Guild Wars 2

Jerus.4350:

Croc, gear is your base offense or defense stats. That’s it.

Why do people feel that gear should be the primary source of depth? Why is the trait system, weapon choices, sigils and runes constantly ignored?

And what about Utilities (oil, stones and crystals) which increas offensive stats based on your defensives… nobody mentions that there is no reverse such things

Jerus.4350:

And, that would make things more fun how?

Bringing in full Nomads guardian to do mai trin doesn’t sound fun, it sounds long and tedious.

No, you don’t have to bring in full nomads guardians. The idea is to create alternative play! You could instead bring a condition spec’ed Thief, Necro, etc to use blindness and weakness to shave off some of the brunt of these state-changing attacks or a healing/support oriented character to heal the damage after it is received/quickly pick up the guy that took the hit and get him back in good shape.

The trouble with going with a condition spec’ed guy, though, is that blind wouldn’t change the state of the boss so you’d likely need to manually change the state of the enemy more (controls could be one way) OR you can use various other methods that might be riskier but might kill the target fast.

One of the enjoyable things about the zerk meta is that while you can do it, a little mistake and boom dead. If you simply had to go tanky just to have enough dodges/blocks/etc then a mistake is also less risky and that whole mentality is lost.

That’s the idea though, zerk approach will still be one, and it will still require extreme precision and some luck or you’re done. I’ve played zerk and power/condition hybrid specs for about 75% of my playtime in the game so I know how tough it can be to learn an encounter, keep myself alive while timing my bursts and dodges WHILE carrying less capable players, so on and so forth. I know how unforgiving mistakes can be, but they aren’t that unforgiving when you’ve got downed state, dodges, endurance restoring traits, boons, invulnerability, blocks, and a personal heal among other near infallible safe-cards.

Offense builds will still have safe-cards but not as potent or as numerous so that relying on more people offers more than just faster kills, over all.

Croc.5129:

I understand the reasoning behind the attacker having to hit something to change state, and agree with it as a condition, but in this model do you also include blocks as a hit that counts towards the change in state?

Yes. In the direction I’m imagining, Blocks wouldn’t be infallible unless spec’ed to be more reliable. Instead, Blocks would do something like block X amount of damage modified by Y stat and/or Z trait. So an offensive spec can still use a block to change state and shave off a portion of the damage + ignore the attack’s other effects. I’d imagine there’d be stats that improve the threshold of how much damage a block can nullify as well as picking up a trait to do the same but perhaps with a catch, like Warrior Shield Master might give a guaranteed 1st block, improve the modifier that Y stat gives blocks or greatly improve the block threshold but at the cost of % decrease of damage for T time after a shield skill block….

Croc.5129:

Traits tend to work as effect modifiers for a class’ skills, while gear works to determine the power of a skill. So the value of a non-damage condition can be determined by gear, while traits can be used to further increase their range of use in combat.

..yeah, like that…

Croc.5129:

As for stats which affect blocks and reflections, I was thinking that the same stat used to increase boon intensity would also be used to govern those abilities….~snip~

Frankly, I’m not too concerned with which stat affects what card here. What might be important though, is thinking about how these cards function without their governed stat/trait to help them. Like Reflect, IMO is too powerful and I’ve thought as such for a long time. IMO, reflect should only 100% reflect the first shot at best! Reflect should have been watered down a while back, either by making it less infallible or decreasing how much damage it can reflect. Whatever would improve reflect incrementally, should push close to current reflect when focused by perhaps at 66% current effectiveness.

But regardless, mobs need to be able to counter reflect some of the times (besides outright ignoring it). Introduce counters to counters for specific bosses so just bringing reflect isn’t quite the harshest counter…make it so the boss occasionally punishes you for countering him…that’s what a player would do, yes?

Croc.5129:

I am also not sure whether stamina regeneration should be something governed by one’s gear. I feel it would be more appropriate for it to remain relegated to the trait lines, with actions performed by the specific class triggering increased stamina regeneration. More room for individuality among the classes there.

I think it should be both trait and stats. Traits should just require certain hoops like Warrior’s Building Momentum trait would give endurance for landing a burst skill so they can dodge, burst and have another dodge right after…or they can build toward vitality so they have 2 dodges and consistent stamina recovery…or maybe a hybrid of offense/defense so they can do more dodging and damage to be self sustaining.

Jerus.4350:

Croc, gear is your base offense or defense stats. That’s it.

Why do people feel that gear should be the primary source of depth? Why is the trait system, weapon choices, sigils and runes constantly ignored?

Ask Anet, since your damage stats affect how much damage your attacks and offensive utilities are capable of, while you have no way of increasing the effectiveness of boons, non-damage conditions, and block abilities through gear. All traits do is modify the effects, sigils add extra stats and nifty effects, but power of the ability is something that is handled by stats, according to the design.

I also feel that many traits are rather boring, but that is another issue.

In a world where you can’t force the enemy to attack you, what is the point of increasing your health or your armor? And again, why can’t you increase the effectiveness of your support and control abilities to make a difference?

And yes, further depth through the game’s core mechanics would be wonderful too, such as the idea of certain attacks causing vulnerability states after hitting a target mentioned earlier, but it still does not mean that ability power having different rules for one set of effects compared to another is cohesive design.

Edit: Upon further reflection, I rethought my position on the effect of stats themselves undermining trait interaction. The problem is not the stats existing, but rather the traits not all having significant enough effects, which is a matter of just designing better traits. But the lack of cohesiveness in design regarding the stats we do have still remains, and is the focus of my issues in relation to this topic.

hybrid.5027:

Philosophically speaking, why should players be rewarded for using passive stats or punished for using active defense? If you have to use defensive stats to survive, managing to survive the encounter is your reward. If you don’t need defensive stats to survive… why use defensive stats? If you have to tack on some functionality to defensive stats as a carrot in order to get players to use them, you clearly aren’t taking the hint.

Well for some, they seek different rewards than other players. There are people out there that will drag along a few newbies to finish their story dungeons and teach them the ropes of dungeons by explaining the encounters and walking them through things.

I am NOT one of those people that will do that. It’s not rewarding for me. If I even bother to team with newbies, I’d rather just team with them through thick and thin, harsh and simple, let them make their mistakes and just play along. That’s rewarding for me because it’s funner and funnier and so long as everyone comes out of it with their manners and sanity, it’s a success.

Same deal with what you’re talking about. Some people aren’t seeking rewards for either. They might be using whatever arbitrary example we’re using because it’s more fun or different or they might be using it for the sake of someone else, not themselves.

As far as tacking on carrots and such, the funny thing is, this also partially addresses content being too linear with regards to strategy. Players that feel “If you don’t need defensive stats to survive, then why use them?” So we can introduce different content that might favor different approaches, perhaps?

hybrid.5027:

It sounds like the goal here is buffing defensive stats for the sake of buffing defensive stats.

That’s only part of it. I wrote a whole portion up there giving a sort of basic proposal of altering the approach of attacking mobs. Basically, if a boss is using normal attacks, he’s in a neutral state but he has stronger attacks and those attacks would put the boss in various durations of a vulnerable state. In a neutral state, a boss would take normal damage and reduced critical damage (I’d imagine a defensive state would take less damage from all types of damage) and a vulnerable state takes very high critical damage. You’d just have to find a way to get them to that vulnerable state.

I’d even propose all mobs be changed to such, but normal mobs have larger vulnerable windows to make them easier to kill. This is multi-fold, so that you cannot just kill a boss before it can even attack, force you to face what the boss is capable of and with defensive set-ups, give them some of the means to open that vulnerable state for offensive set-ups.

I suppose one could say it’s a goal of buffing defense for the sake of it, but I’m also attempting to make fights less linear, more challenging and require more effort, teamwork, coordinated/timed attacks/defenses and be entertaining.

hybrid.5027:

Cool bro, but an easier solution than redesigning how gear works in the game is for people to be adults and realize what the game is and game isn’t and enjoy it for what it is. One solution requires more developer time and effort than you can reasonably expect and the other requires players to put on their big kid pants and repeat the mantra, “experienced players don’t need, and shouldnt want, defensive stats in PvE.” That’s what the game is. Stop bashing your head against the wall trying to change it. Breath deeply and accept the inherent truth, move forward and enjoy the game.

Haha, okay.

Well, bro, I’m sure everyone here would like lots of changes to the game and think the game could be better so like discussing stuff like this as a hypothetical. If we were being childish, we’d be demanding our changes to be made without thought, but I’m hoping we’re being adult about discussing hypothetical ideas that probably won’t come to fruition but that’s how GOOD ideas are formed, through discussion. Even if the idea becomes the groundwork for someone else for another game, it’s better to have discussed than to clam up.

I’d hope you can act more adult than this and simply step out of the thread if you don’t wish to discuss stuff like this. You can bring your torches and pitchforks (when they’re implemented in the game) after we start banging on the dev’s offices for our changes to be made.

Ranael.6423:

I think he’s right : it is not a problem just because people complain.

Imagine a world where people could buy a car that goes fast but without GPS system or cars with GPS that go slower. It is a matter of choice : those who can orient easily will go for the rapid car and those who get lost will opt for the GPS. Everyone can go from point A to point B. Some quicker than other generally but if someone without GPS makes a mistake on his way he’ll lose more time than everyone.
Since people like speed and are always in hurry, there will be a huge trend for the sport cars (as in meta).Is this a problem ?

Imagine a world where people stopped trying to make things better. You wouldn’t even have GPS in your car or in your hand, you’d still be using a brick portable phone or carphones.

Now here, people ask for roads to have surprise holes or false roads so that the use of GPS become mandatory if you don’t want to have bad surprises on the road. Basically the fact that people who have a nice orientation should be punished for their skill.

Funny you bring up roads.

You could be speaking to the future creator of the next WoW killing MMO in these forums or they could be reading and thinking for themselves. They could be seeing the roads GW2 paved and making note of its potholes and false roads so that when they make their MMO, it might never make the mistake of paving such roads.

