More Frequent Balance Updates

[Holgarf.6581]

If it involves anything to do with builds then no. I find it incredibly time consuming and tedious to set up a build and if that gets frequently ruined I'd probably just stop playing tbh.

[Obtena.7952]

@zealex.9410 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@zealex.9410 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@zealex.9410 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:

@Astralporing.1957 said:Basically, longer balance intervals do not mean the balance fixes will be any better. It will only mean that in a given timeframe there will be less chances to adjust them in the right direction.

OK ... and shorter ones could mean they do it worse.They could. Or they could mean they do it better. It's not a manual work, but theorycrafting - theorycrafting that needs to be confirmed ingame. Making bigger changes at longer intervals is in many ways worse than doing small changes at smaller intervals, because hamfisted balance is far more likely to overshoot the target in the other direction, and balance progress is very dependent on the number of balance iterations, which with longer intervals is much smaller in any given timeframe.

I think my point here isn't what could or couldn't be. The point is that whatever Anet is doing, it's probably the best way they know how to do it. Maybe Mr Expert 20 years in the software dev business could walk in there with his agile approach and straighten them out ... or maybe not ... because we don't know what they do.

What I am pretty sure of is that whatever work the balance team is doing, it's not 50% work and 50% slacking off to delay our balance patches. So just saying they should do them more often because 'better' is a completely ignorant way of thinking.

Anet has done alot of think they thought they knew how to do right and still fail miserably. Ppl here just think this diff aproach might be better.

... and I'm not debating that. Maybe that's true but it's all just speculation. It doesn't really change what I said ... if Anet had the bandwidth to do it, why wouldn't they be doing it now? Do you think the balance team is playing ping pong half their day or something? I understand what's being asked here ... but if you don't know how balance patches work, it's all just hand wavy kinds of wishful thinking.

@zealex.9410 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:Maybe I'm ignorant but I don't know any game that uses balance patches to keep the game 'fresh' for players. It's primarily content driven ... am I offbase here?

What do you consider content in pvp games like league, dota etc if not balance updates?

Those games are a different genre than GW2. But even in those game, I can imagine a scenario where things kept fresh doesn't necessarily mean they come in and mess with the class balance.

Gw2 has pvp and wvw.

That doesn't change anything I've said ... Keeping the game fresh isn't limited to ONLY changing balance ... in ANY game mode.

But its far more important in pvp and wvw because you interact play with and against other ppl which are playing other classes.In pve its much less valueable because regardless if your power mirage build is weaker than the power chrono or not you are still doing the same content and killing the same static bosses. If they change thief then every interaction with thieves in pvp has the potential of being different.

Are you really telling me balance doesnt hold more weight in pvp than pve? Concent for players in pvp are the player versus player interactions, if their tools change each patch their interactions also change.

You're question to me is misdirection anyways ... I'm asking if there are other games out there that use balancing patches to continually keep the game fresh for players ... what I consider content in other games has nothing to do with how someone answers that question.

And i told you, pvp games or gamemodes value balance higher than pve game and gamemodes because your enemy isnt a boss with predetermined mechanics, its another dude with their class that can and does change every balance patch.

I think my point is pretty simple. It's already hard enough for most game devs to use balance patches to get good balance ... now people are implying it should keep the game fresh for players as well? What fantasy land are people living in here?

Its been implied for years... I feel like you've been given the answer and are simply ignoring it.

No one here is debating if 'fresh' is important ... but anyone that thinks they are going to get more balance, more often and with fresh play, all through balance patches is just kidding themselves. You aren't getting any of those things right now ... now you think it will be reasonable without knowing how Anet works to get them all this way? OK well ... I will leave you to that.

[TheBravery.9615]

Voted other. Realistically would think frequent = lower quality as a trade off. If we could get frequent high quality patches that would be ideal but unrealistic. In that case prefer quality over quantity.

Also aren't we due for a balance patch? last one was 04/23, past cadence. When is the next one?https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/74356/game-update-notes-april-23-2019#latest

[Bladestrom.6425]

@"TheBravery.9615" said:Voted other. Realistically would think frequent = lower quality as a trade off. If we could get frequent high quality patches that would be ideal but unrealistic. In that case prefer quality over quantity.

Also aren't we due for a balance patch? last one was 04/23, past cadence. When is the next one?https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/74356/game-update-notes-april-23-2019#latest

Its the opposite, Frequency equals better quality in software dev, it can be the same build potentially as the 3 month code dump but built in smaller chunks and tested faster and earlier with precision and released to get value to customers ASAP.

[Bladestrom.6425]

Duplicate..

