One week until the "ratio'd" balance patch goes live - will we hear a response to our feedback before then?

[Lord Voldemodem.4598]

12 minutes ago, AresGuildwars.6372 said:

I did all the stages of grief and am now at acceptance to just quit and not care much further. Haven't logged it once since the preview and touched some grass. Turns out, other devs also have pretty games. Quite the easiest solution. They gonna make more money with a heavily fluctuating playerbase anyway so I shouldn't see myself as the target audience at all. *shrug*

same. I'm done with it. diablo 4 is enjoyable for me right now. I'll keep post on the forum and come back to it when it's reasonable for me to do so

[ventress.4879]

12 minutes ago, AresGuildwars.6372 said:

I did all the stages of grief and am now at acceptance to just quit and not care much further. Haven't logged it once since the preview and touched some grass. Turns out, other devs also have pretty games. Quite the easiest solution. They gonna make more money with a heavily fluctuating playerbase anyway so I shouldn't see myself as the target audience at all. *shrug*

I left becouse the class I played where getting reworked so now they have reworked Untamed I want to jump back in to try it out. 

[Beddo.1907]

Unhappy players are more likely to emote, than the happy/passive ones. Ratio isn't accurate.

If they change something, they probably won't say it till it's done and by that point it's going to be too close to the patch day to reveal it.

[Nimon.7840]

5 hours ago, Shae.9147 said:

they are literally removing the core identity of mirage. 

What?

Maybe you see something different as core identity. - being able to dodge while being cc'd I'd assume?

Imo the core identity of mirage is mirage cloak. And I believe that's going to stay.

There had to be done something when they first took away one dodge for mirage. it was extremely oppressive and unfun to play against. Having like 80% invuln/dodge uptime while basically being unaffected by cc was just broken.

Imo this patch is good in regards to their goal "bring the player not the class".

In order for that to happen, every class needs to be able to bring alac on one build, and quickness on another one. You could go even further and say, that every class should have one good healing spec.

Giving every class means to provide quickness or alacrity is a good thing. The only problem I have with this patch is, that some things feel like they aren't really well thought through. 

Some application methods of those crucial boons are just way inferior to other application methods.

For example:

Renegade can give alacrity with basically no requirement. Yes it costs energy, but you can basically press that button freely even out of combat.

But then there are specs like warrior or harbinger, that need to hit enemies for the crucial boon uptime. Warrior through burst/dragon trigger hits and for those you need to build resource. same with harbinger that has elixirs yes, but needs it's shroud to maintain quickness.

 

[Sirvaleen.1379]

Nope.

Edit for the confused one :

Title : One week until the "ratio'd" balance patch goes live - will we hear a response to our feedback before then?

Answer : Nope.

Is all.

Edited June 23, 2023 by Sirvaleen.1379
Confus'ed

[soulknight.9620]

42 minutes ago, Nimon.7840 said:

Imo this patch is good in regards to their goal "bring the player not the class".

Which is already flawed in context of GW2 being an MMORPG. There is a reason different classes exist. Some of them can do things that couldnt be performed by other classes. This is how most MMORPGs are supposed to be balanced. If you have 9 classes that can do all of the things you will find urself in the same situation as having 9 classes that can do unique stuff. People will pick "the best of the best" to fill a specific role and that role will be softlocked to a certain class by the community itself. Even if you give every class tools to do everything there always will be a single spec/class/build that outperforms others and that will be picked/demanded by others. Even if you create 2 perfectly identical classes but one of them will have a 3 sec invuln and the other 2 sec invuln, guess which one will people going to play? If devs want to achieve perfect balance they have to get rid of class system and have only 1 class with all of the skills unlocked. Or... you know... they could go the other way and make classes FUN and unique to play, with unique skills, mechanics, roles and forget about that abstract concept of "perfectly balancing the game".  In a MMO you bring a class (aka role) to perform a specific task. 

