Curse

Melf_Himself · Jun 01, 2007, 06:03 AM // 06:03

Every single person discussing this issue is wasting their time. Let me explain why:

1) The easiest way to balance the game is for both teams to have exactly the same build.

2) Introducing multiple viable builds introduces more and more complexity into the balancing process.

3) With the number of classes and skills currently in Guild Wars and the way the game is played, this has escalated to a point where it is impossible to achieve a state of satisfactory balance without dramatically reworking, or completely removing, literally 50% of the classes in the game (the 'button-mashing' classes)

4) ANet is not going to bother doing either of these things.

5) Therefore the metagame will never get stale. There will always be gimmicks that people will exploit to win over teams that have more skill than them. Therefore wuzzman's concerns are unfounded.

6) The people that are replying to wuzzman reliving the glory days of pre-factions balance builds are deluding themselves since, as I said, ANet is never going to return us to those days, as it would require too large a time investment on their part. Additionally, it would deeply upset the less skilled PvP players, which constitute the majority of their player base, which would be a pretty dumb business move.

So all of you stop whining, thanks.

P.S. Starcraft != Guild Wars

lord of shadow · Jun 01, 2007, 08:20 AM // 08:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Melf_Himself

The easiest way to balance the game is for both teams to have exactly the same build.

Since when did easiest=only?

Genova · Jun 01, 2007, 08:22 AM // 08:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Melf_Himself

Every single person discussing this issue is wasting their time. Let me explain why:

1) The easiest way to balance the game is for both teams to have exactly the same build.

2) Introducing multiple viable builds introduces more and more complexity into the balancing process.

3) With the number of classes and skills currently in Guild Wars and the way the game is played, this has escalated to a point where it is impossible to achieve a state of satisfactory balance without dramatically reworking, or completely removing, literally 50% of the classes in the game (the 'button-mashing' classes)

4) ANet is not going to bother doing either of these things.

5) Therefore the metagame will never get stale. There will always be gimmicks that people will exploit to win over teams that have more skill than them. Therefore wuzzman's concerns are unfounded.

6) The people that are replying to wuzzman reliving the glory days of pre-factions balance builds are deluding themselves since, as I said, ANet is never going to return us to those days, as it would require too large a time investment on their part. Additionally, it would deeply upset the less skilled PvP players, which constitute the majority of their player base, which would be a pretty dumb business move.

So all of you stop whining, thanks.

P.S. Starcraft != Guild Wars

QFT.

If we want to have all the classes (or builds) balanced a huge amount of work have to be done. The mechanics of the new classes and whatever amount of interesting variation they offer to the game seems to not have been evaluated beforehand. This reminds me of WoW balance : fun mechanics but broken from the start.

Most posters here already explained in substance what is a balanced build and why it works that way. And yes r/p/s is a viable choice for a competitive game as long as there are meaningful counters for each strategy and you are not gimped because of your build, you should always have a way to win by changing tactics / strategy.

Unfortunately we should realise that the incredible amount of skill variety (hex, condition, heal, degen, physical damage, elemental damage, enchantment, regen, health gain, health loss, disruption, interrupt, stances, attack, spellcast, signet, skill use, energy, adrenaline, etc...) makes it impossible to counter them all in the same build with only 64 skills, without assuming that a certain skillset is balanced. Hence the justification of the balanced build providing a standard of good, interesting and rewarding gameplay.

If there were a hard line and a strong definition for each class, a lot of problems could be avoided. Actually it is a mess and there is a lot of overlapping (I am personaly disgusted of mesmerish abilities given to other classes). Futhermore, if there was no mean for the players to choose a secondary profession, it would be easier to balance the game, but that's not the case. The abuse of other classes secondary professions is the perfect demonstration of lack strong class definition.

Other problems are broken mechanics like : shouts who stacks, cast instantly and are unremovable ; shadow steps without significant drawback (offensive or defensive) ; spirits (passive gameplay) ; aoe enchantments and hexes (aegis, blurred vision) when you have mostly single hex and enchantment removal skills ; immunity (avatar of melandru, spellbreaker) without significant drawback ; soulreaping (do I need to explain why ?). All this makes a game unbalancable, and that's why Guild Wars is doomed, Arena.Net will never adress these issues. However there is still hope, Fury is in beta and Starcraft 2 is in progress.

wuzzman · Jun 01, 2007, 11:17 AM // 11:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by RaZoO

I've played quite a few matches where both teams carried the exact same template (2 Warriors, 1 Ranger, 1 Mesmer, 2 Eles, 2 Monks) with only a 4-5 skill difference. The game was not stale AT ALL. It often ends in 5-10 minuted MAX. (This is against good teams, not your average rank 1000 team.

Your argument is not only flawed, it's wrong. Had you played with and against a balanced build and good players you would realize that these games are not stale at all. Of course, all you seem to have played is tombs. What can you expect.

Thats because YOU OR YOUR OPPONENT WAS THE BETTER TEAM. The skill gap between players often accounts for quicker matchers. When players of equal skill fight each other however it is usually a much longer match. lord of shadow, the accepted build for balance does have a counter. For the simple fact that a balance team believe it or not can not prepare for everything is why they are counters to accepted view of a balance team because balance teams have different prioties defense wise and offense wise. Again the reason why people call the current meta unbalanced, is because teams are not going to priotize hex's. It doesn't really make sense in the ladder, especially in the uper tiers, to bring expel's and divert hex's, when the chances of facing that build is basicly dice roll. Basicly, if I'm rock, and you bring paper, why should I bring scissors, when someone else can beat me easy with rock? Just ban the paper, so I don't have to worry about bringing scissors.

