Guild Wars 2

If you nerf every class into the ground you start to accomplish the opposite of what you wanted in the first place; build diversity. Nerfing becomes counterintuitive while buffing would allow for more variety, focus on the weaker traits, and the useless traits.

Edit: just so everyone is clear, a buff does not necessarily imply an increase in damage.

Yes buff some other weapons or skills that are not used often.

Agreed, there’s a lot of underperforming traits/skills/runes/sigils etc. in the game. Lot of those was quite good in the beta/shortly after release, but was nerfed to the ground. That’s really limiting the build diversity, which is the strongest factor in how to make the game interesting to the playerbase imho.

Nerfing is generally better than buffing, though you need to do both – nerf what’s too good and buff what’s too weak. If you don’t nerf things which are too good, they will always be dominate and overshadow alternatives. Buffing everything to match the top takes longer, is harder to get right, and is counter-productive because it dilutes everything and creates an “arms race”.

They have to tune outliers on both ends, that’s the only sensible way to do it. That said, they do not put enough energy into tweaking underperforming skills in a lot of cases.

Jelzouki.4128:

If you nerf every class into the ground you start to accomplish the opposite of what you wanted in the first place; build diversity.

How so?

If you got 4 classes with power level 3, 4 with power level 5, you can nerf to power level 3, everyone balanced. Or buff to power level 5, everyone balanced.

How you choose depends on a few other factors, though:

• Lifetime expectancy you’re aiming for.
• PvE difficulty you’re aiming for.
• Importance of combat initiative (as an addendum, certain skills like Stealth become stronger or weapon the more or less important initiative is).
• Relative power of binary skills which interact with the other combat skills versus those who don’t. Example, stronger arrows with the same HP make reflects stronger, but not Portal.

But really, assuming those outside factors don’t weight in to the specific choice, what does it matter?

The title of this thread is exactly what I have been saying for so long.

+11111111111111111111111111111111 to OP.

Okay to all those who support the OP’s idea:

MMO rule #1 – If instead if toning down some skills/things etc, you are buffing everything else, you lose contact with the world around you, causing people to be able to faceroll any PvE content, to the point of playing naked.

Source: Long time MMO history of: WoW, RIFT, LOTRO, SWTOR, etc etc…

I think the major problem is that there are many more voices over something being OP, and in need of a nerf, than there is of something UP that needs a buff.

You’ll find that there are many threads of “X class is way OP please nerf”, then “Y skill/profession isn’t very good, and could use a buff.” While there are some of each, the more vocal ones are how X,Y,Z needs to be nerfed.

I agree that there should be more buffs to certain skills, on certain professions, like more necro buffs, but generally any suggestion to buff something is met with the cries of “It’s too OP as it is!! No buff, nerf!!” and Anet DOES take these suggestions into consideration, and tends to act according to the vocal minority, rather then the more reasonable, level toned, suggestions.

“stop balancing, start power creeping” -jelzouki.4128 2014

Just going to leave this here for you, these guys are great:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bxszx60ZwGw

The best thing Anet should do is to split up all Skills, Traits, Sigils and Runes between PvE, PvP and WvW Versions.

This way can get every game mode focused on balance wise specifically, without that certain changes to a skill ruin the skill for another mode, while the changes make it again for another mode totally overpowered on the other side.
That has been already a huge problem for ANet in GW1, which is why they started very late to split up the Skills in PvE and PvP Versions.
I don’t know, why ANet hasn’t made this here also too from begion on.

It would make their life so much easier, if they could make balance nerfs without having to look upon the skills for each game mode at the same time, but you just make their changes they want to do, beign ensure, that the change will also change only the gameplay of the skill there, where the change was intended to be, without affectign automatically everything else also too and that in most cases negatively, than positively sadly …

I do agree about it, that the game has tons of runes/sigils, traits and skills, which are totally useless either, or underpowered compared to some way more useful/powerful alternatives , which need to get looked at finally.
Alot of stuff could get merged in this game when it comes down to traits, sigils, runes and utility skills especially to make space for some new traits/utilities that could be more useful/fun to use and could create some new build variety…

Two of the games classes are in a really dire need of getting redesigned – the Ranger and the Thief, due to being not very well thought out and makign not really full usage of their real potentials.

