So Relics will be vertical progression, power creep and pay to win? [Merged]

[Linken.6345]

46 minutes ago, Khisanth.2948 said:

"Starting on August 22, everyone’s build will include a relic slot that becomes usable at level 60. " first sentence in the paragraph

Many of the relics that are available to players regardless of expansion ownership will cover the functionality of popular sixth-tier rune bonuses.

You could have included that line aswell mate 😄

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/combat-in-guild-wars-2-secrets-of-the-obscure/

1 hour ago, Axelteas.7192 said:

I though core players wouldnt have access to the relics system....  Like core players cannot equip jade cores

It helps to actualy read the blogposts instead of just lashing out with p2w accusations.

Edited July 16, 2023 by Linken.6345

[Echo.3725]

3 hours ago, DeathPanel.8362 said:

The context of the discussion was about legendary runes.  It doesn't matter what the best rune is after the release because legendary rune users will still be able to customize it at will.

Depending on what the new meta is non-legendary rune users might have to get new runes.

Those quotes are all related to the rune changes. 

Current BiS rune is going to be "nerfed" and the "nerf" is being "buffed" on  the relic. 
The net change is the same as if they just rebalanced the runes and added new runes to do what they want as new combat traits.

The point is that the progression is no longer horizontal for the same content you already have. The pay to win conversation is a bit loose in my opinion but is still valid as legendary rune holders would normally get access to the new released runes I believe. 

So the "new" relic system you are proclaiming is all new is not infact "all new". It is taking existing functionality and claiming it as its own. 

This is the poor design choice that people are griping about. 

If this change was more in-line with jade bots it wouldn't be an issue as your BiS is still BiS due to functionality all staying the same. Stats + rune set bonus is whole. The rune set bonus being moved is the problem with the argument that runes are still BiS as they were prior to the expansion. 

Sure if you look at it post-expansion there is still going to be BiS runes as they are post-SotO  but vs the runes Pre-SotO they are not BiS. That horizontal progression that HoT announcement touted is no longer applicable.  

Regardless of if there are one or two new effects, as should be expected with an expansion, there will be major drawbacks for all current effects. They are also not modifying some of them meaning rune of the trooper that is currently BiS for the effect rune of the trooper provides means you will need a relic of the trooper and rune of the trooper to maintain that BiS you had previously.

Ignoring this fact is irresponsible of you as a player and inconsiderate as a whole. Even if you don't have legendary runes you should be worried about that type of change. 

This would be similar to them taking a greatsword, removing 15% of its stats and then adding that same 15% nerf as a boost on something called a pommel. Sure pommels didn't exist before the change so your greatsword is still BiS isn't it? your net change is nothing but the time it takes for you to get that new gear piece. 

Even if it provides flexibility, mandating the users to do the work to get that added flexibility is wrong.  It should be optional at that point. Leave the rune set bonus but provide an override if they have a differing relic. 

[Khisanth.2948]

1 hour ago, Linken.6345 said:

Many of the relics that are available to players regardless of expansion ownership will cover the functionality of popular sixth-tier rune bonuses.

The point is that it doesn't require buying the expansion unless someone wants to nitpick over the definition of "everyone".

[DeathPanel.8362]

7 hours ago, Echo.3725 said:

This is why that logic is flawed:

I'm not sure I understand your statement.  Are you saying his logic is flawed or are you saying my response to his logic is flawed?

 

7 hours ago, Echo.3725 said:

So net gain is what for those who currently use Rune of the Trooper?

Will they have to now have Rune of the Trooper and Relic of the Trooper to do what Rune of the Trooper currently does?
Or can we just keep using Rune of the Trooper and it will still be BiS for this stat and effect combo?

The net gain is flexibility.  If you need the effect of Rune of the Trooper but rather have DPS stats then you can combine Runes of the Scholar with Relic of the Trooper for example.  The effect will no longer be tied to stats meaning there can be more optimal combinations leading to more overall build power in certain builds.

[DeathPanel.8362]

2 hours ago, Echo.3725 said:

Current BiS rune is going to be "nerfed" and the "nerf" is being "buffed" on  the relic. 

Nerf balance patches are part of every MMO ever created.  The problem isn't that runes are getting nerfed.  The problem is that people are framing it as if it was a broken promise by ANET when ANET promised no such thing implicitly or explicitly.

[Redfeather.6401]

It means the game makers can keep imagining new effects without having to release entire rune sets. And it can help limit what can be used in certain game modes a lot easier. Like how certain items cannot be used in wvw because they got abused.

