(edited by Zenith.7301)
Make a raid wing where thieves are crucial
1 2
Well considering there are 6 developers out of 300 working on raids (aka 2%), I would consider it a smashing success.
Edit: And to get partially back on topic, I think I found out another reason you hate raids like no tomorrow: you play a thief.
Well, not in raids, for what little time I’ve dabbled in raids it was Ele or Necro. I have 12 level 80s at the moment, and while my Thief is my main, my first launch character, the one I cleared HoT’s content with first, etc., I play with most of the others daily as well, to varying degrees. For the most part whichever class they would make viable, I’d be fine enough with that, but I do think they should all be viable in all boss fights in some role (and not just “it won’t hurt us too badly if you tag along”).
Deliberately miss the point all you like it doesn’t change the fact that raids are a successful feature in GW2 which are contributing to player retention.
That’s highly dubious thing to state as a fact.
Having 1/10th of the player base doing content that’s not meant for everyone in the first place is pretty good.
Some types of content are simply bound to achieve higher numbers since you get slapped in the face with them and are available from the beginning of the game (story, events, maps/events) while raids are completely optional and basically the last stop for a player after they leveled their character, gained knowledge on their class and improved their gameplay in other content such as fractals.
They shouldn’t make any class crucial for raids. Some could be better than others but forcing a crucial class just makes it no better than other raid games where you need a particular tank or healer.
The current design is fine, thief is in a good strong place for raids such as Matthias and Sabetha and even on other bosses such as VG it is still a solid choice.
Most raiders can and should have multiple classes for raids and swap it up depending on the situation.
FOR THE GREEEEEEEEEEEEN
If they just gave engineers or thieves and aura utility like Spotter or Assassin’s Presence that was strong enough (200 of a stat to a group), I bet you’d see less stacking of tempests and more class variety.
Same for Guardian, problem is Guardians got an aura that gives Toughness, and Toughness is a trash stat in a PvE where you can completely avoid most threats with the dodge button.
Scrappers could give an aura that gives 10% condi duration increase, and daredevils could give a 15% movement speed increase that stacks with swiftness.
Guardians could have an aura that increases the effectiveness of boon effects by 5% (so 5% more to prot value, might power gains, etc).
You would then see all classes represented.
This goes directly against what they want to achieve though and forces a super comp where you bring 1 of every “Aura Stat Trait” to coin a phrase. Which means that they then would have to design each encounter around a fixed comp to ensure all dps/mechanics could be met.
Instead of solving the problem that way they just need to design encounters that play to the strengths of each each class. IE a boss that has adds, but when the adds die the boss gets stronger somehow or reduces the kill timer (limits AoE’s, promotes thief) etc…
More creative encounter design is the best way to increase diversity, not that its in that bad a spot to begin with.
If they just gave engineers or thieves and aura utility like Spotter or Assassin’s Presence that was strong enough (200 of a stat to a group), I bet you’d see less stacking of tempests and more class variety.
Same for Guardian, problem is Guardians got an aura that gives Toughness, and Toughness is a trash stat in a PvE where you can completely avoid most threats with the dodge button.
Scrappers could give an aura that gives 10% condi duration increase, and daredevils could give a 15% movement speed increase that stacks with swiftness.
Guardians could have an aura that increases the effectiveness of boon effects by 5% (so 5% more to prot value, might power gains, etc).
You would then see all classes represented.
This goes directly against what they want to achieve though and forces a super comp where you bring 1 of every “Aura Stat Trait” to coin a phrase. Which means that they then would have to design each encounter around a fixed comp to ensure all dps/mechanics could be met.
Instead of solving the problem that way they just need to design encounters that play to the strengths of each each class. IE a boss that has adds, but when the adds die the boss gets stronger somehow or reduces the kill timer (limits AoE’s, promotes thief) etc…
More creative encounter design is the best way to increase diversity, not that its in that bad a spot to begin with.
We already have meta comps, this changes nothing. I suspect this complaint derives from not wanting to change away from players who already committed to 3-4 tempests.
If you’re running a different comp, you’re already being subpar, so adding auras so some classes are represented isn’t changing anything.
Besides, I don’t buy the argument for one moment that encounters need to encourage some classes. That just means you’re gonna class stack differently for each boss, which is terrible.