Theres the whole underwater combat systenm, thats so much crap, that Anet even went do far to basically nearly completely remove it out of the game, rather than to go fix this unbalanced piece of junk and make underwater combats in general more fun to play together with adding completely separate underwater traits for all the classes.

Adding more Weapon Options with new Weapon KSilsl could also help in increasign not only just build varity of all classes, but also to balance classes out more for the various situations…

Adding Sub Classes to all classes could not just only improve massively the Character Progression of GW2, which lacks completely since 2 years, but it could help the Devs also in general for overall class balancing …

Reducing the amount of Stats from 9 to 6 by merging Damage with Condition Damage, Vitality with Healing Power and Ferocity with Boon Duration for example would also make overall game balancing alot easier around Stats, because you would have to consider alot lesser stat combinations from equipment sets for class balancing

Redesigning the Condition System is in my opinion also a heavy thign ANet needs to consider, if they want to ever reach a good game balance for any game mode.
Its somethign that needs to be considered also to work differently for each game mode,
Conditions in WvW should not work exactly the same, like for example in SPvP, because obviously you have in WvW alot more players that can spam you full with all conditions in a matter of seconds and keep you spammed full ,so that using any condi removals there in large combats is mostly useless
Conditions need to be integrated more into the Strengths and Weaknesses of each
There shouldnt be condi removals, which can simply cure every condition.
Every condi removal skill should be able to cure only some very specific conditions like for example that that thief healing skill cures only burn and poison.
here there should be options for skill specific traits to change the effetcs of the skills.
You want that your thief’s healing skill should not cure burn and poison, but for example cure no conditions, but should reload therefore 20% faster, then you should be able to customize this way ypour build for a 20% faster reloadign healing stealth skil, that therefore cures no conditions anymore.

Or you want that the skill should be able to work as Stun Breaker and cure also torment, then the skill would have for example a 20% longer recharge time, or therefore heal 20% lesser health.

Thats the kind of stuff, that needs also to happen to give players better build options and lettign become build varity also more flexible for everyone.
The whole trait system is way too much restrictive.

I just hope, we will see more bigger imprvements to all those related systms, if Anet wakes finally up and does something significantly more for the horizontal Character Progression of GW2, if you think about it, that this was this forums very first CDI topic

They need to do both. Just buffing results in power creep and we’re no better off because instead of a nonstop cycle of nerfs we end up with a nonstop cycle of buffs. It’s actually more detrimental because the all buffs approach to game design tends to remove individual class identity (something this game doesn’t have much of to begin with).

Atherakhia.4086:

class identity (something this game doesn’t have much of to begin with).

sure it does
do cm with and without a thief
do non-wor cheese lupi with and without a mes
do fractals with and without a guard
do a gvg with and without warriors
do a jumping puzzle beside a rifle engi or a mes
get 25 might with and without engi/war/ele/guard

youre confusing generally low skill floor for a lack of class identity

It is still too early to say “stop nerf”, but it is also true that there are too many things that need improvement.

Let’s uh. Let’s look at the last patch’s balance changes.

Elemental buff
Lesser Elemental buff
Magnetic Shield buff
Slick Shoes buff
Super Speed buff
Toss Elixir H fix
Toss Elixir C fix
Retreat buff
Bane signet buff
Maim the Disillusioned buff
Death Shroud fix/buff
Necrotic Grasp buff
Life Siphon buff
Point Blank Shot nerf
All Venoms buffed
Crushing Blow buffed
Tremor buffed

One nerf. Three fixes. Twelve buffs.

Sarrs.4831:

Let’s uh. Let’s look at the last patch’s balance changes.

