Some runes are now just worse than others without any niche justifying their existence

[Sindust.7059]

Let's for example look at these 2:

1. Rune of the Pack: 175 power (25+50+100), 125 precision (125), 15% boon duration (5+10)
2. Rune of the Chronomancer: 175 power (25+50+100), 100 precision (35+65), 10% boon duration (10)

With the loss of the 6p unique effect there is no reason whatsoever for the Rune of the Chronomancer to exist at all, because Rune of the Pack has the same stats, just more of them with no tradeoff. I haven't gone through all the runes (I just noticed this one while I was experimenting with a chrono boon support build), but I suspect there are more pairs like this after the recent change.

[Dadnir.5038]

Unfortunately it's just one amongst many examples that this rework was done poorly. It's amusing to see that for once a runeset coming from an x-pack end up being weak compared to a core runeset, thought.

[Matoro.9708]

4 hours ago, Dadnir.5038 said:

Unfortunately it's just one amongst many examples that this rework was done poorly. It's amusing to see that for once a runeset coming from an x-pack end up being weak compared to a core runeset, thought.

When you put it that way, I'm sure it will be fixed next patch.

[draxynnic.3719]

15 minutes ago, Matoro.9708 said:

When you put it that way, I'm sure it will be fixed next patch.

Nah. Heart of Thorns has been out long enough that any mandate for HoT stuff to be good in order to drive sales probably expired years ago.

[Matoro.9708]

59 minutes ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

Nah. Heart of Thorns has been out long enough that any mandate for HoT stuff to be good in order to drive sales probably expired years ago.

I was being sarcastic

[Dadnir.5038]

1 hour ago, Matoro.9708 said:

When you put it that way, I'm sure it will be fixed next patch.

They probably think that they did a great job, so i wouldn't bet on it. Most likely, unless something blatantly break balance they won't lift a finger (even then, history prove that they can take quite a bit of time until they react)

[Infusion.7149]

For your particular example it is probably because far more people used pack runes than chronomancer runes. The whole point of chronomancer runes was the quickness on well usage (which was not applied to other people anyway so it was unusable in instanced group content).

Pack runes originally did not have +125 precision, it was added on later because the 6th piece bonus of might, fury, and swiftness was not particularly strong.

There are far more cases of runes being outright nerfed with the introduction of SotO, such as ogre runes (lost the rock dog and +4% flat damage), renegade runes (lost 7% condition damage mod), golemancer runes (lost the golem so not as huge), eagle runes (lost +10% vs <50% HP), infliltration rune (lost 10% damage bonus vs <50% HP), berserker runes (lost 5% modifier for both power and condi), strength rune (lost 5% damage mod under might) , ranger rune (lost 7% bonus with pet active), spellbreaker rune (lost 7% damage mod vs no boons), flame legion runes (lost 7% vs burning), lich runes (lost 4% condition damage), thief runes (lost 10% flanking), elementalist rune (lost 10% condition duration which is 150 expertise), etc.

 

[Sindust.7059]

10 minutes ago, Infusion.7149 said:

There are far more cases of runes being outright nerfed with the introduction of SotO

Yes, I brought up that very same point in one of the other threads about runes/relics. But this isn't about the nerf compared to what it was before, it is about imbalance of the different options in the current state of the game.

[Chyro.1462]

5 hours ago, Infusion.7149 said:

For your particular example it is probably because far more people used pack runes than chronomancer runes. The whole point of chronomancer runes was the quickness on well usage (which was not applied to other people anyway so it was unusable in instanced group content).

Pack runes originally did not have +125 precision, it was added on later because the 6th piece bonus of might, fury, and swiftness was not particularly strong.