Ranael.6423:

Why should people be punished because they are good at avoiding aoe, timing their dodge …. ? Is there any content that is not doable in cleric/magi/nomad stuff ? I don’t see one but if people complain it must be because there is …

Gosh, it’s like talking to teenagers who are often only concerned for themselves XD

Go on with your bad selves. Nothing I say here on these forums is going to stop you from going unpunished for timing your dodges and avoiding those AoEs in your zerk gear because that’s all I’m concerned with is punishing you with my words.

/sarcasm for the last sentence.

Damage output is what kills mobs there is only viable source of damage in pve: direct, those propositions about toughness scaling and whatnot doesn’t solve kitten. Damage kills until conditions are effective “the zerker meta” is to stay a guard(or venom share thief )could roll nomad AH and be a bait and support and not hold back but you only need 1 of them rest is pure glass no need for any other gear than zerker.

Sure mobs are dumb,some skills scale horrible with healing power but in pve safe damage dominates and we only have one.

IndigoSundown.5419:

More points:

• The same trade-off for offensive v. defensive stats that exists in GW2’s two PvP modes also exists in PvE. More defense means a player can make mistakes. Yet, I don’t hear complaints about defensive stats being pointless in PvP.

This is because defensive players can till kill offensive players. Offensive players tend to have low HP or rely on windows of defense that can be waited out and countered. In PvE, mobs cheat. They have damage that can do significant damage even to defensive players but are not smart enough to avoid offensive players’ bursts. If AI were as smart as players, their damage could be toned down so defense stats can work better.

• Sure, players don’t attack at the same speed as mobs. Sure, players are less predictable than mobs. However, that just means it take more skill to get away with glass.

Players also don’t have the same HP as mobs or have the same skills as mobs.

• Sure, in sPvP, there is a role for defensive stats, as a point holder. But, what role do defensive stats play in WvW — other than as a means to bolster survivability for players who need it?

How many roles should there be for such a spec? And it’s not like a defensive spec still can’t kill so they still function for that as well.

• So, why the double standard? Because the opportunity cost is higher and fewer players can play glass in PvP? That’s essentially what you’re pushing for PvE to become if you’re pushing for defensive boons to be reduced if one has offensive stats.

How is this a double standard? PvP and PvE are different and they’d be treated differently.

Again, folks, it’s all about dungeon design.

Okay, so berserker speedrun takes 15 mins on a dungeon, full nomads, a bit over an hour.

Perhaps why not incorporate an area of the dungeon where a DoT effect occurs for a shortcut, but allows for only a tankier player to traverse this environment? Why not improve boss move-sets such that they more frequently hit in smaller denominations to make GC-play more risky and based on getting in and out rather than just bigger, harder-hitting AOE nukes on huge tells?

The fact of the matter is that the berserker meta comes not from defensive gear being too weak but because players want to spend less time grinding dungeons for money/tokens and get more out of their time. Nerfing berserker builds/stats or unifying gear combinations only reduces diversity and makes new metas which does nothing but divert the same problem elsewhere, and thus ruins gameplay for those (like myself) who ONLY play full-aggressive builds and will not continue to play the game if building defensively is required just to stay alive. That’s why GW2 is so appealing: anyone can do literally anything given enough skill and some slight kit adjustments, regardless of build.

There is quite literally nothing that can be done in the scope of gear that will improve the overall state of the game while changing/removing the berserker/DPS meta aside from changing the very encounters themselves. Yes, truly unifying all gear combinations would resolve this, but that’s only achieved because then there exists no possibility of a meta and no diversity.

Tank specs have roles in other parts of the game, most notably WvW and GvG (in NA; EU plays slightly more aggressive builds). In many instances, if you are not playing at least a PTV spec, you will not be considered as a candidate for an elite guild group. There are many, many guilds that simply will kick players for not partaking in the tankier specs designated to them, regardless of performance or skill level.

TheBlackLeech.9360:

Harper.4173:

TheBlackLeech.9360:

Harper.4173:

TheBlackLeech.9360:

-stuff-

First and foremost people don’t stack anymore because FGS has been nerfed. Really there’s little reason to stack now.

Second of all your " one anchor" meta will never happen – because you can’t design an encounter with that kind of pressure on one person. If he’s bad he’ll get kicked instantly.
If he’s good he’ll be wanted in every group.

Welcome to the new trinity.

People don’t stack anymore? LOL

That is just a blatant lie.

Also, I’m happy you can predict the future.

I can predict what will happen because I know how I think and how people like me think. This is what will define the new meta because metas are set by those “elitist jerks” which I happen to be a part of.
I know what I’ll be doing and it’s a pretty safe bet most of the other elitists will do the same.

Also people who are clueless still stack – but most of them didn’t even know why they stacked in the first place.

The point is people who know the game realize there’s little point in stacking anymore.

So you are changing what you said to you don’t understand why people stack in corners?

I’m pretty sure that even the worst pugs from the bottom of the barrel realize that enemies you are in combat with who can’t see you will all run to a spot where they can see you to continue fighting.

It is called LoS, and pretending like you don’t know what I’m talking about only makes your responses even more insulting to your intelligence.

LoSing is one thing. Stacking in corners and against walls is another. If you’d know the difference things would go smoother.

hybrid.5027:

Croc.5129:

hybrid.5027:

Croc.5129:

hybrid.5027:

You’re right what the game needs is one person to “tank” the boss while one person drops water fields and blast finishers on him and 2 of the other pew pew with their k-rad leet ranged dps builds and one person King DPS goes in and melees the boss opposite the tank. That guy will have to bring skills that force the boss to aggro the tank if he ever turns around to face him.

I think this is a good start yes?

Oh I have another idea!

How about we have 5 people playing whatever random no-thought-put-into-it builds fighting bosses in empty open rooms and they around around erratically like headless chickens spamming their skills and eventually boring the boss to death after a 5 minute fight to do 100,000 total damage. In case the boss ever does an attack at them luckily they will be able to easily avoid it because they are safely at 1200 range. This also sounds quite riveting.

I think either of these options are good.

That’s just intentionally bad encounter design used to describe unwanted situations, too vaguely outlined to be of any real value as examples, and cannot be related to any discussion of the flawed mechanics of the game.

You would have to go into more detail as to what mechanics are affecting the game and the bosses in order for these realities to come true, as well as go into more detail as to how the encounter would go to actually show that the encounter would be boring, shallow, unfun, etc. Because when people speak of changing the mechanics of the game, they are also speaking of changing ability interactivity and function along with it.

Simply changing the way stats work does nothing when the way abilities work are left untouched. Again, this is why the game is not likely to change, but if it is to be discussed, consideration for abilities working differently will need to be made.

I feel like your sarcasm detection abilities need to be discussed and considered. But one thing I do know is you are quite verbose so we can settle that issue right now.

It was obviously sarcasm.

I’m just saying it really doesn’t prove any point at all.

Please clarify the purpose of the sarcasm, if you feel it did prove a point of some kind, reveal a truth you wish to share. We are not enemies, we are just random customers of a game discussing mechanics.

The point it proves is that all the alternatives proposed thus far are significantly inferior to the mechanics that exist. It’s been settled long before this thread that the way to get bad players to use tankier gear or to require more defensive support in general is to introduce new content that is mechanically complicated. The reason bad players can get away with berserker gear now is because they have had two years to practice running these dungeons and rote learning when to dodge. Give them encounters they haven’t memorized and that will be all the change they need.

Advocating a trinity, soft trinity, or disorganized, passive gameplay (which are the only three options I’ve seen any of the nerf crowd offer) is a terrible solution to a non-problem. I mockingly offered a hyperbolic example of their own arguments so they can hopefully see how outlandish they sound.

Honestly, I think the entire discussion is a joke because it’s just that, a non-problem. This is like a doctor prescribing invasive solutions to illnesses a patient doesn’t have. We don’t have a berserker problem, we have an old content problem.

Pretty much this.

A steadier stream of “end-game” content would have solved this long ago – sadly we’ve had the same dungeons for 2 + years now.
Of course people are going to clear them like crazy – we’ve done them hundreds upon hundreds of times so far.

Give us new content, content we’re not familiar with – content that’s brand new and things wouldn’t be as easy as content we’ve been navigating for 2 years.

Croc.5129:

IndigoSundown.5419:

More points:

• The same trade-off for offensive v. defensive stats that exists in GW2’s two PvP modes also exists in PvE. More defense means a player can make mistakes. Yet, I don’t hear complaints about defensive stats being pointless in PvP.
• Sure, players don’t attack at the same speed as mobs. Sure, players are less predictable than mobs. However, that just means it take more skill to get away with glass.
• Sure, in sPvP, there is a role for defensive stats, as a point holder. But, what role do defensive stats play in WvW — other than as a means to bolster survivability for players who need it?
• So, why the double standard? Because the opportunity cost is higher and fewer players can play glass in PvP? That’s essentially what you’re pushing for PvE to become if you’re pushing for defensive boons to be reduced if one has offensive stats.

The system would boil down to using your abilities properly or die a horrible death because your timing is attrocious and you let the enemy’s attacks get through instead of baiting them into wasting said attacks.

Consequences for a failed attack on an opponent creting an opening sound like it would add a greater amount of interplay in the mechanics.

And WvW is still supposed to ideally be a team game, so create opportunities for your allies to take advantage of. This is assuming a system where only your abilities would be increased, not your armour and health.

The problem with this mechanic is that I think it’s too complicated for the average GW2 player.
Keep in mind most dungeons and encounters in this game are designed to be full proof when it comes to players completing said content.

I don’t really know how well the average player would do or how much he’d enjoy more and more complex fight mechanics.

There’s a reason most engagements in this game are simplistic at best – with more complex encounters ( see lupi) becoming the bane of most PUGS and random players – and that reason is that your average GW2 player is bad and there’s really no way the devs can go around that.

He has to win so he’ll keep playing and spending cash on the gem store – so the game is made easy so he can win too.