Elemental buff
Lesser Elemental buff
Magnetic Shield buff
Slick Shoes buff
Super Speed buff
Toss Elixir H fix
Toss Elixir C fix
Retreat buff
Bane signet buff
Maim the Disillusioned buff
Death Shroud fix/buff
Necrotic Grasp buff
Life Siphon buff
Point Blank Shot nerf
All Venoms buffed
Crushing Blow buffed
Tremor buffed

One nerf. Three fixes. Twelve buffs.

Needed buff>number of buff. They were no nerfs that I know of.

point black shot got nerfed slightly with a windup-time and obvious animation.
tbh, it does not really impact the flow of LB skills, and tpvp players have something new to consider when planning their dodges. Nothing else got changed from the skill

not really a nerf, just a balance-adjustment

Yelloweyedemon.2860:

Okay to all those who support the OP’s idea:

MMO rule #1 – If instead if toning down some skills/things etc, you are buffing everything else, you lose contact with the world around you, causing people to be able to faceroll any PvE content, to the point of playing naked.

Source: Long time MMO history of: WoW, RIFT, LOTRO, SWTOR, etc etc…

We’ve always been able to do that. I’ve solod Arah P3 naked a year ago and I was much worse of a player than I am now.

Sarrs.4831:

Let’s uh. Let’s look at the last patch’s balance changes.

Elemental buff
Lesser Elemental buff
Magnetic Shield buff
Slick Shoes buff
Super Speed buff
Toss Elixir H fix
Toss Elixir C fix
Retreat buff
Bane signet buff
Maim the Disillusioned buff
Death Shroud fix/buff
Necrotic Grasp buff
Life Siphon buff
Point Blank Shot nerf
All Venoms buffed
Crushing Blow buffed
Tremor buffed

One nerf. Three fixes. Twelve buffs.

The sad part about these “buffs” is that many were not necessary, and they had to be released as part of a “feature patch”. We only saw two of those this year.

insanemaniac.2456:

“stop balancing, start power creeping” -jelzouki.4128 2014

Please take your negativity that’s not backed by reason elsewhere.

Exedore.6320:

Nerfing is generally better than buffing, though you need to do both – nerf what’s too good and buff what’s too weak. If you don’t nerf things which are too good, they will always be dominate and overshadow alternatives. Buffing everything to match the top takes longer, is harder to get right, and is counter-productive because it dilutes everything and creates an “arms race”.

It won’t create an arms race though. The goal intended is make every class effective at every role. A great example is the warrior. A warrior is effective at every role in tpvp. Bunker, condi, DPs, support cc etc.

If every class was effective at these roles then choosing a composition in tpvp would not limit teams to certain classes. Constantly nerfing will time and time again limit your class to what they are capable of doing effectively. There obviously has to be a sense of balance to this concept but that is not our job, its arena nets job to balance it, or let the pros test it and give them feedback!

Jelzouki.4128:

insanemaniac.2456:

“stop balancing, start power creeping” -jelzouki.4128 2014

Please take your negativity that’s not backed by reason elsewhere.

What negativity? He is being factually. It is the logically reason not to buff certain aspects. If your going to brand everyone who disagrees with you, based on realities of the situation, you shouldn’t have opened the discussion.

i was thinking they should add some new weapons that balance well with unused skills/traits like on my engineer we cant run heavy gadget builds because they dont bring anywhere near the amount of stuff kit builds can bring so if they made a weapon that could bounce well with the gadgets they could effectivly buff gadget builds without buffing other builds while still adding something new to the game

insanemaniac.2456:

“stop balancing, start power creeping” -jelzouki.4128 2014

There is a difference between buffing and power creeping.