Blame the Monks · Jun 01, 2007, 01:13 PM // 13:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by wuzzman

When players of equal skill fight each other however it is usually a much longer match.

You spent too much time in tombs. In real pvp, people don't run 24356256236 spirit spammers, 325624352345 monks, bonders, wards, aegis chains, weapon rits, and a spike that does 500 damage without deep wound. In real pvp, even equally skilled teams with the same build can win or lose quickly based on tactics or other factors.

minor · Jun 01, 2007, 01:39 PM // 13:39

The mods can let this go on forever if they want but its pointless. The OP has made up his mind and no matter what logic or arguements you present hes just going to keep saying hes right. Good players know that balanced run by the best teams should beat any scrub gimmick in a perfect game. QQ this thread.

Patrograd · Jun 02, 2007, 09:10 AM // 09:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by wuzzman

Again the reason why people call the current meta unbalanced, is because teams are not going to priotize hex's. .

This isn't the case at all

The meta is imbalanced when players can win games against better teams because their build is so strong and probably tailored to thier home map that through relatively skill-less "cast and forget" - button mashing - they can overwhelm everything the better team tries to do. When the skills on your bar are so strong that, especially when allied to your map choice they counter the skillful application of skills and strategy of your better opponents *then* the game is imbalanced.

It is important to understand why this is bad for the game. Good players dont want to play in an environment where they will lose to lesser players, and in fact lose before the gates open. As a result, good players leave the game.

Because lesser players understand that if they run a certain build they will win more games and score "impressive" victories against famous teams there is no incentive for them to run anything other than an imbalanced build. Such builds do not promote skillful play, and as a result there are no or at least very, very few new skilled players being developed in the lower tiers of the game to replace the good players that are leaving the game at the top end.

The result you are left with is a standard of gameplay which is considerably weaker than it was 12-15 months ago. It is better now than it has been for a little while, but there is still a long way to go before the meta is truly competitive again.

Farin · Jun 02, 2007, 09:30 AM // 09:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blame the Monks

You spent too much time in tombs. In real pvp, people don't run 24356256236 spirit spammers, 325624352345 monks, bonders, wards, aegis chains, weapon rits, and a spike that does 500 damage without deep wound. In real pvp, even equally skilled teams with the same build can win or lose quickly based on tactics or other factors.

That is pretty much what I meant. Maybe if you took part in actual high end gvg you'd realize.

Melf_Himself · Jun 04, 2007, 06:53 AM // 06:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patrograd

It is important to understand why this is bad for the game. Good players dont want to play in an environment where they will lose to lesser players, and in fact lose before the gates open. As a result, good players leave the game.

...

The result you are left with is a standard of gameplay which is considerably weaker than it was 12-15 months ago. It is better now than it has been for a little while, but there is still a long way to go before the meta is truly competitive again.

Bad for the game is a relative thing. Bad for you or I, yes. Bad for NCSoft as a business venture? No.

Bear in mind that there are a constant flow of people leaving this game, and a constant flow starting to play this game. NCSoft's one and only goal must be to maximise the equation:

Rate of inflow - rate of outflow = $$$

Sure they can make decisions that seem dumb to the PvP community, which will cause an increased trickle in the rate of people leaving the game. But as long as word spreads among the 10 year old kiddies that zomg my NINJAZOR just wtf pwnzzd all!!!~1111, the rate of inflow will far exceed this.

ANet will make balances to keep you (ie, the PvP community) as happy as possible, but not at risk to the majority of their fanbase.

Yes the game could in theory be perfectly balanced, but ANet won't do it. Therefore as I already stated, you are all wasting your time discussing this.

sir lockt · Jun 04, 2007, 06:55 AM // 06:55

/agree with Blame the Monks,

I think the mistake made in this post is to assume a "balanced build" is something similar only. There is a lot of balance in GW, unfortunately this balance is disturbed by a few skills. The wish list is an excellent platform to discuss the possibilities to increase game balance a bit.

Stale games only excist when teams "unbalance" their build like e.g. loading to much defense in it and thus being unable to kill something, while they are unkillable. Still it isnt impossible to force kills. Your ability to enforce kills by changing tactics is what makes you balanced. True, mirror builds will reveal the differences in tactics and its advantages, but there is much more in the game and superior tactics can make so much difference and personal skill does as well.

Balance becomes a problem when superior tactics and skill will lose from a superior build, for (As anet stated themselves) this is not the goal of this game.

To avoid confusion you might want to change the word "balanced build" to a "multi-purpose" or "fit-to-improvise" build. From my point of view a build is balanced when you have options to adjust your usual tactics on the role. So if you bring a 123 spike build, you are still balanced if you can succesfully split when you cannot force kills with spike, or where you can outpressure, gank or whatever if your "usual-trick" doesnt work.

Patrograd · Jun 04, 2007, 07:23 AM // 07:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by sir lockt

/
To avoid confusion you might want to change the word "balanced build" to a "multi-purpose" or "fit-to-improvise" build. From my point of view a build is balanced when you have options to adjust your usual tactics on the role. So if you bring a 123 spike build, you are still balanced if you can succesfully split when you cannot force kills with spike, or where you can outpressure, gank or whatever if your "usual-trick" doesnt work.

It used to be said that a balanced build consisted of a series of "toolbox" characters, characters who's skillbar comprised various "tools", essentially utility skills, that could be applied in different ways in a variety of situations to counter whatever it was that the other team was doing as long as you used the right "tool" at the right time to solve the right threat.

I dont think its quite as simple as the build being able to split, spike and pressure, "a true balanced build" is a bit more sophisticated than that imo