[Bladestrom.6425]

Duplicate.

[Widmo.3186]

We dont need more frequent balance updates. What we need is PROPER balance updates. I dont care if balance patch appears every 3 months, or even every 6 months as long as it clears all (most) the problems and if it fucks up somewhere, then there happen to be POST Balance Patch clearing what was made wrong.

In most causes community will notice problems during first week after update, ANet should stay around, read those threads and think whether there is actually a real problem or it is just a Q_Q l2p issue. That happened to zerker Arc Divider, maybe with bit of postpone, but still happened.

Dev sees one "Pls nerf rev thread"? Okay, random player got one-shoted and started whining on forum, happens. 4 threads during 2 weeks? Okay, maybe actually we should take a closer look and do sth about it.Atm I think most Q_Q threads are about rev, holo, scrapper, few about Spellbroken (Rampage) and Mezmer in general. While mezmer and teef are cried all over and over every patch, do you think other (lets say 4 classes) are getting nerfed/adjusted next patch? No, they are not. At best there will be Rampage nerf, one other class (lets say holo) nerf and during same time 3 other things (for example revert rev changes, core engi gets some sick condi adjust and DH gets +50% dmg overall) will get buffed.

Which makes -2 overperfoming things adjusted, +3 overperforming things added and 2 other left alone in their unhealthy state.Ends as one step backward instead of one step forward.

And it will go on and go on until Devs will start actually caring about balance state and listen to the community, at least the higher rank part of this community instead of taking 99% of threads as granted l2p and whining issues. Because atm it looks like that, like lost children wandering in the mist.

//Despite fact that this thread is in "general discussion" i talked solely about PvP, because there are the most issues. Lets be honest, what ppl care about is when you try to play PvP and get one-shoted by evade machine with 25k hp stealth and 12k healing potential (just an example, not that this monster actually exist). Problem of having 12k dps instead of 18k dps and making you switch from Core Ele to Weaver Ele is...not a problem. And dont even try dealing with this fact.

[Bladestrom.6425]

@"Widmo.3186" said:We dont need more frequent balance updates. What we need is PROPER balance updates. I dont care if balance patch appears every 3 months, or even every 6 months as long as it clears all (most) the problems and if it kitten up somewhere, then there happen to be POST Balance Patch clearing what was made wrong.

In most causes community will notice problems during first week after update, ANet should stay around, read those threads and think whether there is actually a real problem or it is just a Q_Q l2p issue. That happened to zerker Arc Divider, maybe with bit of postpone, but still happened.

Dev sees one "Pls nerf rev thread"? Okay, random player got one-shoted and started whining on forum, happens. 4 threads during 2 weeks? Okay, maybe actually we should take a closer look and do sth about it.Atm I think most Q_Q threads are about rev, holo, scrapper, few about Spellbroken (Rampage) and Mezmer in general. While mezmer and teef are cried all over and over every patch, do you think other (lets say 4 classes) are getting nerfed/adjusted next patch? No, they are not. At best there will be Rampage nerf, one other class (lets say holo) nerf and during same time 3 other things (for example revert rev changes, core engi gets some sick condi adjust and DH gets +50% dmg overall) will get buffed.

Which makes -2 overperfoming things adjusted, +3 overperforming things added and 2 other left alone in their unhealthy state.Ends as one step backward instead of one step forward.

And it will go on and go on until Devs will start actually caring about balance state and listen to the community, at least the higher rank part of this community instead of taking 99% of threads as granted l2p and whining issues. Because atm it looks like that, like lost children wandering in the mist.

//Despite fact that this thread is in "general discussion" i talked solely about PvP, because there are the most issues. Lets be honest, what ppl care about is when you try to play PvP and get one-shoted by evade machine with 25k hp stealth and 12k healing potential (just an example, not that this monster actually exist). Problem of having 12k dps instead of 18k dps and making you switch from Core Ele to Weaver Ele is...not a problem. And dont even try dealing with this fact.

Your missing the point, the lack of 'proper' balance fixes is a side effect of low frequency changes. You will never ever get it right over time by making changes every 3 months.its a fundamentally flawed and dated approach that is proven not to work. Also agree its pvp where the damage is done with poor balancing. There are real people involved, not just npc's, and the focus on whoring damage on bosses is a big fail - but a separate discussion.

[Nath Forge Tempete.1645]

We don't need more ... we need better balance patches !

[Widmo.3186]

@vesica tempestas.1563 said:

@"Widmo.3186" said:We dont need more frequent balance updates. What we need is

PROPER

balance updates. I dont care if balance patch appears every 3 months, or even every 6 months as long as it clears all (most) the problems and if it kitten up somewhere, then there happen to be

POST

Balance Patch clearing what was made wrong.

