Curse

Burton2000 · Mar 02, 2008, 03:33 PM // 15:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by RhanoctJocosa

5e 3s gale pls

Yay for more spike.

Winstar · Mar 02, 2008, 03:56 PM // 15:56

I don't see the reasons for the gale change. Sees a lot of play as it is and a 5e 3 sec kd is too much. Its just too much of a low skill means of creating an opportunity to kill or as a snare at that level compared to other means of doing so (bulls, etc). Why exactly is this needed?

Boogz · Mar 02, 2008, 04:07 PM // 16:07

basically , you want to kill every single skill from the other campaigns and bring back boonprot.
turn all skills in the game back into their original form , its easier :/

Dzan · Mar 02, 2008, 04:48 PM // 16:48

I have no problems making Core/Prophecies skills the dominant force again. Try playing a Prophecies only scrimmage if you have some friendly guilds who are interested, it really is much more fun.

Remember when A-net did the Factions only tournament? Why not treat the expansions like that always? One month all the ATs and mAT will be prophecies only, next month core/factions only and next core/nightfall only. How about a mAT where the elimination rounds are done Seal Deck?

"Limited" formats work in pretty much every competitive card game. In Magic the Gathering, most tournament formats are either some form of sealed deck or draft, or constructed formats based on a limited pool of sets to draw from. I don't believe the Vintage (every card ever made allowed from any set) has ever been played on the Pro Tour, and not just for cost reasons.

I think "unlimited" play in Guild Wars should be relegated to HA and ladder GVGs. High end GVG play ought to be about alternative formats that challenge guilds' abilities to create new, unconventional builds. Not to mention, since you will only have a mAT for a particular format once every 4 months at best, you don't have to worry about the meta getting stale.

Additionally, this will help for individual skill balance, as Izzy will have 3+ months to figure out how to balance a degenerate skill. Lets say a Factions only mAT is absolutely dominated by one build, Izzy will have several months to implement a tested, balanced solution to the issue before it is a problem again.

Neo-LD · Mar 02, 2008, 04:51 PM // 16:51

I support this. I would come back and play again if this were implemented. Some of the changes dont make a ton of sense in a vacuum, but if you actually consider all the changes within the context of the vision that shapes the entire OP, theres no doubt that this set of changes would dramatically improve the game. I particularly approve of the suggested changes to Curses, Gale, Blackout, and the castration of Sins and Paragons.

The only part I really disagreed with was the part about Boon prots. Monk design (specifically, the seperation of heal and prot) is one of the few things that has been improved since Prophecies. Many people are beholden to BoonProt monks because they were so powerful in an era where nothing else was. But make no mistake, Boon Prots are to monking what Melandru Dervs are to frontlining. Do not bring Boon back.

Heinrich · Mar 02, 2008, 05:09 PM // 17:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dzan

"Limited" formats work in pretty much every competitive card game. In Magic the Gathering, most tournament formats are either some form of sealed deck or draft, or constructed formats based on a limited pool of sets to draw from. I don't believe the Vintage (every card ever made allowed from any set) has ever been played on the Pro Tour, and not just for cost reasons.

I think "unlimited" play in Guild Wars should be relegated to HA and ladder GVGs. High end GVG play ought to be about alternative formats that challenge guilds' abilities to create new, unconventional builds. Not to mention, since you will only have a mAT for a particular format once every 4 months at best, you don't have to worry about the meta getting stale.

Bingo !!!!!!!!!

Lorekeeper · Mar 02, 2008, 05:10 PM // 17:10

Iirc boon prots were removed from play because there were no other monk builds being run... which necessitated the buffing of other monk elites and the nerfing of the boon prot to artificially shift the 'stale backline' meta into new directions (that was one of the first steps down the slippery road of Anets skill balance policy - to nerf and buff in order to shift metas). All that was needed was to buff alternative elite options, specifically in the healing lines so that people could choose to run something that suited them or suited the meta... now that has happened somewhat, boon prots could be buffed back into some form of viability. Maybe not to the same level as before, but even if they were, i have some doubts as to whether they would become as dominant today as they were before, simply because of things like WoH and RC.

At the very least, if boon prots were reintroduced and did not become dominant backline meta, the option to run them would make for a closer step towards the type balance alot of players desire (metas that evolve out of a skill balance that provides options rather than metas that evolve out of skill imbalances that remove options or give glaringly obvious ones).

Kaon · Mar 02, 2008, 06:33 PM // 18:33

This is probably the best post on gwg and the best post regarding balance ive EVER seen. It almost exactly encompasses my vision together with the visions of many "old" players. I can understand some people may not grasp certain nerfs or buffs because they haven't been around this long, but sleep a night over it and you might understand.