My problem is not dodging, my problem is that I feel like the game has the depth of a puddle on a hot summer day. That video is pretty much par for the course of what I remember before I stopped playing.

The depth comes from the average player.

GW2’s casual players don’t have the time, drive or capacity to get really good at the game so the game has to make simple and easy encounters that still fulfill their power fantasy of being super awesome hardcore win at everything heroes.

If it doesn’t they’ll move on and take their money elsewhere. Anet doesn’t want that so they keep the skill requirement for most of the game at a very low level.

That’s why the initial attribute system that was implemented during alpha builds was replaced by what we have today.
Look up the old system – read about it – and see how it would have provided more “depth”, more “specialization” and pretty much would have been an all together different experience than what we have today.

Also realize at least 50% of GW2’s player base would have completely failed to use said system to make even barely viable builds.

So instead we got the current system – with few skills, skills tied to weapons and as many crutch fail proof methods to keep players from failing and quitting as possible.

Leo G.4501:

Gosh, it’s like talking to teenagers who are often only concerned for themselves XD

Go on with your bad selves. Nothing I say here on these forums is going to stop you from going unpunished for timing your dodges and avoiding those AoEs in your zerk gear because that’s all I’m concerned with is punishing you with my words.

/sarcasm for the last sentence.

Thing is I never run dungeon in zerk gear… and I’m fine with it. I don’t want to touch that level nor I know if I’m able to. I run dungeons with guildies and pug to complete the group, never asked people to ping gear. Most of the time we have at least one support/healer in the group and if we don’t we can feel it. Oh and I run a lot of different condi build on several characters. I’m not a good player and never pretended to be. The thing is that I don’t feel impaired in the fun I have playing, simply because I like, like in GW1,to change build each time I load a toon.

And right now the discussion is about suppressing a problem that doesn’t really exist by making the way things interact together super complicate. It’s cool to imagine that this trait here will interact with this stat which will increase effectiveness of this skill… but in the end people will even more min/max things so that you may destroy the zerk meta but instead will get something like :
“Have a zerk torso with cleric gloves, magi boot, sinister shoulders, one weapon giver and the other celectial or get kicked”.

Ranael.6423:

Leo G.4501:

Gosh, it’s like talking to teenagers who are often only concerned for themselves XD

Go on with your bad selves. Nothing I say here on these forums is going to stop you from going unpunished for timing your dodges and avoiding those AoEs in your zerk gear because that’s all I’m concerned with is punishing you with my words.

/sarcasm for the last sentence.

Thing is I never run dungeon in zerk gear… and I’m fine with it. I don’t want to touch that level nor I know if I’m able to. I run dungeons with guildies and pug to complete the group, never asked people to ping gear. Most of the time we have at least one support/healer in the group and if we don’t we can feel it. Oh and I run a lot of different condi build on several characters. I’m not a good player and never pretended to be. The thing is that I don’t feel impaired in the fun I have playing, simply because I like, like in GW1,to change build each time I load a toon.

And right now the discussion is about suppressing a problem that doesn’t really exist by making the way things interact together super complicate. It’s cool to imagine that this trait here will interact with this stat which will increase effectiveness of this skill… but in the end people will even more min/max things so that you may destroy the zerk meta but instead will get something like :
“Have a zerk torso with cleric gloves, magi boot, sinister shoulders, one weapon giver and the other celectial or get kicked”.

I love you. Marry me?

oxtred.7658:

TheBlackLeech.9360:

Harper.4173:

TheBlackLeech.9360:

Harper.4173:

TheBlackLeech.9360:

-stuff-

First and foremost people don’t stack anymore because FGS has been nerfed. Really there’s little reason to stack now.

Second of all your " one anchor" meta will never happen – because you can’t design an encounter with that kind of pressure on one person. If he’s bad he’ll get kicked instantly.
If he’s good he’ll be wanted in every group.

Welcome to the new trinity.

People don’t stack anymore? LOL

That is just a blatant lie.

Also, I’m happy you can predict the future.

I can predict what will happen because I know how I think and how people like me think. This is what will define the new meta because metas are set by those “elitist jerks” which I happen to be a part of.
I know what I’ll be doing and it’s a pretty safe bet most of the other elitists will do the same.

Also people who are clueless still stack – but most of them didn’t even know why they stacked in the first place.

The point is people who know the game realize there’s little point in stacking anymore.

So you are changing what you said to you don’t understand why people stack in corners?

I’m pretty sure that even the worst pugs from the bottom of the barrel realize that enemies you are in combat with who can’t see you will all run to a spot where they can see you to continue fighting.

It is called LoS, and pretending like you don’t know what I’m talking about only makes your responses even more insulting to your intelligence.

Gs5 and focus pull; learn to use those.

Implying I already don’t, and which tactic you decide to use isn’t purely situational.

IE:
At the end of the uncategorized fractal, when all the cat golems become hostile at once, using guardian GS 5 to bunch them together is the best method I’ve seen.

For SE P1, focus pulling the golems together for easy AoE is the best method I’ve seen.

For Leurent and his adds in TA, you stack up in a corner and LoS.

Of course, If there are no available LoS corners nearby it might be better to just focus pull the mobs into a wall and stack there… or bunch them up.

Just because physically pulling mobs together in a handful of situations is marginally better, does not mean the LoS tactic doesn’t exist, and it doesn’t mean it isn’t used.

This is comical.

Leo G.4501:

This is because defensive players can till kill offensive players. Offensive players tend to have low HP or rely on windows of defense that can be waited out and countered. In PvE, mobs cheat. They have damage that can do significant damage even to defensive players but are not smart enough to avoid offensive players’ bursts. If AI were as smart as players, their damage could be toned down so defense stats can work better.

People complain about defensive stats being under-powered compared to offensive stats in PvE. Someone even linked wooden potatoes vids about healing and tanking builds. So what do those vids show?

1. A bulky character with (he claims) 6000 Armor. He shows the character taking hits that he says would one-shot his glass elementalist. The bulky warrior takes about 1/10th of his bar and quickly regens that. He concludes that the survivability is ridiculous.
2. An elementalist healer blasting water fields produced by a consumable. He state that he can heal 21K health for a group in 15 seconds. He concludes that is a large amount of healing. Factually, it’s more health than any profession would have at 80 if they were full glass, and more than some professions would have if they were built bulky.

How much more effective do you want defensive stats to be?

To be fair, he laments that these builds are not accepted in the meta, but that’s a different issue that the builds being effective.

Leo G.4501:

How many roles should there be for such a spec? And it’s not like a defensive spec still can’t kill so they still function for that as well.
…
How is this a double standard? PvP and PvE are different and they’d be treated differently.

That’s the point. If the point of defensive stats in WvW is to keep you alive, and that’s OK, why is it not OK if that’s the point of defensive stats in PvE? That’s why I see a double standard. If it’s not a double standard, then it’s yearning for trinity.

Harper.4173:

That’s why the initial attribute system that was implemented during alpha builds was replaced by what we have today.
Look up the old system – read about it – and see how it would have provided more “depth”, more “specialization” and pretty much would have been an all together different experience than what we have today.

Also realize at least 50% of GW2’s player base would have completely failed to use said system to make even barely viable builds.

So instead we got the current system – with few skills, skills tied to weapons and as many crutch fail proof methods to keep players from failing and quitting as possible.

I’m curious, what was the GW2 alpha build like? I googled and didn’t come up with anything right off the bat.

Ranael.6423:

And right now the discussion is about suppressing a problem that doesn’t really exist by making the way things interact together super complicate. It’s cool to imagine that this trait here will interact with this stat which will increase effectiveness of this skill… but in the end people will even more min/max things so that you may destroy the zerk meta but instead will get something like :
“Have a zerk torso with cleric gloves, magi boot, sinister shoulders, one weapon giver and the other celectial or get kicked”.

So, are you going to bother discussing what I posted or just make up some notion of what you think I’m talking about and dismiss it with the same stilted argument?

Leo G.4501:

So, are you going to bother discussing what I posted or just make up some notion of what you think I’m talking about and dismiss it with the same stilted argument?

Ok I must be too dumb to understand your point because

Something like:

power = base-strike damage, potency of vulnerability, absorb threshold (blocks nullify conditions/CC and damage up to X and the rest goes through; retaliation shaves off a portion of the attack received)
precision = multi-strike damage, critical chance, fury duration, reflect duration, blink duration (after a dodge you can blink past AoEs, as well as automatically blink after receiving a crit)
toughness = decrease base-strike damage, increase block duration, increase protection potency, retaliation damage potency and CC duration.
vitality = increase base HP, decrease multi-strike damage, increase stamina, increase fury potency (decreases duration but increases attack speed)
healing = increase healing received and granted, increase downed HP and revival speed, decreases DoT, increase condition magnitude (increases the chance of foe cleansing failure)

is so simple for everyone to understand that I don’t see why I’m talking about you making things overcomplicate….

IndigoSundown.5419:

People complain about defensive stats being under-powered compared to offensive stats in PvE. Someone even linked wooden potatoes vids about healing and tanking builds. So what do those vids show?

1. A bulky character with (he claims) 6000 Armor. He shows the character taking hits that he says would one-shot his glass elementalist. The bulky warrior takes about 1/10th of his bar and quickly regens that. He concludes that the survivability is ridiculous.
2. An elementalist healer blasting water fields produced by a consumable. He state that he can heal 21K health for a group in 15 seconds. He concludes that is a large amount of healing. Factually, it’s more health than any profession would have at 80 if they were full glass, and more than some professions would have if they were built bulky.

How much more effective do you want defensive stats to be?

To be fair, he laments that these builds are not accepted in the meta, but that’s a different issue that the builds being effective.

Did you not read what I’m posting? The majority of what I was posting is a means to alter the combat so his build would have some sort of purpose. He admits it’s somewhat useless because you don’t get anything out of taking hits. My proposal said “Hey, mobs take less crit damage unless they connect with a super special skill! So who’s gonna eat that?”