@OP:

Because some specs are over the top. Right now in PvP, engi and ele are stupidly OP. They need an adjustment down.

yolo swaggins.2570:

insanemaniac.2456:

“stop balancing, start power creeping” -jelzouki.4128 2014

There is a difference between buffing and power creeping.

op is calling for an end to nerfs (which implies that any changes should be buffs)
that is power creep

insanemaniac.2456:

yolo swaggins.2570:

insanemaniac.2456:

“stop balancing, start power creeping” -jelzouki.4128 2014

There is a difference between buffing and power creeping.

op is calling for an end to nerfs (which implies that any changes should be buffs)
that is power creep

I don’t usually(ever) agree with this guy cuz lol traited bombs no precise sights dungeon build and other stuff..BUT he makes a fair point!

All buff no nerf is power creep! Nerfs remove stuff from meta/viability but balancing by buffs is never a good idea! Sooner or later you get so much over the top it gets gamebreaking.

The game needs shavings and slight buffs but given the tactic anet employs it goes like “x is popular nerf, y is unpopular buff” which is worse than any of the other choices. Balance should be done around risk/reward not popularity contests.

Sagat.3285:

Needed buff>number of buff. They were no nerfs that I know of.

That’s kind of the point of these buffs; they weren’t ‘needed’. They’re skills which aren’t significant elements of the meta at all, so they can be safely played with without worrying too much.

Jelzouki.4128:

The sad part about these “buffs” is that many were not necessary, and they had to be released as part of a “feature patch”. We only saw two of those this year.

They were not released as part of a feature pack. They were released with the new episode of living story.

Jelzouki.4128:

Sarrs.4831:

Let’s uh. Let’s look at the last patch’s balance changes.

Elemental buff
Lesser Elemental buff
Magnetic Shield buff
Slick Shoes buff
Super Speed buff
Toss Elixir H fix
Toss Elixir C fix
Retreat buff
Bane signet buff
Maim the Disillusioned buff
Death Shroud fix/buff
Necrotic Grasp buff
Life Siphon buff
Point Blank Shot nerf
All Venoms buffed
Crushing Blow buffed
Tremor buffed

One nerf. Three fixes. Twelve buffs.

The sad part about these “buffs” is that many were not necessary, and they had to be released as part of a “feature patch”. We only saw two of those this year.

And that the ‘buffs’ to the Ele summons were actually fixes – when it was announced that we’d get to choose when they activated, Eles were pleased… then it turned out that the actives had a 3/4s cast time for the player, and the cast was then just added to the end of the current action queue. Not only did we now have to take time out of combat to cast these skills, we couldn’t even expect them to go off when they were actually needed.
The changes made, intended as buffs, actually made the summons worse in combat.

Now, as instant-casts, it’s possible to queue these actions at any time… but this might as well be done every time they’re off cooldown, because they still really aren’t reliable. Doesn’t help that they can’t be cast out of combat (no idea why?!) so not even a first hit can be timed with any accuracy.

robertul.3679:

insanemaniac.2456:

yolo swaggins.2570:

insanemaniac.2456:

“stop balancing, start power creeping” -jelzouki.4128 2014

There is a difference between buffing and power creeping.

op is calling for an end to nerfs (which implies that any changes should be buffs)
that is power creep

I don’t usually(ever) agree with this guy cuz lol traited bombs no precise sights dungeon build and other stuff..BUT he makes a fair point!

All buff no nerf is power creep! Nerfs remove stuff from meta/viability but balancing by buffs is never a good idea! Sooner or later you get so much over the top it gets gamebreaking.

The game needs shavings and slight buffs but given the tactic anet employs it goes like “x is popular nerf, y is unpopular buff” which is worse than any of the other choices. Balance should be done around risk/reward not popularity contests.

hmmm what do i even have in my signature i forget, been quite a while

edit: nope.. looks fine. precise sights is crap. forceful explosives is debatable.

robertul.3679:

insanemaniac.2456:

yolo swaggins.2570:

insanemaniac.2456:

“stop balancing, start power creeping” -jelzouki.4128 2014

There is a difference between buffing and power creeping.

op is calling for an end to nerfs (which implies that any changes should be buffs)
that is power creep

I don’t usually(ever) agree with this guy cuz lol traited bombs no precise sights dungeon build and other stuff..BUT he makes a fair point!

