Suggestion Remove 4 Stat Amulets from PvP

[Leonidrex.5649]

@MyPuppy.8970 said:Or just give everyone 3000 stat points to spend.

2k healing power. 700 toughness 300 vitality.FeelsTankMan Clap

[MyPuppy.8970]

@Leonidrex.5649 said:

@MyPuppy.8970 said:Or just give everyone 3000 stat points to spend.

2k healing power. 700 toughness 300 vitality.FeelsTankMan Clap

I Can definitely picture that on a thief.

[Downstate.4697]

I'm sorry but I'm not willing to play a 16k health elementalist with 0 toughness and 0 healing power.

[Dantheman.3589]

@shadowpass.4236 said:Honestly having only 3 stat amulets would be fine. This alone would reduce powercreep by a lot as every spec would have to choose between being tanky or dealing damage. Bruiser builds would likely go cavalier which means they lose out on ferocity. Roaming/damage builds won't have access to extra vitality from marauders. Obviously there would have to be more stat combos, but idk. Seems alright albiet less build options and customization. I don't like the idea of less build diversity but this could open up new ones as well.

Actually this list is incorrect- it has cavalier listed in the place of knights amulet. Cavalier is Toughness, power ferocity- which I think is pretty decent w/o trade off on staff/staff thief with rune of daredevil

[Master Ketsu.4569]

Yes lets make the meta between WvW and PvP even more ridiculously different than it needs to be.

Or... how about not.

[Crab Fear.1624]

@otto.5684 said:Ya, lets keep removing options, cuz Anet cannot balance jack, so we just remove them. Who gives a kitten about diversity? There should only be 3-4 meta builds.

Epic fail.

There are enough 3 stat amulets to make multiple more builds than just 3 it 4 meta.

You are essentially saying the health tier is the fail if you think removing 4 stat amulets are going to kill diversity.

I would be completely down with them removing any bonus toughness and vitality and really focusing on why they made 3 health tiers.

But, choosing more defense and still getting strong offense is what messes up the game.

We only have 3 or 4 meta as it is.

You just cant manage without the extra vitality, admit it.

[Bazsi.2734]

Yes please. Cavemen likes no choices, makes brain hurt. Give power amulet, Gork smash. Reading bad, much time, confuse.

Seriously, stop removing options to customize builds, this game is turning simpler and simpler each patch lately. Things can be needlessly complicated for sure, but you cannot have depth without at least some complexity.

Also you really don't want to see what happens when the only amulet left for power thief is berserker's.

[Crab Fear.1624]

@Bazsi.2734 said:Yes please. Cavemen likes no choices, makes brain hurt. Give power amulet, Gork smash. Reading bad, much time, confuse.

Seriously, stop removing options to customize builds, this game is turning simpler and simpler each patch lately. Things can be needlessly complicated for sure, but you cannot have depth without at least some complexity.

Also you really don't want to see what happens when the only amulet left for power thief is berserker's.

They can make more 3 stats.

Btw with 27 potential specs....we have plenty of complexity.

As damage goes up, defense should go down.

Having options to negate this most basic principle is what has been hurting the game.

[Exedore.6320]

Bad idea. Many builds need 4, 5, or even 6 stats in various quantities to work well. 3-stat amulets severely limit builds. And that rigidity helped give rise to power creep to cover the problems of stat extremes.

What you really need to do is to reduce the amount of stats on the 4-stat amulets to be equal in total to the 3-stat amulets, which is something ANet is moving toward.

The best fix though is to split the amulet into 3 items which only have 3-stat combos. I recommend 50/25/25% ratios. The mix and match still allows you to spread stats, but it also gives ANet control over possible total stats and combos without a convoluted system like pure stat point distribution.

[otto.5684]

@Crab Fear.1624 said:

@"otto.5684" said:Ya, lets keep removing options, cuz Anet cannot balance jack, so we just remove them. Who gives a kitten about diversity? There should only be 3-4 meta builds.

Epic fail.

There are enough 3 stat amulets to make multiple more builds than just 3 it 4 meta.