The reason I’m forming these ideas is to conform the proposition with a scenario that might work out better and be more dynamic. The reason you’d have support builds is because you couldn’t get as reliable support with the new way the stats affect the support aspects of the game. And a role for that support is to put openings in the mobs and help take advantage of those openings.

IndigoSundown.5419:

That’s the point. If the point of defensive stats in WvW is to keep you alive, and that’s OK, why is it not OK if that’s the point of defensive stats in PvE? That’s why I see a double standard. If it’s not a double standard, then it’s yearning for trinity.

Well your idea of a double standard raises another double standard. If the PvP environment is to be treated like the PvE environment, why do you not face similar threats in both? What will keep you alive in one won’t keep you alive in the other. What tactics work in one fail in the other. What moves you face in one don’t exist in the other.

And bringing up ‘trinity’ is only a logical fallacy since I’m not endorsing one nor does my idea create one. You can even continue with zerk groups and take out foes without making openings (or with, it would just be risky) while the other combos can take more advantage of said openings through teamwork and a collaboration of builds.

Ranael.6423:

Leo G.4501:

So, are you going to bother discussing what I posted or just make up some notion of what you think I’m talking about and dismiss it with the same stilted argument?

Ok I must be too dumb to understand your point because

Something like:

power = base-strike damage, potency of vulnerability, absorb threshold (blocks nullify conditions/CC and damage up to X and the rest goes through; retaliation shaves off a portion of the attack received)
precision = multi-strike damage, critical chance, fury duration, reflect duration, blink duration (after a dodge you can blink past AoEs, as well as automatically blink after receiving a crit)
toughness = decrease base-strike damage, increase block duration, increase protection potency, retaliation damage potency and CC duration.
vitality = increase base HP, decrease multi-strike damage, increase stamina, increase fury potency (decreases duration but increases attack speed)
healing = increase healing received and granted, increase downed HP and revival speed, decreases DoT, increase condition magnitude (increases the chance of foe cleansing failure)

is so simple for everyone to understand that I don’t see why I’m talking about you making things overcomplicate….

That was an old post. I’ve since posted and ambiguized the idea. I’m pulling more from the OP but with a more malleable approach. Try pointing out more flaws and I can try to reform the idea.

Leo G.4501:

Frankly, I’m not too concerned with which stat affects what card here. What might be important though, is thinking about how these cards function without their governed stat/trait to help them. Like Reflect, IMO is too powerful and I’ve thought as such for a long time. IMO, reflect should only 100% reflect the first shot at best! Reflect should have been watered down a while back, either by making it less infallible or decreasing how much damage it can reflect. Whatever would improve reflect incrementally, should push close to current reflect when focused by perhaps at 66% current effectiveness.

Croc.5129:

-snip-

I think it should be both trait and stats. Traits should just require certain hoops like Warrior’s Building Momentum trait would give endurance for landing a burst skill so they can dodge, burst and have another dodge right after…or they can build toward vitality so they have 2 dodges and consistent stamina recovery…or maybe a hybrid of offense/defense so they can do more dodging and damage to be self sustaining.

My idea for reflect functionality would also tie into a new designation for projectile attacks, categorising them as either minor or major projectiles. You can have the stat affecting the reflection skill to determine how much damage is reflected back, up to 100% when fully invested, investing further to increase the number of hits at which the reflection mitigation stays at 100% (achievable without going beyond exotic gear), and then have traits which further allows a character to be able to reflect the greater projectiles without the barrier getting destroyed.

Without the trait, the major projectile would destroy your barrier and push on through to damage you, with the major projectile’s damage being reduced by only a quarter of the mitigation value of the barrier you put up.

These greater projectiles are also likely to come with some nasty secondary effects. This allows for the option to either dodge out of the way, or put up a superior barrier and give the enemy a taste of their own medicine. Only at 100% reflection would the full effects of the projectile attack affect the projectile’s caster though, otherwise there is just the mitigation from the barrier and the rest of the damage, plus the nasty effect, going through as normal. So if you miss your window to block the full effect of the projectile, dodging will be your best recourse. Or have your cleansing ready to deal with whatever is being shot at you.

The interplay here would be whether it is worth it to keep the barrier in reserve until they make a shot with their greater projectile, relying on your other protective boons and healing to see what attacks they will use, because unless heavily invested into the governing stat, only the first projectile will be mitigated at the maximum of your barrier power before diminishing returns on mitigation percentage settles in, and this is at the maximum investment into the regulating stat. This would also require that these attacks have a tell for attentive players to react to in combat, so that they can know to get their barrier or block ready instead of continuing to bash their enemy in the face. Even better, such a powerful ability would also leave the enemy winded momentarily, making them vulnerable to further assault under the system you proposed.

A counter to reflection barriers could be boon stripping, if barriers could become targetable by players and mobs. If these are used on the barrier, then the barrier’s mitigation will be diminished in proportion to the condition regulating stat of the boon stripping caster, with stats balanced so that when fully invested the shield will still provide some decent protection at its lower level, and uninvested the mitigation of the barrier is rendered negligible. In either case, the duration of the barrier would also be affected

A trait would also allow boon stripping effects to cause these barriers to explode instead of just weaken. The same trait which which allowed the barrier to resist greater projectiles would also protect the barrier from this overload effect, as well as grant protection for the mitigation, but still decrease the barrier’s duration. Or leave the duration as normal but still diminish the mitigation. I would need to consider that some more.

There is also the use of AoEs and conditions, which are unaffected by barriers.

As for a stat affecting stamina recharge, given how powerful dodges are in the game, an investment like that would need to be balanced carefully so as not to seem mandatory. The reliance on merely dodging the greatest dangers in the game makes it soundvery enticing, and I am hesitant to just have that ability be managable by stacking a certain stat. Would dodge function differently somehow, or would it just come down to encounter design in your scenario?

Hmmm, the suggestion for reflection sounds a bit complicated. Considering people are already poking that as a hole in the idea (all this being complicated), do you think you could dumb down your mechanics for reflection? The idea about the minor and major projectiles could work though.

And I think boon stripping, boon stealing, condition transfer along with cleansing could all some of the untouched mechanics that wouldn’t be governed by stats. It’d even be pretty cool if the sigils and such were strengthened slightly so that they could create a counter to boon users or condition spammers for the set-ups that don’t use or rely on specific support types that are capable of mitigating such encounters.

Boon stripping being a counter to reflect could be an interesting concept. What are some of the encounters that uses reflect walls in the game? Regardless, I think it’d be easy to make that a mechanic in such a fight, that the wall would be targetable for your boon strippers or possibly a secondary mechanic where attacking it grants nearby allies a kind of ‘boon stripper’ status to rip off the boss’ boons for a time.

As for endurance, I feel there are other tools (except for Necromancer and Mesmer currently) to aid in endurance. One just might have to regulate part of their build for it or changes could be made to some weapons’ skills to give them extra flavor by adding endurance enhancing features. What I’d hope would come of this is that people will find a necessity to have something to cover their kittens but spec allocation is always going to be limited. You might choose a long cooldown invulnerable skill, a weapon with some block or evade, a stunbreaker teleport, stat allocation to improve defenses or stamina, runes or sigils that grant some kind of mitigation, traits that gives them sustain…something.

I think that adds a personal touch to the build too, deciding what method is best for you or your group to go with to cover your kitten. You might go with none of that and rely on base mitigation and all damage, or you might go for a blend that leans toward stamina so you have aLL teh dodges (vitality, traits and sigils/runes) with the rest going toward offense or maybe a blocking build that picks up traits and weapons for blocking (and for the Warrior’s case, reflect) to be an interrupt point-man to open up the foe for your team by blocking their special melee, reflecting their major projectiles and flinging CC into the mix (which would take a few traits and some weapons)…

Meh, now I’m rambling.

Leo G.4501:

Did you not read what I’m posting? The majority of what I was posting is a means to alter the combat so his build would have some sort of purpose. He admits it’s somewhat useless because you don’t get anything out of taking hits. My proposal said “Hey, mobs take less crit damage unless they connect with a super special skill! So who’s gonna eat that?”

So, a bulky build gets nothing out of being bulky _except being able to take hits. That’s true in both modes. What your idea sounds like to me is another artificial mechanic that makes no sense. I could buy that attempting a risky attack that does a lot of damage might create a window of opportunity, but why would succeeding at that attack open the window? Why, just because you want a role for a tank?_

The reason I’m forming these ideas is to conform the proposition with a scenario that might work out better and be more dynamic. The reason you’d have support builds is because you couldn’t get as reliable support with the new way the stats affect the support aspects of the game. And a role for that support is to put openings in the mobs and help take advantage of those openings.

Personal defense is not a support role unless you’re tanking. You want a tank, you just aren’t calling it that. It’s functionally the same, the bulky character takes hits others can’t take so the others can do damage.

Well your idea of a double standard raises another double standard. If the PvP environment is to be treated like the PvE environment, why do you not face similar threats in both? What will keep you alive in one won’t keep you alive in the other. What tactics work in one fail in the other. What moves you face in one don’t exist in the other.

De facto, the PvP environment is being treated like the PvE one because players have the same tools to deal with challenges. I don’t fight every player the same, but I also don’t fight every mob the same. Would the threats in PvE have to use the exact same skills and tactics as players for their to be similarity in your mind? That’s a load. Players are harder than mobs, granted, but what that does is create a higher threshold to survive with a fully glass build. So, I’m asking, in your mind is the fact that players are harder to fight what makes defensive stats OK as is in WvW but not in PvE?

And bringing up ‘trinity’ is only a logical fallacy since I’m not endorsing one nor does my idea create one. You can even continue with zerk groups and take out foes without making openings (or with, it would just be risky) while the other combos can take more advantage of said openings through teamwork and a collaboration of builds.

I get that the new mechanic would be optional, but consider the nature of efficiency play.

• If your method is faster, it’s now required for whatever fights it appears in. That player would then be forced to switch gear/build for any fights where that mechanic does not exist.
• If your method is not faster, it won’t be used even if it’s the same speed because it’s a pain in the kitten to change gear in this game. At best, “anything goes” groups would get faster kills on that boss.