All buff no nerf is power creep! Nerfs remove stuff from meta/viability but balancing by buffs is never a good idea! Sooner or later you get so much over the top it gets gamebreaking.

The game needs shavings and slight buffs but given the tactic anet employs it goes like “x is popular nerf, y is unpopular buff” which is worse than any of the other choices. Balance should be done around risk/reward not popularity contests.

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=power%20creep%20definition

In all my time on these forums, not one person has used the term “power creep” properly. It requires 2 things for it to be labeled “Power Creep”:

1. New content added to the game.
2. Older content that becomes obsolete with the addition of newer content.

Buffing anything in any way is not power creep for 2 reasons:

1. The buff, whether it enhances the current content or changes it all together, can be considered as new content. But due to the fact that it overrides the old content, there is no content to become obsolete.
2. It can also be argued that buffing doesn’t add anything to the game, because it doesn’t. No new content means that the older content does not become obsolete, since it is still the newest bit of content.

And even if your definition was the true one, they’ve already placed multiple nerfs on everything so it wouldn’t be pure buffs. The problem is that there are unused skills and traits all over the place which creates niches. But poorly using “power creep” as an excuse to keep it that way contributes to one of the many reasons why people leave this game. Why keep it that way?

yolo swaggins.2570:

robertul.3679:

insanemaniac.2456:

yolo swaggins.2570:

insanemaniac.2456:

“stop balancing, start power creeping” -jelzouki.4128 2014

There is a difference between buffing and power creeping.

op is calling for an end to nerfs (which implies that any changes should be buffs)
that is power creep

I don’t usually(ever) agree with this guy cuz lol traited bombs no precise sights dungeon build and other stuff..BUT he makes a fair point!

All buff no nerf is power creep! Nerfs remove stuff from meta/viability but balancing by buffs is never a good idea! Sooner or later you get so much over the top it gets gamebreaking.

The game needs shavings and slight buffs but given the tactic anet employs it goes like “x is popular nerf, y is unpopular buff” which is worse than any of the other choices. Balance should be done around risk/reward not popularity contests.

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=power%20creep%20definition

In all my time on these forums, not one person has used the term “power creep” properly. It requires 2 things for it to be labeled “Power Creep”:

1. New content added to the game.
2. Older content that becomes obsolete with the addition of newer content.

Buffing anything in any way is not power creep for 2 reasons:

1. The buff, whether it enhances the current content or changes it all together, can be considered as new content. But due to the fact that it overrides the old content, there is no content to become obsolete.
2. It can also be argued that buffing doesn’t add anything to the game, because it doesn’t. No new content means that the older content does not become obsolete, since it is still the newest bit of content.

And even if your definition was the true one, they’ve already placed multiple nerfs on everything so it wouldn’t be pure buffs. The problem is that there are unused skills and traits all over the place which creates niches. But poorly using “power creep” as an excuse to keep it that way contributes to one of the many reasons why people leave this game. Why keep it that way?

blanket buffs on profession skills will obsolete pve mob hp pools
there you go

yolo swaggins.2570:

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=power%20creep%20definition

In all my time on these forums, not one person has used the term “power creep” properly. It requires 2 things for it to be labeled “Power Creep”:

1. New content added to the game.
2. Older content that becomes obsolete with the addition of newer content.

You may want to actually read the definition google cited from in the infobox.
Or think logically about what the term “power creep” means.

It seems that kitten often, you being the one person to use the term wrong, you think everyone else is wrong. This is the classical “There’s hundreds of people driving the wrong way!”-situation.

Anyway:
On a balance level, avoiding power creep is about denying the “Buff this!”-mentality.
If in doubt, nerf the stronger stuff! Only if you’re 110% sure that slightly stronger than the currently strongest ability is where you want everything to be, then you buff the weaker stuff.
A way to circumvent the player backlash is to make sure that most changes are transformative. Instead of nerfing a 3-condition cleanse to a 2-condition cleanse, you change it to be a self-buff which cures 6 conditions over 30 seconds. You still nerfed it, but on some level you also buffed it (it becomes very difficult to compare).