There are far more cases of runes being outright nerfed with the introduction of SotO, such as ogre runes (lost the rock dog and +4% flat damage), renegade runes (lost 7% condition damage mod), golemancer runes (lost the golem so not as huge), eagle runes (lost +10% vs <50% HP), infliltration rune (lost 10% damage bonus vs <50% HP), berserker runes (lost 5% modifier for both power and condi), strength rune (lost 5% damage mod under might) , ranger rune (lost 7% bonus with pet active), spellbreaker rune (lost 7% damage mod vs no boons), flame legion runes (lost 7% vs burning), lich runes (lost 4% condition damage), thief runes (lost 10% flanking), elementalist rune (lost 10% condition duration which is 150 expertise), etc.

 

Though keep in mind that pretty much all the runes that gave a dmg bonus as 6th effect aren't really losing anything if you equip the proper dps relic, since they give comparable dmg boosts. So dps builds in general shouldn't be affected much (think power dps have been less affected than condi builds, since there are no straight up condi-dmg relics. only condi durations or additional condis on x trigger. But purely on numbers I don't think the 6th rune -> relic change affected dps builds much. The things that have been lost were mainly utility, niche or survival things that were neat to have. The golem is a good example, that many people liked to have in open world.

[Stx.4857]

I noticed this the other day with these two sets specifically.  
 

However I will counter by saying that the rune rework has actually made more rune sets viable in total, especially for power.  Condi is still kind of trapper or bust but before it’s not like there were a ton of options either.  
 

Are there any other examples of two sets like pack/chrono where there is a straight up imbalance between the same set of stats?

[draxynnic.3719]

I think there was a much greater range of viable runes for condi beforehand. Nightmare was the default if you had a range of conditions, but Krait, Tormenting, and Balthazar could all come up in meta builds if they primarily used bleeds, torment, or burning respectively. From what I've seen, though, they've pretty much all been converging on trapper since.

[Buran.3796]

   ^ Yep. Unless you rely almost solely in a single condi source (as burn guardian) the best choice used to be NM or a specific rune for your main condition. But with the 6th effect replaced by stats and NM only giving +20% condi duration the obvoius choice is just run Trapper on almost every condition build: +15% condi duration and + 400 condition damage in stats. Trapper is also better due doesn't require dungeon tokens, so helps to kill that instanced content even faster.

   People arguing that relics would bring up variety were deadly wrong.  Now instead of niche builds running a variety of runes due the extra minion, added +10% HP, stealth on traps, +25% movement pace...   You have a couple of runes to use if you run a power build* and another two for condi. Everything else is mathematically subpar. SAnd most of relics are hot garbage, also. Get amazed for the infinite possibilities...

(*) Scholar if you class caps crit chance, Ranger if not (until you notice that you chose the wrong class and then you reroll to a class which caps crit chance).

Edited September 2, 2023 by Buran.3796

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

6 hours ago, Buran.3796 said:

   ^ Yep. Unless you rely almost solely in a single condi source (as burn guardian) the best choice used to be NM or a specific rune for your main condition. But with the 6th effect replaced by stats and NM only giving +20% condi duration the obvoius choice is just run Trapper on almost every condition build: +15% condi duration and + 400 condition damage in stats. Trapper is also better due doesn't require dungeon tokens, so helps to kill that instanced content even faster.

   People arguing that relics would bring up variety were deadly wrong.  Now instead of niche builds running a variety of runes due the extra minion, added +10% HP, stealth on traps, +25% movement pace...   You have a couple of runes to use if you run a power build* and another two for condi. Everything else is mathematically subpar. SAnd most of relics are hot garbage, also. Get amazed for the infinite possibilities...

(*) Scholar if you class caps crit chance, Ranger if not (until you notice that you chose the wrong class and then you reroll to a class which caps crit chance).

Classic. I can tell that this is targeted indirectly towards me specifically. But lets get something clear: that you must have never actually understood any of the posts I've made :

 

Literally the thing that people have an issue with, is this EXACT thing that I have been repeating over and over and over and over again...not just recently but for years...but people manage to divert the issue constantly to something else...and use the excuse that presentation of options, like decoupling runes from relics for instance...which happens to be the only balance operation that actually can increase diversity...is the problem, when it's not.