You’re right, though, my bad. If that build were required, it would not be a trinity, just a duality in certain fights.

IndigoSundown.5419:

So, a bulky build gets nothing out of being bulky _except being able to take hits. That’s true in both modes. What your idea sounds like to me is another artificial mechanic that makes no sense. I could buy that attempting a risky attack that does a lot of damage might create a window of opportunity, but why would succeeding at that attack open the window? Why, just because you want a role for a tank?_

Because perhaps your enemy isn’t as dumb as they look (although they kind of are)? If the enemy sees you dodging at the last second, he’s not going to put his back into the attack, if he’s suddenly blinded, he’s not going to put his all behind the hit and if you’re invulnerable, he’s going to be right on guard after he throws down that hit.

You can write the mechanic off as artificial but it only seems as artificial as dodging through AoEs without a scratch or that the mob has to wind up a suuuuuuuupppppeeeeerrrrrrrrr lllloooooooonnnnngggg ttttttttttttttttttttiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii….
…..mmmmmmee for his strong attacks. Some things you just have to swallow for the sake of game mechanics. Are you going to pick nit all the other oddities in game design now too? XD

IndigoSundown.5419:

Personal defense is not a support role unless you’re tanking. You want a tank, you just aren’t calling it that. It’s functionally the same, the bulky character takes hits others can’t take so the others can do damage.

Okay, so what? You want to use that to label this trinity then?

The problem with that is, I’m not proposing that you need a tank to tank or to even do damage or accomplish anything. It’s simply another angle to tackle the mobs. Like I said, you can pick up other things to take those hits on your glass specs but it comes with its risks. You can use a conditioneer to weaken the foe or a buffer to strengthen the group. A trinity means you require 3 sides to fulfill the task but I’m not even suggesting only 3 sides (tanking, damage, CC, boons and conditions all play a role…so a pentity?) yet not all have to be present. The goal is to force you to shift tactics depending on what you have available to a steeper degree than what we do now

IndigoSundown.5419:

De facto, the PvP environment is being treated like the PvE one because players have the same tools to deal with challenges. I don’t fight every player the same, but I also don’t fight every mob the same. Would the threats in PvE have to use the exact same skills and tactics as players for their to be similarity in your mind? That’s a load. Players are harder than mobs, granted, but what that does is create a higher threshold to survive with a fully glass build. So, I’m asking, in your mind is the fact that players are harder to fight what makes defensive stats OK as is in WvW but not in PvE?

Well you’re switching from PvP (what was being talked about in previous posts) to WvW (shifted to that in your last post). WvW has many different encounters you likely won’t face in PvE or PvP. PvP aims for a closer balance while WvW is far wilder.

You’re obviously trying to goad me into making a statement regarding defense in WvW vs PvE so that you can counter it. Why not just say what’s on your mind? One issue I find different in WvW vs PvE: with intelligence comes focused fire. You can be focused down and drowned in CC in WvW while in PvE, you can simply abuse the AI in various ways to ignore this.

IndigoSundown.5419:

I get that the new mechanic would be optional, but consider the nature of efficiency play…~snip~

I acknowledge this downfall, but that’s going to happen regardless of what system you speak of….partially. What people demand or cry for in the forums and such isn’t always the majority or the rule. People still run Rangers in dungeons (lol it’s not that hard either, only a pain when agony is in the mix…but I’m speaking before agony was spread to pets) and people still use different builds in dungeons (hah, I’ve used a hybrid power/condi elementalist in every dungeon! Not optimal but not useless). Not everyone asks for gear ping, not everyone is interested in farming and not everyone who’s not a speedrunner goes around crying about speedrunners.

To end my blathering, this particular argument of yours is an impossible conditions fallacy. There’s no way you can introduce a condition where your argument wouldn’t be true therefore the idea is dismissed? No fair. The only way things would fulfill your argument was if the game was changed to City of Heroes…and even then, Stalkers were still shunned despite being perfectly capable as spikers, better than the heralded Scrapper at spiking down bosses.

I think the Zerker meta makes for some of the worst pve dungeons in MMO’s today. Basically everyone stack up, spam a few blocks and blinds and burn pretty much everything down like that.

Would love for the game to become a little more about Roles, whatever they happen to turn out to be, because atm pve is pretty unstimulating.

Relentliss.2170:

I think the Zerker meta makes for some of the worst pve dungeons in MMO’s today. Basically everyone stack up, spam a few blocks and blinds and burn pretty much everything down like that.

Would love for the game to become a little more about Roles, whatever they happen to turn out to be, because atm pve is pretty unstimulating.

That’s the thing. No role is supposed to be required for you to complete any content. And by complete, I mean kill it. Even if it takes a long time. A dungeon run of Arah Path 1 is doable by a group who are all wearing Clerics and traited to be support/healers. It might take them forever and a day because that build does not have high DPS by any stretch of the imagination. But still doable.

It’s been 815 days since the game launched, 818 days for those with headstart access. Let’s say the first 90 days, most players weren’t doing explorable dungeons. They were hard. That’s 725 days or 728 days. Then let’s assume only 1 run of a dungeon per day (and I’d imagine that before the dungeon reward change to daily only, that they were likely run multiple times per day). That’s 725 to 728 times through a dungeon. Please tell me that after doing 700+ runs that you wouldn’t have memorized the tells of the attacks that you would need to dodge or die or figured out how to best kill the bosses.

Now some people don’t mind taking their time in the dungeons even after that many runs. And that’s fine. But there are others who want to see how fast they can do it. To see if they can set/beat a record. And that’s fine as well. There are others who play for the rewards the dungeons give. And that’s also fine.

The thing is, the latter two groups benefit the most if they do the dungeon as quickly as possible. And that means killing things as quickly as possible. And that means high group DPS will be king for those groups. And right now the highest group DPS is zerker.

Until boss mechanics change or new dungeons or other such end game content is added at a semi-regular basis, the meta will always be one build: whatever gives the highest group DPS. There will still be no variety in the meta.

And I do not support any change that would make any group have to wait until they got a specific role before they would be able to complete the content. Even PUGs. Even groups who decide to go in as all Clerics with support/healer builds. Even groups who are all Zerkers with high DPS builds.

There is no real point to change the PvE “meta” people who want to do speed runs will ALWAYS find and run the optimal. No matter how much you balance and tweak there will be an option that is objectively better.

I think we should just be happy that we have a game that is accessible to all players and play styles…

I don’t see the problem anyways. Players who want to play optimal and min/max a comp let them?

Groups who just want to have a fun and run CoE it doesn’t matter what you bring as long as you can count to 3.

Tips for happy LFGing: 1. READ WHAT THE PARTY WANTS!. 2. as·sess if you can bring that, and join.

DO NOT: 1. Join a Speed run group if you are not compatible. 2. Join a group accepting “any” and expect it to go at your pace.

I think I said it before, but really, there should be changes in the area design itself rather than the specs. 6k armor and 21k/15s heals are great, but not really worth it if there isn’t much to spend it on, or if simply damaging is more effective.

Of course, damaging will always be effective, as long as enemies don’t have decent defenses or heals. In GW1, even a crappy charr overseers (level 6) could heal out a warrior’s damage (on the same level) for a long time 1v1, and groups with two of them were practically impossible to beat without numerical superiority superiority and focused damage. Better yet, later, a monk could heal out an entire player’s party worth of damage, or prot it into near-nothingness, at least for a while.

Case in point, the Forgotten Sages (WoH monks) were insanely hard to beat without proper shutdown after WoH was changed to allow self-targeting, while their enchanted hammer warriors pounded everything with weakness (-60% damage) and had a block stance, their elementalists had strong armor enchantment (-80% damage and burst heals from ER) and necromancers buffed physicals, enchanted swords crippled and had endure pain, and even their rangers could throw dirt to apply a blindness (90% chance to miss for a decent duration).

So to sum it up, an area design that included
*Healing (with 3s recharge)
*Weakness and Blindness
*Blocks
*Life Steal
*Defensive enchantments (Kinetic Armor, Ether Renewal)
*Damage based archers,
*strong spike damage from elementalists,
*life steal buffs for melee
*Corpse Denial against minion masters
*Tons and Tons of mana drain from mesmers

You couldn’t just toss in 6 warriors against them with permafrenzy, or 1 tanky warriors with 5 permafrenzy. When coming up against them, one of you would be slowed by the mesmer, if you stacked you’d ALL get hit by the blind of the ranger and the knockdown of the elementalist, and you’d still have to outdamage the monk’s healing while staying alive. I can’t stress the last part enough, as just popping a healing signet isn’t nearly enough (you might take more damage while activating it than it heals)

But sure, you can take vigorous spirit, predatory season and blood bond, you can take measures against conditions, you can even get some enchantment removal, but all of these cost your offensive ability, and more importantly, your abysmal mana pool that you can’t really manage without sacrificing your elite (Auspicious Blow doesn’t count) and ultimately, your damage potential. Same goes for fire eles, and ineptitude mesmers as well, or Prep Shot / barrage rangers (though Barrage/Pet works wonders, you new to gw might be surprised at how much the “bearbow” was the meta for farming greens in ToPK, one even managed to get away without healers, and that was the closest thing we had to GW2).

But enough of nostalgia, the point is that the encounters were always group versus group, and enemy groups were diverse. We wouldn’t have this meta if there were earth elementalists in ascalonian catacombs using Glyph of Storms + earth attunement against stacking players, if the ascalonian soldiers had either the mace block skill from warriors or the bubble block of guardians, the mesmers used feedback and illusions like maniacs, the warriors used warrior hammer 1-3, and their archers had shortbow or longbow skills. These ghosts were the dead of a defensive battle, it even makes sense for them to be playing “bunker builds”. Same with the covert bandits of Caudecus, but with more blinds.

