Curse

Ratson Itamar · May 12, 2009, 09:43 PM // 21:43

Great post Kaon. I completely agree with everything that you've said, which is quite rare as I always find something to argue about.

The game was more fun back then, but maybe it's not only the bars and thus the enhanced tactical play, maybe it's also it's age. Without a doubt, this game has consumed more of my time than any other game haver had. Even though I enjoyed playing the old meta much more than this one, I wouldn't even be playing the game if they weren't spicing things up on regular basis.

One more point, I don't think that pointing a finger at a single man (izzy) is right. They had other skill tester when they released each campaign, which in my eyes is what really screwed the balance. Most skills were already broken at the very release. However, he did some bad and some good, arguably more wrong than right, but holding grudge against a single man isn't right. I blame Anet as a whole. Take their biggest "betrayal" of them all; Splitting the skills to two versions, PvE and PvP. They bragged, on their game's box for heaven's sake, that Guild Wars is one world, and such all of it's skill has only one version. This wasn't izzy's doing, he isn't the be all and end all.

All in all, this isn't the game we bought 4 years ago. I left my warrior on the shelf quite some time ago, around the time the class got brain-dead. In my eyes Anet is making matters worse by giving us the huge but unneeded game "updates" while abandoning skill updates more and more. Either way, Thank you for sharing your thoughts and insights, especially for the newcomers who don't really know why this game used to be the greatest.

A side note - It's all about selling as much as possible before close. With that in mind and with a retrospective of the last year or so, it's obvious that the game is dead, not socially wise but for the developers of this game. Let's hope for the best with GW2 and then, if Anet plays their cards right, the same for GW3.

For all the QQ moar guys - Get lost, if you don't contribute, and yes a conflict is perfectly fine too, then you have nothing to do here except for the pointless purpose of +1.

Vanquisher · May 12, 2009, 10:23 PM // 22:23

I don't get this whole "hope it gets fixed for GW2" things. If underlying problems aren't fixed in this game, why does everyone think they will magically be remedied come GW2? Sure, a few more people will be working on balances, but hey, individual skills are hardly the main problem.

When is pro-active defence (as Gus mentioned re: Mending Touch) going to be talked about?
What about super-efficient base turtling?
Effiency of unspecced skills?
Crossing boundries in terms of utility/movement control/damage/defencet?
Abuse of skills that break other skills' balance?
Primary attribute abuse?
Power of interrupts over other forms of shutdown?
Lack of viable party healing?
Stacking of defensive skills?
Lack of need to invest heavily to accomplish something well (best form of example being spike - why can teams only run 1 skill devoted to it but still be successful, rather than needing to back it up with a corresponding bar)?
Removals that destroy entire builds centered around one concept (conditions, hexes, enchantments)?

And when the hell are we going to have random maps which actually means we won't necessarily be seeing all the crap, and instead teams will actually have to run something with more tactical options than spike on 1 or roll your hand over your keyboard for big damage? How is this not vital for tournament play, and why has it not yet been incorporated or even had significant discussion?

Mobility is the key framework for tactical options and play. The best example I can give in this situation is Ward Melee. It was nerfed because it got stacked with a million other party wide defensive measures that were all similarly linked - their range. What would be the option in the past? Splitting to prevent the Ward from having the effect it would have otherwise. In most cases the guy with the Ward would be the one back in the base. Instead we get super-turtling abilities now, and superpowered split characters like MB Eles.

And this whole thing with interrupts is even worse. How has this not been addressed? Why are skills like Power Block, Power Leak, Distracting Shot, and Magebane Shot running around in current form?

The concept of buffing counters is the completely wrong philosophy in terms of balance as has been stated so many times by so many people it's simply ridiculous. The concept of nerfing individual skills that aren't actually the root cause of problems is equally as terrible a viewpoint to have. Why do skills like Glyph of Renewal and Mind Blast exist in current form? When you have skills balanced by concepts such as cost, recharge, cast time, among others, why is there an allowance to abuse this feature through the use of other skills? I'm less concerned about anti-interrupts but they need to be listed too, and there really needs to be an analysis into the benefits of putting skills like Rend or Pain of Disenchant on huge huge recharges to justify their powerful effects.

I don't even know why Weaken Knees exists as it does, punishing players for doing something they should be so heavily.

Snow Bunny · May 12, 2009, 10:38 PM // 22:38

I'm the only one that thinks this, but GW2 won't have the original VoD and that makes me sad.

Kaon, your post is good, but to an extent it just reiterates the collective complaining of the GvG community (warranted/justified complaining nonetheless) at the mistakes post summer 2006.

