Curse

erk · Nov 14, 2007, 12:45 AM // 00:45

I love all the fuss about splinter, it's like there has never been any AoE before in the game that could wipe out a bunch of NPCs! Have you seen what Glyph Sac.- >Meteor Shower ->Savannah Heat does to them?

Splinter is best before VoD to make teams spread out and stop the borning camping in wards.

BTW. If you read the Izzy/Ensign interview it would be quite clear that Izzy thinks the game is too balanced

Quote:

Izzy: Players currently use mostly Core skills, followed by Nightfall skills and then skills from the original Guild Wars campaign (Prophecies). The metagame is quite stale at the moment and needs some shaking up. One example is changing how Light of Deliverance works in relation to other skills in the backline.

Lorekeeper · Nov 14, 2007, 01:09 AM // 01:09

theres no such thing as being too balanced... youre either in a state of good balance or youre not.

in a state of good balance... metas will shift once players get bored of running a particular build or learn how to exploit a build thats dominating the meta... like running condition builds vs teams using only dual dismiss in the sod+lod meta (a meta-shift we just narrowly missed out on because the skill update at that time put RC monks back on the map)

Unfortunately GW has rarely enjoyed this kind of meta because of the perpetual existence of overpowered builds which throw any semblance of proper balance in the air. The continual existence of overpowered builds requires continual skill balancing... which continually upsets the overall balance of the game by nerfing and buffing various overpowered and underpowered skills and does not let it settle as a result.

Even when balance settles into a relative good state - arguably just before the NOV 8th update (give or take a few necessary changes that have been on the communities agenda for aaaages)... it gets totally shaken up again with yet another set of drastic nerfs and buffs.

Its wrong to say that a stale meta is an imbalanced one... a stale meta more often than not points to good balance...

When a meta becomes stable and quite possible stale as a result (they are two words to describe a similar situation imo)... patterns emerge... behaviour becomes predictable... thats when a meta becomes exploitable... thats when meta-shifts can occur. But its down to the players to make the shift, not the game designers using heavy handed skill changes.

ensoriki · Nov 14, 2007, 03:04 AM // 03:04

Black lotus Strike was not a nerf, it was just a plain balance.

Putting it as a lead is only bad for gimmick builds, even the Shadow Form Tombs solo doesn't need it NEED it as an off hand. It also opens up many other L-O-D combo's so how can you call it a nerf?
It stops 1 thing a bit, but enables more. Thats not a nerf.

Horns shows A-net doesnt understand game balance.

Horn-s Penalized you if you did not show position awareness.

In the days before Nightfall, horns was followed by Falling spider.

Falling Spider Would NOT be activated if you went after the monk next to the rt, serves you right =P.

Horns was also not what made the builds damage Strong, horns damage was moderate to blend in with its knock down.

Now the damage is so pitiful.... 1 damage at 1 dagger mastery? dual attack tho so thats umm +2 damage.....oh then add daggers (at 1 dagger mastery daggers wont give you good damage) so lets see.... 4-6 damage?

Freaking win!

Captain Robo · Nov 14, 2007, 04:35 AM // 04:35

I don't know about you, but most people don't run assassins with 1 Dagger Mastery.

shoogi · Nov 14, 2007, 07:23 AM // 07:23

and yet, for the last 15 months or so the game is constantly imbalanced. Anet are trying to balance, but every skill balance is followed by heavy boos from the community. that's the situation with 1235 skills. A long time ago, when there was no factions and hoh was in tombs (ftw), when there were 400 skills, the game was fairly balanced and, as Lorekeeper said, the meta constantly and naturally shifted without the devs forcing it. Back then, Anet did understand skill balancing and did try hard enough and did care about the pvp community or whatever other accusation you might have. The difference between then and nowadays- triple the skills.

Anyway, that discussion is quite pointless because if the problem is here (which I believe is the case), it cannot be solved. Anet cannot remove professions and skills. The question is what can be done.