Edited July 16, 2023 by Redfeather.6401

[Astralporing.1957]

6 minutes ago, Redfeather.6401 said:

It means the game makers can keep imagining new effects without having to release entire rune sets. And it can help limit what can be used in certain game modes a lot easier. Like how certain items cannot be used in wvw because they got abused.

Yes, and that's the good part. The bad part however (which some people here refuse to even notice) is that it creates a precedent in which Anet will be allowed to bring in through a backdoor a gear grind system in which old gear will keep getting nerfed with its functions migrated to new slots, requiring new grind.

[Echo.3725]

54 minutes ago, DeathPanel.8362 said:

Nerf balance patches are part of every MMO ever created.  The problem isn't that runes are getting nerfed.  The problem is that people are framing it as if it was a broken promise by ANET when ANET promised no such thing implicitly or explicitly.

Nerf implies that the functionality being adjusted is just gone. Its a balance activity. Moving said nerf to a new equipment slot, no matter what MMO, is not a "nerf" it becomes a substantial change in how the game is played and requires new gear to become whole again. A standard nerf would not mean you can regain that same stat that was taken away by just equipping the "new" content.

31 minutes ago, Redfeather.6401 said:

It means the game makers can keep imagining new effects without having to release entire rune sets. And it can help limit what can be used in certain game modes a lot easier. Like how certain items cannot be used in wvw because they got abused.

Yea, they could do the exact. same. thing. by homogenizing runes and letting you select the stats like we do with gear and have the "of the" suffix define the combat bonus. Berserker Rune of the Trooper as an example. 

There are so many paths that could be taken that would not break the functionality of an existing piece of gear just to add a new  one arbitrarily. 

Think of what they could have done with relics besides taking the set bonus from runes? That function already existed in the game so why not just actually rebalance runes  instead of breaking them into stats and bonus items?

[DeathPanel.8362]

24 minutes ago, Echo.3725 said:

Nerf implies that the functionality being adjusted is just gone. Its a balance activity. Moving said nerf to a new equipment slot, no matter what MMO, is not a "nerf" it becomes a substantial change in how the game is played and requires new gear to become whole again.

A game mechanic is decreased in effectiveness by removing effects from it that it used to have.  That's the definition of a nerf.

What you did is call it by another label.   Labels are taxonomical.  Changing the label doesn't change the thing it points to.

[Healix.5819]

1 hour ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Yes, and that's the good part. The bad part however (which some people here refuse to even notice) is that it creates a precedent in which Anet will be allowed to bring in through a backdoor a gear grind system in which old gear will keep getting nerfed with its functions migrated to new slots, requiring new grind.

This is a reasonable change for the better. There's no reason to assume they're going to start making unreasonable changes. If they were going to add a new armor slot for example, they have no reason to adjust the other slots to compensate.

[Echo.3725]

3 hours ago, DeathPanel.8362 said:

A game mechanic is decreased in effectiveness by removing effects from it that it used to have.  That's the definition of a nerf.

What you did is call it by another label.   Labels are taxonomical.  Changing the label doesn't change the thing it points to.

No where in nerf does it account for that equivalent exchange of the  decrease in effectiveness being moved to another item. That is not a label. That is a change in function. But sure the nerf to runes and the creation of relics to counteract it is the problem.

If you want to get into it about semantics take it elsewhere, that isn't constructive to what is actually being discussed which is the movement of function from an existing item to another item creating  the void we are now all going to have to deal with as vertical progression. 

 

2 hours ago, Healix.5819 said:

This is a reasonable change for the better. There's no reason to assume they're going to start making unreasonable changes. If they were going to add a new armor slot for example, they have no reason to adjust the other slots to compensate.

Better for who? For the developers it creates a currently innumerable amount of stat combinations to balance effects and combat bonuses against, based on last balance patch this should be a nightmare for all of us. Also is likely to create more of a min-max requirement for content as there will surely be outperformers that may invalidate even more "rune" sets. For players it requires us to invest more time and energy into a function we previously had with runes. So the time and energy you already invested is devalued already in the aspect that you are regaining something you already had.

I would much rather see more weapons being added to classes, new races,  actual balance changes, or w8 over this. 

 

[Healix.5819]

1 hour ago, Echo.3725 said:

Better for who? For the developers it creates a currently innumerable amount of stat combinations to balance effects and combat bonuses against, based on last balance patch this should be a nightmare for all of us. Also is likely to create more of a min-max requirement for content as there will surely be outperformers that may invalidate even more "rune" sets. For players it requires us to invest more time and energy into a function we previously had with runes. So the time and energy you already invested is devalued already in the aspect that you are regaining something you already had.