Whether you want to believe it or not, you do have objectively, more choices you can make now than you did before (even with less relics), and you now, have more possibilities to make possible builds, and therefor as players go along exploring the space of possible builds, there will be different builds that will come to exist. But the sheer number of choices won't matter until the game is also, no longer a simple addition and subtraction game...once they design mechanics to be undecidable, only then will each choice become infinitely complex.

What you are experiencing now is the result of you not understanding anything I've said.

Just gonna quote myself because I think people have an issue with clicking on links, reading things and doing basic research:

"The fact that you can easily compare the strengths and weaknesses of these options is the actual problem...it's no different no matter what options you are choosing from, whether they are skills, weapons, traits or classes wholesale. In a game that is based on numbers, and with humans being optimizers, if the effects of things could be compared so easily...then no matter what the choices are, it will always boil down to everyone choosing the same things if they all have the same goals.

The solution to your problem is again, not in the presentation of choices (with which the world gives you an infinite number of those) but the fact that you can compare them trivially. In a game defined by simple addition and subtraction problems like gw2...get us-to your choices being meaningless. The only way you will ever stop this issue, is with an analysis of the game's mechanics and making choices undecidable."

But hey if you want to continue diverting, you will simply just be going backwards. The Relic system (and Weapon Mastery) are the first step in at least going in a direction where these operations actually solve the real problems (cause hell, before people weren't even aware of what the problems actually are let alone solutions to them). If you are defending the older system to the newer one, you are defending not only a broken and crippled diversity and  balance regime, you are also in favor of doing counter operations to anything that could ACTUALLY ever get you a diverse and balanced game. That is the ultimately irony of your position, to mine...you can NEVER have a diverse or balanced game, by homogenizing it, liquidating it's effects through number balancing, or stripping it of the ability for agents to make choices.

 

 

Edited September 2, 2023 by JusticeRetroHunter.7684

[Buran.3796]

 ^ Actually, the new system resembles the ultra homogenized PvP in which 80% of builds ran Divinity since everything else was too mediocre to be chosen. Now is al Scholar or Dragonhunter runes for power builds, Trapper for condi builds, Thief or Akeem relics. There's a bit more for support but that is a niche role for niche game modes, anyway.

   The only reason ANet did the change was to add some vertical progression to push regearing and the purchase of future expansions with OP relics. I'm actually surprised they didm't monetized the relics with skins, but now that the gates to new gear are open they could do in the future with belts or anything else.

   Honestly, I don't even care that much: didn't buy the expansion, don't play instanced content nor meta builds; but the nerfs to the old system already cost me over 50 gold coins just replacinf Fireworks with alternatives as Runes of Surging, and in the process tome niche builds as trapper DH got deleted, so I don't see a single improvement. 

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

2 hours ago, Buran.3796 said:

 ^ Actually, the new system resembles the ultra homogenized PvP in which 80% of builds ran Divinity since everything else was too mediocre to be chosen.

It has nothing to do with the system...again I keep repeating this over and over again ...it has to do with the fact that options that you are presented can be trivially compared, and that's irrespective of the number of options you are given.

The operation of 99 runes x 52 relic combinations is more build possibilities, than 99 x 1. This is the system (Relic/Rune System), objectively... the new system is more options and therefor (way) build possibilities. What the effects of Relics DO is the notion that the effects of said options can be compared trivially, and that this is the other important part. I brought this up many times... and yet HERE you are talking about how mediocre some effects are... and you are still blaming the presentation of options rather than the effects and how trivial they can be compared.

The same goes for runes... but runes are just numbers and they are going to be compared as numbers typically do. to introduce undecidability of runes, will depend on traits and how traits push stats in ways that are non-trivial. For instance; would a Power/Precision/Toughness stat set do more DPS on a particular build, than a Power/Precision/Ferocity on that particular build. If the traits are designed in a trivial way where the answer to the question is "no" then obviously this pushes more builds to go Power/Precision/Ferocity...and typically that is what you see. 