It strikes me as what just happened to T4 fractals, where now you’re stacking the new optimal class for the encounter.
I don’t trust them with encounter design for one second as a surefire way to make sure all classes are represented and equally wanted.
(edited by Zenith.7301)
If they just gave engineers or thieves and aura utility like Spotter or Assassin’s Presence that was strong enough (200 of a stat to a group), I bet you’d see less stacking of tempests and more class variety.
Same for Guardian, problem is Guardians got an aura that gives Toughness, and Toughness is a trash stat in a PvE where you can completely avoid most threats with the dodge button.
Scrappers could give an aura that gives 10% condi duration increase, and daredevils could give a 15% movement speed increase that stacks with swiftness.
Guardians could have an aura that increases the effectiveness of boon effects by 5% (so 5% more to prot value, might power gains, etc).
You would then see all classes represented.
This goes directly against what they want to achieve though and forces a super comp where you bring 1 of every “Aura Stat Trait” to coin a phrase. Which means that they then would have to design each encounter around a fixed comp to ensure all dps/mechanics could be met.
Instead of solving the problem that way they just need to design encounters that play to the strengths of each each class. IE a boss that has adds, but when the adds die the boss gets stronger somehow or reduces the kill timer (limits AoE’s, promotes thief) etc…
More creative encounter design is the best way to increase diversity, not that its in that bad a spot to begin with.
We already have meta comps, this changes nothing. I suspect this complaint derives from not wanting to change away from players who already committed to 3-4 tempests.
If you’re running a different comp, you’re already being subpar, so adding auras so some classes are represented isn’t changing anything.
Besides, I don’t buy the argument for one moment that encounters need to encourage some classes. That just means you’re gonna class stack differently for each boss, which is terrible.
It strikes me as what just happened to T4 fractals, where now you’re stacking the new optimal class for the encounter.
I don’t trust them with encounter design for one second as a surefire way to make sure all classes are represented and equally wanted.
There’s a big difference between a “meta comp”, versus needing to find one of every aura stat boost class. Not only does that effectively kill build diversity it leads to stagnant design encounter because you do have to design around the fact that every player will have an additional ball of stats. These words by the way were said on stream by Crystal herself at one point. I’ll see if i can find that stream just so you can view it.
Video here – https://youtu.be/1FUkGRxuxV0?t=22m
As far as not trusting them for designing encounters, i think they’re doing fine.
(edited by TexZero.7910)
If they just gave engineers or thieves and aura utility like Spotter or Assassin’s Presence that was strong enough (200 of a stat to a group), I bet you’d see less stacking of tempests and more class variety.
Same for Guardian, problem is Guardians got an aura that gives Toughness, and Toughness is a trash stat in a PvE where you can completely avoid most threats with the dodge button.
Scrappers could give an aura that gives 10% condi duration increase, and daredevils could give a 15% movement speed increase that stacks with swiftness.
Guardians could have an aura that increases the effectiveness of boon effects by 5% (so 5% more to prot value, might power gains, etc).
You would then see all classes represented.
This goes directly against what they want to achieve though and forces a super comp where you bring 1 of every “Aura Stat Trait” to coin a phrase. Which means that they then would have to design each encounter around a fixed comp to ensure all dps/mechanics could be met.
Instead of solving the problem that way they just need to design encounters that play to the strengths of each each class. IE a boss that has adds, but when the adds die the boss gets stronger somehow or reduces the kill timer (limits AoE’s, promotes thief) etc…
More creative encounter design is the best way to increase diversity, not that its in that bad a spot to begin with.
We already have meta comps, this changes nothing. I suspect this complaint derives from not wanting to change away from players who already committed to 3-4 tempests.
If you’re running a different comp, you’re already being subpar, so adding auras so some classes are represented isn’t changing anything.
Besides, I don’t buy the argument for one moment that encounters need to encourage some classes. That just means you’re gonna class stack differently for each boss, which is terrible.
It strikes me as what just happened to T4 fractals, where now you’re stacking the new optimal class for the encounter.
I don’t trust them with encounter design for one second as a surefire way to make sure all classes are represented and equally wanted.