You are essentially saying the health tier is the fail if you think removing 4 stat amulets are going to kill diversity.

I would be completely down with them removing any bonus toughness and vitality and really focusing on why they made 3 health tiers.

But, choosing more defense and still getting strong offense is what messes up the game.

We only have 3 or 4 meta as it is.

You just cant manage without the extra vitality, admit it.

Hmm... you know, by design, small HP pool classes use HP. It is not an option.

Reducing the number of amulets, even to one, is not going to solve balance issues. This is nothing more than a fasade Anet hides behind. "we cannot balance it cuz of amulets." "we cannot balance cuz of sigils." "we cannot balance it cuz of the PvE team." "we cannot balance it cuz of power creep." They cannot balance cuz they do not monitor or test shit.

Removing amulets is not going to help neither diversity nor balance (and neither will next patch). It will only limit diversity further.

[Curennos.9307]

Consider a scale with many weights on both sides.

Anet is considered bad at balancing - but the # of weights on each side ensures that adjusting this or that weight and failing to do so properly has its loss/gain minimized by the presence of many other weights.

I think this sort of change would be unhealthy in the long run, shift anet into a balance paradigm for the worse, and so on.

Having less things to balance does not always make the remaining things easier to balance. I would rather see adjustments to 4-stat amulets to bring the loss-gain to a more even point.

[Sikieiki.7403]

ΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞ

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

@otto.5684 said:

@Crab Fear.1624 said:

@otto.5684 said:Ya, lets keep removing options, cuz Anet cannot balance jack, so we just remove them. Who gives a kitten about diversity? There should only be 3-4 meta builds.

Epic fail.

There are enough 3 stat amulets to make multiple more builds than just 3 it 4 meta.

You are essentially saying the health tier is the fail if you think removing 4 stat amulets are going to kill diversity.

I would be completely down with them removing any bonus toughness and vitality and really focusing on why they made 3 health tiers.

But, choosing more defense and still getting strong offense is what messes up the game.

We only have 3 or 4 meta as it is.

You just cant manage without the extra vitality, admit it.

Hmm... you know, by design, small HP pool classes use HP. It is not an option.

Reducing the number of amulets, even to one, is not going to solve balance issues. This is nothing more than a fasade Anet hides behind. "we cannot balance it cuz of amulets." "we cannot balance cuz of sigils." "we cannot balance it cuz of the PvE team." "we cannot balance it cuz of power creep." They cannot balance cuz they do not monitor or test kitten.

Removing amulets is not going to help neither diversity nor balance (and neither will next patch). It will only limit diversity further.

Yes, although I wouldn’t say it’s because anet doesn’t test things...I’m sure they do in some form or fashion.

The real problem is that there is a fundamental misunderstanding of what balance truly is. I’ve said this many times on the forums and it’s very un-intuitive but what will bring balance to the game IS diversity. The more stuff that gets removed or balanced via buffs/nerfs, the worse balance will be because of this fundamental misunderstanding.

To put it shortly, true balance implies that all things must be exactly the same, which is impossible to achieve because then every skill, every ability converges down to just one singular amulet or one singular sigil or one trait etc... Only then it will be truly balanced...so therefor anything that is different will always be imbalanced one way or another, and as we remove things, the balance between the different abilities will become constrained by larger and larger min max forces.

There’s more to it then just that, but ya...my prediction is we will see more balance issues come post balance patch.

[Bazsi.2734]

@Crab Fear.1624 said:

@Bazsi.2734 said:Yes please. Cavemen likes no choices, makes brain hurt. Give power amulet, Gork smash. Reading bad, much time, confuse.

Seriously, stop removing options to customize builds, this game is turning simpler and simpler each patch lately. Things can be needlessly complicated for sure, but you cannot have depth without at least some complexity.

Also you really don't want to see what happens when the only amulet left for power thief is berserker's.

They can make more 3 stats.