Some builds do exist that have features like this...where say, a stat set like Power/Precision/Toughness over Power/Precision/Ferocity, could conceivably work and do comparable performance...but in the way many traits are designed, this is a lot of the time not the case. So the issue you have with runes, is not fixable without touching traits : because no matter how many stat choices you have with runes there are you are always going to choose scholars in PVE or against a golem if you are running a build in which scholars does the most damage on it. And those are based on the design of traits and how they interact with stats.

So this is what I'm saying to you : You do not even have a solution to any problem. Going back to an inferior system is not the solution (mind you everyone ran scholars before).

About Build Diversity : The Weapon Master and Relic System has opened up a huge amount of possibilities...especially for support builds. Something interesting has been Staff/Staff Untamed (O.o) which is a healing build I didn't even think would have been possible...There's also Staff Stance Soul-beast, Regular Druid. That's 3 Healer builds over just 1...and this doesn't even cover possible variations, playstyles, rune or relic sets. Similiar trends have occurred on a variety of other classes, and you will see a lot of variety coming out of the game, when people explore the space more and figure out how to piece the puzzle together. And ultimately this proves every single point I've ever made, and most of your claims are not even true. Like someone else posted elsewhere...In PVE, there's like 24 builds so far that have had their benchmarks done, and the number of builds that have cropped up in PVP or WvW are more prevelant. A lot of that is due to the fact that weapons and relic effects have been made available to off-meta builds that can NOW with those additions, function more cohesively... a fact most people tend to miss or ignore about the instantiation of options. 

Edited September 3, 2023 by JusticeRetroHunter.7684

[Stx.4857]

On 9/2/2023 at 12:21 AM, draxynnic.3719 said:

I think there was a much greater range of viable runes for condi beforehand. Nightmare was the default if you had a range of conditions, but Krait, Tormenting, and Balthazar could all come up in meta builds if they primarily used bleeds, torment, or burning respectively. From what I've seen, though, they've pretty much all been converging on trapper since.

It’s not just because of trapper.  Now you can get 15% duration in your relic slot which makes it easier to hit cap with trapper on most specs, even the ones without duration in their traits.  

[alaskawinter.4728]

I kind of wish they didn't mess with the 'fun' runes, ones where the 6th slot really didn't change much. Mad King added a raven, Privateer's add a parrot, or Ogre's rock dog. I was personally running ranger runes on my Elementalist just because I spammed out elementals. It wasn't meta, but just fun to play with. My one hope, is that down the road, these runes will come back as relics, but if we don't see an equivalent of Mad King's next month, I'm not so sure. 

[DanAlcedo.3281]

On 9/3/2023 at 7:30 PM, alaskawinter.4728 said:

I kind of wish they didn't mess with the 'fun' runes, ones where the 6th slot really didn't change much. Mad King added a raven, Privateer's add a parrot, or Ogre's rock dog. I was personally running ranger runes on my Elementalist just because I spammed out elementals. It wasn't meta, but just fun to play with. My one hope, is that down the road, these runes will come back as relics, but if we don't see an equivalent of Mad King's next month, I'm not so sure. 

The only thing that matters is how a class performs on the golem. Anything that doesn't matter on the golem can be removed without a second thought or an explanation. 

That has been Anets way for years now. 

[draxynnic.3719]

On 9/3/2023 at 1:02 AM, JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

 

The solution to your problem is again, not in the presentation of choices (with which the world gives you an infinite number of those) but the fact that you can compare them trivially. In a game defined by simple addition and subtraction problems like gw2...get us-to your choices being meaningless. The only way you will ever stop this issue, is with an analysis of the game's mechanics and making choices undecidable."

 

Here we go again: same argument, yet another different thread.

Let's express the problem here using an example you yourself presented.

I don't recall the exact details, but you presented an example which had three skills, one did a small amount of damage, one did a moderate amount of damage, and one did a large amount of damage (your numbers might have been different, I'm running off memory here). Obviously, the skill that does 1000 damage would be the one you'd choose, all else being equal.

