Guild Wars 2

The recent discussion about the “best” class mechanic made me think of a more objective way to measure the class mechanics.

The idea is that warriors have the highest base health, highest base armor but the most basic class mechanic. Health and Armor can be converted to vitality/toughness and classes “buy” their better class mechanic with these attribute points. The difference between high and medium/low health is worth 330/750 vitality and medium/low armor is worth 150/290 toughness. This gives the following ranking by cost from the cheapest to the most expensive mechanic:

• 0 points: Adrenaline and Burst Skill

• 290 points: Life Force, Death Shroud with 5 skills

• 490 points: Choice of two pets, one active; 1 active pet skill

• 490 points: 4 Toolbelt skills depending on heal/utilites; 1 weapon set, but Kits

• 620 points: 4 Shatter Skills; Illusions (Clones and Phantasms)

• 750 points: 3 Virtues with an passive and active effect

• 900 points: Initiative, Steal; Stealth and Stealth Skills (#1), #3 depends on both weapons

• 1040 points: 1 weapon set with 4 attunements (10 additional skills); Range-Locked, but Conjures

Italic Mechanics are strictly speaking not class mechanics, but are still an integral part of the class.

Do you think that the class mechanics are worth the cost? Which mechanics are overpriced/underpriced? Do you agree with that ranking? Have I missed something obvious? Discuss.

Edit: Because there is some confusion in the first few posts: It’s not only about survivability

I just used toughness/vitality as reference how I calculated the attribute cost of the class mechanics. It’s not only about survivability though. I just used the attribute points as measurement of how powerful the class mechanics are (or should be) compared to each other. For example: Are attunements really twice as powerful as the toolbelt skills?

Translating mechanics into raw stats can be a helpful tool for balancing. Somewhere in a balancing discussion a dev said that a GM trait is/should be worth about 300 attribute points. With the trait updates we see that exact number ingame: XIII: Force of Will: +300 Vitality.

While I understand the idea of ranking things with numbers (its something interesting to do in more simple games) I think profession mechanics using vitality/toughness is too simplistic to really capture the idea.

For example, Necromancer does not only pay 290 points for Death Shroud and its related mechanics, they pay 290 points, plus tying for worst mobility in the game (with Guardian), and having literally 0 ways (not including base dodge mechanic) to re-actively negate damage. So you don’t just give up the toughness compared to warriors, you give up a lot of mitigation.

Similar can be said of other professions, the give/take of the base mechanics of every profession are more complex than just giving up a bit off the vitality/toughness max for whatever profession mechanic they have.

Bhawb.7408:

While I understand the idea of ranking things with numbers (its something interesting to do in more simple games) I think profession mechanics using vitality/toughness is too simplistic to really capture the idea.

For example, Necromancer does not only pay 290 points for Death Shroud and its related mechanics, they pay 290 points, plus tying for worst mobility in the game (with Guardian), and having literally 0 ways (not including base dodge mechanic) to re-actively negate damage. So you don’t just give up the toughness compared to warriors, you give up a lot of mitigation.

Similar can be said of other professions, the give/take of the base mechanics of every profession are more complex than just giving up a bit off the vitality/toughness max for whatever profession mechanic they have.

I do think the same. Ill take ranger as an example. They might loosing some toughness/vitality but there is more, they “loose” ~30% of their dps by having their pet since in player versus player those pets cant hit. Even in pve, the pet is continuously trying to flank the enemy. So, if you move alot you might lower the dps of your pet by alot, to the point of achieving 0% extra dps before the enemy is dead.

That being said, same thing goes with ele, they loose lots of toughness vitality but gain ALOT of heals and sustain.

You cant simplify to toughness/vitality imo.

Updated the OP with that answer

I just used toughness/vitality as reference how I calculated the attribute cost of the class mechanics. It’s not only about survivability though. I just used the attribute points as measurement of how powerful the class mechanics are (or should be) compared to each other. For example: Are attunements really twice as powerful as the toolbelt skills?

Translating mechanics into raw stats can be a helpful tool for balancing. Somewhere in a balancing discussion a dev said that a GM trait is/should be worth about 300 attribute points. With the trait updates we see that exact number ingame: XIII: Force of Will: +300 Vitality.