In short, if the enemies were more like players, we’d be forced to think differently. One blind or block does little against multiple-shot channeled abilities, and stacking can be just as severely punished by monsters as by players. Having your entire party stuck inside a feedback bubble? Or behind an opposed Wall of Reflection? Who is laughing now, zerk?

On that note, the rampaging melee champions in these instances could use a nerf and some adds.

Leo G.4501:

Harper.4173:

That’s why the initial attribute system that was implemented during alpha builds was replaced by what we have today.
Look up the old system – read about it – and see how it would have provided more “depth”, more “specialization” and pretty much would have been an all together different experience than what we have today.

Also realize at least 50% of GW2’s player base would have completely failed to use said system to make even barely viable builds.

So instead we got the current system – with few skills, skills tied to weapons and as many crutch fail proof methods to keep players from failing and quitting as possible.

I’m curious, what was the GW2 alpha build like? I googled and didn’t come up with anything right off the bat.

Ranael.6423:

And right now the discussion is about suppressing a problem that doesn’t really exist by making the way things interact together super complicate. It’s cool to imagine that this trait here will interact with this stat which will increase effectiveness of this skill… but in the end people will even more min/max things so that you may destroy the zerk meta but instead will get something like :
“Have a zerk torso with cleric gloves, magi boot, sinister shoulders, one weapon giver and the other celectial or get kicked”.

So, are you going to bother discussing what I posted or just make up some notion of what you think I’m talking about and dismiss it with the same stilted argument?

Wooden Potatoes had a video on it. On how GW2 evolved over time. There’s quite a bit of footage out there.

There were also posts about the old system ( doubt you’ll find many now)

Notice his attributes and how each they’re distributed. Stats were not tied into gear at that point.
Seriously google it – it was more like GW1 than GW2’s current system. It also had energy – which gave another dimension of depth to combat and in combat resource management.

Relentliss.2170:

I think the Zerker meta makes for some of the worst pve dungeons in MMO’s today. Basically everyone stack up, spam a few blocks and blinds and burn pretty much everything down like that.

You’ve never been in a speed run. Don’t discuss what you don’t know.

Give more power to berserker and add a minus(negative) toughness or increase damage taken increase XX% since its called berzerker, necromancer on GW1 had some armor that smiting skills would do double damage.

if a player wan to make full damage sure he can but he will be paper, it will be required more skill tho.

Leo G.4501:

Because perhaps your enemy isn’t as dumb … XD

Some of the sillier mechanics in game do in fact bother me more than your suggestion, but they’re already in the game.

Taken just as a mechanic, your suggestion is better than a lot I’ve heard. However, the suggestion would create (an) alternative way(s) to handle a specific boss encounter. ANet has created specific encounters that favor different stats (e.g., Husks) and this has in no way diminished the complaints by people who want the core systems of the game to change so that their preferences are the norm. I don’t believe that’s what you’re asking for, but that is what the thread is about.

Okay, so what? You want to use that to label this trinity then? … The goal is to force you to shift tactics depending on what you have available to a steeper degree than what we do now.

Your suggestion uses defense to produce greater offense. There was a time when I believed that the risk of glass builds was too small or the reward too great. I no longer believe that. When the intro of Ferocity reduced the upper end of glass damage, I believe that righted the ship. Maybe the fact that the defensive stat character would be increasing group damage, not just his personal damage makes it that messing around with the opportunity cost of defense v. glass is OK. I’ll have to think about it.

I acknowledge this downfall, but that’s going to happen regardless of what system you speak of…. To end my blathering, this particular argument of yours is an impossible conditions fallacy …

I’m cynical that way. Really, though, this depends on what problem you’re trying to solve. If you’re talking about a new boss mechanic for a specific encounter, that’s one thing. However, no matter how many of these bones ANet throws at the player base it will not resolve the complaints of those who want the type of stat relevance found in trinity games in a game that eschewed the trinity. That’s especially true if they’re also trying not to invalidate the current meta.

In short, I’m fine with ideas for boss mechanics that you find more interesting. However, they won’t solve the problem presented by this thread, because that problem is a fundamental disagreement with the basic premises of this game’s design.

IndigoSundown.5419:

Leo G.4501:

Because perhaps your enemy isn’t as dumb … XD

Some of the sillier mechanics in game do in fact bother me more than your suggestion, but they’re already in the game.

Taken just as a mechanic, your suggestion is better than a lot I’ve heard. However, the suggestion would create (an) alternative way(s) to handle a specific boss encounter. ANet has created specific encounters that favor different stats (e.g., Husks) and this has in no way diminished the complaints by people who want the core systems of the game to change so that their preferences are the norm. I don’t believe that’s what you’re asking for, but that is what the thread is about.

Okay, so what? You want to use that to label this trinity then? … The goal is to force you to shift tactics depending on what you have available to a steeper degree than what we do now.

Your suggestion uses defense to produce greater offense. There was a time when I believed that the risk of glass builds was too small or the reward too great. I no longer believe that. When the intro of Ferocity reduced the upper end of glass damage, I believe that righted the ship. Maybe the fact that the defensive stat character would be increasing group damage, not just his personal damage makes it that messing around with the opportunity cost of defense v. glass is OK. I’ll have to think about it.

I acknowledge this downfall, but that’s going to happen regardless of what system you speak of…. To end my blathering, this particular argument of yours is an impossible conditions fallacy …

I’m cynical that way. Really, though, this depends on what problem you’re trying to solve. If you’re talking about a new boss mechanic for a specific encounter, that’s one thing. However, no matter how many of these bones ANet throws at the player base it will not resolve the complaints of those who want the type of stat relevance found in trinity games in a game that eschewed the trinity. That’s especially true if they’re also trying not to invalidate the current meta.

In short, I’m fine with ideas for boss mechanics that you find more interesting. However, they won’t solve the problem presented by this thread, because that problem is a fundamental disagreement with the basic premises of this game’s design.

And to build upon what the poster above said.

It’s been two years since the game launched and its overall direction and goals gameplay-wise are clear and evident.

It’s curious why some people – after all this time – fail to realize what this game is, how it was and is intended to work and that maybe, just maybe they should consider it’s not the game they imagined, rather it is the game they’re faced with.

A curious question – if people are so riled up by the current system being “broken” or “wrong” why do said people keep playing?

If I thought a game was broken I certainly wouldn’t play it for two years and complain constantly.

hybrid.5027:

Relentliss.2170:

I think the Zerker meta makes for some of the worst pve dungeons in MMO’s today. Basically everyone stack up, spam a few blocks and blinds and burn pretty much everything down like that.

You’ve never been in a speed run. Don’t discuss what you don’t know.

Lately I’ve been doing them with my pve friends. So I do know of what I speak.

IndigoSundown.5419:

I’m cynical that way. Really, though, this depends on what problem you’re trying to solve. If you’re talking about a new boss mechanic for a specific encounter, that’s one thing. However, no matter how many of these bones ANet throws at the player base it will not resolve the complaints of those who want the type of stat relevance found in trinity games in a game that eschewed the trinity. That’s especially true if they’re also trying not to invalidate the current meta.

In short, I’m fine with ideas for boss mechanics that you find more interesting. However, they won’t solve the problem presented by this thread, because that problem is a fundamental disagreement with the basic premises of this game’s design.

Well actually, the whole neutral/vulnerable(/defensive) state idea would be game-wide. It’d throw a wrench in quite a few ways of doing things currently (or at least it does in my head), i.e. that cluster of trash you normally melt with a couple of cleaves, some of them might resort to a defensive state to ‘block’ the burst leaving some of the cluster left.

Harper.4173:

And to build upon what the poster above said.

It’s been two years since the game launched and its overall direction and goals gameplay-wise are clear and evident.

It’s curious why some people – after all this time – fail to realize what this game is, how it was and is intended to work and that maybe, just maybe they should consider it’s not the game they imagined, rather it is the game they’re faced with.

A curious question – if people are so riled up by the current system being “broken” or “wrong” why do said people keep playing?

If I thought a game was broken I certainly wouldn’t play it for two years and complain constantly.

Well aren’t you just a fine generalizer.

For one, I don’t fail to realize any of that. I guess you failed to read properly? I know how old the game is, I know how the game works, and I realize what possibilities are likely for implementation. I just find it far more entertaining to discuss ideas like these on a forum built for discussion rather than constantly whine and complain about every little issue that I don’t like like +75% of the forum posters do. Not that complaints aren’t important for feedback, but so are suggestions, brainstorming and collaboration.

And for two, I don’t play the game all that often. I’m not riled up about a system being broken or wrong, I’m shooting the shi- about improvements to the game because I’m bored.

I took a year long break after getting bored with the game, came back and played for about another month before getting bored again. I like this game, I really do, but it’s more repetitive than CoH ever was which was the king of repetitive encounters. How it managed to stay fun for 6+ years still feels like a mystery to me but I’m going to guess it had to do with the magnitude of ways you can play a character. GW2 needs an infusion of some imagination or at least some hope considering how many cranky forum posters crying about content or jaded players that feel the need to slash the throat of any kind of ‘new’ idea posted.

Leo G.4501:

IndigoSundown.5419:

I’m cynical that way. Really, though, this depends on what problem you’re trying to solve. If you’re talking about a new boss mechanic for a specific encounter, that’s one thing. However, no matter how many of these bones ANet throws at the player base it will not resolve the complaints of those who want the type of stat relevance found in trinity games in a game that eschewed the trinity. That’s especially true if they’re also trying not to invalidate the current meta.

In short, I’m fine with ideas for boss mechanics that you find more interesting. However, they won’t solve the problem presented by this thread, because that problem is a fundamental disagreement with the basic premises of this game’s design.

Well actually, the whole neutral/vulnerable(/defensive) state idea would be game-wide. It’d throw a wrench in quite a few ways of doing things currently (or at least it does in my head), i.e. that cluster of trash you normally melt with a couple of cleaves, some of them might resort to a defensive state to ‘block’ the burst leaving some of the cluster left.

I see where your head is now. Honestly, I’d be fine if mobs got new abilities, but not all the same new abilities. Especially not just to make defensive stats relevant in groups.