You then presented a counter-example where the skill that did a small amount of damage also offered a powerful, albeit somewhat situational, utility, the moderate damage skill had a moderately useful utility effect, while the high-damaging skill had a relatively minor utility effect. Which do you use now? It's not really clear - it depends on just how useful those utility effects are in a specific build or environment to determine whether that utility is worth the damage reduction.

Now, let's extend this further. Let's imagine that a "skill builder" system where the damage and utility were decoupled, and you could choose which damage value you couple with which utility. What happens now? It collapses right back into the first scenario: you take the high damage.

This is essentially what splitting off relics has done. Previously, with the stat bonuses and the 6-slot bonuses coupled together, there was at least some degree of weighing different options against one another - getting a good 6-slot bonus might require compromising on base stats or vice versa. Now, though, you can just take the runes with the best stats and the relic with the best bonus effect and combine them. The move may have created more combinations that are possible, but in a world where people analyse and evaluate the buildcrafting tools at their disposal rather than picking things at random, it makes it easier to identify what the best ones are.  

Seriously, it's getting to the point where even Snowcrows are starting to get snarky about how often the same rune and relic combinations come up. It's not quite as bad as some people have said in this thread, but it's pretty close.

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

12 hours ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

I don't recall the exact details, but you presented an example which had three skills, one did a small amount of damage, one did a moderate amount of damage, and one did a large amount of damage (your numbers might have been different, I'm running off memory here). Obviously, the skill that does 1000 damage would be the one you'd choose, all else being equal.

You then presented a counter-example where the skill that did a small amount of damage also offered a powerful, albeit somewhat situational, utility, the moderate damage skill had a moderately useful utility effect, while the high-damaging skill had a relatively minor utility effect. Which do you use now? It's not really clear - it depends on just how useful those utility effects are in a specific build or environment to determine whether that utility is worth the damage reduction.

/Facepalm

no this is not anything even close to what the argument is.

The argument is as follows:

you have 3 choices A, B and C

Option A- $1000

Option B- $10,000 

Option C- $100,000

These are 3 diverse (which means different) options. Clearly though, option C is the best choice…and the reason you can even make such a conclusion is because you can compare the three options trivially as it’s an easy addition and subtraction problem.

For N number of different options, if they can be trivially compared, you will always arrive at a single answer.

Undecidability is in contrast, the notion that you can’t trivially compare things with one another. Formally, you get undecidability when the problem that is in need of being solved, can’t fundamentally be solved because it would be in the same problem class as the halting problem. When you have a problem that is undecidable, you can’t create an optimization calculation for it because it’s in fact impossible to do.

It’s easy to get undecidability as it’s a ubiquitous property of the world…by making the rules with which your system is following (mechanics) to use variables as inputs (preferably non-linear)…for instance a variable defined by what players do.

A well known example of an undecidable problem is Rock Paper Scissors: You can’t optimize a true RPS game…because your answer depends on a move that someone else is making and in order to do so requires a computation on par with knowing the state of the universe.

RPS is just a good example of what undecidability is but it’s no where near the end of the story as most people like to think… the level to which you can design mechanics to be undecidable are much much deeper. I mentioned another undecidable problem in that thread (the Mandelbrot set)…and an example with guild wars 2: that the numbers skills would generate as output are defined by input variables that are based on real-time player agency…would also not be decidable.

I’ll highlight once again; that undecidability is the notion that a mechanic can not fundamentally be calculated, because such a property means that the problem sits in the same problem space as trying to solve the halting problem…this is one of the indisputable facts of the world we exist in that we’ve known for a hundred years now (Alan Turing) and it’s these same properties that make it possible for you to even type on a computer and why we have the diversity of computer programs that we do: the sheer number of permutations of 0’s and 1’s and the fact that you can construct arbitrary computation based on the constructs assembled by these sequences to be undecidable.

as I also mentioned, so long as you stick around defending trivial mechanics (ie addition and subtraction problems as your set of choices) than you will forever be stuck with balance problems and you will never attain anything close to a truly balanced and diverse game. Allowing the game to permute its choices is just the first (of two) steps to get there

Edited September 5, 2023 by JusticeRetroHunter.7684

[draxynnic.3719]

I see you're not relying on the same counterexample this time.