In most causes community will notice problems during first week after update, ANet should stay around, read those threads and think whether there is actually a real problem or it is just a Q_Q l2p issue. That happened to zerker Arc Divider, maybe with bit of postpone, but still happened.

Dev sees one "Pls nerf rev thread"? Okay, random player got one-shoted and started whining on forum, happens. 4 threads during 2 weeks? Okay, maybe actually we should take a closer look and do sth about it.Atm I think most Q_Q threads are about rev, holo, scrapper, few about Spellbroken (Rampage) and Mezmer in general. While mezmer and teef are cried all over and over every patch, do you think other (lets say 4 classes) are getting nerfed/adjusted next patch? No, they are not. At best there will be Rampage nerf, one other class (lets say holo) nerf and during same time 3 other things (for example revert rev changes, core engi gets some sick condi adjust and DH gets +50% dmg overall) will get buffed.

Which makes -2 overperfoming things adjusted, +3 overperforming things added and 2 other left alone in their unhealthy state.Ends as one step backward instead of one step forward.

And it will go on and go on until Devs will start actually caring about balance state and listen to the community, at least the higher rank part of this community instead of taking 99% of threads as granted l2p and whining issues. Because atm it looks like that, like lost children wandering in the mist.

//Despite fact that this thread is in "general discussion" i talked solely about PvP, because there are the most issues. Lets be honest, what ppl care about is when you try to play PvP and get one-shoted by evade machine with 25k hp stealth and 12k healing potential (just an example, not that this monster actually exist). Problem of having 12k dps instead of 18k dps and making you switch from Core Ele to Weaver Ele is...not a problem. And dont even try dealing with this fact.

Your missing the point, the lack of 'proper' balance fixes is a side effect of low frequency changes. You will never ever get it right over time by making changes every 3 months.its a fundamentally flawed and dated approach that is proven not to work. Also agree its pvp where the damage is done with poor balancing. There are real people involved, not just npc's, and the focus on kitten damage on bosses is a big fail - but a separate discussion.

Ive cursorily read your posts above. Why do you try to convince all other ppl, that have different opinion than you, that you are the right one? Lol, just let them/us be.Irl Im working in lab, my specialization are genes and mutations. If you start working on genes of some organisms, deleting/adding/changing them, then you need to stick around because there might occur some unhealthy and far from controllable mutations. Here yes, frequency = quality because there are other factors than those intended by ppl.

In gw2 you dont have other factors than those made by developers. Game is stable, its neither evolving nor devolving. After changing things in balance patch there wont occur any mutations, the only thing that might happen is that some ppl invent a new build (that happened for example after Mirage nerf when Chrono got some attention, maybe "new build" is too much but lets say it just got more "popularized"). If u do a balance patch every 3 months and take care of all problems while listening to community, then you should get a proper quality. Ppl noticed that 3 classes are overperforming, we nerf them (bit enough, not to the ground) and see what happens. During first weeks community will say whether problem is solved or its not enough/went too far. Then ANet should add Post Balance Patch adjusting things.Example? Swipe. Half range for unblockable was really a bad deal. Most teefs that previously were playing d/p (me included) switched from d/p to s/d. So maybe we should consider community response and for example change 600 to 900/1k and leave/take back unblockable, after 1/2 weeks. Win-win situation.

Now lets see what could possibly happen with more frequent patches. Lets say every month. ANet wont get enough time to gather responses, consider them and make proper buffs/nerfs. Maybe during first few months it wont be so visible, but after some time there will occur situation where they have to handle bad decisions from last month, still not cleared situation of buffs/nerfs from 2 months ago and ofc add new buffs/nerfs from present month. And this will go on and on. More chaos, and this chaos is not a ladder.Thats one thing that could happen if they would listen to community. If they wouldnt then 1 month would be probably taken as not enough time to gather enough informations about state of the game so we would see at best only few skills adjusted, rest wouldn't be even touched because devs wouldn't be sure whether its OP or its not. As unhealthy as chaos described above.

[Bladestrom.6425]

@Widmo.3186 said:

@vesica tempestas.1563 said:

@Widmo.3186 said:We dont need more frequent balance updates. What we need is

PROPER

balance updates. I dont care if balance patch appears every 3 months, or even every 6 months as long as it clears all (most) the problems and if it kitten up somewhere, then there happen to be

POST

Balance Patch clearing what was made wrong.