There’s a big difference between a “meta comp”, versus needing to find one of every aura stat boost class. Not only does that effectively kill build diversity it leads to stagnant design encounter because you do have to design around the fact that every player will have an additional ball of stats. These words by the way were said on stream by Crystal herself at one point. I’ll see if i can find that stream just so you can view it.
Video here – https://youtu.be/1FUkGRxuxV0?t=22m
As far as not trusting them for designing encounters, i think they’re doing fine.
So fine that we’re stacking 3-4 tempests, sure.
This is being obtuse by now. There’s no build diversity when you can’t even have class diversity lol
If they just gave engineers or thieves and aura utility like Spotter or Assassin’s Presence that was strong enough (200 of a stat to a group), I bet you’d see less stacking of tempests and more class variety.
Same for Guardian, problem is Guardians got an aura that gives Toughness, and Toughness is a trash stat in a PvE where you can completely avoid most threats with the dodge button.
Scrappers could give an aura that gives 10% condi duration increase, and daredevils could give a 15% movement speed increase that stacks with swiftness.
Guardians could have an aura that increases the effectiveness of boon effects by 5% (so 5% more to prot value, might power gains, etc).
You would then see all classes represented.
This goes directly against what they want to achieve though and forces a super comp where you bring 1 of every “Aura Stat Trait” to coin a phrase. Which means that they then would have to design each encounter around a fixed comp to ensure all dps/mechanics could be met.
Instead of solving the problem that way they just need to design encounters that play to the strengths of each each class. IE a boss that has adds, but when the adds die the boss gets stronger somehow or reduces the kill timer (limits AoE’s, promotes thief) etc…
More creative encounter design is the best way to increase diversity, not that its in that bad a spot to begin with.
We already have meta comps, this changes nothing. I suspect this complaint derives from not wanting to change away from players who already committed to 3-4 tempests.
If you’re running a different comp, you’re already being subpar, so adding auras so some classes are represented isn’t changing anything.
Besides, I don’t buy the argument for one moment that encounters need to encourage some classes. That just means you’re gonna class stack differently for each boss, which is terrible.
It strikes me as what just happened to T4 fractals, where now you’re stacking the new optimal class for the encounter.
I don’t trust them with encounter design for one second as a surefire way to make sure all classes are represented and equally wanted.
There’s a big difference between a “meta comp”, versus needing to find one of every aura stat boost class. Not only does that effectively kill build diversity it leads to stagnant design encounter because you do have to design around the fact that every player will have an additional ball of stats. These words by the way were said on stream by Crystal herself at one point. I’ll see if i can find that stream just so you can view it.
Video here – https://youtu.be/1FUkGRxuxV0?t=22m
As far as not trusting them for designing encounters, i think they’re doing fine.
So fine that we’re stacking 3-4 tempests, sure.
This is being obtuse by now. There’s no build diversity when you can’t even have class diversity lol
I mean that’s your groups choice to stack that many tempest when its not required.
However the overall health of raids allows pretty much all classes to be viable, just not optimal.
If they just gave engineers or thieves and aura utility like Spotter or Assassin’s Presence that was strong enough (200 of a stat to a group), I bet you’d see less stacking of tempests and more class variety.
Same for Guardian, problem is Guardians got an aura that gives Toughness, and Toughness is a trash stat in a PvE where you can completely avoid most threats with the dodge button.
Scrappers could give an aura that gives 10% condi duration increase, and daredevils could give a 15% movement speed increase that stacks with swiftness.
Guardians could have an aura that increases the effectiveness of boon effects by 5% (so 5% more to prot value, might power gains, etc).
You would then see all classes represented.
This goes directly against what they want to achieve though and forces a super comp where you bring 1 of every “Aura Stat Trait” to coin a phrase. Which means that they then would have to design each encounter around a fixed comp to ensure all dps/mechanics could be met.
Instead of solving the problem that way they just need to design encounters that play to the strengths of each each class. IE a boss that has adds, but when the adds die the boss gets stronger somehow or reduces the kill timer (limits AoE’s, promotes thief) etc…
More creative encounter design is the best way to increase diversity, not that its in that bad a spot to begin with.
We already have meta comps, this changes nothing. I suspect this complaint derives from not wanting to change away from players who already committed to 3-4 tempests.