Power damage benetifs from power/precision/ferocity. However 3 classes are absolutely forced into picking a vitality amulet. Unless they make a 3 stat amulet with these 4 stats on it, those classes will never be able to compete with other power builds.

Btw with 27 potential specs....we have plenty of complexity.

When the best combination for X purpose is crystal clear after reading what the traits do just once, it's not complex enough. Maybe I'm too used to GW1 levels of complexity, lately buildcrafting in GW2 for me barely takes more time than loading in a saved template.

As damage goes up, defense should go down.

That's already how it works. Maybe the 4 stat amulets provided too much stats in total, they are getting a hefty nerf with this incoming patch. I happen to think that will tone things down enough... many builds with more then 11K base health will pick a 3 stat amulet instead. But of course we can just delete everything without seeing how it pans out. Yes, thats definitely a better idea.

Having options to negate this most basic principle is what has been hurting the game.

The earth is flat and hollow.

[Jekkt.6045]

sure, if they give every class the same hp and armor. and at that point you could argue that classes will just be "skins" for a playable character.

[ZDragon.3046]

Tbh i would have been up for just removing amulets entirely and letting professions use their base stats with a rune and a sigil and nothing more.IF you want more healing power then you trait for it.IF you want more toughness then you trait for it.

Had they done this from the start it would have been much harder for power creep to get out of hand and no one would throw up the lack of diversity claims cause the diversity would be defined by the profession you pick and your traits / weapons and nothing more thats all you realistically need to have great diversity. The amulets just make you hit bigger numbers, or heal bigger numbers etc.

In all honestly the ammulet system could have been removed which would save them a lot of trouble trying to balance... add or remove them when people say "i need more stat options" or "x ammulet is busted on x profession"

Ideally had they not nerfed damage so much already i would have said just remove amulets from pvp all together and that would solve most of your power creeping issues.

[Math.5123]

Guardian and Ele (and to a lesser extent thief) would never be able to play a power build in that case.

Dropping any of the three offensive stats will make you do zero damage. Having 11k hp will make you fall dead to someone sneezing the wrong way.

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

@"ZDragon.3046" said:Tbh i would have been up for just removing amulets entirely and letting professions use their base stats with a rune and a sigil and nothing more.IF you want more healing power then you trait for it.IF you want more toughness then you trait for it.

Had they done this from the start it would have been much harder for power creep to get out of hand and no one would throw up the lack of diversity claims cause the diversity would be defined by the profession you pick and your traits / weapons and nothing more thats all you realistically need to have great diversity. The amulets just make you hit bigger numbers, or heal bigger numbers etc.

The best way to do away with amulets is to just make stat spreads fully customizable, because the stats aren't themselves inherently overpowered...

The reason BUNKER amulets was removed was because bunkering in SPVP where holding nodes is the primary objective, is in itself a stronger than not bunkering in such a mode. They "solved this issue" by simply deleting the play-style all together. But the truth is that it was never really the amulets that were the problem, it's just that the balance between DOING damage and TAKING damage were imbalance. These differences were further borked by BROKEN trait's and abilities that scale with infinite number of players...mechanics like EVADES and BLOCKS where it makes no difference if one player is smacking you or a million players are smacking you...If you were blocking for 3 seconds, you were blocking for 3 seconds. warriors, distortion chrono's, and bunker weavers come to mind.

CMC is FINALLY addressing the block mechanic by making it ammunition based which should have been in the game from the start... (one of the few changes i actually liked in this doomsday patch)

Also, mechanics like doing damage while invulnerable should also have never been a thing (nobody remembers Shadow Form from Gw1, which was the most imbalanced skill in game history).

The idea should have always been that as you go more tanky--> you start doing less damage. the more damage you start doing the less tanky you should become... and a tanky target should always EVENTUALLY lose to a max damage target. but all these things got messed up when they introduced seriously broken mechanics and never addressed the inherent problems. Just my 2 cents on the topic.

[ZDragon.3046]

@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

@"ZDragon.3046" said:Tbh i would have been up for just removing amulets entirely and letting professions use their base stats with a rune and a sigil and nothing more.IF you want more healing power then you trait for it.IF you want more toughness then you trait for it.