Also, for those that believe boonprots are noob friendly, what monk bar isn't noob friendly?

Neo-LD · May 12, 2009, 11:49 PM // 23:49

Local definition: Desirable = Good for the game in general; promoting of a healthy and player-skill-rewarding metagame.

@ Boon Prot defenders

Prots and removals were often not used properly by boonprots since they were withheld unless you could get the healing from Boon out of it as well. Also, BoonProts could move bars too easily with 1/4c spells. Attaching healing to slower (interruptible) casts is desirable. However, I do miss (disruptable) active energy management and energy denial. Those were desirable things about boonprots. Also the stances on current monks are undesirable as they cover up the lack of protting talent that nearly every team in the game suffers from. So again, its not like modern monk templates are desirable. Its just that BoonProts were also undesirable in different ways.

Gift/Prot monks were a massive improvement in terms of stylistic desirability of monk templates, except for the stances they usually brought. Mo/Me BLight was probably the most desirable monk template in the history of the game.

@ Vanquisher, Aegis

I think you misunderstood me. I did not mean that Aegis is a bad skill, as it is in fact one of the most powerful anti-pressure skills in the game atm. What I meant is that party-wide blockinig is not a desirable part of this game. Currently offense is so strong that sustainable defense is nearly impossible without it, but if the game were rebalanced in other ways that are being discussed here, it would also be desirable to remove Aegis.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaon

current monks [are] the most buffed and overpowered profession in the game, therefore they do the most harm.

Care to explain? Currently when two top teams meet eachother in 8v8 combat, one will wipe in a matter of minutes. Aegis is the only thing keeping teams afloat and once it gets disrupted its impossible for monks to keep up with competent offense for long. All of that would imply to me that monks are incredibly weak and fragile, only surviving as long as their 3 good skills (Word, PnH, Aegis) remain unmolested.

Kaon · May 13, 2009, 12:02 AM // 00:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

Kaon, your post is good, but to an extent it just reiterates the collective complaining of the GvG community (warranted/justified complaining nonetheless) at the mistakes post summer 2006.

My post only states facts, together with a list of opinions. The facts indeed seem to point in the direction everyone has always been yelling: The game has gotten consistently worse every since factions got released.

kedde · May 13, 2009, 12:18 AM // 00:18

Monks are RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOing powerful when they can pretty much singlehandedly keep up teams against mindless paintrains like WE, retarded hexes and ridiculous spikes.

All the offense and defense really needs to be toned down and there needs to be a lot more focus on opening windows of opportunities to be taken by good players.
That's done by realy shutdown, not merely highpowered interrupts that are a 50/50 on pingwars.

FoxBat · May 13, 2009, 12:45 AM // 00:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vanquisher

I don't get this whole "hope it gets fixed for GW2" things. If underlying problems aren't fixed in this game, why does everyone think they will magically be remedied come GW2?.

It's difficult to talk about such specific things in GW2 with so little information going around. For example I expect there to be no secondary classes in GW2 at all; that alone removes several of your points and changes game balance completely. (E.G. if there are flags to be run, which classes get run boosts? Will there even be flags at all? Will GvG instead be balanced and focused on 6-player battles to increase the ease of team organization? etc...) So as mentioned, issues that are deeply rooted in GW1 can be sidestepped entirely in a way that no balance update ever could, although there will likely be completely new problems facing GW2 that we can't even begin to speculate on.

Certain elements are very likely to surface again; spike vs. split vs. pressure, heal vs prot vs debuff defense vs passive defense vs disruption, and so forth; but the variables involved could be very different. Imagine if hexes and enchants were no more stackable than weapon spells; or maybe if they had a max stack size (3?) - or if removal could pick particular hexes/enchants to remove.

I know alot of people are expecting GW 1.5, but I'm expecting a true sequel, as much as all the Diablo versions have differed from each other - while there will be basic similarities, some fundamental mechanics will really be turned on their heads that makes for entirely different balance needs.

Robster Lobster · May 13, 2009, 02:15 AM // 02:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vanquisher

And when the hell are we going to have random maps which actually means we won't necessarily be seeing all the crap, and instead teams will actually have to run something with more tactical options than spike on 1 or roll your hand over your keyboard for big damage? How is this not vital for tournament play, and why has it not yet been incorporated or even had significant discussion?

Random maps at the moment would make split builds even less viable, 8vs8 builds can win against splits at the moment even on maps like Frozen and Wurms, and would have a massive advantage on more 8vs8 focussed maps.

I don't really like the idea of them in general either, for example a lot of the time it would be in a weaker guilds best interest to run a pure 8vs8 build and hope to draw Druids or Jade, gaining an advantage over a team that built for a variety of maps.