[Batalix.2873]

8 hours ago, soulknight.9620 said:

Which is already flawed in context of GW2 being an MMORPG. There is a reason different classes exist. Some of them can do things that couldnt be performed by other classes. This is how most MMORPGs are supposed to be balanced. If you have 9 classes that can do all of the things you will find urself in the same situation as having 9 classes that can do unique stuff. People will pick "the best of the best" to fill a specific role and that role will be softlocked to a certain class by the community itself. Even if you give every class tools to do everything there always will be a single spec/class/build that outperforms others and that will be picked/demanded by others. Even if you create 2 perfectly identical classes but one of them will have a 3 sec invuln and the other 2 sec invuln, guess which one will people going to play? If devs want to achieve perfect balance they have to get rid of class system and have only 1 class with all of the skills unlocked. Or... you know... they could go the other way and make classes FUN and unique to play, with unique skills, mechanics, roles and forget about that abstract concept of "perfectly balancing the game".  In a MMO you bring a class (aka role) to perform a specific task. 

It's a bit of a slippery slope argument, but real life data does show this to be the case. Again FFXIV class identity and playstyles have been eroded so much over the years in pursuit of "balance" and "viability" that classes of the same role all play 90 percent identically.

[LichOverlord.6329]

4 hours ago, Batalix.2873 said:

It's a bit of a slippery slope argument, but real life data does show this to be the case. Again FFXIV class identity and playstyles have been eroded so much over the years in pursuit of "balance" and "viability" that classes of the same role all play 90 percent identically.

I was obsessed with FFXIV back in Heavensward 

I started playing rhe game back in 2014 (during patch 2.3), and not only was the lead into HW amazing, but the expansion itself blew me away - story, music, environments, content, and gameplay were all phenomenal

Sadly the game has been since homogenized and every class basically does the same thing and the only buffs and debuffs that still exist are damage buffs and shields - Heavensward is the "wrath of the lich king" of XIV, and usually the people who are obsessed with the game now didn't play them, and don't understand what it is they missed

I'd hate to see GW2 become that way, as I stopped playing XIV after endwalker because I decided I was done. I'm done with WoW, ESO, etc. GW2 is the last mmo I feel is worthy of obsessing over, but if they keep making changes like this, then...

[Crey.5263]

On 6/20/2023 at 5:18 PM, Myror.7521 said:

Well said. Im one of those "weird" persons that do like this patch. Yes there are some nerfs coming in. But will they nerf things to death? Well besides maybe necro, no! Will this changes maybe open the window for more builds and maybe change the Meta over all? Yes!

In no way is this meant to be argumentative (you can never really tell on the forums).  I am legitimately trying to clarify your position: Are you of the thought that the current scourge necro is currently edging out other classes or other necro specs? Or that necro boon corrupt is preventing other classes from being able to play?

[Serephen.3420]

18 hours ago, AresGuildwars.6372 said:

I did all the stages of grief and am now at acceptance to just quit and not care much further. Haven't logged it once since the preview and touched some grass. Turns out, other devs also have pretty games. Quite the easiest solution. They gonna make more money with a heavily fluctuating playerbase anyway so I shouldn't see myself as the target audience at all. *shrug*

It's interesting reading the reasons some people quit. If only I were writing a psych thesis, these forums would be rich with data.

Just a word of warning, the grass is never greener. Speaking from experience. 

Edited June 22, 2023 by Serephen.3420

[Gaiawolf.8261]

15 hours ago, soulknight.9620 said:

If you have 9 classes that can do all of the things you will find urself in the same situation as having 9 classes that can do unique stuff. People will pick "the best of the best" to fill a specific role and that role will be softlocked to a certain class by the community itself. Even if you give every class tools to do everything there always will be a single spec/class/build that outperforms others and that will be picked/demanded by others.

To be fair, that's mostly just true for optimizers. Most players pick their class by concept, theme, and playstyle rather than which one outperforms the others by 5-15%. Some players love necromancers so much, that's all they play. Some are warrior diehards, no matter the game. Many players just chose whatever class they find the most fun, and never know another class is doing their role or playstyle several % better than them. That said, a unique feature that sets each class apart is a highly valued game design, but it does NOT have to be tied to "what they do well."

Just because all classes/especs can perform the same role, doesn't mean each won't have an audience as long as it brings something unique to the table, and that unique feature can be of concept, theme, playstyle, or role. Personally, I prefer games when most class concepts are versatile enough to be able to play any role I want to play, but offers a unique theme and playstyle. That way, I can pick my theme, and not be locked out of a role solely because of my choice in character concept.

Example, firebrand is my absolute favorite endgame "class" because a) it's the only class representing the divine caster theme in the game, b) it can play any role without having to drastically alter my character concept or class/subclass (smiting priest/healer/protector, etc.), and c) it provides a uniquely distinct playstyle from every other class, even when they overlap roles.