Wasteland Squidget · Nov 14, 2007, 07:43 AM // 07:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by shoogi

and yet, for the last 15 months or so the game is constantly imbalanced. Anet are trying to balance, but every skill balance is followed by heavy boos from the community. that's the situation with 1235 skills. A long time ago, when there was no factions and hoh was in tombs (ftw), when there were 400 skills, the game was fairly balanced and, as Lorekeeper said, the meta constantly and naturally shifted without the devs forcing it. Back then, Anet did understand skill balancing and did try hard enough and did care about the pvp community or whatever other accusation you might have. The difference between then and nowadays- triple the skills.

Anyway, that discussion is quite pointless because if the problem is here (which I believe is the case), it cannot be solved. Anet cannot remove professions and skills. The question is what can be done.

There has never been a period of time in Guild Wars when the community did not complain about balance. During the Gale/E-surge days, people complained about the power of E-surge and E-drain. During the GWFC days, people complained about the power of various 321 spike builds, thumpersmite, IWAY, and other gimmicks.

Understanding of the game is better than ever, so the balance complaints might be more grounded in reality, but they have always been there. The current state of affairs might seem like an unhappy community for someone who's newly arrived, but it really is business as usual.

shoogi · Nov 14, 2007, 09:22 AM // 09:22

Gimmick builds are a result of imbalance. Today gimmick builds dominate pvp, from RA (a/mo) to gvg (everybody runs that same build). Gimmicks always existed but they didn't dominate as they do now. You didn't enter a GvG knowing exactly what you are going to face, and that happens to be the same thing that you are running yourself. It's much worse in tombs were fotms rule.

QFT from ensign + izzy's SotG-

Izzy: Balance should make the game enjoyable to play, with large variety in terms of the builds you can play and in-game tactics you can employ. Right now I see balance as being off because there are a limited number of strong skills you basically need to bring if you want to win. Also, in the game itself, 8v8 is much more viable than a split strategy, thereby making 8v8 the dominant choice by most teams. One reason for this is that many guilds around are no longer trying new things.
Ensign: Agreed with Izzy. The Guild Wars Factions Championship was the pinnacle of balance because you never knew what people would bring. Back then you could try bringing different things, and you weren't ever sure what your opponents would have on their Skill Bars. But now you can almost know for sure what the opponents will have.

wuzzman · Nov 14, 2007, 11:31 AM // 11:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lorekeeper

theres no such thing as being too balanced... youre either in a state of good balance or youre not.

in a state of good balance... metas will shift once players get bored of running a particular build or learn how to exploit a build thats dominating the meta... like running condition builds vs teams using only dual dismiss in the sod+lod meta (a meta-shift we just narrowly missed out on because the skill update at that time put RC monks back on the map)

Unfortunately GW has rarely enjoyed this kind of meta because of the perpetual existence of overpowered builds which throw any semblance of proper balance in the air. The continual existence of overpowered builds requires continual skill balancing... which continually upsets the overall balance of the game by nerfing and buffing various overpowered and underpowered skills and does not let it settle as a result.

Even when balance settles into a relative good state - arguably just before the NOV 8th update (give or take a few necessary changes that have been on the communities agenda for aaaages)... it gets totally shaken up again with yet another set of drastic nerfs and buffs.

Its wrong to say that a stale meta is an imbalanced one... a stale meta more often than not points to good balance...

When a meta becomes stable and quite possible stale as a result (they are two words to describe a similar situation imo)... patterns emerge... behaviour becomes predictable... thats when a meta becomes exploitable... thats when meta-shifts can occur. But its down to the players to make the shift, not the game designers using heavy handed skill changes.

meta-shifts don't happen in this game because it's considered an exploit. An exploit in this community is treated as a hack, which must be removed or the game will spiral into noobishness of broken proportions. The community stunts its own growth and forces anet to change the game so it can play the same way it did "when it was balanced". Not allowing the meta to become exploitable, but anything that does exploit weaknesses is automatically an imbalance that needs to be fixed before the servers crash on Izzy's head. Even when Anet finally does comply with the community a new meta of even more "brokenness" is discovered that is actually worse then the last meta that ya'll nerfed your way out of. This cycle continues without fail.

People say the pvp-community is dieing because it lacks support. If that is truely so what if Anet left the pvp side of the game alone, no balance changes, no new skills, no new profession, or new maps, since March 2005 would the pvp-community still be in its heyday now in 2007?