In most causes community will notice problems during first week after update, ANet should stay around, read those threads and think whether there is actually a real problem or it is just a Q_Q l2p issue. That happened to zerker Arc Divider, maybe with bit of postpone, but still happened.

Dev sees one "Pls nerf rev thread"? Okay, random player got one-shoted and started whining on forum, happens. 4 threads during 2 weeks? Okay, maybe actually we should take a closer look and do sth about it.Atm I think most Q_Q threads are about rev, holo, scrapper, few about Spellbroken (Rampage) and Mezmer in general. While mezmer and teef are cried all over and over every patch, do you think other (lets say 4 classes) are getting nerfed/adjusted next patch? No, they are not. At best there will be Rampage nerf, one other class (lets say holo) nerf and during same time 3 other things (for example revert rev changes, core engi gets some sick condi adjust and DH gets +50% dmg overall) will get buffed.

Which makes -2 overperfoming things adjusted, +3 overperforming things added and 2 other left alone in their unhealthy state.Ends as one step backward instead of one step forward.

And it will go on and go on until Devs will start actually caring about balance state and listen to the community, at least the higher rank part of this community instead of taking 99% of threads as granted l2p and whining issues. Because atm it looks like that, like lost children wandering in the mist.

//Despite fact that this thread is in "general discussion" i talked solely about PvP, because there are the most issues. Lets be honest, what ppl care about is when you try to play PvP and get one-shoted by evade machine with 25k hp stealth and 12k healing potential (just an example, not that this monster actually exist). Problem of having 12k dps instead of 18k dps and making you switch from Core Ele to Weaver Ele is...not a problem. And dont even try dealing with this fact.

Your missing the point, the lack of 'proper' balance fixes is a side effect of low frequency changes. You will never ever get it right over time by making changes every 3 months.its a fundamentally flawed and dated approach that is proven not to work. Also agree its pvp where the damage is done with poor balancing. There are real people involved, not just npc's, and the focus on kitten damage on bosses is a big fail - but a separate discussion.

Ive cursorily read your posts above. Why do you try to convince all other ppl, that have different opinion than you, that you are the right one? Lol, just let them/us be.Irl Im working in lab, my specialization are genes and mutations. If you start working on genes of some organisms, deleting/adding/changing them, then you need to stick around because there might occur some unhealthy and far from controllable mutations. Here yes, frequency = quality because there are other factors than those intended by ppl.

In gw2 you dont have other factors than those made by developers. Game is stable, its neither evolving nor devolving. After changing things in balance patch there wont occur any mutations, the only thing that might happen is that some ppl invent a new build (that happened for example after Mirage nerf when Chrono got some attention, maybe "new build" is too much but lets say it just got more "popularized"). If u do a balance patch every 3 months and take care of

all

problems while listening to community, then you should get a proper quality. Ppl noticed that 3 classes are overperforming, we nerf them (bit enough, not to the ground) and see what happens. During first weeks community will say whether problem is solved or its not enough/went too far. Then ANet should add

Post Balance Patch

adjusting things.Example? Swipe. Half range for unblockable was really a bad deal. Most teefs that previously were playing d/p (me included) switched from d/p to s/d. So maybe we should consider community response and for example change 600 to 900/1k and leave/take back unblockable, after 1/2 weeks. Win-win situation.

Now lets see what could possibly happen with more frequent patches. Lets say every month. ANet wont get enough time to gather responses, consider them and make proper buffs/nerfs. Maybe during first few months it wont be so visible, but after some time there will occur situation where they have to handle bad decisions from last month, still not cleared situation of buffs/nerfs from 2 months ago and ofc add new buffs/nerfs from present month. And this will go on and on. More chaos, and this chaos is not a ladder.Thats one thing that could happen if they would listen to community. If they wouldnt then 1 month would be probably taken as not enough time to gather enough informations about state of the game so we would see at best only few skills adjusted, rest wouldn't be even touched because devs wouldn't be sure whether its OP or its not. As unhealthy as chaos described above.

its not my opinion, just like your profession, i'm sure you have standards and best practices. Software dev is no different, and there are patterns and practices that are well established. For those involved with software development its screamingly obvious what the issues are, and i'm trying to point out these obvious root causes, i.e long development cycles are bad. We can see the side effects now, for example i'm sure you will agree introducing a bug that breaks a fundamental aspect of a product is terrible and should demand instant action - that is not happening, in fact in the last couple patches ele alone has had 3 breaking changes. If you care to read back, you will also see I have linked blogs from highly respected devs on this very matter that is widely accepted.

ps my specialisation is certainly not labs and genes, and although i probably use many products linked with this profession I understand enough to appreciate there are areas where I just don't have any expertise, and would be interested in opinions. Its ok to listen to people with professional experience, not everything has to be ad hominem time (although that is the way of things currently with impersonal online forums right)

[zealex.9410]

Hooooolllyyy hell the balance patch just makes more apparent the problems with the current balance aproach.

