daredevil has reduced range in steal but has extra endurance bar (3 dodges), deadeye lacks mobility but has range and pew pew, specter has reduced initiative but has strong SINGLE TARGET (WHAT A JOKE) support and can spam wells to provide 1...boon that can only be earned via taking all wells in utility....where its not really utility. (you treated some wells as if they were old thief preparations/traps...not cool boo boo

[Gwynnion.7364]

There have been multiple threads recently wondering about the current team's balance philosophy but the important questions are much more specific, e.g.:

• What do they think is broken and why, even if it's beyond the scope of the latest patch?
• How much of a difference should there be between LI and "mastery" builds?
• What role or roles do they think every elite spec is supposed to fulfill?
• What specs do they think are currently over and under their "power budget?"
• How is that budget weighted, e.g., power vs. condi, ranged vs. melee?
• Are power budgets allocated on a mode specific basis?
• How do they intend to make other classes relevant versus mainstays like Firebrand?
• What are their plans to fix classes with longstanding issues like elementalist?
• What do they think are "bad choices" that should be removed from the game?
• What are specific examples of player feedback they're taking into account?

Because "philosophy" is so vague, it lets them deflect with this type of feel good nothingburger.  For all we know, the November 29 balance patch has been in final form for months, based on considerations they don't feel like sharing with us.

[LadyKitty.6120]

Nice to hear about current balance philosophy and how versatility has now a huge focus since it's one of the greatest strengths of GW2 combat and build system though previously underutilized due to huge power disparity between weapons. (Something Kitty's been saying for years.) Changes in recent balance patches have also hinted at that direction, yush. There's still some work to do with some weapons, though, and some specs do need some boosting as well. (Esp. for power melee builds)

And though Kitty personally isn't the best benchmarker (she rarely plays one build for longer than few days as she's always looking for new playstyles and thus somewhat consistently plays at 85-90% efficiency most of the time), she does do bunch of testing for unused builds and playstyles while also mathing on how much and which stuffs needs to be changed to make them into competent options.

Kitty will be posting her suggestions of possible changes and reasonings on why those particular changes should be made. She already has a long balance patch wishlist going on that she'll be updating as she gets more math done and builds tested. So, you might want to check this post occasionally: 

Kitty will also write in on the Balance preview after copying the damage values into her spreadsheet for possible changes if there's some major issues incoming. And on a sidenote: Kitty's using a spreadsheet with actual cast times and the skill datas to see quite precise estimations on how various skills do as damage multiplier alone doesn't tell much about how strong a skill really is. Currently esp. skills that have long casts and low damage coefficients are pushing bunch of weapons to incompetence and some weapons indeed lack a clear identity (Warr's main-hand mace, engi's Tool Kit and Elixir Kit as a couple examples in PVE).

[Simo.6819]

Signet of Inspiration

[Tails.9372]

6 hours ago, Rubi Bayer.8493 said:

We want to design builds that allow players with a high level of mastery to demonstrate their prowess and be appropriately rewarded in terms of effectiveness. At the same time, we want to ensure that there are builds for every profession that require less mastery to be effective.

What I'd like to know is what you would consider to be an appropriate difference in performance between "less mastery to be effective" (on the low end) for the later and "appropriately rewarded in terms of effectiveness" (on the high end) for the former, especially in regards to the DPS of a Damage Dealer (assuming all other relevant factors are identical).

[eXruina.4956]

watched the stream, it was quite convincing, sounds like a fresh start.

 

forgive me if i'm skeptical, only results can convince me now, so lets see how it all plays out.

 

good luck to cal, roy and the rest of the balance team, you've got a load of work ahead of you, i'll be rooting for your success. 💪

[itspomf.9523]

6 minutes ago, Simo.6819 said:

Signet of Inspiration

Shame it only lasts 3 seconds before being useless for 7, and then changing to something entirely else.

Unless you roll Might of course.