The thing you're missing is that in these sorts of games, "undecidability", as you put it, comes from increasing the size of the package you have to choose at once. Consider, for instance, Jalis and Shiro on a power revenant build. Shiro is well known for being the best damage choice, but Jalis brings valuable utility such as much more efficient breakbar option and stability. Which is better? Depends on what you need. If the stability or the cheap breakbar is important, you take Jalis and accept the lower damage. If it's not, you take Shiro. It's not really "undecidable" - a sensible person can actually decide based on their needs at the time - but you can't really say that one is strictly better than the other, it depends on what you need.

Now, imagine you broke that down and revenants could choose their skills freely. In raid situations, you'd then be able to have a build with stability access, cheap CC, AND the high damage of Shiro through Impossible Odds. Breaking it up and letting the player optimise lots of small choices rather than one big one makes it easier to find the optimal one.

That's essentially what's happened with runes and relics. Runes are now mostly just stats - which stats you need for which builds is pretty much a solved problem, and I don't really see that being able to be changed. Relics are a little more complicated, but not enough to avoid a situation where a small handful of relics are used most of the time. Under the old system, you'd have a few tradeoffs such that no one set is going to line everything up perfectly - now, it's easy to pick out the runeset with the best stats and the relic with the best relic effect.

The game mechanics, when broken down to their most basic elements, are pretty simple. You have damage and damage over time, you have healing, you have various boons and nondamaging conditions that do various things. We're not going to get a situation where intelligent humans can't identify the builds that will achieve their objectives out of these building blocks - especially since PvE generally doesn't have much of the "rock paper scissors" aspect once players have some experience with the content and know what's involved. The more players are able to fine-tune their builds without having to make tradeoffs, the more they'll be able to optimise their builds, and the more likely that something is going to work out strong enough that it completely outshines the rest. Changing that isn't something the balance team can address. It would take an entirely different game.

This is part of why Guild Wars 2 went more towards containing build choices within packages - choosing weapons instead of individual skills, reducing choice even on the right side of the bar, limiting builds to a single profession rather than having secondary professions, introducing elite specialisations in the first place rather than just adding to the core professions: because it allows the company to have more control over what synergies can come up and generate a flatter balance curve. Perfect balance isn't necessarily the goal, it just needs to be close enough that personal preferences can outweigh the absolute differences in power between them. Even between builds that do nothing other than damage, most people don't care if one build does 1k damage more than another, but they do care if one build does 10k more than another.

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

6 hours ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

I see you're not relying on the same counterexample this time.

What are you talking about? The whole point of the post I made just now to you here, is that you are imagining this counter example, and I'm correcting you because i know what i said and say.

Please, go in and tell me what this "counterexample" you are telling me...my arguments have been pretty consistent over the past 4 years so I'll sit here and wait for a quote... 

Tip: Every argument I've ever made uses logic that supports itself, so any quote you will find, will just substantiate what I said, and anything I ever will say. In other words, it's not a very smart move to make up false accusations.

 

[LadyKitty.6120]

On 9/3/2023 at 4:06 AM, JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

It has nothing to do with the system...again I keep repeating this over and over again ...it has to do with the fact that options that you are presented can be trivially compared, and that's irrespective of the number of options you are given.

The operation of 99 runes x 52 relic combinations is more build possibilities, than 99 x 1. This is the system (Relic/Rune System), objectively... the new system is more options and therefor (way) build possibilities. What the effects of Relics DO is the notion that the effects of said options can be compared trivially, and that this is the other important part. I brought this up many times... and yet HERE you are talking about how mediocre some effects are... and you are still blaming the presentation of options rather than the effects and how trivial they can be compared.