Leo G.4501:

I took a year long break after getting bored with the game, came back and played for about another month before getting bored again. I like this game, I really do, but it’s more repetitive than CoH ever was which was the king of repetitive encounters. How it managed to stay fun for 6+ years still feels like a mystery to me but I’m going to guess it had to do with the magnitude of ways you can play a character. GW2 needs an infusion of some imagination or at least some hope considering how many cranky forum posters crying about content or jaded players that feel the need to slash the throat of any kind of ‘new’ idea posted.

Guess what. There ARE a magnitude of ways to play a character.

Just because Zerker is the way the speed running group in dungeons likes to play their characters, doesn’t mean that that’s the only way to play the game.

I pretty much soloed the entire portion of map completion on my main. At the time my main was an Elementalist. Geared in full Clerics once she hit 80, mixed gear sets beforehand. One of the opposing gear sets to Zerker. It’s DPS is abysmal compared to Zerker. I had fun doing it. And parts were challenging. But the Elementalist was my first character in this game and GW2 is my first MMO. There were a few skill challenges that others showed up at and I did need assistance for a few skill points in Malachor’s Leap and Cursed Shore (they tended to be the ones with at least a champion or two nearby and I couldn’t figure out how to sneak by them). And champions aren’t meant to be easily soloed and I don’t have the skills as a casual.

I don’t hear too many complaints about how difficult content is so there must not be too many builds that aren’t able to complete the content.

So it seems to me that the content is doable by any number of builds.

The only time that people demand zerker is when they are organizing a speed run of a dungeon

Zerker gear is popular by the other players because the game mechanics mean that DPS is king. No amount of stat reassignment will change that. It will just mean that the new meta gear set will likely be something other than Zerker.

New mechanics would likely help increase variety, but like with the current dungeons, eventually, the variety will lessen as people learn the new mechanics. The new meta would just likely not be as much of a glass cannon as a full zerker is. Old content you’ve done several hundred times you tend to learn what you can and can’t take and how glassy your cannon can be.

Like in Fractals how some people do them without any Agony Resistance, even when they pass level 10.

IndigoSundown.5419:

I see where your head is now. Honestly, I’d be fine if mobs got new abilities, but not all the same new abilities. Especially not just to make defensive stats relevant in groups.

Well it’s not just defensive stats that is the aim, that’s only where it started. Since condition stats would thus govern how often conditions are applied by abilities and how strong those conditions are, it would mean conditions aren’t as common place thus pushing condition specs and since condition damage would do the same damage for neutral or vulnerable states (although lower damage to defensive states) it would be the ‘consistent damage’ route.

Abilities that primarily apply boons or conditions would likely require something added to them in the cases where they are wielded by someone not specialized in the stats to take full advantage to them…so that straight power still gives them something to take advantage of…perhaps control utility.

And if boons are governed by a stat, those would be less common place too. Current boon skills might have more advantages added to them that relies on having a higher count in the boon stats or maybe unlock more advanced effects of boons themselves.

The way I imagine doing the whole defensive/neutral/vulnerable state thing would vary among monsters. Some trash mobs might shift between defensive and vulnerable while other trash might not have defensive states, only neutral and vulnerable. Vets and Champions would have shorter vulnerable states while boss mobs might have extended defensive states. But whatever special skill each monster uses would trigger the state changes. It would again vary. Some special skills might put the mob in a defensive state while it’s being charged but vulnerable after, some might be the opposite, etc, but the windows would differ from mob to mob.

The idea is pretty much a whole other game, if I’m trying to explain it. I can imagine it in GW2 terms, but it would be a very different GW2.

Seera.5916:

Guess what. There ARE a magnitude of ways to play a character.

Just because Zerker is the way the speed running group in dungeons likes to play their characters, doesn’t mean that that’s the only way to play the game.

Don’t think I don’t know that. Like I mentioned before, I’ve played zerk and hybrid about 75% of the time I played. The other 25% has been a mix. I’ve played celestial ele, condi ele, balanced ele, cleric mesmer, knights ranger, soldiers warrior…alot more that I can’t think off the top of my head…but yeah. The only problem I notice is the same that WoodenPotatoes mentions in that video:

I marvel at what my cleric phantasm mesmer could manage to do by herself and even what support she could afford a team (dat phantasmal defender) but at the end of the day, there’s no content to take advantage of it, not many players will yield to its support, the dynamic of the content leans toward negating nearly all damage, conditions is a mess of trampled feet, boons practically rain upon you…it all just narrows the scope of encounters. It makes it harder to devise content that challenges us in newer ways besides timing your dodges and interrupts.

Seera.5916:

Zerker gear is popular by the other players because the game mechanics mean that DPS is king. No amount of stat reassignment will change that. It will just mean that the new meta gear set will likely be something other than Zerker.

I take that as a challenge! Never say never, if there’s a will there’s a way and all that jazz.

Seera.5916:

New mechanics would likely help increase variety, but like with the current dungeons, eventually, the variety will lessen as people learn the new mechanics. The new meta would just likely not be as much of a glass cannon as a full zerker is. Old content you’ve done several hundred times you tend to learn what you can and can’t take and how glassy your cannon can be.

Hmmm, now that I think about it, that might be one reason why City of Heroes was pretty fun despite being horribly repetitive. Yes, there will always be an optimal set-up with very specific professions, specs and such, but the variables come in at that point:

• Can you amass this perfect-storm of a team? If not, you usually take what you can get and that one small change can make encounters feel vastly different.

• What is optimal for one encounter isn’t always optimal for the next. If enemies have varying styles, strengths and weaknesses, settling is necessary especially if there is such variety in the enemy within the same instance.

• Playing alongside variety tends to whet your desire more for variety. Cannot tell you how often I played along side a hero with power combinations I hadn’t bothered to try and formed such an amazing motif and strategy that it inspired me to make something new. It’s tougher to get that feeling when everyone is technically doing the same thing.

I keep mentioning City of Heroes but I know Guild Wars 1 had similar flavor (although unsure how strict their trinity was…in CoH, there were tanks, support, DPS and control of varying types but there were many blends that gave alternatives….like if you didn’t have tanks to soak up damage, support could strengthen you enough to compensate or control could neutralize foes instead or if you took sustainable DPS you could manage without support or if you coordinate ranged DPS and nukes, you didn’t need control).

The thing is, the meta will always be relatively limited in a game whose mechanics do not require a group of people to do specific set roles.

Because for farmers and for those who want to see how fast they can do something, killing things the fastest is king. And that means high DPS.

Because everyone can contribute to the role of tank, support, healer, etc, without sacrificing too much personal DPS. And that’s the beauty of this game that some people can’t seem to grasp is a major difference between GW2 and WoW (and its clones).

Let’s say I run a dungeon with Tina, Ulysses, Victor, and Wendy on some random night and we all wear full Zerker gear. If one member specializes in a certain aspect, via the traits and skills already available to us, it means I can shift my build to work on other aspects or have higher DPS if every other role needed for the dungeon’s encounters is already met. Even though all of us have Zerker gear.

A game without roles will always a favor a high DPS meta. Anything that would force the meta to include other roles for the meta (support, healing, tanking, etc) would be such that it would have to require those roles, something this game is not designed to do.

While new mechanics and wild shifts to gear and traits would likely increase variety in the meta to start in a game without roles, eventually as people learned the new mechanics and calculated the math in the gear and trait set up, the meta will eventually come down to the same variety that we have now.

Seera.5916:

Anything that would force the meta to include other roles for the meta (support, healing, tanking, etc) would be such that it would have to require those roles, something this game is not designed to do.

That just isn’t true and I stated examples of why and cited roles in other games etc. Just because there could be roles does not mean one can logically leap that each role or one role will be required above all else or that just because a meta exists, variety can simple be boiled down to the simplicity that exists today. That’s just flat out ignoring variety right there.

For example, in City of Heroes, one could say the meta was mainly Controllers as they could buff each other, negate foes’ attacks with CC and pile on damage with pets. That didn’t stop people from running practically everything else (Controllers weren’t even that popular, Scrappers and Brutes were the most played).

Don’t underestimate player preference. I bet you there are tons of players yerning to use suchandsuch spec in normal play, it’s just most spec not angled toward damage have very little scope of use in normal play. Things don’t have to be a meta to be useful or fun.

Leo G.4501:

Seera.5916:

Anything that would force the meta to include other roles for the meta (support, healing, tanking, etc) would be such that it would have to require those roles, something this game is not designed to do.

That just isn’t true and I stated examples of why and cited roles in other games etc. Just because there could be roles does not mean one can logically leap that each role or one role will be required above all else or that just because a meta exists, variety can simple be boiled down to the simplicity that exists today. That’s just flat out ignoring variety right there.

For example, in City of Heroes, one could say the meta was mainly Controllers as they could buff each other, negate foes’ attacks with CC and pile on damage with pets. That didn’t stop people from running practically everything else (Controllers weren’t even that popular, Scrappers and Brutes were the most played).

Don’t underestimate player preference. I bet you there are tons of players yerning to use suchandsuch spec in normal play, it’s just most spec not angled toward damage have very little scope of use in normal play. Things don’t have to be a meta to be useful or fun.

And you can already use suchandsuch spec in normal play. Full Clerics doesn’t have much scope in normal play in PvE. Yet I was able to do a majority of the normal play in full Clerics with a build not built for dealing damage. I’ve done a number of casual Fractal runs in Clerics (running in a group that ANOTHER full Cleric member with us).

The only play they couldn’t do is joining groups whose stated purpose is to get through the dungeon as fast as possible.

Any change to the game to that would FORCE a variety of builds in the META would require the necessity of roles. Anything short of forcing a variety of builds will only lead to a temporary state of variety in the meta.

Normal play does not require the use of a Meta build. Just because the meta build is all that’s really talked about on the forums or when people ask for a good build, doesn’t mean that other builds don’t exist or aren’t played. They’re just specific to a person’s play style & skill level, and those that aren’t good at making builds likely refer to the meta because it’s a build they know will work.