If you’re running a different comp, you’re already being subpar, so adding auras so some classes are represented isn’t changing anything.
Besides, I don’t buy the argument for one moment that encounters need to encourage some classes. That just means you’re gonna class stack differently for each boss, which is terrible.
It strikes me as what just happened to T4 fractals, where now you’re stacking the new optimal class for the encounter.
I don’t trust them with encounter design for one second as a surefire way to make sure all classes are represented and equally wanted.
There’s a big difference between a “meta comp”, versus needing to find one of every aura stat boost class. Not only does that effectively kill build diversity it leads to stagnant design encounter because you do have to design around the fact that every player will have an additional ball of stats. These words by the way were said on stream by Crystal herself at one point. I’ll see if i can find that stream just so you can view it.
Video here – https://youtu.be/1FUkGRxuxV0?t=22m
As far as not trusting them for designing encounters, i think they’re doing fine.
So fine that we’re stacking 3-4 tempests, sure.
This is being obtuse by now. There’s no build diversity when you can’t even have class diversity lol
I mean that’s your groups choice to stack that many tempest when its not required.
However the overall health of raids allows pretty much all classes to be viable, just not optimal.
………Why are you being dense?
The same would be the case with not bringing all classes with auras? You’d be completely viable, just not optimal.
Nothing in a game is required; gameplay is optional, but that’s beside the point.
We’re balancing around optimal scenarios because optimal is what most people shoot for.
You say they can change with encounter design, which is pure garbage.
3 years we had before the xpac came out, 3 years of elementalist stacking. Raids come out, more elementalist stacking. That’s 4+ years of encounter design favoring elementalists, so I doubt that will change unless it’s hamfisted like fractals and then we just see engineers and necromancers stacked instead.
Then we take your tortured view of encounter shifting, look at fractals, now we stack necromancers or engineers.
We need numbers and class mechanics balancing, not encounter gimmicks that just tilt the encounter to favor the optimal class.
The auras for each class are the most simple solution at seeing all classes represented instead of the realistic scenario of tempests being vastly over-represented, and in the absence of a driving utility you’ll always stack the best DPS class. The auras prevent that by at least making you want to bring every class to be optimal, and then maybe you’ll occasionally see 2 tempests instead of 3-4.
3 years we had before the xpac came out, 3 years of elementalist stacking. Raids come out, more elementalist stacking. That’s 4+ years of encounter design favoring elementalists, so I doubt that will change unless it’s hamfisted like fractals and then we just see engineers and necromancers stacked instead.
Someone forgot about the 4 warrior 1 mesmer CoF runs that were huge back in the day. Also the fact that elementalist was trash for the first year of the game.
If they just gave engineers or thieves and aura utility like Spotter or Assassin’s Presence that was strong enough (200 of a stat to a group), I bet you’d see less stacking of tempests and more class variety.
Same for Guardian, problem is Guardians got an aura that gives Toughness, and Toughness is a trash stat in a PvE where you can completely avoid most threats with the dodge button.
Scrappers could give an aura that gives 10% condi duration increase, and daredevils could give a 15% movement speed increase that stacks with swiftness.
Guardians could have an aura that increases the effectiveness of boon effects by 5% (so 5% more to prot value, might power gains, etc).
You would then see all classes represented.
This goes directly against what they want to achieve though and forces a super comp where you bring 1 of every “Aura Stat Trait” to coin a phrase. Which means that they then would have to design each encounter around a fixed comp to ensure all dps/mechanics could be met.
Instead of solving the problem that way they just need to design encounters that play to the strengths of each each class. IE a boss that has adds, but when the adds die the boss gets stronger somehow or reduces the kill timer (limits AoE’s, promotes thief) etc…
More creative encounter design is the best way to increase diversity, not that its in that bad a spot to begin with.
We already have meta comps, this changes nothing. I suspect this complaint derives from not wanting to change away from players who already committed to 3-4 tempests.
If you’re running a different comp, you’re already being subpar, so adding auras so some classes are represented isn’t changing anything.
Besides, I don’t buy the argument for one moment that encounters need to encourage some classes. That just means you’re gonna class stack differently for each boss, which is terrible.
It strikes me as what just happened to T4 fractals, where now you’re stacking the new optimal class for the encounter.