Chrono shatters will be gutted for 3 months and portal is now prob going for half+ year of being pmuch dead.

[zealex.9410]

@Widmo.3186 said:

@vesica tempestas.1563 said:

@Widmo.3186 said:We dont need more frequent balance updates. What we need is

PROPER

balance updates. I dont care if balance patch appears every 3 months, or even every 6 months as long as it clears all (most) the problems and if it kitten up somewhere, then there happen to be

POST

Balance Patch clearing what was made wrong.

In most causes community will notice problems during first week after update, ANet should stay around, read those threads and think whether there is actually a real problem or it is just a Q_Q l2p issue. That happened to zerker Arc Divider, maybe with bit of postpone, but still happened.

Dev sees one "Pls nerf rev thread"? Okay, random player got one-shoted and started whining on forum, happens. 4 threads during 2 weeks? Okay, maybe actually we should take a closer look and do sth about it.Atm I think most Q_Q threads are about rev, holo, scrapper, few about Spellbroken (Rampage) and Mezmer in general. While mezmer and teef are cried all over and over every patch, do you think other (lets say 4 classes) are getting nerfed/adjusted next patch? No, they are not. At best there will be Rampage nerf, one other class (lets say holo) nerf and during same time 3 other things (for example revert rev changes, core engi gets some sick condi adjust and DH gets +50% dmg overall) will get buffed.

Which makes -2 overperfoming things adjusted, +3 overperforming things added and 2 other left alone in their unhealthy state.Ends as one step backward instead of one step forward.

And it will go on and go on until Devs will start actually caring about balance state and listen to the community, at least the higher rank part of this community instead of taking 99% of threads as granted l2p and whining issues. Because atm it looks like that, like lost children wandering in the mist.

//Despite fact that this thread is in "general discussion" i talked solely about PvP, because there are the most issues. Lets be honest, what ppl care about is when you try to play PvP and get one-shoted by evade machine with 25k hp stealth and 12k healing potential (just an example, not that this monster actually exist). Problem of having 12k dps instead of 18k dps and making you switch from Core Ele to Weaver Ele is...not a problem. And dont even try dealing with this fact.

Your missing the point, the lack of 'proper' balance fixes is a side effect of low frequency changes. You will never ever get it right over time by making changes every 3 months.its a fundamentally flawed and dated approach that is proven not to work. Also agree its pvp where the damage is done with poor balancing. There are real people involved, not just npc's, and the focus on kitten damage on bosses is a big fail - but a separate discussion.

Ive cursorily read your posts above. Why do you try to convince all other ppl, that have different opinion than you, that you are the right one? Lol, just let them/us be.Irl Im working in lab, my specialization are genes and mutations. If you start working on genes of some organisms, deleting/adding/changing them, then you need to stick around because there might occur some unhealthy and far from controllable mutations. Here yes, frequency = quality because there are other factors than those intended by ppl.

In gw2 you dont have other factors than those made by developers. Game is stable, its neither evolving nor devolving. After changing things in balance patch there wont occur any mutations, the only thing that might happen is that some ppl invent a new build (that happened for example after Mirage nerf when Chrono got some attention, maybe "new build" is too much but lets say it just got more "popularized"). If u do a balance patch every 3 months and take care of

all

problems while listening to community, then you should get a proper quality. Ppl noticed that 3 classes are overperforming, we nerf them (bit enough, not to the ground) and see what happens. During first weeks community will say whether problem is solved or its not enough/went too far. Then ANet should add

Post Balance Patch

adjusting things.Example? Swipe. Half range for unblockable was really a bad deal. Most teefs that previously were playing d/p (me included) switched from d/p to s/d. So maybe we should consider community response and for example change 600 to 900/1k and leave/take back unblockable, after 1/2 weeks. Win-win situation.

Now lets see what could possibly happen with more frequent patches. Lets say every month. ANet wont get enough time to gather responses, consider them and make proper buffs/nerfs. Maybe during first few months it wont be so visible, but after some time there will occur situation where they have to handle bad decisions from last month, still not cleared situation of buffs/nerfs from 2 months ago and ofc add new buffs/nerfs from present month. And this will go on and on. More chaos, and this chaos is not a ladder.Thats one thing that could happen if they would listen to community. If they wouldnt then 1 month would be probably taken as not enough time to gather enough informations about state of the game so we would see at best only few skills adjusted, rest wouldn't be even touched because devs wouldn't be sure whether its OP or its not. As unhealthy as chaos described above.