But the bottom line, this patch goes too far into deleting unique aspects of classes/especs to make them work into Anet's weird role designations, which is the heart of the problem. I'm fine with expanding versatility and roles, but not at the expense of unique aspects. There is plenty of design space for both, as several of the better designed, versatile classes/epsecs show us.

(Also, since I didn't use Anet's terminology, I'm considering each espec as an endgame class/subclass from other games, since many especs alter the profession mechanics, theme, and playstyles so much that they might as well be entirely different character concepts. Sorry for any confusion that caused.)

[ventress.4879]

On 6/22/2023 at 1:29 PM, Gaiawolf.8261 said:

To be fair, that's mostly just true for optimizers. Most players pick their class by concept, theme, and playstyle rather than which one outperforms the others by 5-15%. Some players love necromancers so much, that's all they play. Some are warrior diehards, no matter the game. Many players just chose whatever class they find the most fun, and never know another class is doing their role or playstyle several % better than them. That said, a unique feature that sets each class apart is a highly valued game design, but it does NOT have to be tied to "what they do well."

Just because all classes/especs can perform the same role, doesn't mean each won't have an audience as long as it brings something unique to the table, and that unique feature can be of concept, theme, playstyle, or role. Personally, I prefer games when most class concepts are versatile enough to be able to play any role I want to play, but offers a unique theme and playstyle. That way, I can pick my theme, and not be locked out of a role solely because of my choice in character concept.

Example, firebrand is my absolute favorite endgame "class" because a) it's the only class representing the divine caster theme in the game, b) it can play any role without having to drastically alter my character concept or class/subclass (smiting priest/healer/protector, etc.), and c) it provides a uniquely distinct playstyle from every other class, even when they overlap roles.

But the bottom line, this patch goes too far into deleting unique aspects of classes/especs to make them work into Anet's weird role designations, which is the heart of the problem. I'm fine with expanding versatility and roles, but not at the expense of unique aspects. There is plenty of design space for both, as several of the better designed, versatile classes/epsecs show us.

(Also, since I didn't use Anet's terminology, I'm considering each espec as an endgame class/subclass from other games, since many especs alter the profession mechanics, theme, and playstyles so much that they might as well be entirely different character concepts. Sorry for any confusion that caused.)

I fell like after this update the most likely complaint will be, My X role with X class is not longer the most demanded role. 

When you get too end game two things happen, one you realise that your favourite class can't do something. Two it excels at a specific game-mode/role. Theif is probably the best example with it only really being used in PvE on a very specific raid bosses. Outside this it is only a PvP class at the highest level. 

Now I guess you can bring that same class into any game mode / role and not be booted. Or atleast that is what Arena Net is trying to do. 

Edited June 23, 2023 by ventress.4879

[soulknight.9620]

14 hours ago, Batalix.2873 said:

Again FFXIV class identity and playstyles have been eroded so much over the years in pursuit of "balance" and "viability" that classes of the same role all play 90 percent identically.

Yeah, thats how i feel about it right now. You can also see the extent of this philosophy in any generic korean mobile mmo that basically has a single class with different "skins". 

7 hours ago, Serephen.3420 said:

It's interesting reading the reasons some people quit.

I believe its more of a "last straw on the camels back" thing than an actual reason. Two of my friends quit gw2 after seeing balance preview saying something like "im tired of changing my builds every 3 months". I kinda understand what they mean. 

6 hours ago, Gaiawolf.8261 said:

To be fair, that's mostly just true for optimizers.

To a certain extent. We need to set the definitions straight.

Casual players who do not engage in any "end game" content (like CMs, raids etc) mostly play for fun without thinking about min/maxing. In the content that they play (OW, easy strikes etc) it doesnt actually matter what class/build you play that much.

And there is other group of semi-casual/hardcore players. They mostly focus on "end game" content and follow a set of "rules" defined by communities such as SC/HS etc. We have all seen the impact groups like SC and HS have on the gameplay. These people just try to copy the gamestyle/meta of these "top players". Its always "but on SC this build is 2k dps higher so other builds are trash". You can even see this attitude on the forums. 

6 hours ago, Gaiawolf.8261 said:

But the bottom line, this patch goes too far into deleting unique aspects of classes/especs to make them work into Anet's weird role designations, which is the heart of the problem. I'm fine with expanding versatility and roles, but not at the expense of unique aspects. There is plenty of design space for both, as several of the better designed, versatile classes/epsecs show us.