I don’t trust them with encounter design for one second as a surefire way to make sure all classes are represented and equally wanted.
There’s a big difference between a “meta comp”, versus needing to find one of every aura stat boost class. Not only does that effectively kill build diversity it leads to stagnant design encounter because you do have to design around the fact that every player will have an additional ball of stats. These words by the way were said on stream by Crystal herself at one point. I’ll see if i can find that stream just so you can view it.
Video here – https://youtu.be/1FUkGRxuxV0?t=22m
As far as not trusting them for designing encounters, i think they’re doing fine.
So fine that we’re stacking 3-4 tempests, sure.
This is being obtuse by now. There’s no build diversity when you can’t even have class diversity lol
I mean that’s your groups choice to stack that many tempest when its not required.
However the overall health of raids allows pretty much all classes to be viable, just not optimal.
………Why are you being dense?
The same would be the case with not bringing all classes with auras? You’d be completely viable, just not optimal.
Nothing in a game is required; gameplay is optional, but that’s beside the point.
We’re balancing around optimal scenarios because optimal is what most people shoot for.
You say they can change with encounter design, which is pure garbage.
3 years we had before the xpac came out, 3 years of elementalist stacking. Raids come out, more elementalist stacking. That’s 4+ years of encounter design favoring elementalists, so I doubt that will change unless it’s hamfisted like fractals and then we just see engineers and necromancers stacked instead.
Then we take your tortured view of encounter shifting, look at fractals, now we stack necromancers or engineers.
We need numbers and class mechanics balancing, not encounter gimmicks that just tilt the encounter to favor the optimal class.
The auras for each class are the most simple solution at seeing all classes represented instead of the realistic scenario of tempests being vastly over-represented, and in the absence of a driving utility you’ll always stack the best DPS class. The auras prevent that by at least making you want to bring every class to be optimal, and then maybe you’ll occasionally see 2 tempests instead of 3-4.
You are failing to understand this….The encounters are not designed around, nor built around having an “optimal” teamcomp 24/7 for runs. They are intentionally built with enough leeway that you can bring whatever is viable so long as you perform the mechanics.
This is good design, they only thing they have to do is tweak how they design each boss / encounter so the strengths of other classes are able to be showcased. For example if they had a boss where-in killing ads made the boss stronger classes that excel in single target damage (thief) would see more play than ele whose AoE would prove to be a liability. This is a simple conceptual design change that shows ways they can grow and build more diverse encounters.
also on the whole four tempests thing
are people bringing 4 tempests because they need 4 tempests?
are people bringing 4 tempests because they want 4 tempests?
are people bringing 4 tempests because they have fun playing tempests?
are people bringing 4 tempests because they perform the best DPS and they enjoying topping the dps meters?
frankly it reminds me of iron reaver parses with 10 arcane mages. you can do the fight with any combination of classes, it’s just funny watching iron reaver blow up in <30 seconds.
Nalhadia – Kaineng
3 years we had before the xpac came out, 3 years of elementalist stacking. Raids come out, more elementalist stacking. That’s 4+ years of encounter design favoring elementalists, so I doubt that will change unless it’s hamfisted like fractals and then we just see engineers and necromancers stacked instead.
Someone forgot about the 4 warrior 1 mesmer CoF runs that were huge back in the day. Also the fact that elementalist was trash for the first year of the game.
Elementalist was never trash the first year. Only idiots believed warrior was better.
You know, sorta like how people were stacking engineers and revenants when wing 1 of the raid came out, and now they’re barely used classes.
(edited by Zenith.7301)
This suggestion is poorly thought out. Never should any content depend on a class to exist in the team. There are so many reasons why that it’s not even worth reviewing them but primarily, it goes against the whole idea of playing how you want. No one wants to be forced to have specific approaches to solving problems in games. That defeats the purpose.
You know, sorta like how people were stacking engineers and revenants when wing 1 of the raid came out, and now they’re barely used classes.
There was a reason why they were doing it then, and why they stopped doing that later. Just as there were reason why at one point people were stacking burnzerkers in raids, but stopped doing it later on.