Ill tell u whats an unhealthy mutation, god damn mesmer portal being garbo for 2 patches now and chrono shatters being garbo for the next 3 months.

When it will take players only 1 to 2 weeks max to realise the problems having to w8 an aditional 2 and half months is unnecesary.

[Dreamy Lu.3865]

I voted other.

Personally, I'm a very slow learner and don't adapt to changes easily. Once I know a class and start performing OK with it, in raids or wvw, it's only after long work and I'm sooooo happy! From there, changes coming to that class are for me a big work again and I don't enjoy it at all.On the other hand, I'm officer in a guild and I can see how a vast majority of my friends has an enormous pleasure at those changes, talking about it for days. It's enjoyable to seem how they get fun at it.So, all in all, for myself, it would rather be a no, but since my friends are important to me and get such fun at balance changes, that's a yes at same time. :3

[TakeCare.3182]

I think more frequent balance patches are essential to player retention. All of the WvWers and PvPers that I used to play with quit the game because the patch cycle is just too slow. It's fine if things are over or under powered, but it goes on for so long that the game gets stale and people find other things to do. The living story content is great, but it's short lived and not everyone is interested in running PvE metas all the time.

ANet should establish a new patch cycle where we get one small balance patch every 2-4 weeks and a big patch every 6 months. It would look something like...

Small patch (every 2-4 weeks): This patch would include small to moderate changes to over and under performing builds in the meta. It should also include buffs to non-meta weapons/skills/classes to incentivize theory crafting and the introduction of new meta builds. Occasionally, ANet could also add one new skill to every class, like they did with the new heals back in 2013 or the new Grandmaster traits they introduced in 2014. They already do a pretty good job of adding new runes, sigils, and stat combos so no need for change there. Essentially, they just need to make changes that are big enough to keep everyone interested, but small enough that people don't have to completely upend all their gear and start over every patch.

Big patch (every 6 months): This patch would include large changes in order to shift the meta or improve the state of the game. This is where class reworks should go. This is where unhealthy and unfun builds get deleted. This is where new trait lines and/or weapons are introduced. That isn't to say that every 6 months ANet has to reinvent the meta or dump a bunch of resources into new content. But if any of those kinds of changes are to be made, it should be done in a big, telegraphed patch that everyone saw coming, like when they reworked stats with the introduction of Ferocity or overhauled the trait system.

Maybe that is asking too much at this point in the game's life span. I just find it hard to stay engaged with the game when they only balance every few months. It feels especially bad when you read the patch notes and they've clearly missed the mark so you know you're going to be waiting another few months just to have a chance for things to change. It has taken way too long to nerf Soulbeast, just like it took way too long to nerf Deadeye and ghost thief and all of the other problematic builds of the past that made the game awful.

[Bladestrom.6425]

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/81729/upcoming-balance-notes#latest

This is what we are talking about, the risk with this torrent of changes is off the charts, there is NO WAY this has been user tested to a decent level, we know this is guaranteed to introduce new issues, and has not solved others (for e.g to pick 1, earth in ele is STILL useless)

[b k.1648]

So how do you do 1% of a complete rebuild of Scrapper, Chronomancer etc. every week?

[aetemes.2603]

@Ashen.2907 said:Its not the frequency of balance patches that concerns me, but rather their content.

thiz.

[Alin.2468]

The problem is not frequency, or how often there are balance updates. The problem is quality of balance updates. Right now everything is around community and what they think, and young customers will always want more CC or more damage, or more accent for conditions or for boons.

Anet should completely stop listening to community, because what current community wants is selfish builds, for their own single-player game which they voted for a few years ago (aka SoloQ). This game was designed for teamwork, and nowadays players don't like it that way, therefore more CC, or more damage, or more healing, proves to be wrong for building an MMO (Massive MULTIPLAYER). We need a game for teams, for balance in teamwork, for spells combined in voice chat (see combo). In my opinion designers should listen for feedback of veteran players, old PvP players, players that play in teams, players that still play PvP since release, or even teams that left the game (no discrimination intended towards current young players).

Unfortunately, I do understand why they took this path regarding balance. To make money in this business, and sell gems in this game, designers have to listen to community; otherwise players will create a bad advertising through free communication and social networking, because they're not feeling listened, or valued as customers.

[zealex.9410]

@"Alin.2468" said:The problem is not frequency, or how often there are balance updates. The problem is quality of balance updates. Right now everything is around community and what they think, and young customers will always want more CC or more damage, or more accent for conditions or for boons.