There's a few issues i would've brought up as well but they're inferior as they will come in time once Izzy would've finally embraced a concrete vision like this about the game.

This post needs to get all possible support, and to be rubbed in Izzy's nose with undebatable evidence that this is the right thing to do.

Ledah · Mar 02, 2008, 08:12 PM // 20:12

Email it to him every day?

Snow Bunny · Mar 02, 2008, 09:07 PM // 21:07

For all of you downplaying Gus' suggestion to essentially revert us back to April of '06, why not?

The meta was nicer back then.

X Cytherea X · Mar 02, 2008, 10:03 PM // 22:03

wow, it would be really boring. late '06 - early '07 was better

Shuuda · Mar 02, 2008, 10:06 PM // 22:06

Well, any balance that gets rid of instagib sins and Passive defence Paragons has gotta be good......right?

DreamWind · Mar 02, 2008, 10:22 PM // 22:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank Dudenstein

Gus that was quite a lengthy post. For those of you that didn't make it through the whole thing, let me recap in a more concise format:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy Gus
Delete Factions, Nightfall, EotN and revert every skill balance since April 2006

See ... much easier.

No, THIS was the best gwg post regarding balance I've ever seen.

Trylo · Mar 02, 2008, 10:49 PM // 22:49

im glad to see as im reading this the count is 28 other members viewing this thread. it should be read and is a good assessment of what should happen.

however, im not too sure with a few of your profession changes, more notably necro... you advocate taking away hex stacks but you want new hexes that can shut down a certain class? i see how it would seem they are proactive but im not content with one class being able to so easily shut down 2 or 3 enemies (atrophy the ele/mes, meekness the monk... sit there...). i know they were probably just random suggestions, but i do not see this as being a good change.

edit: making necro hexes end when another hex is cast makes it a choice between mes and necro on a team

DutchSmurf · Mar 02, 2008, 10:50 PM // 22:50

The first half of the OP was great, the "Fix/Remove Problem Professions/Attributes" was unrealistic. With that in mind, it sadly made the complete post unrealistic since the first part without the second part happening won't do much good. Which is too bad, since I liked most parts of the post.

Mr Emu · Mar 02, 2008, 11:07 PM // 23:07

Anet. Head. Ass. Out. Now.

Vaga · Mar 02, 2008, 11:19 PM // 23:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winstar

I don't see the reasons for the gale change. Sees a lot of play as it is and a 5e 3 sec kd is too much. Its just too much of a low skill means of creating an opportunity to kill or as a snare at that level compared to other means of doing so (bulls, etc). Why exactly is this needed?

He said 5e OR 3s KD. So 5e means you can run it on a warrior, 3s KD basically means mesmers will also use it and it becomes a really strong skill again.

Winstar · Mar 02, 2008, 11:37 PM // 23:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vaga

He said 5e OR 3s KD. So 5e means you can run it on a warrior, 3s KD basically means mesmers will also use it and it becomes a really strong skill again.

misread the 'or' as an 'and', my bad. Still not sure why either motivation is good or necessary, though I know there was another thread discussing this which I'd have to look back at instead of dredging up all of it again here.

Almighty Zi · Mar 02, 2008, 11:45 PM // 23:45

Great post Gus.

I'm really a fan of bringing risk back into the game and getting rid of highly durable compressed bars and always available hard resses.

The only thing I would be wary of is putting gale back to 3 seconds KD. 3 seconds KD on both monks during a spike is pretty harsh.

Kaon · Mar 02, 2008, 11:54 PM // 23:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by DutchSmurf

The first half of the OP was great, the "Fix/Remove Problem Professions/Attributes" was unrealistic. With that in mind, it sadly made the complete post unrealistic since the first part without the second part happening won't do much good. Which is too bad, since I liked most parts of the post.

The changes are absolutely realistic technically. The big question is:

When will Izzy change his mindset to a concrete form of rewarding skillful play, as seen in earlier meta's notably in 2005 and 2006.

If that change of mindset is realistic, then these changes are only a matter of time. If Izzy doesn't change his mindset... well, quite frankly then he just fails at his job and Anet needs to hire someone else.

Oh, and for the ones scared of gale: That skill's been like that for 2 years without too harsh problems. And in 8v8 situations it isn't much better than shock (no damage, longer cast time). It's just much better in split and therefore adds more risk/reward in splitting (which also means more complex strategy and more skillful play), which is a good thing. This has been said a million times over again, just as about everything else in the OP, but many people (including Izzy himself) just don't seem to grasp it.

Monks traditionally never were key in stopping a spike, the support always was.