Neither of those reasons had anything to do with people being stupid.
creative interpretations of developer claims just undermine your argument
Well, if you think only the most strict interpretation can be used, then i’d like to point out, that it was never said they were contributing to player retention in a positive way.
Actions, not words.
Remember, remember, 15th of November
Remember, remember, 15th of November
I can’t believe this thread is still going on
creative interpretations of developer claims just undermine your argument
Yes, exactly so.
Having 1/10th of the player base doing content that’s not meant for everyone in the first place is pretty good.
We don’t know the exact percentage of players doing it, nor do we know the number of players who have reduced their participation in the game due to raiding. There are too many unknown variables here.
while raids are completely optional and basically the last stop for a player after they leveled their character, gained knowledge on their class and improved their gameplay in other content such as fractals.
But lets be fair, most of the people currently playing the game were as ready as they’d ever be for raids about two years or more ago. It’s not like there’s this huge gulf between players who just started the game and players who are raid-ready.
You know, sorta like how people were stacking engineers and revenants when wing 1 of the raid came out, and now they’re barely used classes.
You do understand that a large part of why engies are no longer as popular in raids is because they nerfed one of the core utilities that engies provided, right? It’d be like if they halved staff Ele damage, and then people stopped bringing Eles to the raids, and you said “see, Eles were never a problem, silly meta. . .”
“If you spent as much time working on [some task] as
you spend complaining about it on the forums, you’d be
done by now.”
you spend complaining about it on the forums, you’d be
done by now.”
3 years we had before the xpac came out, 3 years of elementalist stacking. Raids come out, more elementalist stacking. That’s 4+ years of encounter design favoring elementalists, so I doubt that will change unless it’s hamfisted like fractals and then we just see engineers and necromancers stacked instead.
Someone forgot about the 4 warrior 1 mesmer CoF runs that were huge back in the day. Also the fact that elementalist was trash for the first year of the game.
Elementalist was never trash the first year. Only idiots believed warrior was better.
You know, sorta like how people were stacking engineers and revenants when wing 1 of the raid came out, and now they’re barely used classes.
Actually Elementalists were trash first year. Were you there? I was. I don’t remember a good ele build being used in the community until Kitsune made the Lightning Hammer build.
And guess what? LH build, even after people appreciated it had super high DPS, wasnt meta because…
Persisting Flames didn’t give Fury yet until it was buffed. Without access to Fury, people were still required to stack For Great Justice to get perma Fury. That meant that, at best, 1 ele could fit into a group.
Before Persisting Flames? Before Lava Font had 95% uptime? Before Fresh Air? Before Lightnign Whip buff? Before people used FGS/Ice Bow? Ele was actually bad.
[DnT]::Nike::
www.twitch.tv/nike_dnt
www.twitch.tv/nike_dnt
Just like you and others, who like thieves, there are people who don’t like thieves, like me, so it’s a no for me.
You know, sorta like how people were stacking engineers and revenants when wing 1 of the raid came out, and now they’re barely used classes.
There was a reason why they were doing it then, and why they stopped doing that later. Just as there were reason why at one point people were stacking burnzerkers in raids, but stopped doing it later on.
Neither of those reasons had anything to do with people being stupid.creative interpretations of developer claims just undermine your argument
Well, if you think only the most strict interpretation can be used, then i’d like to point out, that it was never said they were contributing to player retention in a positive way.
Engineers didn’t get nerfed DPS wise. Revenants didn’t get nerfed, the nerf to auto was more than made up by sword 2 buff.
Burnzekers stopped being used because they, unlike eles, were brought back in line.
People took at least a week or two into the expansion to figure out necromancer was actually a desirable raid class.
I remember spoj had overestimated the DPS of power reaper greatsword, and then people found out about things like the aftercast greatly diminishing its value.
Hammer dragonhunter certainly wasn’t in the radar until later, and people were underestimating the output of dagger/warhorn ele compared to staff.
People are slow to adapt tactics. They were slow to take up commander chrono. They were slow to make use of Nature Magic stone spirit druids in lieu of a guardian, or a rev for perma prot.
Perry from SC is a daredevil main who excels just fine in his preferred content despite what most raid runners would tell you about how useless daredevils are. Even qT has a daredevil main running.
People greatly exaggerate the requirements these raids have for being completed. As they always have with the previous content as well.