The same goes for runes... but runes are just numbers and they are going to be compared as numbers typically do. to introduce undecidability of runes, will depend on traits and how traits push stats in ways that are non-trivial. For instance; would a Power/Precision/Toughness stat set do more DPS on a particular build, than a Power/Precision/Ferocity on that particular build. If the traits are designed in a trivial way where the answer to the question is "no" then obviously this pushes more builds to go Power/Precision/Ferocity...and typically that is what you see. 

Some builds do exist that have features like this...where say, a stat set like Power/Precision/Toughness over Power/Precision/Ferocity, could conceivably work and do comparable performance...but in the way many traits are designed, this is a lot of the time not the case. So the issue you have with runes, is not fixable without touching traits : because no matter how many stat choices you have with runes there are you are always going to choose scholars in PVE or against a golem if you are running a build in which scholars does the most damage on it. And those are based on the design of traits and how they interact with stats.

So this is what I'm saying to you : You do not even have a solution to any problem. Going back to an inferior system is not the solution (mind you everyone ran scholars before).

About Build Diversity : The Weapon Master and Relic System has opened up a huge amount of possibilities...especially for support builds. Something interesting has been Staff/Staff Untamed (O.o) which is a healing build I didn't even think would have been possible...There's also Staff Stance Soul-beast, Regular Druid. That's 3 Healer builds over just 1...and this doesn't even cover possible variations, playstyles, rune or relic sets. Similiar trends have occurred on a variety of other classes, and you will see a lot of variety coming out of the game, when people explore the space more and figure out how to piece the puzzle together. And ultimately this proves every single point I've ever made, and most of your claims are not even true. Like someone else posted elsewhere...In PVE, there's like 24 builds so far that have had their benchmarks done, and the number of builds that have cropped up in PVP or WvW are more prevelant. A lot of that is due to the fact that weapons and relic effects have been made available to off-meta builds that can NOW with those additions, function more cohesively... a fact most people tend to miss or ignore about the instantiation of options. 

Problem with these 99x52 is that yeah, you technically have more options now but...the number of relevant combos is about same or lower than runes were. Pretty much 3-5 relics are currently worth using and each of those have 1-2 runes are superior combos with them compared to other rune options so the real useful number of rune+relic combo options is under 10. Scholar/DH/Infiltration+Thief/Fireworks (depending on crit rate and power/crit damage breakpoint), Monk+Monk and Trapper+Aristocracy/Fractal/Akeem.

In some cases, one might consider some specific boon/condi duration rune instead. Previously we had bunch of runes used by various condi builds, Monk/Pack/Flock used by heal/support builds and Scholar, Thief, Ogre and some power+precision runes as well as meme runes like Golemancer used by power builds. And that's just instanced PVE, open-world builds used various runes for self-booning and survivability through various now-gone 6th bonuses and as people have been loud about, bunch of WvW builds that relied on 6th bonus for their playstyle are demolished without any real replacements...except using some boring standard combo with nerfed gameplay.

Tl;dr there's more theorethical options but less (and many missing that should be there) practical quality options.

[xellink.7568]

18 minutes ago, LadyKitty.6120 said:

Problem with these 99x52 is that yeah, you technically have more options now but...the number of relevant combos is about same or lower than runes were. Pretty much 3-5 relics are currently worth using and each of those have 1-2 runes are superior combos with them compared to other rune options so the real useful number of rune+relic combo options is under 10. Scholar/DH/Infiltration+Thief/Fireworks (depending on crit rate and power/crit damage breakpoint), Monk+Monk and Trapper+Aristocracy/Fractal/Akeem.

In some cases, one might consider some specific boon/condi duration rune instead. Previously we had bunch of runes used by various condi builds, Monk/Pack/Flock used by heal/support builds and Scholar, Thief, Ogre and some power+precision runes as well as meme runes like Golemancer used by power builds. And that's just instanced PVE, open-world builds used various runes for self-booning and survivability through various now-gone 6th bonuses and as people have been loud about, bunch of WvW builds that relied on 6th bonus for their playstyle are demolished without any real replacements...except using some boring standard combo with nerfed gameplay.