Carighan.6758:

yolo swaggins.2570:

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=power%20creep%20definition

In all my time on these forums, not one person has used the term “power creep” properly. It requires 2 things for it to be labeled “Power Creep”:

1. New content added to the game.
2. Older content that becomes obsolete with the addition of newer content.

You may want to actually read the definition google cited from in the infobox.
Or think logically about what the term “power creep” means.

It seems that kitten often, you being the one person to use the term wrong, you think everyone else is wrong. This is the classical “There’s hundreds of people driving the wrong way!”-situation.

Then please explain to me exactly how buffing anything will contribute to power creep and then try to compare what you are saying to the definition. Apparently there is a major disconnect involving semantics going on here.

And 100 people out of 101 can drive the wrong way, fyi.

yolo swaggins.2570:

Then please explain to me exactly how buffing anything will contribute to power creep and then try to compare what you are saying to the definition. Apparently there is a major disconnect involving semantics going on here.

Easy enough.
Say you have 4 abilities, arbitrarily chose to just deal direct damage and be 100% comparable.
Ability A deals 5000 damage, B deals 1500, C deals 1450, D deals 1400. None have any CDs or other requirements.

It’s easy to see that this is kinda unbalanced.

Now if you are a developer and you want to do something about it, you have three options:

• Nerf ability A to ~1450 damage.
• Buff B, C and D to ~5000 damage.
• Nerf A and buff B,C and D so they meet in the middle.

Let’s assume we buff, we take the second option. Now, all 4 abilities deal 5000 damage.
However one thing we didn’t account for: HP never changed. An enemy which previously took the class wielding ability C 10 seconds to kill now takes ~3.
And we established those 3s as the new baseline for that type of enemy to die because well, that’s what we buffed everything to.

So, before we had a baseline of 10 seconds and an outlier ability which was too strong.
Now we have a baseline of 3 seconds.

Overall power has increased.

That very thing is why the idea of “buff instead of nerf” is so incredibly dangerous to game balance. Because no, it’s not just about the abilities compared to one another. There’s lots of outside factors and as power creep is measured against these, you need to make sure that player overall power does not change. Unless that’s an intended outcome, ofc.
But then again, as PvE is so easy in this game, I think an overall nerf might be a much smarter idea. Makes PvE more difficult and if anything makes PvP healthier as twitch-reflexes and initiative play less of a role.

insanemaniac.2456:

yolo swaggins.2570:

insanemaniac.2456:

“stop balancing, start power creeping” -jelzouki.4128 2014

There is a difference between buffing and power creeping.

op is calling for an end to nerfs (which implies that any changes should be buffs)
that is power creep

No, just a new forum issue was identified, I should call it “Learn to Read – L2R”
OP suggested that instead of constant nerfing of abilities that have their use, devs should focus on the uselless skills/traits to improve them, so ppl have the option to use them and don’t suck while doing it.
If something is blatantly OP, that’s another case and of course, that has to be fixed somehow, adjustment, nerf or whatever….

@ Carighan

There are a few problems with your example:

1. The enemy was already minimized by the class wielding Ability A. So the enemy was obsolete regardless if new content was added or not.
2. Nothing was added. However, if you want to call it new content by all means do so. But all of the abilities that would have been made obsolete (older versions) were essentially removed.
3. Just for observation’s sake, GW2 is already highly imbalanced in every area. The only way it could become any more unbalanced than it is is if Anet’s imbalanced updates were obvious. The fact might have gotten a buff to longbow but all it really did was boost Ranger’s popularity (which they kind of needed it) to war and guard levels.
4. PvE in this game is insignificant.
5. The example showed imbalance between multiple areas before you applied Option B and reduced the imbalance to one area. Granted, the enemy melts to 4 abilities instead of 1 now but it was still insignificant before the buff.