Shuuda · Nov 14, 2007, 01:35 PM // 13:35

Quote:

People say the pvp-community is dieing because it lacks support. If that is truely so what if Anet left the pvp side of the game alone, no balance changes, no new skills, no new profession, or new maps, since March 2005 would the pvp-community still be in its heyday now in 2007?

I'd say that if that happened, the PvP community would complain that PvP is boring, since it never changes. If things never change, they become too predictable and boring.

kvndoom · Nov 14, 2007, 04:17 PM // 16:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shuuda

I'd say that if that happened, the PvP community would complain that PvP is boring, since it never changes. If things never change, they become too predictable and boring.

Oddly enough, though, GW PVP was at its peak before new skills / professions were added. The game was not stagnant because there were many more team builds that could be played successfully. Power creep has narrowed that number significantly, because if you don't bring the stronger skills, you get wiped. We could use Thumpers for an example. Compare any pre-Nightfall thumper build against Rampage. Enraged was nice DPS, Ferocious was good energy, but they still pale when compared to a skill that combines Frenzy and Sprint, cannot be removed, and has no drawback aside from its energy cost. Or look at LoD. The LoD nerf hurt people because power creep made the skill mandatory for successful GVG. In the Boon Prot days, a Monk's elite was energy management to power small heals and spot prots. Now a Monk's elite is either mega-defensive or a super-efficient heal.

People take the best skills, and inferior skills get left behind. Frenzy/Eviscerate/Executioner's will never get repalced because there's nothing better. Some builds using Dismember and a different elite see a little play, but not much. 3 games later, Anet could not create an axe skill better than Eviscerate that is still balanced. Decapitate at 10 adrenaline without the penalties might have been a good skill, but we'll never know. But the point is, as the game evolved, the amount of viable builds had to decrease because of power creep. Had GW1 seen another chapter or two, with a few hundred more skills and even more classes, I wouldn't be surprised to see it degrade to 4 monk backlines.

Shuuda · Nov 14, 2007, 04:25 PM // 16:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by kvndoom

Oddly enough, though, GW PVP was at its peak before new skills / professions were added. The game was not stagnant because there were many more team builds that could be played successfully. Power creep has narrowed that number significantly, because if you don't bring the stronger skills, you get wiped. We could use Thumpers for an example. Compare any pre-Nightfall thumper build against Rampage. Enraged was nice DPS, Ferocious was good energy, but they still pale when compared to a skill that combines Frenzy and Sprint, cannot be removed, and has no drawback aside from its energy cost. Or look at LoD. The LoD nerf hurt people because power creep made the skill mandatory for successful GVG. In the Boon Prot days, a Monk's elite was energy management to power small heals and spot prots. Now a Monk's elite is either mega-defensive or a super-efficient heal.

People take the best skills, and inferior skills get left behind. Frenzy/Eviscerate/Executioner's will never get repalced because there's nothing better. Some builds using Dismember and a different elite see a little play, but not much. 3 games later, Anet could not create an axe skill better than Eviscerate that is still balanced. Decapitate at 10 adrenaline without the penalties might have been a good skill, but we'll never know. But the point is, as the game evolved, the amount of viable builds had to decrease because of power creep. Had GW1 seen another chapter or two, with a few hundred more skills and even more classes, I wouldn't be surprised to see it degrade to 4 monk backlines.

But, it would still get boring. Also, put some statistical data to prove that GW was at it's peak when you said it was, other people think different. (I believe Ensign said in he talk with Izzy, the Faction championships could be candidate)

Riotgear · Nov 14, 2007, 06:09 PM // 18:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by wuzzman

meta-shifts don't happen in this game because it's considered an exploit.

Meta shifts happen all the time. There are always going to be people resistant to change, but everyone is resistant to boring, low-skill crap.

Things like Spiritway, sin split, DA spammers, Avatar of Grenth, Ritspike, Searing Flames, Bloodspike, Ride the Lightning spike, Hexes-on-Jade, Spiritual Pain telespike, Paragon holding builds, Jagged Bones hexway, and that sort of thing all have one thing in common: Way too much effect for way too little of a skill requirement.