Wish Swiftdeath · May 13, 2009, 03:00 AM // 03:00

Great post Kaon,

I miss the old days when there was more thinking involved instead of just spamming ridiculously overpowered skills (Warriors, rangers, elementalists, monks - everyone).

Power creep after the release of each chapter was to be expected but the problem is that Anet went the wrong way about dealing with it (buffing counters instead of the actual problem) and this is the result.

The game is beyond repair now and for the people still left in GW it's a case of following the trend or getting left behind (aka build warsed)

Jaden Stone · May 13, 2009, 05:35 AM // 05:35

Balance is, and always will be, the same in guildwars. There will always be skills that are better, there will always be meta builds. It's the way it was then, it's the way it is now. Regardless of how much you think balance effected your enjoyment of the game in the past, there were other factors that cannot be restored. I'll be the first to admit this meta is not to my liking, but bad metas come and go as they always have. In guildwars I've always had the outlook that you play around the skills. It's a hard concept to explain, but in general you're all on equal ground and trying to achieve the same goal, to win. In the end, the skills become a moot point. I certainly know not everyone feels this way and people derive great pleasure from using specific skills, but you cant please everyone. What one enjoys winning with, another despises for the loss. Such is PvP.

There are four main factors that I feel greatly contributed to the current state of GvG.

Player Evolution is the first on my list. Teams have become disgustingly good at abusing game mechanics. They are incredibly quick on skill migration after updates and understand how to play to win. Being able to understand thier enemy and what beats what. Teams now understand the most efficient way to win. 3 years ago players were sheep. They didn't understand tournament play, they didn't understand how to exploit winning conditions. They didnt know how to play not to lose. Not only that, but players have become faster and more efficient in game as well. They know what makes a build tick and go straight for it. You could never get away with an Eprod midline or an energy denial mesmer. Not because these builds are being outclassed or are underpowerd, because we've outgrown them. Ignorance is bliss.

Automated tournament system. This has killed off all forms of casual play. It's initial implementation delays lost a lot of high end gvgers. However it's biggest offense is forcing teams to play tournament style builds against known opponents. With ladder play removed teams are able to streamline thier builds for specific maps and opponents, pushing us further into buildwars. Tournaments back 3 years ago were once a month, only 16 teams, map choice based on rank, best out of 3, and spanned 2 days. Very few people had tournament experience and the builds players had the most knowledge of were ladder farming builds. Ladder supported more offensive builds with a win quick or die trying attitude, and it did spill over to tournament play, although rarely won.

VoD. I feel it was a massive mistake the direction VoD was taken. It stripped a lot of the tactics and strategy out of GvG and it just has never felt like the same game since. The current win condition is very shallow, therefor builds will become shallow. Splitting is no longer an offensive means to win the game, it's a time delay. You make it to 28 minutes you might just win. It's really sad how much was lost with VoD and what fixes could have been made instead. This is the only thing I blame izzy for, bad decision.

Core game mechanics. You have 8 players on your team, max health around 600, and there are hundreds of skills which deal over 90 damage. Add in the fact that damage can be compressed by multiple other means and you come to the conclusion of what is the most effective way to kill. They have the means to bring with them all the skills needed to make the damage go through. Poor conditions such as cracked armor and deep wound only help to compound the issue. In the end it would take a massive overhaul to fix a lot of this, and it's still not a gaurentee.

Apok Omen · May 13, 2009, 06:04 AM // 06:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaden Stone

Snip

This

Face it, the beginning of the game was very primitive. There were no end-clauses, no skills that complimented each other, and the skills back then that were used in competitive play had a much higher risk factor. If you didn't use one skill to the best of it's abilities, then that was it. But, no one was really looking for a way to abuse the mechanics. They were just following what the metagame was, and still are now.

I don't blame anybody for wanting to abuse mechanics in competitive play, because that is what I expect from them. I could give 3 shits about honor or any other myth thrown into GW meant to glorify the game. Once gale warriors, IWAY, ERenewal smiters were discovered, Anet put these issues first and fixed them. But I fear the glyphsac+metshower thing was the turn of the balance.

Once people found a way use VoD as a ways of winning, the fun was taken out of the game. From then on, people have been searching for the build that complimented NPC's instead of themselves. Skills that either protected Archers (Wards, Spirits, etc.), used their AI to finish them off quickly (Clumsiness, Wandering Eye, ESurge, Splinter Weapon, AoM), or used them as weapons (Anthem of Weakness, even Favorable Winds) were forced into support bars.