[Xenesis.6389]

So wvw is only two roles, support and damage dealer, while spvp has five? 🥴

Ok, carry on with your boon ball balancing I guess. 🙄

P.S

Quote

 

Purity of Purpose

Purity of purpose is the idea that a skill (or trait, or weapon, etc.) should have a well-defined identity. In other words, skills should not do too many different things at once. Some common skill identities include damage, defense, support, control, and mobility.

 

Congratulations you already failed.

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Shift_Signet

Signet Passive: Increases movement speed. Boons you gain are copied to your mech.
Signet Active: You and your mech shadowstep to the target location. Removes conditions on you and your mech.

Conditions Removed: 2

Movement Speed Increase: 25%

Breaks Stun

Range: 1,200

P.P.S

Quote

Skill Splits

In cases where the core mechanic of a skill or trait is problematic in a particular game mode, we'll investigate if there's a way to rework the mechanic that feels good for every mode. In extreme cases, we may decide to significantly adjust how a skill behaves in a single mode, but this would only happen if the skill causes a major balance issue, there isn't a viable rework, and the skill cannot be balanced effectively while respecting the usual considerations of skill splits. Ideally, we want to avoid splits of this nature as they significantly increase the learning curve for players who play multiple game modes, but we will still utilize them when necessary.

And pretty much this has only been applied to Mirage handicapping them of a dodge, and now waiting almost 3 years for a rework to get their 2nd dodge back, meanwhile you go and release another one dodge elite specs, only to see it doesn't work, and then decide 6 months later to fix it, before mirage gets their fix.

Mirage 2nd dodge when?

 

 

Edited October 28, 2022 by Xenesis.6389

[Zychuu.7294]

6 hours ago, Rubi Bayer.8493 said:

World vs. World (WvW)

WvW group compositions have a similar makeup to PvE group compositions, with a focus on damage dealers to deal damage and support characters to defend them. Stability is always in high demand and is essentially a requirement for every group.

Support

(...)

Damage Dealer

(...)

Player vs Player (PvP)

Over the years, we've seen metagames dominated by both team fight compositions built around the support role, and more split compositions built around bruisers or mobility. Ideally, we'd like to get to a state where multiple styles of team compositions are viable.

Support

(...)
Team Fight Damage Dealer

(...)

Bruiser

(...)

Roamer

(...)

Sidenode

(...)

 

This back to back comparison of wvw and pvp feels sad. I'm pretty sure that is much more going on in wvw than having dps and supports, and I'm pretty sure there is more going on than just big group fights. For example are wvw roamers not a separate thing worth mentioning anymore, if they can't even get a mention in "balance philosophy", when such diverse pvp roles are listed literally one paragraph later? I just hope this generalisation of everything wvw-balance related is not a peek into how is attention being distributed in between game modes.

[Coldtart.4785]

Aiming high in WvW I see...

There was a time when you could call the roles: tanky frontliner, damage frontliner, damage backliner, support backliner and gank squad. Now it seems that a blob of minstrel gears and marauder gears is good enough for Anet.

If you wonder why the WvW base responds to everything you do with anger here is a small part of the answer.

[Simo.6819]

10 minutes ago, itspomf.9523 said:

Shame it only lasts 3 seconds before being useless for 7, and then changing to something entirely else.

Unless you roll Might of course.

Thats why it was mentioned

[Astralporing.1957]

6 hours ago, Rubi Bayer.8493 said:

Player vs. Environment (PvE)
Boon Support

A hybrid role focused on providing high uptime of key offensive boons, though a single build should not provide both quickness and alacrity. They also contribute to damage or healing in lesser amounts than dedicated builds for those roles.

Why is that exactly? You mentioned in the stream, that it was because "history has proven" that such a build would overpower all alternatives. I have to disagree with that claim. The only case ever of such a build was chrono, and it wasn't really them having both alacrity and quickness that crowded out alternatives. The dominance of chrono was due to it being a sole support build at that time. There simply was no alternative at all. By the time firebrand and renegade combo got buffed out to the level where they truly could take over that role, chrono was already nerfed to the ground level. In reality, there was never a long enough timeframe to see how those builds compared to each other.