This. I do think that the main goal of a game is to have fun. And atm balaning is getting in a way of fun. We have a good example here like warframe where devs went full "balance is not fun" philosophy. And sure warframes (aka classes) are not even closely balanced in warframe, but they are unique and fun to play. 

Anet just makes every class and elite spec generic by giving them every tool to work with. Just a simple question, when you pick a warrior class do you expect it to perform a dedicated healer role? No, you dont (well at least i dont). You want to smash things with different kind of weapons. That is aestetics and flavour of this class. The same goes for all of the other classes. Each one has a distinct "role" that it should be able to fill. It wouldnt be great if a "divine warrior" like guardian went all in on torment stacking. 

Edited June 22, 2023 by soulknight.9620

[Vidit.7108]

On 6/20/2023 at 11:51 AM, LichOverlord.6329 said:

can we expect a response before this patch goes live? An entire month of radio silence despite the outcry is simply an unacceptable way to treat your community, and I have faith in the Arenanet team that they're true to their word, and they'll step up to the plate and respond to the feedback they've been given.

No probably not. If they do respond meaningfully it would be to say this balance patch is being delayed, with a list of changes that they want feedback on. We're unlikely to get that based on previous balance patch history. 

Based on their approach to criticism over the last year, they're going to let the "new" notes on patch day speak for themselves. Maybe on a few things you'll get some beefier numbers, but any gameplay complaints they're just not going to address for months or years. You don't like the gameplay loop of needing to spend 6 upkeep for quickness? Too bad if you're lucky it will be 5 upkeep now. Etc. 

[Gaiawolf.8261]

6 hours ago, ventress.4879 said:

I fell like after this update the most likely complaint will be, My X role with X class is not longer the most demanded role. 

When you get too end game two things happen, one you realise that you favourite class can't do something. Two it excels at a precific game-mode/role. Theif is probably the best example with it only really being used in PvE on a very specific raid boss. Outside this it is only a PvP class at the highest level. 

Now I guess you can bring that same class into any game mode / role and not be booted. Or atleast that is what Arena Net is trying to do. 

That seems to be the goal, which made me a bit hopeful for the patch, but some of the steps taken to get there are flat out disrespectful to certain playstyles and builds, or just plain bad. They are stripping away more than they add to several classes.

4 hours ago, soulknight.9620 said:

Yeah, thats how i feel about it right now. You can also see the extent of this philosophy in any generic korean mobile mmo that basically has a single class with different "skins". 

I believe its more of a "last straw on the camels back" thing than an actual reason. Two of my friends quit gw2 after seeing balance preview saying something like "im tired of changing my builds every 3 months". I kinda understand what they mean. 

To a certain extent. We need to set the definitions straight.

Casual players who do not engage in any "end game" content (like CMs, raids etc) mostly play for fun without thinking about min/maxing. In the content that they play (OW, easy strikes etc) it doesnt actually matter what class/build you play that much.

And there is other group of semi-casual/hardcore players. They mostly focus on "end game" content and follow a set of "rules" defined by communities such as SC/HS etc. We have all seen the impact groups like SC and HS have on the gameplay. These people just try to copy the gamestyle/meta of these "top players". Its always "but on SC this build is 2k dps higher so other builds are trash". You can even see this attitude on the forums. 

This. I do think that the main goal of a game is to have fun. And atm balaning is getting in a way of fun. We have a good example here like warframe where devs went full "balance is not fun" philosophy. And sure warframes (aka classes) are not even closely balanced in warframe, but they are unique and fun to play. 

Anet just makes every class and elite spec generic by giving them every tool to work with. Just a simple question, when you pick a warrior class do you expect it to perform a dedicated healer role? No, you dont (well at least i dont). You want to smash things with different kind of weapons. That is aestetics and flavour of this class. The same goes for all of the other classes. Each one has a distinct "role" that it should be able to fill. It wouldnt be great if a "divine warrior" like guardian went all in on torment stacking. 

I agree that balancing for different player groups is probably the most problematic issue for design decisions. I'm sorry, but I just can't support the logic that a build is trash because it performs 10% less efficient than another. That goes beyond fair optimizing and into elitism. But when your class simply cannot perform a certain role you want to play or does so only 50% as good as others, that gets in the way of character selection and Anet's overarcing design concept of "bring the player, not the class." 