Even if Clumsi+Wandering were Smiters Booned, people would start looking for the next best thing. But instead of making a simple change to VoD, Izzy chose to make it a lord-race, which was a lazy attempt at solving a problem.

Brian the Gladiator · May 13, 2009, 06:34 AM // 06:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeHoMaR

People don't get the point of balancing. Balancing is NOT for actually balance the game, the real purpose is to keep people playing the game and trying different builds. Indeed, they are unbalancing the game on purpose with every skill update (not a sarcasm)

And how is that working out for A-net? Looks like everyone left the game. Time for a new business model? I'd say so.

My biggest question is, why do we only get a skill balance every month... and sometimes not even then? It seems to me, as soon as a skill is identifiable as being imba, Izzy should be able to put out an update correcting the problem immediately... Is it really that hard to update skills where it takes MONTHS to do? Perfect example of this = PnH... That should be nerfed immediately after it was buffed... but it has existed FAR too long. Same with Lingering Curse. I just don't understand.

Edwards · May 13, 2009, 06:39 AM // 06:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by StManTiS

That and you seem to despise efficiency, you complain of higher and more sustained damage and builds that work just as well but are easier to play. Simply put you like builds that dont work as well but are a beautiful unique snowflake. Thats great, just stay out of PvP please.

Higher and more sustained damage is boring. Modern day GW is a race to see who can out-damage their opponent first. GW used to be about scoring kills through creating skillfully coordinated and executed windows of shutdown to land your damage, or by applying pressure not through extremely high amounts of damage, but through disruption and skillful play.

Why fake a spike when prots help your PoD powered spike go through?

Why bring a mesmer to mess with monks when you can render them almost useless by using LC?

Why shutdown monks during a spike when your WE + SoH powered warriors with a FC snare and a Mel's Shot ranger can carry out a lethal spike every ~5 seconds?

Bars like those make the game much simpler, and much more boring.

Vanquisher · May 13, 2009, 08:29 AM // 08:29

To those that say there was no build wars in tournament play prior to the GWFC and subsequent implementation of AT's.

EW FoC Spike.
FCAS.
Obs Flame Spike.
Ranger Spike.
Shelter/Union.

There was definately Build Wars. It just wasn't a matter of stalling for 30 minutes and then farming NPC's.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robster Lobster

Random maps at the moment would make split builds even less viable, 8vs8 builds can win against splits at the moment even on maps like Frozen and Wurms, and would have a massive advantage on more 8vs8 focussed maps.

I don't really like the idea of them in general either, for example a lot of the time it would be in a weaker guilds best interest to run a pure 8vs8 build and hope to draw Druids or Jade, gaining an advantage over a team that built for a variety of maps.

6 maps in rotation, all can come up as many times. Make all maps symmetrical, fix their balance issues, put in 2 maps that are favorable to split, 2 to 8 vs 8, and 2 that are about equal. Re-introduce VoD, decent balance, and people will tend to run the thing that gives them an advantage in terms of change to beat everything. Obviously Build Wars will still happen in tournament play when Guilds get good at certain things, but there's far more chance of this backfiring.

As an aside, when you take away access to things that actually benefit mobility and can only be fit into things like spikes builds, utilising their lack of investment requiring to make the spike go through, that's what makes them so incredibly strong. See; Incoming.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaden

Not only that, but players have become faster and more efficient in game as well. They know what makes a build tick and go straight for it. You could never get away with an Eprod midline or an energy denial mesmer. Not because these builds are being outclassed or are underpowerd, because we've outgrown them. Ignorance is bliss.

While this is true you also have to look at reasoning behind why those wouldn't work, and it's very much in part to them being so incredibly underpowered to their counterparts it's a joke. The entire direction the game has taken through the various skill balances has made it ridiciulous to the point that now regardless of nerfs there are still other skills that do similar jobs. For example, I don't know who had the brain wave of destroying preprot by adding to mass removal (for 2 campaigns it was Lingering and Rend), much less the even better idea of giving them damage. Surely this was going to have an obvious consequence?!?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neo-LD

@ Vanquisher, Aegis

I think you misunderstood me. I did not mean that Aegis is a bad skill, as it is in fact one of the most powerful anti-pressure skills in the game atm. What I meant is that party-wide blockinig is not a desirable part of this game. Currently offense is so strong that sustainable defense is nearly impossible without it, but if the game were rebalanced in other ways that are being discussed here, it would also be desirable to remove Aegis.