Everyone. Relics were going to be implemented regardless. Moving the bonus to relics was just an extra, allowing people to pick the stats and bonus they actually wanted. You'll still be wanting legendary runes after this, as the prices will probably explode. If they had gone in the opposite direction and only added on to runes, they would have needed to give runes their own slots and you'd likely be forced to use celestial stats for the new ones, as I suspect they'll be required at times.

There are certainly nicer ways this could have been handled. All they had to do was add a relic bonus to runes and had a default/no relic use that bonus. They wouldn't have had to change anything else.

[Astralporing.1957]

5 hours ago, Healix.5819 said:

This is a reasonable change for the better. There's no reason to assume they're going to start making unreasonable changes. If they were going to add a new armor slot for example, they have no reason to adjust the other slots to compensate.

Ah, but the key point is "unreasonable for whom?". They have made it quite clear more than once in the past that they would really like to introduce some sort of gear grind/gear progression hamster wheel system. They can't do it with a classic gear progression mode, because player community can recognize it and has already mentioned more than once their dislike of it, but that's exactly why we need to be on guard even more by Anet trying to introduce something like this under the guise of just "adding anew gear slot" or "minor balance changes" for example. Notice, that it's not a firstattempt so far, but fourth. First was, of course, ascended - that was a classic new gear tier addition in a style everyone that already played a MMORPG before was extremely familiar with. This didn't fly, and partly it was exactly because everyone realized where it can lead if left unchallenged. The next step was stat infusions, that went in alongside ascended (probably as a prepared backup plan), with the original design assuming further release of higher tier ones (+5 stat were originally considered to be blue tier). Fortunately, overall backlash against ascended managed to kill that progression idea as well. Then there was the Jade bot, that wasn't all that well receive, but neither the backlash was that massive - probably due to it masquerading as utility gear, and its stat bonus being limited to only small amount of vitality. Now it's a third attempt, and in this case for the first time introduction of the new gear slot is causing a nerf  (and a transfer of functionality) from another slot.

It's typical Anet - they know what result they want to achieve, and are going with new and new things trying to see what might stick. I'd rather the idea of gear grind though transferring old gear functionality to new gear slots didn't stick. But for that we need to cut out the gear grind part of that new idea.

[Astralporing.1957]

6 minutes ago, Healix.5819 said:

Everyone. Relics were going to be implemented regardless. Moving the bonus to relics was just an extra, allowing people to pick the stats and bonus they actually wanted. You'll still be wanting legendary runes after this, as the prices will probably explode.

I doubt it. We'll almost certainly end up with a far smaller selection of runes, many runesets merged, and many formerly cheap runes suddenly equated with their more pricey equivalent (i.e. Ogre vs Scholar). That likely will mean there will be an overabundance of runes in the beginning, with the prices more likely going down, not up.

And as for the future... well, most of the balance changes to runes were to their special bonuses, not to stats, so i would not be surprised if all rune balance from this time forward would be concentrated on Relics only. Which means no reason to change runes ever again.

[Linken.6345]

14 minutes ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

I doubt it. We'll almost certainly end up with a far smaller selection of runes, many runesets merged, and many formerly cheap runes suddenly equated with their more pricey equivalent (i.e. Ogre vs Scholar). That likely will mean there will be an overabundance of runes in the beginning, with the prices more likely going down, not up.

And as for the future... well, most of the balance changes to runes were to their special bonuses, not to stats, so i would not be surprised if all rune balance from this time forward would be concentrated on Relics only. Which means no reason to change runes ever again.

Notice also they are not saying all rune 6yh special bonus will carry over only the popular ones.

[Astralporing.1957]

17 minutes ago, Linken.6345 said:

Notice also they are not saying all rune 6yh special bonus will carry over only the popular ones.

Oh yes, i have noticed that. It won't be a 1:1 replacement - Thief rune to relic changes clearly show this. They will use this as an excuse to rebalance most of the rune non-stat bonuses, is my guess, with a lot of nerfs incoming.

Still, most fo rune costs (and, as i've said, balance changes) will likely move on to Relics in the future, which will make a decision to craft legendary runes way less beneficial than it is currently. And i sincerely doubt they are going to adjust their crafting costs to balance that.

Edited July 17, 2023 by Astralporing.1957

[rotten.9753]

1 hour ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Oh yes, i have noticed that. It won't be a 1:1 replacement - Thief rune to relic changes clearly show this. They will use this as an excuse to rebalance most of the rune non-stat bonuses, is my guess, with a lot of nerfs incoming.