Traditional healers might not come to mind for a your basic warrior, but shout barbarians and tactical leaders that rally/"heal" their allies and interpose barriers and other buffs certainly are staples in many games. At minimum, I think every endgame class/concept should be able to build for:

1. Viable DPS (since that's the only way to actually overcome an encounter in the game, especially solo),
2. Offensive support/CC (which unfortunately almost always means quick or alac, but that's a whole other discussion with entire threads dedicated to it), and,
3. Defensive support/tankiness (either healing/barriers/boons or taking the heat off the team in some way).

However they get there can be as unique and flavorful as the dev's imaginations. A defensive support druid may straight up heal, while a tactics warrior would interpose barriers and Protection. 

Also, for a fun delve into a divine warrior that fits with the imagery of chill and torment, do a google or reddit search for the fan-made Inquisitor espec for guardians. It's not my cup of tea and would need some heavy tweaks, but it's cool and thematic.

Edited June 22, 2023 by Gaiawolf.8261

[soulknight.9620]

2 hours ago, Gaiawolf.8261 said:

I'm sorry, but I just can't support the logic that a build is trash because it performs 10% less efficient than another. That goes beyond fair optimizing and into elitism.

Im not a fan of that either. But thats how a lot of people see gw2 endgame. And even some "content creators" are making this a mantra for anyone that wants to get into end game content. Ive even seen a guy that actually said that if you dont play a boon support in OW you are selfish and useless and shouldnt play gw2 at this point. 

2 hours ago, Gaiawolf.8261 said:

But when your class simply cannot perform a certain role you want to play or does so only 50% as good as others, that gets in the way of character selection and Anet's overarcing design concept of "bring the player, not the class." 

This here is where we disagree i believe. Sure a class should perform a number of roles so there is a reasonable window of opportunity for that class to get into all parts of the content. But i dont agree that every class should do every role even if that role contradicts the "lore" of the class (like that heal warrior for example). Being able to do every single thing with every single class costs us (the players) many unique aspects of asymetrical balancing. Ranger spirits are basically glorified wells now. Same goes for scrapper gyros. And so on. These skills loose their identity and uniqueness. But hey, now they are "balanced".

2 hours ago, Gaiawolf.8261 said:

Traditional healers might not come to mind for a your basic warrior, but shout barbarians and tactical leaders that rally/"heal" their allies and interpose barriers and other buffs certainly are staples in many games.

I would like to see a shout warrior that could actually provide a unique buffs with their shouts. But all we have is the same number of generic boons on every god kitten support skill. 

2 hours ago, Gaiawolf.8261 said:

At minimum, I think every endgame class/concept should be able to build for:

1. Viable DPS (since that's the only way to actually overcome an encounter in the game, especially solo),
2. Offensive support/CC (which unfortunately almost always means quick or alac, but that's a whole other discussion with entire threads dedicated to it), and,
3. Defensive support/tankiness (either healing/barriers/boons or taking the heat off the team in some way).

I would actually add a position. 
4) Viable solo self sutainable build.

Quick/alac support concept is boring. Anet wanted to get away from the holy trinity and introduced the holy trinity 2.0. But instead of tanks we have boon supports. Its basically every group 1 alac, 1 quick (one of them is a heal) and 3 dps. Its the same as every other mmo now. 

 

[voltaicbore.8012]

7 minutes ago, soulknight.9620 said:

Quick/alac support concept is boring. Anet wanted to get away from the holy trinity and introduced the holy trinity 2.0. But instead of tanks we have boon supports. Its basically every group 1 alac, 1 quick (one of them is a heal) and 3 dps. Its the same as every other mmo now. 

Sadly I think trinity 2.0 is actually their goal.

I'm not sure if they consider stuff like HT CM a success, but they certainly showed us they want to up the endgame challenge instead of sticking to the game's rather casual OW identity. Without trinity 1.0, the only way to have players succeed in encounters is for everyone to become some homogenous self-sustaining dps, or to implement trinity 2.0. It's pretty clear (at lest in my opinion) that they're going down the trinity 2.0 route.

 

[Gaiawolf.8261]

13 minutes ago, soulknight.9620 said:

Im not a fan of that either. But thats how a lot of people see gw2 endgame. And even some "content creators" are making this a mantra for anyone that wants to get into end game content. Ive even seen a guy that actually said that if you dont play a boon support in OW you are selfish and useless and shouldnt play gw2 at this point. 