It’s just a fact that some people fail to understand players looking to optimize their playing time in terms of rewards per time will always create new metagame strategies which clear the content the fastest and will not want anything else.

This exists in EVERY game. The mtagame strategy may not be DPS-only, but there is a meta, and in many cases, said meta is set in stone and often content is designed around this meta to keep content challenging.

But if I don’t want to play a tank or healer, I don’t have any interest in playing. That’s why GW2 is so awesome: you don’t depend on pre-defined strategies to achieve the same end result. Time spent can and will always be optimized, but that’s just how it works. That’s why the dungeons need re-designs; until they are more than just depleting health bars (a measure of DPS), the DPS-based meta will always exist. There will never and should never be a point in time where nomad’s is the meta.

The traditional trinity “roles” do not exist in GW2. – only strategies within the game and the context of what is trying to be performed. Each player is merely an entity built upon his or her own preferences. It’s that simple, and nothing about it should change to enforce pre-defined strategies of roles in the game.

Don’t like the meta? Then don’t speedrun. Don’t like the trinity in WoW or other games? Don’t do those dungeons or don’t play that game. That’s the reason why most of us are here, frankly. It’s that simple.

DeceiverX.8361:

you don’t depend on pre-defined strategies to achieve the same end result

Tell that to the stack in the corner (and skip if that doesn’t work) people.

DeceiverX.8361:

It’s just a fact that some people fail to understand players looking to optimize their playing time in terms of rewards per time will always create new metagame strategies which clear the content the fastest and will not want anything else.

This exists in EVERY game. The mtagame strategy may not be DPS-only, but there is a meta, and in many cases, said meta is set in stone and often content is designed around this meta to keep content challenging.

But if I don’t want to play a tank or healer, I don’t have any interest in playing. That’s why GW2 is so awesome: you don’t depend on pre-defined strategies to achieve the same end result. Time spent can and will always be optimized, but that’s just how it works. That’s why the dungeons need re-designs; until they are more than just depleting health bars (a measure of DPS), the DPS-based meta will always exist. There will never and should never be a point in time where nomad’s is the meta.

The traditional trinity “roles” do not exist in GW2. – only strategies within the game and the context of what is trying to be performed. Each player is merely an entity built upon his or her own preferences. It’s that simple, and nothing about it should change to enforce pre-defined strategies of roles in the game.

Don’t like the meta? Then don’t speedrun. Don’t like the trinity in WoW or other games? Don’t do those dungeons or don’t play that game. That’s the reason why most of us are here, frankly. It’s that simple.

First off, the only reason the Tank-DPS-Heal triangle doesn’t exist is because there isn’t anything other than DPS, but just like in a trinity game you are supposed to bring the meta, and as the game gets older, this will shift even more as more people settle into speedruns or just quit the game.

The only difference in gw2 is that you can do even less things within a metagame than in a trinity game: If you have a tank, you build and play it differently, making tanky sets useful within a metagame. If you build a nuker or any kind of DPS, you might be looking into DPS items (which may be DoT like conditions, direct damage, or damage bonus scaling with your distance to target, all potentially useful), same with healer or defensive supporter: healing boosts, boosts to prots, or just boosts to spell casting time and spell recharge (the 40/40 sets).

The supposed beauty you keep talking about is that it chains your hands to DPS, even though the core idea was to abolish it in a way to allow wildly different combinations to not only work, but flourish, depending on player skill. Instead you have about two-three builds per profession and that’s it, they all do the same few things. It’s not better than the trinity: it’s even less.

In case you want to see where it leads, gw1 devolved into speedclears as people either adapted to the very very ultra specific builds items ranks and consumables, or quit playing deeming the grind not worth their time. And dead game is dead.

Seera.5916:

And you can already use suchandsuch spec in normal play. Full Clerics doesn’t have much scope in normal play in PvE. Yet I was able to do a majority of the normal play in full Clerics with a build not built for dealing damage. I’ve done a number of casual Fractal runs in Clerics (running in a group that ANOTHER full Cleric member with us).

The only play they couldn’t do is joining groups whose stated purpose is to get through the dungeon as fast as possible.

Yeah, I know. We’ve covered this and I’ve done the same.

But thinking on it a bit further, you’re right. Clerics might not have a wide scope of use in normal play but the content can still be completed so it’s still viable. The same can be said for Berserkers: it doesn’t have a wide scope of use besides killing things.

The next thought though is reward…and I’m not talking about gold/loot. The game rewards you in many ways with Berserker’s gear: you destroy enemies faster, you gain xp for killing and possibly even bonus xp from killing more enemies within a timed window, faster kills = faster loot = less time being attacked, how the stats works exponentially increases the damage of pretty much every offensive skill, you feel powerful…I’m sure you can probably think of more.

Cleric’s gear or a defensive spec in general has its rewards but how pertinent are those rewards to the content? I can think of: your heal skill is more effective, your regen boon heals for more/sec, you feel more helpful by helping others, you can keep NPCs alive, the way the stats work toughness is magnified by passive/reactive healing to make you bulkier.

I can only pinpoint one particular advantage pertinent to the content and that’s keeping NPCs alive. Now how rewarding is that in the content? With Offensive specs, they can also keep NPCs alive by killing enemies faster, they can attain mission complete quicker meaning more loot, more gold, more exp and they can bonuses for those as well by being quick.

Am I skewing the sides too much?

Seera.5916:

Any change to the game to that would FORCE a variety of builds in the META would require the necessity of roles.

~rubs brow~

Well, I’ve done my kittenest to not use the term ‘meta’ and even when I do, I usually put it in single quotes. I feel it’s off topic for me because I don’t want to argue about it nor do I actually care about it. It’s only brought up because people like you use it as an argument. That’s fine, I don’t care. But I feel it’s a false positive for your argument regardless. It exists as an entity that is neither good nor bad, it simply is yet its existence is used (not the meta itself is used, but the fact that there is one) in so many strange and sidelong ways, it screws up the meaning of people’s words and communication is lost. I’m not going to keep making comments about it. You can change the word to something else more descriptive of your meaning such as optimization.

Also, necessity of roles in an encounter is only true if those roles were not to some level interchangeable. Even if the level of interchangeability was not perfectly balanced, player preference would still play a larger role in what is used more often. Optimization is not the point either, as the idea is to create a basis for variety first then balance from there.

Leo G.4501:

Well, I’ve done my kittenest to not use the term ‘meta’ and even when I do, I usually put it in single quotes. I feel it’s off topic for me because I don’t want to argue about it nor do I actually care about it. It’s only brought up because people like you use it as an argument.

Changing the meta is the topic of the thread, which is “The zerker meta and how to change it.” If the meta is off-topic for your post, then your post is off topic in this thread.

IndigoSundown.5419:

Leo G.4501:

Well, I’ve done my kittenest to not use the term ‘meta’ and even when I do, I usually put it in single quotes. I feel it’s off topic for me because I don’t want to argue about it nor do I actually care about it. It’s only brought up because people like you use it as an argument.

Changing the meta is the topic of the thread, which is “The zerker meta and how to change it.” If the meta is off-topic for your post, then your post is off topic in this thread.

Exactly.

And I feel, Leo G, that you only claim it’s off topic to avoid discussing the fact that we’ve hit the nail on the head with the problem with your solution. That it won’t increase the variety in the meta unless it FORCES people to play in specific roles to do content. And I will never support any solution that could do that. And since you want variety of roles viable in the meta, then your solution would have to force people to play in specific roles to do content.

In the midst of a duo CM run I had to turn to my friend and ask, doesnt it seem like all this content was designed with the Holy Trinity in mind? After a moments thought she agreed.

Its almost like midway through the developement process it was decided that the Holy Trinity should be taken out, and now we the players get to reap the rewards of pretty broken PvE stuff.

IndigoSundown.5419:

Leo G.4501:

Well, I’ve done my kittenest to not use the term ‘meta’ and even when I do, I usually put it in single quotes. I feel it’s off topic for me because I don’t want to argue about it nor do I actually care about it. It’s only brought up because people like you use it as an argument.

Changing the meta is the topic of the thread, which is “The zerker meta and how to change it.” If the meta is off-topic for your post, then your post is off topic in this thread.

I said it’s off topic “for me”, simply meaning I’m not really into talking about it. Partially because I’ve stretch myself thin talking about junk on the forums as of late but also partially because it would lead me to discussing a slew of other stuff related to the topic, like that it means different things to different aspects of the game, who it’s generalizing and a bunch of other jazz.

If few people want to go out of their way to clarify exactly their meanings when they use the amorphous term ‘meta’ and all the baggage that comes with it, why should I subject myself to do what you people don’t feel bothered to?

Seera.5916:

Exactly.

And I feel, Leo G, that you only claim it’s off topic to avoid discussing the fact that we’ve hit the nail on the head with the problem with your solution. That it won’t increase the variety in the meta unless it FORCES people to play in specific roles to do content. And I will never support any solution that could do that. And since you want variety of roles viable in the meta, then your solution would have to force people to play in specific roles to do content.

You haven’t hit any nail. In fact, it seems like you’re just banging the same drum while the nail is half-way down the hall. But you don’t want to hit the nail, you just want to keep making noise until I shut up.

Also, I’m dismissing most of the baggage of the OP to overturn a ‘meta’ because it’s like overturning a fad. Why even bother with what some speed-runners that find it fun to run dungeons as scripted token dispensers do when my goal is more inline with making other builds like my cleric phantasm mesmer not be at odds with my internal pinging of opportunity cost management. I know how useful my cleric mesmer can be, healing, absorbing damage, stripping boons and throwing around retaliation can be but opportunity costs are a thing. Damage, utilities, cast frames, they are at odds with what I could be doing, such kittentering, reflecting and using my time to attack and dodge instead. And it’s partly like that because of the content.

It all just cheapens the prospect of the idea as a whole because it sets expectations even before an idea is conceived.