It's not really an excuse to rebalance runes. Relic of the Thief, in its current form, would be BiS relic for any DPS because it's pretty much unconditional 10% DPS boost in comparison to e.g. Scholar which is 5% and requires a precondition or Eagle which is 10% but it's pretty much around 5%. The only reason Runes of the Thief are not used that widely is because the stats are only good for non-crit capped builds and you also waste a lot of stats on condition damage. Take that away and the 6th bonus is BiS.

[Astralporing.1957]

16 minutes ago, rotten.9753 said:

It's not really an excuse to rebalance runes. Relic of the Thief, in its current form, would be BiS relic for any DPS because it's pretty much unconditional 10% DPS boost in comparison to e.g. Scholar which is 5% and requires a precondition or Eagle which is 10% but it's pretty much around 5%. The only reason Runes of the Thief are not used that widely is because the stats are only good for non-crit capped builds and you also waste a lot of stats on condition damage. Take that away and the 6th bonus is BiS.

That can be said of any bonus. In each situation there will always be just one that will be BiS. Up to now, it was balanced by stats, but now it won't be anymore. Scholar was a go to choice because it had a good mix of both, but as far as 6th tier bonus goes, there was already more options better than that, not just Thief.

In short, i fully expect a lot of bonuses to be given a balance pass, and people that are now so enthusiastic about "greater flexibility" that pairing best rune with best relic might offer might possibly end up with combinations that won't be any better than what we have now.

The main difference will be that there will be a sudden need to (re)grind for Relics, and that the main cost of runesets will likely at least partially concentrate there.

[rotten.9753]

1 hour ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

That can be said of any bonus. In each situation there will always be just one that will be BiS. Up to now, it was balanced by stats, but now it won't be anymore. Scholar was a go to choice because it had a good mix of both, but as far as 6th tier bonus goes, there was already more options better than that, not just Thief.

We're talking about double the bonus with virtually no preconditions.

1 hour ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

The main difference will be that there will be a sudden need to (re)grind for Relics, and that the main cost of runesets will likely at least partially concentrate there.

I'd wait till tomorrow to at least have some base to form an opinion, it's possible that relics are build component like traits rather than gear component.

[Astralporing.1957]

2 hours ago, rotten.9753 said:

We're talking about double the bonus with virtually no preconditions.

Like rune of the Berserker (flat +5% damage, +5% condition damage with no preconditions)? Ranger (+7% damage when you have an active companion - mech, phantasms, clones, ranger pets and necro minions all count)? Spellbreaker (+7% to foes with no boons) is also easy to keep up, as most enemies in PvE do not have boons. Then there's the Flame Legion (+20% burning duration, +7% damage against burning foes, practically guaranteed in instanced play) . I'd also say that Strength (+20% Might duration; increase strike damage by 5% while under the effect of might) would in instanced content also be strictly superior to Scholars, but that at least would be just +5%.

Then there are other cases, where when after stripping stat bonus, some runes have special bonuses just plain better than others. I.E.Infiltration (+10% to foes at below 50% hps, 5 secs of vigor after entering stealth) would be better than Eagle (just +10% to foes at below 50% hps)

It's absolutely certain that there will be rebalancing, and it would be a rebalancing down, not up.

2 hours ago, rotten.9753 said:

I'd wait till tomorrow to at least have some base to form an opinion, it's possible that relics are build component like traits rather than gear component.

They said crafting will be one of the ways to obtain them (apart from reward tracks, fractals and strikes), so it will be an actual gear piece, not just a build component. 

Edited July 17, 2023 by Astralporing.1957

[DeathPanel.8362]

9 hours ago, Echo.3725 said:

No where in nerf does it account for that equivalent exchange of the  decrease in effectiveness being moved to another item.

Stats and effects are shifted all the time in nerfs.

[quake.9023]

..this sucks

[Astralporing.1957]

1 hour ago, DeathPanel.8362 said:

Stats and effects are shifted all the time in nerfs.

Actually, no, there was no such equivalent in GW2 history so far.

[idpersona.3810]

2 hours ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Actually, no, there was no such equivalent in GW2 history so far.

Which is actually kind of the point that seems to keep getting missed.

How this gets handled (we'll know more [Thursday]) sets precedent, one way or another.
I'm not doom and gloom about it, but this can certainly change expectations going forward.

Edited July 17, 2023 by idpersona.3810
Updated the blog expectation date

[rotten.9753]

3 hours ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

They said crafting will be one of the ways to obtain them (apart from reward tracks, fractals and strikes), so it will be an actual gear piece, not just a build component. 

They also said something about achievements, and the post literally says "build component". After tomorrow, if it's a gear, I will join in complaints :).