The last one is what I want to emphasize on. By bringing the other abilities to level you not only increased diversity but created balance in the process. Now enemies might be more insignificant now than they were before the buff, but overall the game is in a better state since Ability A has become an option instead of a requirement. That is what allows the META to shift naturally which is one of the main signs of game balance. You could have gone with option C aswell and created the same effect because the enemy would still die faster to B, C and D.

So knowing this, whatever definition you just used is not the same one I posted.

It is important that even the definition you cited does not require new content at all.
The block google quotes from it says new content, yes, but just clicking through to the wikipedia page already clarifies that.

And your attitude of “PvE is insignificant” is exactly how power creep enters games. By ignoring that you got a stable background to judge class power level by.

Carighan.6758:

It is important that even the definition you cited does not require new content at all.
The block google quotes from it says new content, yes, but just clicking through to the wikipedia page already clarifies that.

And your attitude of “PvE is insignificant” is exactly how power creep enters games. By ignoring that you got a stable background to judge class power level by.

But the fact that Power creep is caused by adding new content, not by altering (nerfs, buffs) the existing one stays…
So ppl really should learn something about the words they want to use in discussion first…

insanemaniac.2456:

yolo swaggins.2570:

insanemaniac.2456:

“stop balancing, start power creeping” -jelzouki.4128 2014

There is a difference between buffing and power creeping.

op is calling for an end to nerfs (which implies that any changes should be buffs)
that is power creep

If you actually read what I wrote, I said that I understand some nerfs are necessary but we need to focus on the useless skills/traits, in terms of buffs.

Carighan.6758:

yolo swaggins.2570:

Then please explain to me exactly how buffing anything will contribute to power creep and then try to compare what you are saying to the definition. Apparently there is a major disconnect involving semantics going on here.

Easy enough.
Say you have 4 abilities, arbitrarily chose to just deal direct damage and be 100% comparable.
Ability A deals 5000 damage, B deals 1500, C deals 1450, D deals 1400. None have any CDs or other requirements.

It’s easy to see that this is kinda unbalanced.

Now if you are a developer and you want to do something about it, you have three options:

• Nerf ability A to ~1450 damage.
• Buff B, C and D to ~5000 damage.
• Nerf A and buff B,C and D so they meet in the middle.

Let’s assume we buff, we take the second option. Now, all 4 abilities deal 5000 damage.
However one thing we didn’t account for: HP never changed. An enemy which previously took the class wielding ability C 10 seconds to kill now takes ~3.
And we established those 3s as the new baseline for that type of enemy to die because well, that’s what we buffed everything to.

So, before we had a baseline of 10 seconds and an outlier ability which was too strong.
Now we have a baseline of 3 seconds.

Overall power has increased.

That very thing is why the idea of “buff instead of nerf” is so incredibly dangerous to game balance. Because no, it’s not just about the abilities compared to one another. There’s lots of outside factors and as power creep is measured against these, you need to make sure that player overall power does not change. Unless that’s an intended outcome, ofc.
But then again, as PvE is so easy in this game, I think an overall nerf might be a much smarter idea. Makes PvE more difficult and if anything makes PvP healthier as twitch-reflexes and initiative play less of a role.

Why are you assuming buffs have to be all damage based? We could be talking in terms of effectiveness!! It could be sustain/heal for all I care!! People need to learn to read!! More effective builds = more variety

Well ofc they don’t have to be damage based, but it was the easiest example to us.

Purple Miku.7032:

Yelloweyedemon.2860:

Okay to all those who support the OP’s idea:

MMO rule #1 – If instead if toning down some skills/things etc, you are buffing everything else, you lose contact with the world around you, causing people to be able to faceroll any PvE content, to the point of playing naked.

Source: Long time MMO history of: WoW, RIFT, LOTRO, SWTOR, etc etc…

We’ve always been able to do that. I’ve solod Arah P3 naked a year ago and I was much worse of a player than I am now.