This here is where we disagree i believe. Sure a class should perform a number of roles so there is a reasonable window of opportunity for that class to get into all parts of the content. But i dont agree that every class should do every role even if that role contradicts the "lore" of the class (like that heal warrior for example). Being able to do every single thing with every single class costs us (the players) many unique aspects of asymetrical balancing. Ranger spirits are basically glorified wells now. Same goes for scrapper gyros. And so on. These skills loose their identity and uniqueness. But hey, now they are "balanced".

I would like to see a shout warrior that could actually provide a unique buffs with their shouts. But all we have is the same number of generic boons on every god kitten support skill. 

I would actually add a position. 
4) Viable solo self sutainable build.

Quick/alac support concept is boring. Anet wanted to get away from the holy trinity and introduced the holy trinity 2.0. But instead of tanks we have boon supports. Its basically every group 1 alac, 1 quick (one of them is a heal) and 3 dps. Its the same as every other mmo now. 

 

I have a love/hate relationship with unique buffs. They provide a great tool for distinct character concepts and feel. As a designer, they can get out of hand and some become "indispensable," so you need to be careful with them. 

EDIT: Also need to be careful with how they stack. More design mechanics make this harder without running into a class being booted from a pug because "we already have one of those."

I totally agree that a self-sustaining solo build should be an option for every class. Jury is out on how much that should overlap with providing defensive support as well. I'd be happy if my class could at least do DPS and some kind of group support for teamplay, either O or D.

Edited June 22, 2023 by Gaiawolf.8261

[BadLuck.8456]

7 hours ago, soulknight.9620 said:

We have a good example here like warframe where devs went full "balance is not fun" philosophy. And sure warframes (aka classes) are not even closely balanced in warframe, but they are unique and fun to play. 

This could be a good example of why we need balancing though. For starchart clearing you can use any frame. Grind some relics? Sure any frame though some are faster. But if you want to go eidolon hunting? There's a meta and a group would kick you for trying to play Khora. On the other hand, want to do some endless farming? Now Khora is meta and Chroma has no place. For all the endgame activities in warframe there is a very strict meta on what frames you can bring and what builds they need. Also pvp in warframe is a joke and a larger scale pvp would be worse.

Not dismissing the awesome fun game that DE has made but it makes it painfully clear that if you want to farm you use the 3 frames out of all that diverse fun cast that have farming abilities. And I don't want GW2 to be like that where you have to wait around for one specific spec and build to do a given activity because it's the only one in the game that has a needed ability. I don't want to get burned out on the 3 necessary classes or fight the tide of "hi dps" just to play something at least a little bit different.

 

Serious question for people who are complaining, did you not run fractals (no CMs) when every group was HB, AlacRen, BannerWar, and 2 dps? Groups would wait 30 mins for an AlacRen despite that wasting more time than just running the fractal without alacrity because "meta" and I guess thinking they couldn't possibly complete it without.

And if you aren't doing instanced PvE, why do you even care? Liked Daring Dragon and don't want to lose it? Go on the forum and say you want to keep Daring Dragon, not "YOU'RE KILLING MY CLASS". Liked being one of 3 alacrity providers in the game and sad that others are getting alacrity? Get over yourself, that's not a class identity that's just bad game design that you benefitted from.

There are legitimate complaints. Shade duration nerf is counter to the entire original design of scourge. Mirage dodge is getting nerfed in PvE with no compensation and already has survival issues. Etc. Make those arguments. Heck I disagree with the "Remove/baseline alacrity and quickness" but at least it's a coherent argument. This homogenization complaint sounds like people want Warrior to be the only tank, Guardian to be the only healer, Thief to be the only dps, Necro to be the only boon corrupter, etc. You want to make THAT argument, go ahead but that is a completely different game. If there's just a mechanic that you like then ignore the rest and give a good reason as to why that mechanic should stay but be prepared to hear that something is too strong as it is. Body pulling on necro is a powerful but fun mechanic that no one else can do. It can be balanced by cooldown or range or whatever. Fully reviving an entire squad of people every 15 seconds is probably TOO powerful regardless of whether scourge provides alacrity or not. It can be balanced by toning down the numbers (that's what pvp/wvw did and pve is previewed to do) cooldown etc. It could even be moved off of the passive ritual of life and onto signet of undeath. They may also realize that the numbers on ritual of life in the preview make it functionally gone so they need to tune it back up some. Make that argument. Don't provide feedback like they removed transfusion and ritual of life completely from the game and that was the only difference between scourge and mechanist.