Klonko.8341:

I do think the same. Ill take ranger as an example. They might loosing some toughness/vitality but there is more, they “loose” ~30% of their dps by having their pet since in player versus player those pets cant hit. Even in pve, the pet is continuously trying to flank the enemy. So, if you move alot you might lower the dps of your pet by alot, to the point of achieving 0% extra dps before the enemy is dead.

That being said, same thing goes with ele, they loose lots of toughness vitality but gain ALOT of heals and sustain.

You cant simplify to toughness/vitality imo.

I dont even know how to argue with the OP. The difference between heavy armor and light armor is only 16% damage migration for a glass cannon. The difference are much smaller if you add toughness. The fact that the OP included light/medium/heavy armor should be excluded since having access to a protect boon always trumps toughness. The real problem is the huge difference of vitality.

I am using someone elses numbers

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/it-should-not-have-defence-difference/first#post3675807

So how many points is the lack of weapon swap worth? And if you say we got optional kits/conjures then how many points is the used up utility slot worth?

Penguin.5197:

So how many points is the lack of weapon swap worth? And if you say we got optional kits/conjures then how many points is the used up utility slot worth?

The OP numbers is still a little bit too low. Engineers have to deal with the fact that their utilities are tied to the kits. They have even less choice overall.

pmnt.4067:

Updated the OP with that answer

I just used toughness/vitality as reference how I calculated the attribute cost of the class mechanics. It’s not only about survivability though. I just used the attribute points as measurement of how powerful the class mechanics are (or should be) compared to each other. For example: Are attunements really twice as powerful as the toolbelt skills?

Translating mechanics into raw stats can be a helpful tool for balancing. Somewhere in a balancing discussion a dev said that a GM trait is/should be worth about 300 attribute points. With the trait updates we see that exact number ingame: XIII: Force of Will: +300 Vitality.

With things like traits they should be held to a certain standard because they are balanced according to each other, not to the base mechanics.

For example, lets assume every profession needs to have 1000 units of base stats. This is the sum total of all the components that make up the profession, things that are hard-wired into the profession both tangible things like stats and profession mechanic, and intangibles like their access to boons/conditions. For Necromancer this is the base vitality/toughness totals, Death Shroud/Life Force and the related skills, the very high access to conditions of all kinds and ways to manipulate them, weak mitigation of damage, and low/selfish access to only a few select boons. Because without all those things summed together, every profession has different totals, for example Elementalists as you showed would have a lot of “strength” tied up in just their access to more weapon skills, when in fact their “strength” is tied up in their massive utility, DPS, support, etc.

So once a profession has its 1000 base stat units, it can be considered complete as a base. It has its own unique base that while different in use from another, is still balanced in overall power (in theory). Then comes in weapons and utilities, all of which should be balanced against each other within the class and against some overall unit total. You can arbitrarily assign some units to each and every one of the same type should reach that total. Traits are the easiest place to see this because they are quantified already, for example GM minors are around 180 or a 10% conversion. But you have to be sure you are quantifying everything that is involved in a certain total.

In your example, I’d use base stats, and then everything else, profession mechanic itself along with their things like boon access, because they draw from the same “base profession strength” pool.

loseridoit.2756:

The OP numbers is still a little bit too low. Engineers have to deal with the fact that their utilities are tied to the kits. They have even less choice overall.

I didn’t make up these numbers, enginieers just lack 490 attribute points in base stats compared to warrior. My interpretation is just that the class mechanic should somehow compensate for that 490 missing points.

If you are saying that 490 is too low, do you mean that the engi’s class mechanic does not seem worth 490 attribute points? That’s exactly the kind of discussion I’m looking for.

@loseridoit: The difference between light and heavy armor may only be 16%, but that’s about 50% protection uptime… which seems a lot to me.

@Bhawb: Okay, I silently assumed that the “sum of skills” is equally powerful on all classes, but with different weights on damage/condition/utility/support/etc. Do you think that a class compensates the lack of base stats by having overall better skills?

(I have to say, I enjoy this discussion way more than the 1000th “theif op, nerf plx” thread.)

Remember that there’s more to professions than the features you’ve listed. Access to boons, particularly those considered most important, also serve as balancing features. Skill coefficients also factor into profession balance. If you want to have a discussion about the specific features you list, go ahead, but do so in the awareness that you’re not getting the whole picture.

pmnt.4067:

@Bhawb: Okay, I silently assumed that the “sum of skills” is equally powerful on all classes, but with different weights on damage/condition/utility/support/etc. Do you think that a class compensates the lack of base stats by having overall better skills?

