Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Secrets of the Obscure Balance Follow-Ups


Cal Cohen.2358

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Cal Cohen.2358 said:

Hi everyone,

 

Just a heads up that our next round of balance adjustments will be coming on September 26. This will include changes to address some overperforming builds in PvE (on top of a few small adjustments going out in tomorrow’s build to address some outliers in competitive modes). We’ll continue to keep a close eye on things after that update and may make additional tuning adjustments as needed outside of our regular balance cycle.

 

Thanks,

Cal “cmc” Cohen

Skills and Balance Lead

Adress "some" overperforming builds. Almost every single Dps Spec can do 40k+ dps atm. Old Content is worthless. At least give us a reasoning or something. 

  • Like 4
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The previews it was a cool idea, first it was live in a studio, then they let you record at home, now they just tell you to post a text on the forum lmao
Anet doesn't know how to move forward? Make a good decision and undo it.. What a vicious cycle.

Now we are paying $25+ per year, we want to see results and see a real community manager, more lives, more communication on the blog.

Edited by VictorLeal.4102
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 4
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, HotDelirium.7984 said:

I mean that is smarter on some level-release the balance patch and notes, they get feedback on what needs work, they readjust INSTEAD of the preview with a million novels of text feedback, hardly enough time to fix any of it, feels bad, released and people complain that they didn't listen.

The people will still say that he end effect of introduced changes should have been obvious right away, without having to wait and see how they perform in the game. And they'd be right about that. The only difference will be that Anet will get information about what to fix several weeks later.

Now, of course, there is indeed no point in posting balance previews if Anet never intended to listen to the feedback in the first place. And from our side it's actlually better too - this way at least we can see things as they really are instead of mistakenly believing the seeming changes in communication meant anything.

  • Like 8
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope that qherald will get little more buffs. i can imagine pulsing 2000k radius slow and 50k dps to match normal dps.

arene shoud get some buffs too since hes on par with DH and we cant have that.

dont forget to nerf qb cfb i heard that some ppl still playing it.

oh and fractals are still in a game with 5 sec phases now... and most cms are still bugged.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Skill balance = what class cal and roy love get pushed to top priority.

Class dev lead needs to communicate more with us, last 2+ years have been a disaster and next time expansion or gem sales come up people should think otherwise.

The usual ask for feedback post. 20+ pages later ignored btw is anti consumer. If see that again will have had enough supporting game.

Edited by Mike.7983
  • Like 11
  • Confused 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Mike.7983 said:

Skill balance = what class cal and roy love get pushed to top priority.

Class dev lead needs to communicate more with us, last 2+ years have been a disaster and next time expansion or gem sales come up people should think otherwise.

The usual ask for feedback post. 20+ pages later ignored btw is anti consumer. If see that again will have had enough supporting game.

This just doesn't make sense. It's literally not possible for Anet to implement a balanced class scheme by listening more to the disparate opinions of random players. The funny think is that never have I seen Anet ASK for feedback on patch notes. What ACTAULLY happens is that they provide the patch notes and we CAN provide feedback. That's not the same thing as Anet ASKING for it. 

Edited by Obtena.7952
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Confused 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to echo the people who have been asking for more clarity on the goals here. Specifically (this is from a PvE perspective) -

  1. What's the target DPS number? Before SotO, it seemed to be around 40k; now everything seems to be way above that. But there was never an official target. Knowing what the target is helps the community know what's overperforming and likely to be nerfed, vs what's underperforming. It also helps make decisions about whether I should put time into learning a build - how long is it going to stay useful knowledge?
  2. Do you (i.e. ArenaNet) plan to do anything about the "hidden cooldowns" issue with many Relics? The general trend with balance seems to have been to make more builds less difficult to play to a competent level, but hidden cooldowns take things in the opposite direction. Is there a change in philosophy, or is this just something that needs improvement?
  3. Will "good DPS but janky" weapons/rotations get a usability pass? There are many examples but the one I'm most familiar with is Soulbeast mainhand sword, which does great damage but is prone to cancelling Path of Scars (axe 4), and Serpent Strike (sword 3) is unpredictable - it occasionally throws me through the target which can be very, very bad in some content. Meanwhile, I'm hearing that it might be a DPS increase to cancel hammer 3 by stowing after the first hit, which is just obnoxious to play with. (I miss Greatsword being good DPS, that weapon actually felt fun and smooth to play...)
    While I haven't played Firebrand much, I hear similar complaints from people who used to - numbers OK, but feels bad to actually play.
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

how about instead of nerfing player damage, make the pve enemies deal more damage so gearing isnt just all celestial or full glass. the only reason people are talking about "45k benchmark dps" or whatever is because the pve is too easy so the endgame is hitting a golem

Edited by Creativity.3816
  • Like 2
  • Confused 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...