Anet should completely stop listening to community, because what current community wants is selfish builds, for their own single-player game which they voted for a few years ago (aka SoloQ). This game was designed for teamwork, and nowadays players don't like it that way, therefore more CC, or more damage, or more healing, proves to be wrong for building an MMO (Massive MULTIPLAYER). We need a game for teams, for balance in teamwork, for spells combined in voice chat (see combo). In my opinion designers should listen for feedback of veteran players, old PvP players, players that play in teams, players that still play PvP since release, or even teams that left the game (no discrimination intended towards current young players).

Unfortunately, I do understand why they took this path regarding balance. To make money in this business, and sell gems in this game, designers have to listen to community; otherwise players will create a bad advertising through free communication and social networking, because they're not feeling listened, or valued as customers.

Is it not bad advertising when ppl quit because the game is boring?

[Brother.1504]

We need quick balance updates directly after the regular balance updates. Been playing since beta. Anet doesn’t seem to do comprehensive play testing to the changes they go live with. Especially with the competitive game modes.

[Bladestrom.6425]

@Ben K.6238 said:So how do you do 1% of a complete rebuild of Scrapper, Chronomancer etc. every week?

you incrementally change the given build. If you think this Mega dump of fixes is going to be 'the one' your sadly mistaken, get ready for your next 3 month wait.

[Astralporing.1957]

@Widmo.3186 said:In gw2 you dont have other factors than those made by developers.You do. The players. The whole skill/traits/stat system is so complex now that it is impossible for anet to completely predict all possible permutations and understand full consequences of those. As such, every balance patch is going to introduce some stuff that the devs didn't plan for. Players on the other hand have a ton more manpower they can throw at it, and so will eventually find many builds that are based on tricks and principles devs didn't think of. Those need to be balanced by Anet, but the balance patches will introduce new ones. And so it goes, over and over again.

After changing things in balance patch there wont occur any mutationsHow can you say that when those mutations do occur, and have been occuring for 7 years now?

If u do a balance patch every 3 months and take care of all problems while listening to community, then you should get a proper quality. Ppl noticed that 3 classes are overperforming, we nerf them (bit enough, not to the ground) and see what happens.

Yes, if you make an ideal patch that perfectly addresses all the problems without introducing new ones, then indeed you're golden. Too bad it's not going to happen, for the reasons outlined above.

Also, i'd be careful about depending on the community that much. For one post that outlined the problems well and gave a working solution, you'd have several that either understood it only partially, or misread the reason behind it, and then ten times more posts that are asking for nerfs or buffs not due to real balance issues, but merely due to perceived ones, and whose perception is twisted by what are their favored/unfavored classes are. Additionally all those people will suffer from all the problems as the devs - even the best f them won't be able to predict all the consequences changes they propose might cause (unless it's about very small changes, and sometimes not even then).

During first weeks community will say whether problem is solved or its not enough/went too far. Then ANet should add Post Balance Patch adjusting things.See? You've already noticed that waiting 3 months for a fix is not the best idea, and that the balance patch won't be good enough and will, in itself, require patching.

Now lets see what could possibly happen with more frequent patches. Lets say every month. ANet wont get enough time to gather responses, consider them and make proper buffs/nerfs. Maybe during first few months it wont be so visible, but after some time there will occur situation where they have to handle bad decisions from last month, still not cleared situation of buffs/nerfs from 2 months ago and ofc add new buffs/nerfs from present month. And this will go on and on.So now we have the vey same situation, but the intervals are not one month/3 months but more like 3 months/half a year or more. The same amount of problem, but fixing them takes 3 times longer.

Thats one thing that could happen if they would listen to community. If they wouldnt then 1 month would be probably taken as not enough time to gather enough informations about state of the game so we would see at best only few skills adjusted, rest wouldn't be even touched because devs wouldn't be sure whether its OP or its not.

Nobody's saying you should do major changes every month. Quite the opposite - the short balance intervals let you do most of the stuff through small incremental changes. Big things like class reworks would drop only rarely (and would require a lot of smaller balance passes to fix any big issues brought by those big patches).

That's by the way one more advantage of shorter intervals. When you work on balance, you'd ideally want to make as small changes as possible every patch. That's because the bigger the changes, the less able you are to predict what will happen, and the bigger the consequences may be from the things you have missed. Thus, making big changes with long intervals between them doesn't mean the balance will be better. It means something exactly opposite - that you are going to either be balancing the game too slowly (if the changes are small), or keep kicking the balance apart and then wait for next 3 months watchin players trying to settle right before before you'll use the hammer again.