Had they done this from the start it would have been much harder for power creep to get out of hand and no one would throw up the lack of diversity claims cause the diversity would be defined by the profession you pick and your traits / weapons and nothing more thats all you realistically need to have great diversity. The amulets just make you hit bigger numbers, or heal bigger numbers etc.

The best way to do away with amulets is to just make stat spreads fully customizable, because the stats aren't themselves inherently overpowered...

I dont really agree i think if they had not been removing boons and boon up time the stats would be way too high but because boons are going down and damage scaling they wont be but my statement was more of a what iff anet was not doing these things.

The reason BUNKER amulets was removed was because bunkering in SPVP where holding nodes is the primary objective, is in itself a stronger than not bunkering in such a mode. They "solved this issue" by simply deleting the play-style all together. But the truth is that it was never really the amulets that were the problem, it's just that the balance between DOING damage and TAKING damage were imbalance. These differences were further borked by BROKEN trait's and abilities that scale with infinite number of players...mechanics like EVADES and BLOCKS where it makes no difference if one player is smacking you or a million players are smacking you...If you were blocking for 3 seconds, you were blocking for 3 seconds. warriors, distortion chrono's, and bunker weavers come to mind.

I already knew this and every choice that has come after the bunker meta has been pushing the game in the opposite direction.CMC is FINALLY addressing the block mechanic by making it ammunition based which should have been in the game from the start... (one of the few changes i actually liked in this doomsday patch)

Also, mechanics like doing damage while invulnerable should also have never been a thing (nobody remembers Shadow Form from Gw1, which was the most imbalanced skill in game history).

I agree with this in general and they need to lock the skill bar for distortion too.

The idea should have always been that as you go more tanky--> you start doing less damage. the more damage you start doing the less tanky you should become... and a tanky target should always EVENTUALLY lose to a max damage target. but all these things got messed up when they introduced seriously broken mechanics and never addressed the inherent problems. Just my 2 cents on the topic.

This i do not agree with how ever more so the last part.

it should not be set in stone that the tanky target always lose to the max damage target depending on how far each one dips into each side. Especially in this game in 1v1 side node situations. Because the key word you used is eventually. Thats an undetermined amount of time and if that time is not long enough then there is no point in investing in defensive bunker-ish stats which is why we only see bunkers that do tons of damage atm. Because the nothing feels worse than investing in defenses that dont keep you alive any longer than if you had not invested in them. To make matters worse the way the current meta is where investing in offensive stats/traits/utility (on most professions) keeps you alive longer than investing in defensive stats while giving the potential to kill your foes is an issue.

The issue is that something cant be a bunker if it cant even fight off one person for a decent amount of time but people dont like that a bunker should be able to hold off 1 person without going down (provided they know how to play) but should not be able to fight 1 v3 + on a point for 5 mins. Its a hard spot to get bunker builds into.

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

@ZDragon.3046 said:it should not be set in stone that the tanky target always lose to the max damage target depending on how far each one dips into each side. Especially in this game in 1v1 side node situations. Because the key word you used is eventually. Thats an undetermined amount of time and if that time is not long enough then there is no point in investing in defensive bunker-ish stats which is why we only see bunkers that do tons of damage atm.

Technically the two should be equal. A max bunker should never die, and a max damage dealer should always kill...it's the paradox of immovable object meets unstoppable force. But you have to keep in mind that it is indeed a paradox. So one will HAVE to be stronger than the other in order for something to happen. The way this happens is introducing other variables...the game mode itself is a variable that favors holding the nodes... therefor, damage should BE ABLE to kill a bunker eventually, in a game-mode based on nodes, so that we don't have a game-mode where everyone just runs full bunker. In general, the idea of people dying IS more pro-active than people not dying at all.

Because the nothing feels worse than investing in defenses that don't keep you alive any longer than if you had not invested in them. To make matters worse the way the current meta is where investing in offensive stats/traits/utility (on most professions) keeps you alive longer than investing in defensive stats while giving the potential to kill your foes is an issue.