(edited by Zenith.7301)
Engineers didn’t get nerfed DPS wise. Revenants didn’t get nerfed, the nerf to auto was more than made up by sword 2 buff.
Engineers didn’t get a damage nerf, but they did get a utility nerf. In the previous meta, Engineers were useful because they could clobber breakbars, so while that wasn’t the only thing they did, it did serve as a strong reason to take an engi over other classes. With that function removed, yes you can still use an engi for DPS, but there are better options so why not take those instead and increase your odds?
People greatly exaggerate the requirements these raids have for being completed. As they always have with the previous content as well.
The problem is with what “requirement” means. If you are a group that has everything down, really skilled and experienced with the encounter, you have a lot of “cushion” for inefficiency. If you have ideal gear, even more cushion. Maybe a highly skilled group could take on a few less than ideal classes, and still do just fine.
But if a group is right on the margin, if they are prone to failing often, then you don’t want to pile on unnecessary risk, I mean if each class is rated on a 1-10 scale, then even if you only need a minimum combined score of 70 to pass the boss, if people are struggling with a combined score of 90 then they have plenty of reason to maybe try to tweak that score back up towards 100, by pruning weak links.
“If you spent as much time working on [some task] as
you spend complaining about it on the forums, you’d be
done by now.”
you spend complaining about it on the forums, you’d be
done by now.”
But if a group is right on the margin, if they are prone to failing often, then you don’t want to pile on unnecessary risk, I mean if each class is rated on a 1-10 scale, then even if you only need a minimum combined score of 70 to pass the boss, if people are struggling with a combined score of 90 then they have plenty of reason to maybe try to tweak that score back up towards 100, by pruning weak links.
So this is pretty confusing because it seems to not really address much of anything because it has fundamental misgivings about how progression raiding and raid priorities work. Are you addressing cutting edge raiders, or are you addressing raiders after that point?
On cutting edge raiders:
Pretty straightforward first thing: If you are a raider of the caliber expected to be able to participate in cutting edge content, you have to be willing and ready to sit or be sat to bring in a class which better fits the encounter. The total size of a strong raid team is typically 125% of the player requirement of the raid’s player requirement, simply to accomodate for players taking breaks. It’s a team game; if you aren’t willing to sacrifice for your team, you’re the weak link in more ways than class balance.
Secondly, class imbalances aren’t really that drastic of an issue for a cutting edge raider because they are at the play level where they can reasonably be expected to operate high level alts. My most recent raiding guild had members who simultaneously ran four different alts, keeping them at a gear level that would allow each of them to operate at the highest level of content- And this was in WoW, where gearing was actually an effort.
Freedom of alts is especially a thing in GW2 as all Ascended gear is account-bound and you can simply move it between classes; your Engi’s not viable? No problem, you can move that gear to your Thief, maybe statswap it and you’ll be good to go.
Now if you aren’t a serious raider, your specific class’s viability shouldn’t be an issue.
Every class has some build which is, broadly speaking, viable. Some classes will have issues, sure, and those should be addressed, but that’s fixed through broad class design changes rather than raid level changes.
If you’re not at a cutting edge level, chances are any issues you are having with class could probably be fixed by changing your toolkit and simply getting better at the game rather than broad calls that “my class isn’t viable”.
And you’re probably raiding with friends and they’re not going to kick you out of the raid if you’re not comfortable with leaving the raid.
And then there’s PUG raiding. This content isn’t designed for PUGs, nor should it be. And if you’re worried about getting kicked from a PUG, there’s an easy solution: get better at the game and become more valuable such that they won’t want to kick you out.
Nalhadia – Kaineng
(edited by Sarrs.4831)
A lot of that boils down to “you aren’t meant to enjoy any of this, AT ALL, if you don’t enjoy playing the game how I enjoy playing the game.” I think that’s a statement that a lot of people agree with, which is why there’s such a push for alternate versions of the content, because the current version does not and will never work for most players, and most players want to be happy regardless.
“If you spent as much time working on [some task] as
you spend complaining about it on the forums, you’d be
done by now.”
you spend complaining about it on the forums, you’d be
done by now.”