If we look at how chrono was then, and how support builds are now, i sincerely doubt that even if the most infamous chaos chrono support build still existed and was as good as then, that it would be a serious contender for the current meta setups. Support chrono had neither dps nor heal comparable with what support builds nowaday can do. All it had going for itself was the boon support package, nothing else. When there was no alternative (or when existed only one alternative, very specific setup that had its own downsides) it was good enough, but nowadays there's a number of hybrid heal+dps double slot setups that cover all the necessary boons with no issues whatsoever. Pure support build that covers all necessary boons but brings nothing else to the table (both lacking in dps department, and not having heal good enough to replace one heal slot) instead of being overpowered is straight out inferior to all alternatives.

[Halaku.6097]

2 hours ago, Bookah pls.9352 said:

Hello, when do reapers get to spend the rest of their tickets?

 

My first elite spec was the Reaper, and I still have a soft spot for it.

But I decided to try an Engineer to see what all the Mechanist hype was about, and was shocked to see all the icons appearing over the 6-0 Action Bar, until I realized that I was buffing the Hell out of myself, and that an Engineer with a Rifle made a Necromancer with a Staff look like a sad, sad joke. 

And then I took them both into the Mad King's Labyrinth, and my Necromancer felt like a sad, sad joke, even though the Necros is  in Ascended and Exotic gear and the Engineer's only in Exotic and Rare. And that's before the Engineer started working on Mechanist.

7 hours ago, Rubi Bayer.8493 said:

 

Holes in Roles

This is an idea similar to purity of purpose, but applied to builds or professions. As we touched on when discussing identity, we want every profession to have distinct strengths and weaknesses. Professions should have things that they excel at, things that they are less effective at than other professions, and some things that they simply cannot do. If one profession does everything and has no holes, there's no reason for players to play anything else.

 

 

Right now, why would anyone play a Minionmaster Staff Power Reaper when they could play a Mechanist Rifle Engineer? There's simply nothing the minions bring to the table to compare with that bot.

And, exactly what does Reaper "excel" at, besides having extra health? Or is the Necromancer in general considered to be the Honda Accord of the game, able to do everything more or less average but having other professions be able to do any single thing it can do, but better?

[Jeknar.6184]

2 hours ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Why is that exactly? You mentioned in the stream, that it was because "history has proven" that such a build would overpower all alternatives. I have to disagree with that claim. The only case ever of such a build was chrono, and it wasn't really them having both alacrity and quickness that crowded out alternatives. The dominance of chrono was due to it being a sole support build at that time. There simply was no alternative at all. By the time firebrand and renegade combo got buffed out to the level where they truly could take over that role, chrono was already nerfed to the ground level. In reality, there was never a long enough timeframe to see how those builds compared to each other.

If we look at how chrono was then, and how support builds are now, i sincerely doubt that even if the most infamous chaos chrono support build still existed and was as good as then, that it would be a serious contender for the current meta setups. Support chrono had neither dps nor heal comparable with what support builds nowaday can do. All it had going for itself was the boon support package, nothing else. When there was no alternative (or when existed only one alternative, very specific setup that had its own downsides) it was good enough, but nowadays there's a number of hybrid heal+dps double slot setups that cover all the necessary boons with no issues whatsoever. Pure support build that covers all necessary boons but brings nothing else to the table (both lacking in dps department, and not having heal good enough to replace one heal slot) instead of being overpowered is straight out inferior to all alternatives.

Chronomancer got stripped of everything (even it's identity), and Anet just refuses to give it back.

Back in Path of Fire I would hardly see a Chronomancer at all because of Firebrigade being buffed so much it would just over perform compared to Chronodruid and now in End of Dragons I'm the only chrono I've seen still trying to play one of the support roles (I still see a DPS chrono here and there, but they are not even that many). And every time I look at a patch notes, I feel I'm being given the middle finger for playing a profession that was only absolute meta in the past because of the lack of choices.