Dealing with overpowered junk requires several undesirable things:
- A coordinated effort to shut them down, the amount of coordination greatly exceeding the amount of skill needed to actually run the build.
- Bringing skills or builds specifically in preparation to deal with them, or shelving possible skills because of their inability to deal with them.
- Running the build yourself to stay competitive.

Quote:

If that is truely so what if Anet left the pvp side of the game alone, no balance changes, no new skills, no new profession, or new maps, since March 2005 would the pvp-community still be in its heyday now in 2007?

Read my survey thread, read responses to question 6. Most people feel that the game was more fun at a previous point in time, and CAN acknowledge significant positive changes that were made since that point (which is why I put that subquestion in in the first place).

shoogi · Nov 14, 2007, 06:31 PM // 18:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riotgear

Meta shifts happen all the time. There are always going to be people resistant to change, but everyone is resistant to boring, low-skill crap.

Meta fotms are changing when-
a. The fotm build got nerfed. (such as e/mo smiters, boon prots, the old ranger spiritspam)
b. A stronger, similar build shows up. (the introduction of paragons made new iway and rspike, rits along with insanely buffed channeling spells replaced bspike).
c. Broken mechanics are found and exploited. (heroway)
d. A new build meant to counter the old fotm is so successful in doing it that it becomes a fotm itself (the effect heroway had on zergway).

The metagame doesn't shift because people get bored of it. Winning fights takes a very, very long time to get boring (I don't wanna start a discussion about gaming psychology, but that's how it is). Iway and bspike players played their builds for ages, and never got bored of holding halls.

btw I totally agree with kvndoom's post.

Riotgear · Nov 14, 2007, 06:56 PM // 18:56

My comment was poorly worded, I was speaking strictly of the people that are resistant to those changes. It usually falls into two categories, people who simply do not like change, and people who don't like what the meta shifts to.

FOTM runners will run whatever gets them the most wins per ounce of effort spent on it.

Captain Robo · Nov 15, 2007, 12:17 AM // 00:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sleeper Service

say what? thats just wrong sorry.

if you play STANDARD its balanced.

thats all there is to it. If you think mtg is imba take it to wizards, salvation or somewhere else.

/end

T1 is really the only format that lacks a great deal of balance, but that's because you can play a deck with the Power 9. T1.5, Extended, and Standard are all incredibly balanced with respect to the size of the card pools.

The point is, you can balance a game if you really wish to do so, and Magic is meticulously tested with every new set they release (with the exception of Mirrodin... of course) because new concepts must not allow the old to become degenerate, and furthermore, the new cards must not obsolete the old cards.

Magic is the example that proves that this is possible, and there's no reason why GW shouldn't be the same way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by twicky_kid

Which is the exact lesson Anet DIDN'T learn from MTG.

Give us monthly ATs with restricted skills based on chapters then we'll see real balance and competition. Until then everything else is just an appeasement till GW2.

I've been against monthly ATs from the beginning, but I'd love to see formats and a banned and restricted list in this game.

Wasteland Squidget · Nov 15, 2007, 12:33 AM // 00:33

If this turns into one of those threads with everyone whining about things that won't possibly happen (such as reverting the PvP game back to Prophecies), it's going to go away.

Edit: Also, stop posting about Magic: The Gathering.

Bio-Flame · Nov 15, 2007, 12:49 AM // 00:49

Squid:

The point was: Magic was NOT balanced. Never. Ever. But that doesn't necessarily mean that it wasn't "fun" or "healthy".

Unbalanced=unhealthy ----> not true. At least, not always.

I think that sometimes, "too much" balance takes away the fun. Naturally, "too much" unbalance isn't fun neither.
Same thing as with GWs. Even if the game was at times less balanced than it was a couple of weeks ago, that doesn't mean it wasn't fun to play.

Example - one could argue that the meta before LoD nerf was "balanced". true. But one could also argue that is was boring to play in such a "block-block-block-block" metagame.