@Ben K.6238 said:So how do you do 1% of a complete rebuild of Scrapper, Chronomancer etc. every week?No, you do it in one big patch, and then spend the next half a year using smaller (but frequent) patches trying to make it work. Because you can be sure it's not going to be balanced at first.

[Bladestrom.6425]

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@Widmo.3186 said:In gw2 you dont have other factors than those made by developers.You do. The players. The whole skill/traits/stat system is so complex now that it is impossible for anet to completely predict all possible permutations and understand full consequences of those. As such, every balance patch is going to introduce some stuff that the devs didn't plan for. Players on the other hand have a ton more manpower they can throw at it, and so will eventually find many builds that are based on tricks and principles devs didn't think of. Those need to be balanced by Anet, but the balance patches will introduce new ones. And so it goes, over and over again.

After changing things in balance patch there wont occur any mutationsHow can you say that when those mutations

do

occur, and have been occuring for 7 years now?

If u do a balance patch every 3 months and take care of

all

problems while listening to community, then you should get a proper quality. Ppl noticed that 3 classes are overperforming, we nerf them (bit enough, not to the ground) and see what happens.

Yes, if you make an ideal patch that perfectly addresses all the problems without introducing new ones, then indeed you're golden. Too bad it's not going to happen, for the reasons outlined above.

Also, i'd be careful about depending on the community that much. For one post that outlined the problems well and gave a working solution, you'd have several that either understood it only partially, or misread the reason behind it, and then ten times more posts that are asking for nerfs or buffs not due to real balance issues, but merely due to perceived ones, and whose perception is twisted by what are their favored/unfavored classes are. Additionally all those people will suffer from all the problems as the devs - even the best f them won't be able to predict all the consequences changes they propose might cause (unless it's about very small changes, and sometimes not even then).

During first weeks community will say whether problem is solved or its not enough/went too far. Then ANet should add

Post Balance Patch

adjusting things.See? You've already noticed that waiting 3 months for a fix is not the best idea, and that the balance patch won't be good enough and will, in itself, require patching.

Now lets see what could possibly happen with more frequent patches. Lets say every month. ANet wont get enough time to gather responses, consider them and make proper buffs/nerfs. Maybe during first few months it wont be so visible, but after some time there will occur situation where they have to handle bad decisions from last month, still not cleared situation of buffs/nerfs from 2 months ago and ofc add new buffs/nerfs from present month. And this will go on and on.So now we have the vey same situation, but the intervals are not one month/3 months but more like 3 months/half a year or more. The same amount of problem, but fixing them takes 3 times longer.

Thats one thing that could happen if they would listen to community. If they wouldnt then 1 month would be probably taken as not enough time to gather enough informations about state of the game so we would see at best only few skills adjusted, rest wouldn't be even touched because devs wouldn't be sure whether its OP or its not.

Nobody's saying you should do major changes every month. Quite the opposite - the short balance intervals let you do most of the stuff through small incremental changes. Big things like class reworks would drop only rarely (and would require a lot of smaller balance passes to fix any big issues brought by those big patches).

That's by the way one more advantage of shorter intervals. When you work on balance, you'd ideally want to make as small changes as possible every patch. That's because the bigger the changes, the less able you are to predict what will happen, and the bigger the consequences may be from the things you have missed. Thus, making big changes with long intervals between them doesn't mean the balance will be better. It means something exactly opposite - that you are going to either be balancing the game too slowly (if the changes are small), or keep kicking the balance apart and then wait for next 3 months watchin players trying to settle right before before you'll use the hammer again.

@Ben K.6238 said:So how do you do 1% of a complete rebuild of Scrapper, Chronomancer etc. every week?No, you do it in one big patch, and then spend the next half a year using smaller (but frequent) patches trying to make it work. Because you can be sure it's not going to be balanced at first.

This works.

[b k.1648]

@vesica tempestas.1563 said:

@Ben K.6238 said:So how do you do 1% of a complete rebuild of Scrapper, Chronomancer etc. every week?

you incrementally change the given build. If you think this Mega dump of fixes is going to be 'the one' your sadly mistaken, get ready for your next 3 month wait.

Nope - it just changes things around a bit. The somewhat overpowered soulbeast and scrapper builds get a few nerfs, everything else gets a shake-up, and people try new builds.

As usual, I'd expect a few tweaks over the following weeks to adjust things ANet isn't happy with, and then it'll stay roughly where it is until the next time they shake things up in another 3 months. This sort of system is more geared towards providing variety than trying to approach a final, optimal balance state.