Edited October 29, 2022 by Jeknar.6184
spelling

[UNOwen.7132]

Strongly dislike the "more difficult builds should be better" angle. There is a reason no MMO has done that in decades. Its bad. It also makes me wonder, what exactly is their plan for thief in PvE? Thief is never gonna be complex in PvE, so do they just intend for thief to forever be trash in PvE?

[Asum.4960]

I appreciate the communication, but this was extremely surface level. 

I might just not have been the target audience for this, but I don't really need to hear basic game (design) concepts - but rather am interested in the how and when you intend to achieve (read, converge on) them. 

 

I think you have a mountain of work ahead of you in just about all of those design concepts - and hearing you just acknowledge their existence at least for me personally doesn't do much. 

What I'm more interested in is how you envision for example Boon Supports to play out, especially with the recent trend for them to have to forgo any and all choice, Utility and fluidity in gameplay to provide a given boon - is that the direction forward, or is that something you are actively working on to rectify to be more in line with your stated overarching goal? 

How do you intent to address the Utility and Trait system being chock-full of best in slot (non) choices? Is the Trait system more and more just becoming a list of passive modifiers to pick (especially for PvE) something you are happy with? It may be easier to balance, but do you think that's a fun and engaging use for the system? Do you like "Utility" skills becoming mere Weapon skill extensions, or losing their identity to be spammed for a boon appliance? If not, what, if any, work is done to change this, and when?

In terms of purity of purpose and power budget, what is the vision, just as example, for skills like Shift Signet (Pet Boon Share, Pet respositioning tool, 1200 range Shadowstep, 25% Movement Speed Buff, Condition Cleanse, Stunbreak) or Facet of Darkness (Pulsing Fury with Blinding, Revealing, Vulnerability applying, Stunbreaking and with Trait Quickness applying flip over)? 

When, if ever, are we going to see proper Skill and Trait reworks to align them with the stated goals of minimizing bad choices, power budget and purity of purpose - or are we just looking at more number changes primarily?

What is your rough goal in balancing accessibility and skill expression/reward?

etc.

/E:

I also I think DPS, Support and Hybrid are more clear role distinctions for PvE than DPS, Healer and Boon Support. 

DPS is self explanatory.

Supports primary job is boon support, with a secondary focus on healing and Utility.

And Hybrids do DPS, with the secondary focus on filling the boon gap left by the primary support. 

Both of the latter are Boon Supports, and Healer as primary focus isn't really a thing (except for extremely niche use cases - and most healers, even just recently with things like Druid and Tempest, have been moved towards the Support role).

Is this all subject to change again, and you intend to move the game towards a Healer + 2 Boon Support + 2 DPS (sub-) composition, or do you agree with this assessment of Support + Hybrid + 3 DPS?

Edited October 29, 2022 by Asum.4960

[Mara.6782]

I'm interested of what is future role to warrior and thief. Will warrior always be pure DPS role? Specters healing got nerfed does that mean Specter is not supposed to be healer? Is thiefs role only DPS? I hope to see that every elite specs weapons become best weapon to that elite spec. Dragonhunter longbow become the right one to use to get max damage etc.

[Rauderi.8706]

Nice to see some clarity, but this was very bare-bones. Three PvE roles, all of which can overlap to some degree? No real mention or breakdown of secondary functions like tanking or CC or self-boon vs party-boon, etc. 

 

Which, let's be honest, with some tweaking, you could make proper Tank roles via the Defense line and make Taunt easier to access while bypassing Defiance. 

 

Which, by the way, self-boon vs party-boon is a great divide to introduce more clearly between the trait lines. DPS lines? Self boons. Healing and Support? Party boons. 

 

And given how important Alac and Quickness are, why are those not individual roles? 

Muddy waters, that's why. You can have either on a healer or dps, and if they're leaked into the core specs, the other is effectively banned from the profession entirely, unless you have some weird trait like "when you grant Alacrity, grant Quickness instead" in an elite spec. Or just declare some professions never get one for the sake of "build diversity". 

 

It was touched on in the presentation, that at least between Purity of Purpose and Power Budget, we might get some radical changes for balance, which is good. I kinda wish I could be the fly in the room when those budgets are discussed and how much weight is applied for each boon, AoE, CC. 