I’m talking about actual soloing, not dungeon skipping.In many of the games I mentioned, you can solo a dungeon/instance, the way it’s meant to be played anyways. If you did that in GW2 you would be killed over and over again by 1 illusionist. Not to mention that you would spend hours upon hours. So soloing Arah p3 has nothing really to do with what I’m saying.

Jelzouki.4128:

insanemaniac.2456:

yolo swaggins.2570:

insanemaniac.2456:

“stop balancing, start power creeping” -jelzouki.4128 2014

There is a difference between buffing and power creeping.

op is calling for an end to nerfs (which implies that any changes should be buffs)
that is power creep

If you actually read what I wrote, I said that I understand some nerfs are necessary but we need to focus on the useless skills/traits, in terms of buffs.

and yet… there it is… right in the title, you abusing shock value to try to make a bad point.

insanemaniac.2456:

Jelzouki.4128:

insanemaniac.2456:

yolo swaggins.2570:

insanemaniac.2456:

“stop balancing, start power creeping” -jelzouki.4128 2014

There is a difference between buffing and power creeping.

op is calling for an end to nerfs (which implies that any changes should be buffs)
that is power creep

If you actually read what I wrote, I said that I understand some nerfs are necessary but we need to focus on the useless skills/traits, in terms of buffs.

and yet… there it is… right in the title, you abusing shock value to try to make a bad point.

Shock value? Bad point?

1: the majority of replies on this thread are in favor of my suggestion.

2: if a title read Nerf op ranger, are you going to assume the Nerf is directed to shortbow? Longbow? Axe? Dagger? Shock value is what a title is. Next time read the thread before you spew your biased opinion all over it.

Jelzouki.4128:

insanemaniac.2456:

Jelzouki.4128:

insanemaniac.2456:

yolo swaggins.2570:

insanemaniac.2456:

“stop balancing, start power creeping” -jelzouki.4128 2014

There is a difference between buffing and power creeping.

op is calling for an end to nerfs (which implies that any changes should be buffs)
that is power creep

If you actually read what I wrote, I said that I understand some nerfs are necessary but we need to focus on the useless skills/traits, in terms of buffs.

and yet… there it is… right in the title, you abusing shock value to try to make a bad point.

Shock value? Bad point?

1: the majority of replies on this thread are in favor of my suggestion.

2: if a title read Nerf op ranger, are you going to assume the Nerf is directed to shortbow? Longbow? Axe? Dagger? Shock value is what a title is. Next time read the thread before you spew your biased opinion all over it.

most people agreeing with you are agreeing that underused things need buffing and not commenting on what an end to nerfs would mean.

Shock value attempt, yes I agree. Title is terribly worded.

Majority of the replies agree with you? List the names of those that agree with you please.?

The fact is, your not very specific. Your ideas bring potentially, very negative power creep effects.

Why do you assume to claim someone elses opinion as “biased” as bad? Do you know what the word even means? By definition, your “biased” in favor of your own opinion.

Like it or not, you cannot stop nerfs and promote buffs. If you buff weak traits, you have to nerf strong ones in one form or another to compensate. Either by moving them in the trait lines or what not. To prevent to many strong traits being available in one build.

Fact is, your both right.

Carighan.6758:

It is important that even the definition you cited does not require new content at all.
The block google quotes from it says new content, yes, but just clicking through to the wikipedia page already clarifies that.

And your attitude of “PvE is insignificant” is exactly how power creep enters games. By ignoring that you got a stable background to judge class power level by.

Yet your definition doesn’t match the biggest example a majority of the internet uses for that term: WoW and it’s expansions.

Every time Blizzard releases a new xpac they add in an increased level cap, new skills, more powerful equipment, etc. which you can take back into old content (for example the Icecrown Citadel) and wreck face solo. New content is added which makes old content obsolete.

Neither of which your example shows. Your definition, from what I can tell, is essentially power + more power = power creep and the concepts of old content and new content is thrown out the window.

Most ppl want their favorite class buffed and every other class nerfed.