 

Rant over.

[Batalix.2873]

1 hour ago, voltaicbore.8012 said:

Sadly I think trinity 2.0 is actually their goal.

I'm not sure if they consider stuff like HT CM a success, but they certainly showed us they want to up the endgame challenge instead of sticking to the game's rather casual OW identity. Without trinity 1.0, the only way to have players succeed in encounters is for everyone to become some homogenous self-sustaining dps, or to implement trinity 2.0. It's pretty clear (at lest in my opinion) that they're going down the trinity 2.0 route.

 

I'm sorry but two-ish strikes a year is not worth such a radical paradigm shift. That system works in FFXIV because (a) it severely lacks combat-based content outside of 4-8 man raids/trials/dungeons and has virtually no open world/PvP appeal and (b) it puts out like 14 instanced boss fights a year, and that's not even counting the dungeon bosses which raise it closer to 20.

Edited June 22, 2023 by Batalix.2873

[BadLuck.8456]

Quote

Being able to do every single thing with every single class costs us (the players) many unique aspects of asymetrical balancing. Ranger spirits are basically glorified wells now. Same goes for scrapper gyros. And so on. These skills loose their identity and uniqueness. But hey, now they are "balanced".

Asymmetrical balancing has to be supported by game design. It was more asymmetrical on launch and suffered for it. Necro was king of boon corrupts and no monsters had boons. Condition damage had gear and trait support and then conditions didn't stack right, some old objects still don't even get conditions applied, and bosses often phased and cleared all conditions.

Also ranger spirits have always been glorified wells or gyros. Banners are glorified wells. Gyros are just shouts that take longer. Traps are just wells that only start when they'll actually hit someone. They added uniqueness to thief by converting their traps to preparations (still traps but have to manually triggered so, worse traps). 

Quote

But i dont agree that every class should do every role even if that role contradicts the "lore" of the class (like that heal warrior for example).

I understand this argument but thought that especs was a good way to address it by adding different lore, like druid for ranger. Also having old warrior/thief that only has dps builds just leads to more dps bloat. Most MMOs already seem to struggle to find players willing to play healers/non-dps. Making the healer pool even smaller by confining the healer role to fewer classes just makes it worse.

Sucks that they aren't making more especs to add healing warrior lore instead of now potentially looking at how to cram healing onto a berserker/samurai/mage hunter.

Also sucks that many old especs were just "The class already does this, but now with a slightly different flavor!" Can't believe that when they came up with druid, the healing ranger they also came up with daredevil, the more theify thief.

Quote

I would like to see a shout warrior that could actually provide a unique buffs with their shouts. But all we have is the same number of generic boons on every god kitten support skill. 

Unique buffs are bad. They are either useless (vampiric aura) or a requirement for every group (old grace of the land).  They are also the reason we have the trinity 2.0 as you call it because quickness and alacrity were required unique buffs. And then unique-ish buffs. And now generic buffs. 

Quote

I would actually add a position. 
4) Viable solo self sutainable build.

We have this. It's Reaper. It was even better/worse on launch. The result was that you saw them everywhere in open world and then had a bunch of conflict when they couldn't get into raids because a viable solo self sustain build shouldn't do as much damage as a glass cannon dps that needs team support to function. Ignoring the time that people found out how broken OP epidemic bouncing was and then epidemic got nerfed into the ground.

You could also include QtP pylon kiters or Deimos hand kiters as sustainable builds we already have.

[voltaicbore.8012]

1 hour ago, Batalix.2873 said:

I'm sorry but two-ish strikes a year is not worth such a radical paradigm shift. That system works in FFXIV because (a) it severely lacks combat-based content outside of 4-8 man raids/trials/dungeons and has virtually no open world/PvP appeal and (b) it puts out like 14 instanced boss fights a year, and that's not even counting the dungeon bosses which raise it closer to 20.

I fully agree that Anet doesn't put out the instanced content worthy of such a shift. The only thing dumber than making this shift, would be if they were making it on accident.

[soulknight.9620]

1 hour ago, voltaicbore.8012 said:

Without trinity 1.0, the only way to have players succeed in encounters is for everyone to become some homogenous self-sustaining dps, or to implement trinity 2.0.