Right, and this is what i was talking about in my comment. Most people go full on zerk-ish type amulets and stat combinations, and invest their defenses into traits rather than investing it into stats, because some of these traits are designed to enable that style of hybrid game-play. I don't actually disagree with that as a way to play the game, but some of those mechanics are broken (evade spam/block spam/invuln spam), and bunker amulets took the fall for it.

[Crab Fear.1624]

@Bazsi.2734 said:

@Crab Fear.1624 said:

@Bazsi.2734 said:Yes please. Cavemen likes no choices, makes brain hurt. Give power amulet, Gork smash. Reading bad, much time, confuse.

Seriously, stop removing options to customize builds, this game is turning simpler and simpler each patch lately. Things can be needlessly complicated for sure, but you cannot have depth without at least some complexity.

Also you really don't want to see what happens when the only amulet left for power thief is berserker's.

They can make more 3 stats.

Power damage benetifs from power/precision/ferocity. However 3 classes are absolutely forced into picking a vitality amulet. Unless they make a 3 stat amulet with these 4 stats on it, those classes will never be able to compete with other power builds.

Btw with 27 potential specs....we have plenty of complexity.

When the best combination for X purpose is crystal clear after reading what the traits do just once, it's not complex enough. Maybe I'm too used to GW1 levels of complexity, lately buildcrafting in GW2 for me barely takes more time than loading in a saved template.

As damage goes up, defense should go down.

That's already how it works. Maybe the 4 stat amulets provided too much stats in total, they are getting a hefty nerf with this incoming patch. I happen to think that will tone things down enough... many builds with more then 11K base health will pick a 3 stat amulet instead. But of course we can just delete everything without seeing how it pans out. Yes, thats definitely a better idea.

Having options to negate this most basic principle is what has been hurting the game.

The earth is flat and hollow.

I think something like these changes will come around down the way despite resistance here on the forums.

They have already chopped a little into 4 stat amulets.

They will probably chop some more and go after basic runes next.

[ZDragon.3046]

@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

@"ZDragon.3046" said:it should not be set in stone that the tanky target always lose to the max damage target depending on how far each one dips into each side. Especially in this game in 1v1 side node situations. Because the key word you used is eventually. Thats an undetermined amount of time and if that time is not long enough then there is no point in investing in defensive bunker-ish stats which is why we only see bunkers that do tons of damage atm.

Technically the two should be equal. A max bunker should never die, and a max damage dealer should always kill...it's the paradox of immovable object meets unstoppable force. But you have to keep in mind that it is indeed a paradox. So one will HAVE to be stronger than the other in order for something to happen. The way this happens is introducing other variables...the game mode itself is a variable that favors holding the nodes... therefor, damage should BE ABLE to kill a bunker eventually, in a game-mode based on nodes, so that we don't have a game-mode where everyone just runs full bunker. In general, the idea of people dying IS more pro-active than people not dying at all.

I can agree somewhat with this bit and i think skill should be the determining factor in that cause i dont think its right to say that the person with a glass cannon build should always win against a bunker especially in this game where its designed and balanced around being a team based game in competitive modes not a 1v1 duel. In some matchups of course 1 profession or build should win over another thats what hard counters are for and im fine with those still existing but just it always being glass cannon wins every time no matter what.

I think its perfectly fine if a bunker is not killable by 1 person but should die pretty easily should a +1 come along to help out. (this is the hard part to get right.)

That said yes everyone running bunker is an issue but at the same time i dont appreciate the more offense = better defense mentality that anet has been pushing which drove us to the point we are at currently.I would have rather seen more traits that work against fighting bunker builds but are not very effective against glassier builds or something if that is even possible. So that why there are bunker killer options on the table too but not something that people can just pickup and use as a free power creep boost against everything they run into.