I think in some ways yes. Its not possible in my mind to directly draw the line between where base stats and profession mechanics end, and weapon/utility skills begin because of how innately tied together they are.

I think, based completely on my own speculations and I might be totally wrong, that it’d be weapon skills + profession mechanic + base stats = some standard of power. Most utility skills seem to have some consistency across professions, same with healing skills and elites, and of course traits.

pmnt.4067:

loseridoit.2756:

The OP numbers is still a little bit too low. Engineers have to deal with the fact that their utilities are tied to the kits. They have even less choice overall.

I didn’t make up these numbers, enginieers just lack 490 attribute points in base stats compared to warrior. My interpretation is just that the class mechanic should somehow compensate for that 490 missing points.

If you are saying that 490 is too low, do you mean that the engi’s class mechanic does not seem worth 490 attribute points? That’s exactly the kind of discussion I’m looking for.

@loseridoit: The difference between light and heavy armor may only be 16%, but that’s about 50% protection uptime… which seems a lot to me.

the 16% statement represents glass cannons. The number gets lower in wvwvw to something like 8% in wvwvw when a heavy has 3000 overall toughness and light has around 2750respectively.

I use there numbers because I am lazy to calculate the absolute max so I pretend both armor types add 867 toughness due to armor and special traits

base def + base level 80 toughness + amour toughness and other traits

heavy

1217 + 916 + 867 = 3000

light

967 + 916 + 867 = 2750

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Armor#Defense_rating

A defense boon bring much more defense than any armor difference. There is a reason why a boonless ele is a dead ele.

There are problems with the game. Debates about stats differences between light, medium and heavy are pointless.

However, if ele do manage to receive a vitality buff, they might see plenty of nerfs with healing and boon access.

@Bwahb/IndigoSundown: I thought about it, and yes, you are right. “stat-deficit = class mechanic” is a bit too simple.

Take necro for example. Death Shroud seems a bit powerful for 290 points. They have to pay for that with underaverage skills. The guardian’s virtues seem lackluster for 750 points, but they have access to overall better skills (especially utilities). It makes sense. ANet probably put more brain power into class balance than we’re usually giving them credit for

@loseridoit: Okay, I just used your 16% quickly and didn’t consider thoughness stacking – I’m more of a PvE-er. But what you said is the exact reason why PvE is so Berserker-centric: A few boons or defensive traits or a well-used cooldown bring so much more survivablility than changing the whole gear from Berserker to Knight/Soldier/Nomad. But I don’t think that’s a bad thing at all.

I agree on what you said about the ele, but I still think that 750 is a huge vitality gap and it’s really hard to balance that out. A range of 3000 HP/300 vit (between high and low HP) would have been enough and comparable to the difference in defense/toughness.

pmnt.4067:

@loseridoit: Okay, I just used your 16% quickly and didn’t consider thoughness stacking – I’m more of a PvE-er. But what you said is the exact reason why PvE is so Berserker-centric: A few boons or defensive traits or a well-used cooldown bring so much more survivablility than changing the whole gear from Berserker to Knight/Soldier/Nomad. But I don’t think that’s a bad thing at all.

I agree on what you said about the ele, but I still think that 750 is a huge vitality gap and it’s really hard to balance that out. A range of 3000 HP/300 vit (between high and low HP) would have been enough and comparable to the difference in defense/toughness.

Yep, an ele with a protect boon is tankier than a warrior who doesnt have good access.

I think you are measuring classes inappropriately.

I believe classes have lower base vitality have more better survivability then the rest of the classes. Please Note: the primary heal has always been consistent, most classes main heal for 1/4-1/3 the base health. The secondary heals tend to define the good healing aspect of the class

For a guard and ele, their base vitality is low so anet designed them with much better healing, sustain, and protection. I actually believe these classes are strong because their base is so dam low. They can justify their powerful abilities.

For medium health profession

Thevies and Mesmer are not really designed to get hit at all

Engineers suspect able to CC and conditions

Ranger, well the class design sucks. Anet please fix them

For high health classes

The warrior is an oddity, because historically they do not have any proper sustain and has to rely on their teammates. When anet finally gave them proper condition clears and a decent heal, they are became OP.

Necro, they are dependent on their death shroud. They have no proper access to self defense boons.