Tl;dr there's more theorethical options but less (and many missing that should be there) practical quality options.

What I see here is that a structural problem has been solved that opened up more possibilities. It is up to Anet to make use of this opportunity to make meaningful possibilities.

But people are complaining that Celestials/Plaguedoctor scourge is too strong (or any other variant that can compete with a glass cannon) etc on other threads. So we are shooting ourselves in the foot ain't it.

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

13 hours ago, LadyKitty.6120 said:

Problem with these 99x52 is that yeah, you technically have more options now but...the number of relevant combos is about same or lower than runes were. Pretty much 3-5 relics are currently worth using and each of those have 1-2 runes are superior combos with them compared to other rune options so the real useful number of rune+relic combo options is under 10. Scholar/DH/Infiltration+Thief/Fireworks (depending on crit rate and power/crit damage breakpoint), Monk+Monk and Trapper+Aristocracy/Fractal/Akeem.

In some cases, one might consider some specific boon/condi duration rune instead. Previously we had bunch of runes used by various condi builds, Monk/Pack/Flock used by heal/support builds and Scholar, Thief, Ogre and some power+precision runes as well as meme runes like Golemancer used by power builds. And that's just instanced PVE, open-world builds used various runes for self-booning and survivability through various now-gone 6th bonuses and as people have been loud about, bunch of WvW builds that relied on 6th bonus for their playstyle are demolished without any real replacements...except using some boring standard combo with nerfed gameplay.

Tl;dr there's more theorethical options but less (and many missing that should be there) practical quality options.

This has largely been the point of the argument i've been making for a couple months (but in extension a couple years) and i'll just highlight, in bold quotes exactly what i said, which i've said maybe now for the 100th time: 

"The fact that you can easily compare the strengths and weaknesses of these options is the actual problem...it's no different no matter what options you are choosing from, whether they are skills, weapons, traits or classes wholesale. In a game that is based on numbers, and with humans being optimizers, if the effects of things could be compared so easily...then no matter what the choices are, it will always boil down to everyone choosing the same things if they all have the same goals.

The solution to your problem is again, not in the presentation of choices (with which the world gives you an infinite number of those) but the fact that you can compare them trivially. In a game defined by simple addition and subtraction problems like gw2...get us-to your choices being meaningless. The only way you will ever stop this issue, is with an analysis of the game's mechanics and making choices undecidable."

Meaningful choices...quality choices is just as important as the number of options you can permute with said choices. the reason you get meaningless choices, and non-quality choices, comes from the fact you can objectively decide between them with the best answer...meaning you can compare them trivially to arrive at an answer for "which relic is better?" because (some) of them are simple addition and subtraction problems...ie if you have a choice that is "you gain $10,000" and another choice that is "you gain $100,000"...then hello... it's obvious that you are going to optimize the set of choices here...and this applies for N number of choices...even in a game where there is a million choices if they are all trivial, it's going to succumb to this issue.

Over-balancing (by attempting to make things equal) has typically been the culprit in trivializing the mechanics we have received and will be receiving... Like i said...this is the great irony of people that fight against the argument : They will never have a game in which it will ever be meaningful so long as they attempt to fight for decidable, easily optimizable choices...and therefor not understanding this argument shows exactly the problem with the player-base who simply do not get the problem.

The permutability of options, even though it's closely related, is not tied to this particular problem (which I've stated before) it is just one of at least two fundamental steps (permutability and undecidability) involved in going from a broken homogenous game to a game that will has diversity (one that mirrors the natural world) . Permutability of options is the only mathematical anti-homogenization balance procedure that exist among the other procedures (nerfs, buffs, removals, additions)  Permutability falls under additions (where additions is the only non-homogenization procedure, all the others lead to homogenization) where permutability doesn't actually require adding new elements into the game....therefor ideally this is what you want to do first : Make your choices meaningful (undecidable), and be able to permute the ones you already have.

Edited September 11, 2023 by JusticeRetroHunter.7684