Curse

-Loki- · Nov 19, 2005, 10:24 PM // 22:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shimus DarkRaven

Many people misconstrue "updates" with "nerfing" when said "updates" effect gameplay. For instance, the "Nerf to elementalists and AOEs" was really a "Updated AI."

They didn't directly smack AOE's with the nerf-bat, but rather, let the "updates" pinch-hit for them ^_-

--The Shim

No they did it to purposely stop solo farming and make everyone who has a fire elementalist delete their character. I know, one of the devs told me.

entropy · Nov 19, 2005, 11:26 PM // 23:26

Anet doesn't nerf that much. But they buff skills even less fi that is what you mean. The word nerf is usually used with the word farm in any given sentence. They update skills and change them but overall anet's updates center on changing overpowered skills while leaving crappy ones unchanged.

AncientPC · Nov 19, 2005, 11:53 PM // 23:53

This post is mostly about game theory.

If a game is not balanced, then everyone abuses certain advantages (say spirit spamming).

However if a game is completely balance, then there is no skill involved in the game. An example of this is rock, paper, scissors. After three levels of thinking, you're merely returning to the first level.

Player measure of skill is magnified by imbalance; skilled players compensate for the imbalance and that is what makes them skilled. Without imbalance there is no skill.

Mister Overhill · Nov 20, 2005, 12:23 AM // 00:23

May as well face it --- GW was still a long way from being finished on the release date. We are all testers. Frustrating at times, yes, but still a bargain for the money.

Does anyone really expect the "nerfed" AOE skills to be left broken as they are, without being properly adjusted? Expect more changes in the days ahead, as A-net works to get the game "right" before the upcoming expansion. Once they are satisfied, look for the occasional patch, and not the sort of thing that had everyone in an uproar after Nov 10/11.

Kalt · Nov 20, 2005, 12:54 AM // 00:54

No one gives a RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GO about game balance nor do they care about how it's so much realistic that monster run when they take too much damage.

People play video games to have a good time and to constantly adept and come up with crazy builds everyday.

-Loki- · Nov 20, 2005, 01:36 AM // 01:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kalt

No one gives a RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GO about game balance

The PvP community disagrees with you.

Roza · Nov 20, 2005, 02:12 AM // 02:12

Quote:

If a game is not balanced, then everyone abuses certain advantages (say spirit spamming).

However if a game is completely balance, then there is no skill involved in the game. An example of this is rock, paper, scissors. After three levels of thinking, you're merely returning to the first level.

Player measure of skill is magnified by imbalance; skilled players compensate for the imbalance and that is what makes them skilled. Without imbalance there is no skill.

That was pretty much my point before. However, it is not simply a matter of balance vs skill when it comes to GW. If skills are not all equally good, then it takes skill/intelligence to identify the best ones. If they are all equally good, then it takes skill/intelligence to find the best combo's (individually and for a team as a whole). Obviously not every combo can be balanced in the sense of being equally good. Some combo's & team builds stand out as being better than others. Anet tries to maintain a balance between these, most of all.

Finding these 'superior' combo's takes skill/intelligence. Even when the game is balanced in the sense of there being no 'single or only two or three 'best combo's/builds', skill/intelligence is still needed. In fact, this requires more intelligence/skill than a lot of players possess. And using certain skills, combo's and strategies requires some sort of skill as well (quick reactions for interupting spell, for example). And more importantly, playing as a coherent team requires skill too (some degree of social intelligence helps a lot with that

), and also a degree of cooperative 'skill' (a pure, uncompromising egoist (like a constant PD-defector) will not make for a good team-player.

But even if the game were to be a completely balanced game in the way RPS is, there would still be a use for skill/intelligence. Some players tend to win a lot when playing RPS, because their opponent is not selecting strategies randomly (that is very hard for humans). This means that they have some sort of psychological insight into the pattern of game-decidions followed by other players. In GW, there is the metagame. Knowing that well will give you knowledge of the statistical probabilities of encountering certain strategies in battle, allowing you to formulate answers (counters etc) to these. At that point, the game will become a lot like poker.

Like I said above, introducing new skills will upset this balance and everyone will need to go an find new 'best' combo's again (identifying imbalances and exploiting these). So a situation where the game is like poker for the top teams will not persist, though it may return once all the great individual and team combo's have been found and have become public knowledge.

Sorry for this rather dull post, btw. Some of us are science nerds.

AncientPC · Nov 20, 2005, 02:52 AM // 02:52

Apparently poker nerds as well. +EV ftw!