I would rather prefer the first. When i joined gw2 pre hot, it was actually played that way. You bring ur own sustain, boons, dps. If they overlap with other players boons/heals good for all of you. If not, well you can keep urself alive. This was kinda unique.

1 hour ago, Gaiawolf.8261 said:

EDIT: Also need to be careful with how they stack. More design mechanics make this harder without running into a class being booted from a pug because "we already have one of those."

The "we already have one of those" already exists. It applies to any alac/quick/heal. You just get 1 of these per subgroup and you dont actually need more. 

1 hour ago, BadLuck.8456 said:

I don't want to get burned out on the 3 necessary classes or fight the tide of "hi dps" just to play something at least a little bit different.

Its already this way to some extent. And adding stuff to all classes wont make it different. There will always be classes that provide more (for ex. ham gets picked more than hat/druid for alac heal, cause of utility and simplicity). Anet can nerf ham, but then hat will see play and other 2 specs would sit and wait "their turn". Thats the problem. Ofc that all aplies to end game content. 
 

1 hour ago, BadLuck.8456 said:

Serious question for people who are complaining, did you not run fractals (no CMs) when every group was HB, AlacRen, BannerWar, and 2 dps? Groups would wait 30 mins for an AlacRen despite that wasting more time than just running the fractal without alacrity because "meta" and I guess thinking they couldn't possibly complete it without.

And that will not change cause alacren brings the best kit for fractal farming than any other alac support. Ive been runing CMs a lot and when people tried to "soften up" on class diversity by taking alac tempest for example, the whole group suffered. Bladesworn wont make it as an alac support in fractals cause they have 0 utility aside from alac. Renegade could provide: boonstrip, perma stab, good CC. Can bladesworn do that? Nope. 
 

12 minutes ago, BadLuck.8456 said:

Also ranger spirits have always been glorified wells or gyros. Banners are glorified wells. Gyros are just shouts that take longer. Traps are just wells that only start when they'll actually hit someone. They added uniqueness to thief by converting their traps to preparations (still traps but have to manually triggered so, worse traps). 

I disagree. Well cannot be moved and have limited duration. Spirits were different. They provided buffs in an area around them sure. But the buff was unique, spirits could be moved, and there was a mechanic required you to heal them to prolonque their buff uptime. 

15 minutes ago, BadLuck.8456 said:

Sucks that they aren't making more especs to add healing warrior lore instead of now potentially looking at how to cram healing onto a berserker/samurai/mage hunter

This. Thats one of the problem. If they introduced new elite specs that were accordingly themed - sure why not. But they try to fit all of the roles onto these 3 elite specs we have. 

17 minutes ago, BadLuck.8456 said:

They are also the reason we have the trinity 2.0 as you call it because quickness and alacrity were required unique buffs. And then unique-ish buffs. And now generic buffs. 

You could easily remove these boons from the game and just adjust cast time/cd of skills accordingly. Nothing would have changed for the majority of people since these boons are perma in every fight. 

18 minutes ago, BadLuck.8456 said:

We have this. It's Reaper. It was even better/worse on launch. The result was that you saw them everywhere in open world and then had a bunch of conflict when they couldn't get into raids because a viable solo self sustain build shouldn't do as much damage as a glass cannon dps that needs team support to function. Ignoring the time that people found out how broken OP epidemic bouncing was and then epidemic got nerfed into the ground.

I didnt mean that solo self sustained build should do the amount of damage as a full dps build. Ofc dps should be sacrificed to get that utility and sustain. The thing i had in mind is basically and OW/solo farming build. They already exist for most of classes. But some are far better then the rest. 
 

[xellink.7568]

I'll place bets that heal warrior isn't going to work.

[ventress.4879]

14 hours ago, soulknight.9620 said:

Im not a fan of that either. But thats how a lot of people see gw2 endgame. And even some "content creators" are making this a mantra for anyone that wants to get into end game content. Ive even seen a guy that actually said that if you dont play a boon support in OW you are selfish and useless and shouldnt play gw2 at this point. 

This is exactly what happened when EoD Elites came out and was the primary complaint about Virtuoso. It probably still is in the open world.

They get called selfish DPS so I guess this patch is an attempt at fixing that a little, especially with something like Deadeye. 

Edited June 23, 2023 by ventress.4879