I think nailing how strong a bunker should be is a hard thing to balance but i dont want to see builds that erase bunkers just as fast as the erase glass cannons thats just improper balance by a long shot. I think if new bunkers pop up after the patch people will have a hard time adjusting to them. I by no means want to go back to the full team bunker HoT meta that was really nasty and i hated it but i think if some people want to be a well invested bunker it should be a viable option on the table just as much as being a glass cannon or a support and be effective at its role to some extent.

Because the nothing feels worse than investing in defenses that don't keep you alive any longer than if you had not invested in them. To make matters worse the way the current meta is where investing in offensive stats/traits/utility (on most professions) keeps you alive longer than investing in defensive stats while giving the potential to kill your foes is an issue.

Right, and this is what i was talking about in my comment. Most people go full on zerk-ish type amulets and stat combinations, and invest their defenses into traits rather than investing it into stats, because some of these traits are designed to enable that style of hybrid game-play. I don't actually disagree with that as a way to play the game, but some of those mechanics are broken (evade spam/block spam/invuln spam), and bunker amulets took the fall for it.

IT seems with a lot of the things or at least some of the things anet targeted it will be a requirement to invest in defensive stats again to some extent which is a good thing imo. Like the nerfs to Might makes Right, Empty Vessel, certain block or evade skills etc. They kind of some what are trying to passively say no more are the days of taking offense and being super durable.

Dont get me wrong the "A good defense is a good offense" mentality is a good concept and should still remain a way to play for people who like that playstyle but it shouldn't be as effective as it currently is in the live build. IT should be an optional choice not a required one.

[Dantheman.3589]

I think for proper build diversity and trade off Anet needs to lock pvp ques. That way ppl will be force to do content instead of playing like 2k matches a season trying to climb but never actually accomplish.

[Crab Fear.1624]

@Dantheman.3589 said:I think for proper build diversity and trade off Anet needs to lock pvp ques. That way ppl will be force to do content instead of playing like 2k matches a season trying to climb but never actually accomplish.

People that play a lot of matches probably are not trying to climb.

Shard farming for legendary armor, the easy gold, and bots too I imagine.

[ArlAlt.1630]

@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

@"ZDragon.3046" said:Tbh i would have been up for just removing amulets entirely and letting professions use their base stats with a rune and a sigil and nothing more.IF you want more healing power then you trait for it.IF you want more toughness then you trait for it.

Had they done this from the start it would have been much harder for power creep to get out of hand and no one would throw up the lack of diversity claims cause the diversity would be defined by the profession you pick and your traits / weapons and nothing more thats all you realistically need to have great diversity. The amulets just make you hit bigger numbers, or heal bigger numbers etc.

The best way to do away with amulets is to just make stat spreads fully customizable, because the stats aren't themselves inherently overpowered...

The reason BUNKER amulets was removed was because bunkering in SPVP where holding nodes is the primary objective, is in itself a stronger than not bunkering in such a mode. They "solved this issue" by simply deleting the play-style all together. But the truth is that it was never really the amulets that were the problem, it's just that the balance between DOING damage and TAKING damage were imbalance. These differences were further borked by BROKEN trait's and abilities that scale with infinite number of players...mechanics like EVADES and BLOCKS where it makes no difference if one player is smacking you or a million players are smacking you...If you were blocking for 3 seconds, you were blocking for 3 seconds. warriors, distortion chrono's, and bunker weavers come to mind.

CMC is FINALLY addressing the block mechanic by making it ammunition based which should have been in the game from the start... (one of the few changes i actually liked in this doomsday patch)

Also, mechanics like doing damage while invulnerable should also have never been a thing (nobody remembers Shadow Form from Gw1, which was the most imbalanced skill in game history).

The idea should have always been that as you go more tanky--> you start doing less damage. the more damage you start doing the less tanky you should become... and a tanky target should always EVENTUALLY lose to a max damage target. but all these things got messed up when they introduced seriously broken mechanics and never addressed the inherent problems. Just my 2 cents on the topic.

Balancing damage dealt to damage taken will always be an issue in any game as long as you have inexperienced players. It cannot be helped. Conclusion, the devs should ignore that part of the balancing process.