[zealex.9410]

Somthing id love  to hear more about is how elite specs fit in in all this, specificly holes in roles and also how do you value the power budget on a build level when these builds have with different capabilities (melee vs ranged, power vs condi [any mix of the 4] dps with utility vs selfish dps etc).

[A Hamster.2580]

Thank you for the transparency. The only concern I have is regarding the following

 

8 hours ago, Rubi Bayer.8493 said:

We want to design builds that allow players with a high level of mastery to demonstrate their prowess and be appropriately rewarded in terms of effectiveness. At the same time, we want to ensure that there are builds for every profession that require less mastery to be effective.These builds should allow players to succeed in parties and clear content, while still having room for them to improve their mastery over the combat system and increase their effectiveness.

 

I feel it is too ambitious to try and ensure both at the same time. I think the goal of including an "LI" build for every profession should be dropped for the following reason:

 

1.) Even if you succeeded in creating an "LI" build for every profession, the players will gravitate towards one due to how word of mouth works. The player base as a whole will eventually all converge to the default "just gear up and play x" whenever a new player ask what profession/build is best. This contradicts the goal of creating build diversity. You can take a look at the introduction of rifle mechanist to see this is true. There were many other "LI" builds at the time, but everyone eventually recommended new players to play rifle mechanist.

 

2.) You are already trying to balance 9 professions with 3 specs each across 3 game modes. The history of this game indicates this is almost impossible. I think creating an "LI" build for every profession should at the very least be the lowest priority.

 

3.) The "LI" builds are for PvE, but most of PvE is already very easy. The only content the casual players might struggle on would be T4 CM's, Raids, and Strike CM's, but those are intended to be difficult challenging endgame content. I disagree on the philosophy that anyone that just reached lvl 80 should be able to jump right into those content and start clearing them one after another on day one utilizing an "LI" build. We already have emboldened modes for Raids, T1-T3 fractals for fractals CM's, and normal mode strikes for CM strikes to help new lvl 80's progress their skill level. We also have the new training category on the LFG that I see a lot more groups are using now.

 

4.) Most casual players will never notice the impact of playing an "LI" build vs a non "LI" build simply because they would not even have a dps meter installed. If they do have it installed, I can almost guarantee that they do not know how to interpret the data correctly.

[Barraind.7324]

1 hour ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Why is that exactly? You mentioned in the stream, that it was because "history has proven" that such a build would overpower all alternatives. I have to disagree with that claim.

 

Because the second you have a build that can provide both boons, its either going to be

 

1. So far ahead of everything else because of that utility you should never play any other boon provider

or

2. So far behind everything else in terms of damage you should never play it, because it is always worse than any other boon provider.

 

Note, if it has any reasonably acceptable form of healing, it is almost always going to be 1, especially if its on a class with a block or two available. 

 

There is no real middle ground due to how boons work.  You must maintain full uptime in each sub, and you want that with as little loss to damage as possible.  This means you can either replace both boon sources with 1 omniboon  (giving you either a free dps slot, or a healer thats filling the old druid role), boon sources with two omniboons (similar to how you could run 2 of CondiRR / Staxe for alac on some fights and come out ahead of a full dps + one full boon), or you arent replacing either boon source, and now you get to ask why the spec has both if its doing neither.   

 

The "why?" option is  "replacing one boon source with a fake omniboon" by making the spec provide modular quickness or alac depending on traits, but then you're investing heavily into that spec being able to provide boons over other things it could do and why not just make it do one of those things and not eat talent slots (which is also an example chrono can give the world).

 

Its an idea that could have been okay in the 10man buff era as a 50/50 50% that could be paired with CondiRR/Staxe + a quickness equivalent of one of those, but in the 5man era, that balance just isnt a thing unless you redesign everything around it, and thats not going to happen. 

[captrowdy.9561]

I am concerned about wvw. I would say there’s more roles then pvp in wvw. If the devs vision of wvw is just two boonballs plowing into each other that is concerning. They did say in the stream that they still consider the roamer.