A lot of that boils down to “you aren’t meant to enjoy any of this, AT ALL, if you don’t enjoy playing the game how I enjoy playing the game.” I think that’s a statement that a lot of people agree with, which is why there’s such a push for alternate versions of the content, because the current version does not and will never work for most players, and most players want to be happy regardless.
It’s not meant for “most players”. It’s meant as challenging end-game content. It’s meant to push you to do things outside of your general comfort zone and make you actually think and react properly in some stressful combat scenarios.
Again though you’re conflating happy and viable as a reason to change the identity of raids. Go raid…Go start your own group and be happy. Sure you likely wont succeed but that isn’t a case to say that raids failed and dont work or simply aren’t enjoyable. They just aren’t enjoyable for you because you choose to let them be that way.
A lot of that boils down to “you aren’t meant to enjoy any of this, AT ALL, if you don’t enjoy playing the game how I enjoy playing the game.” I think that’s a statement that a lot of people agree with
Yes, a lot of people agree with me. I’m taking this strawman and running with it and nobody can stop me!
Seriously, though, if this is what you take from what I’ve posted you are professionally missing the point. Arguments of minute elements of balance make no sense for the average player because they don’t min/max to that level anyway, and they make no sense for the cutting edge because they play multiple classes anyway.
Nalhadia – Kaineng
(edited by Sarrs.4831)
But again, even players that are more casual would like to have the best possible chances of clearing the content, and any significant class imbalance makes that more difficult for them if the class they have is a poor performer.
“If you spent as much time working on [some task] as
you spend complaining about it on the forums, you’d be
done by now.”
you spend complaining about it on the forums, you’d be
done by now.”
But again, even players that are more casual would like to have the best possible chances of clearing the content, and any significant class imbalance makes that more difficult for them if the class they have is a poor performer.
Well it’s convenient that the classes are not as imbalanced as you make out, and even if they were, that GW2 is one of the most alt-friendly raiding games available.
Nalhadia – Kaineng
But again, even players that are more casual would like to have the best possible chances of clearing the content, and any significant class imbalance makes that more difficult for them if the class they have is a poor performer.
Lets not lie, you don’t want the best possible chance. If you wanted that you’d improve, find a guild and raid.
What you want is to be that guy, you know the one….he’s part of the world boss zerg fest who just sits there and auto-cast auto attack. That’s what you’re actually looking for and its a disgrace.
Lets not lie, you don’t want the best possible chance. If you wanted that you’d improve, find a guild and raid.
I’m not talking about me here, I’m talking about players who do want to make a serious attempt at raiding, but maybe only have a few characters maxed out, only a limited amount of decent gear, and can’t be like “the character I have is not good enough for this party? That’s fine, I have a meta Ele out back!”
What you want is to be that guy, you know the one….he’s part of the world boss zerg fest who just sits there and auto-cast auto attack. That’s what you’re actually looking for and its a disgrace.
That’s not true either. I’m a try-hard, I go above and beyond what is required, I just don’t like it when a lot is required. I’m the guy that in Golem MKII fights is meleeing the guy down, while everyone else is stacked on boxes at 1200 range spamming 1, I just don’t like repeating content endlessly because minor errors lead to total wipes.
“If you spent as much time working on [some task] as
you spend complaining about it on the forums, you’d be
done by now.”
you spend complaining about it on the forums, you’d be
done by now.”
Lets not lie, you don’t want the best possible chance. If you wanted that you’d improve, find a guild and raid.
Yeah, “you will enjoy it the way i like it, or not at all”.
That’s exactly the problem.
I want to enjoy that content with my friends, instead of finding some other people to play with, just because my guild can’t gather 10 players that are hardcore enough.
The very idea that i should be picking friends based on the content i want to play is ridiculous to me.
Actions, not words.
Remember, remember, 15th of November
Remember, remember, 15th of November
It’s ridiculous you think the game mode should cater to what you can and cannot do.
It’s also a bit of a stretch to say that you pick friends based on content. I have WvW friends, PvP friends, raid friends, casual open world friends etc. Many of them do not raid, many do raid, they’re all my friends.
Here’s a novel idea, make some new friends who raid. Alternatively if you don’t want to find some new friends there’s the other 95% of the game that you can play with your friends.
FOR THE GREEEEEEEEEEEEN
1 2