No, by bad I meant people saying bad for the game. I would counter that it's actually good for the game to return on heavy investment skills like Aegis, especially when Physical damage is the strongest form in the game. Add to that the lack of mobility factor Aegis carries, the ease of removal, the ease of interruption, the duration compared to the recharge, and the cost, and I really don't see a problem. Skills that excel in closed gameplay but are obselete when it comes to expanding the game to counter them are good for tactical options as counters, rather than merely hard counters like Mirror and interrupts.

emp · May 13, 2009, 08:58 AM // 08:58

Let's just revert the meta prior GWWC, and I'm in!

- empeh

Vanquisher · May 13, 2009, 09:15 AM // 09:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by emp

Let's just revert the meta prior GWWC, and I'm in!

- empeh

!!!!!!!!!!

Pls all GWWC Guilds come back pls i rly need 10k ok

paK0 · May 13, 2009, 09:16 AM // 09:16

i think it is just understandable how the game developed, as you have to see it from anet's point of view

gw is a really old game so why would they want to create difficult builds

its not just a matter of gvg, ha and ta are the same, its already hard enough for newer players to get into a well organised group

the chance of having them stay increases if you give them well playable builds

spiking is a lot easier than outsmarting your opponent so that is the way to go for anet

Animate · May 13, 2009, 03:06 PM // 15:06

I've been saying since Nightfall's release that skills such as Mending Touch, Glyph of lesser Energy and Natural Stride are bad.

A lot of things could have been fixed with a proper nerf to GolE, but were instead fixed by nerfing skills which never were a problem..

->

Quote:

Power attack, protectors strike, dash, Warriors endurance. These skills have to go. They're ridiculous and serve no purpose but to make the game worse.

Don't do the same mistake over and over again.
1st: Why nerf Power Attack or Protector's Strike? It's Warrior's Endurance that's bad.

2nd: Why do Skills have "to go"? That sounds like Ether Renewalling or Smiter's Booning them.... Skills have to be fine tuned, adjusted, it's what balance is all about.

And the one that needs to be adjusted there is only Warrior's Endurance.
You wouldn't even think about nerfing Power Attack in your dreams if WE wasn't buffed in the first place.

Note that before it was buffed, it was never used.
Why always deal in such extremes? And yet, under the noble profession of balance; you know what that word means? Neither does Anet.
It will go back being a stance again, how stupid.

In the past people even used Frenzy with [email protected] or Bull's Charge, which required even more Skill than Frenzy + Idiotsaver aka. Rush, which is bad too tbh. This becomes a problem because every idiot can Frenzy with Rush and this leads to too much damage, which again lead to linebacking and spiking warriors and everyone needing stances.
Rush is even worse than Dash.

GolE shares the same problem with PwK and Enraged Charge; they stack.
You don't get ~4 adrenaline every 20 seconds; you get ~4 and then a few seconds later again ~4, which is too strong on hammer warriors, who are already very powerful due to Flail.
Same as GolE is too strong on N/E Me/E Mo/E, etc.

I agree with most of the other things, though.

Skills which genuinely required "skill" and/or were good for the game were such as Gale, Blackout, Energy Surge/Burn/Mind Wrack, Distortion, Blessed Light, Divine Boon, Traps, Healing Signet, Windborne Speed, Blinding Flash, Ether Prodigy, Crippling Shot, Return,...

But Anet is making everything simple shoot & forget skills... just look at PaH & FF. RC is far less of a problem for Crippling Shot than FF or PaH.

Izzy's always said how he wanted to make NPCs more important, as one can see now people do flagstand 8v8 for 25 minutes and then hit the guild lord a bit, guild thieves don't exist anymore. They might as well remove the last archers.

Vanquisher · May 13, 2009, 04:12 PM // 16:12

I'd say sure to most of those skills with the very huge grievance over Return. Skills that allow positioning to be less important than otherwise and take away from pre-kiting are terrible. It's just like how you shouldn't really have huge effects given to skills that stop good play (Bull's Strike is one of these to some extent, but has developed its own mini-allowance in promoting people to kite them).

Neo-LD · May 13, 2009, 04:17 PM // 16:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vanquisher

No, by bad I meant people saying bad for the game. I would counter that it's actually good for the game to return on heavy investment skills like Aegis, especially when Physical damage is the strongest form in the game. Add to that the lack of mobility factor Aegis carries, the ease of removal, the ease of interruption, the duration compared to the recharge, and the cost, and I really don't see a problem. Skills that excel in closed gameplay but are obselete when it comes to expanding the game to counter them are good for tactical options as counters, rather than merely hard counters like Mirror and interrupts.

Those are reasons that it is balanced, not reasons that it is desirable. Aegis is dependent on FC sets (undesirable), is fire-and-forget (undesirable), and has a blanket effect that is unrewarding of monk player skill (very undesirable). Its an abomination of a skill, and I despise that game balance currently forces us to use it.