Melody Cross · Nov 15, 2007, 01:02 AM // 01:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by kvndoom

Oddly enough, though, GW PVP was at its peak before new skills / professions were added. The game was not stagnant because there were many more team builds that could be played successfully. Power creep has narrowed that number significantly, because if you don't bring the stronger skills, you get wiped. We could use Thumpers for an example. Compare any pre-Nightfall thumper build against Rampage. Enraged was nice DPS, Ferocious was good energy, but they still pale when compared to a skill that combines Frenzy and Sprint, cannot be removed, and has no drawback aside from its energy cost. Or look at LoD. The LoD nerf hurt people because power creep made the skill mandatory for successful GVG. In the Boon Prot days, a Monk's elite was energy management to power small heals and spot prots. Now a Monk's elite is either mega-defensive or a super-efficient heal.

People take the best skills, and inferior skills get left behind. Frenzy/Eviscerate/Executioner's will never get repalced because there's nothing better. Some builds using Dismember and a different elite see a little play, but not much. 3 games later, Anet could not create an axe skill better than Eviscerate that is still balanced. Decapitate at 10 adrenaline without the penalties might have been a good skill, but we'll never know. But the point is, as the game evolved, the amount of viable builds had to decrease because of power creep. Had GW1 seen another chapter or two, with a few hundred more skills and even more classes, I wouldn't be surprised to see it degrade to 4 monk backlines.

And this is where the circle starts. Half the community hates the skills bcause they say there are just too many to baalnce, the other half (or a small but vocal minority, its hard to tell) is screaming that the problem isn't too many skills, but too few playable ones.

The question isn't "whats the answer" as much as "how are we getting there"? If anyone has a serious answer to this, it'll be Izzy for better or worse. I don't envy his job. Nerf gimmickway, people gripe. Buff skills, more gimmickways show up...and other people gripe. And I guess thats why it seems that everyone gripes on forums: theres always someone from one camp or the other who gets shafted.

Personally, I blame the HA change and always have. It had started long before, but this is "the point" where I think the two communities merged until they are just separate camps of the same town. The old HA gave players a place to play in if all they wanted to run was gimmicks. It rewarded 8v8 mentality and memorization more than actual tactics. It rewarded gimmickplay, and the people who played in HA at that time enjoyed it so. Catering to GvGers and PvEers killed the HA arena...and the result is gimmickplayers migrating to other games or (much the case here) migrating to other PvP formats within GW. A la GvG.

So, even if this game were to ever reach a state of perfect balance in all skills, it would piss people off. What to do? How do you appease the gimmick players and keep GvG the Ferrari of PvP?

A suggestion for GW2: learn from your mistakes; and that statement includes everyone. Some people revel in gimmick. They like it, they want it, and they should have an arena for it no matter what YOU or I say on the matter (and I'll admit to enjoying some gimmick builds in HA back in its heyday). 2 arenas for 2 playerbases and tell the GvGers and PvEers to stuff it up their craw when they ask you to break someone else's' arena for their enjoyment. Otherwise, you get what we have now as quickly as its happened: one total joke of an arena, another one thats quickly sliding into credible oblivion and no one happy about any of it.

If I sound harsh in these statements, I apologize. I've...had a rare day.

GGs

TheOneMephisto · Nov 15, 2007, 01:09 AM // 01:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Melody Cross

stuff

To be honest, I don't really think that the majority of the GvG playerbase ever actively tried to get the HA change to be more tactics based. I mean, everyone knew that it was a horrible place abound with gimmicks and bad mechanics, but few people in GvG actually cared that much. GvG was and always would be the main PvP part of Guild Wars, and most people just accepted that HA would be a festering pit of chaos and degeneration.

I mean, I heard people giving suggestions on how they could make HA more tactically rewarding, on how to reduce the gimmicks and encourage more movement control and etc, but no one really pushed them that hard mainly because they'd rather go play GvG and just play HA as a downtime activity.

Bankai · Nov 15, 2007, 07:01 AM // 07:01

I think it's not the fact that a lot of people wanted Tactics in it, but that a lot of people wanted to get rid of the gimmicks. And the easiest way to beat a gimmick is with tactics, which is the most used counter in GvG. But there were no tactics in HA. So they implemented a couple, to get rid of gimmicks.

Which failed.