Please ANet, look back, not forwards.
If everybody looked backwards, there would be no going forwards.
Your concept of realistic design, isn’t in fact realistic. What’s realistic is taking everything into account.
Did Everquest try and be realistic? No, it dared to push the boundaries.
If you only consider the boundaries, you’re not considering the third element that can be implemented as well, and the third element is in fact not a delusional concept, it is a realistic one.
The idea, is that there is a solution to everything, this has always been scientific.
Don’t believe the skeptics, if we only viewed skepticism as reality, there would be no desire to push science any further.
The idea behind scientific pursuit, has always been one of solving things.
If you were to believe all these cynical “realists” and skeptics, what would happen is we’d be stuck in the past, with no point of even advancing science any further.
As we can see, this is not the case, because science has always evolved.
Take Microsoft and Google for example, Microsoft focuses on the “traditional” scientific view and an ultra-realistic one. As a result, they’ve never been able to break boundaries.
Google focuses on breaking boundaries with its ultra-metrics. And they’ve succeeded in creating a mythical search engine no one has been able to replicate. They’ve essentially solved the problem of the search engine.
As you can see, if history has taught us one thing, it’s that we don’t believe in skeptics.
Purist, Idealist, and Theorist.
(edited by FaRectification.5678)
I’m pretty sure elementalists have some down sides. For one, they are laughably easy to kill in WvW combat (low HP, low defense). On the other hand, they’re very frustrating to defend against in a seige situation.
I don’t play one, or an engineer for that matter, but every class has advantages and disadvantages.
While I think the class descriptions could have been clearer, I don’t think they’ve gimped engineers compared to elementalists. Both classes have “attunement” based mechanics, and a kits engineer is actually capable of having more accessible “weapon” skills than an elementalist (Main weapon skills, healing kit, 3 utility kits = 25 abilities. Elementalist attunements = 20 abilities). Also, engineers benefit from having no internal cooldown when switching between kits, and they can customize their kits on the fly (where as elementalists require different weapons and possibly re-gearing).
If your main concern is with the damage tweaks and numbers “balance” this build, just remember that balance is an ongoing process in any MMO. Numbers can be easily changed, and engineer (as with all classes) will receive multiple adjustments over the course of next year and into the future. I would encourage you provide more details in your feedback in the future; specifically as to where you feel your class is unfairly disadvantaged vs other classes. Also, look forward to how your class/the game will evolve over the course of multiple new builds next year.
Quest for 100 level 80 characters: 25% Completed…
All I can say is that you guys screwed up. I can’t recall a single Engineer who is happy with the recent class changes. Some of the fractal instances are broken. There’s numerous bugs as well.
Especially the classes. Whatever idea you had in mind for them does not seem to work. With all the things that seem to be wrong, from class balance to gem prices, I urge you to NOT add any more content for the time being. Instead, sit down, look over again what you’ve done, work out solutions, give us the time to testplay them. You need to fix what’s broken before you start building something new or the entire system will eventually be flawed in many places.Also please hire a new team for class development. Things did not go well. I mean, explain to me why Engineer is described as a class with huge versatility at the cost of damage while Elementalist is described as the most versatile class while not having to pay in any negative sides to damage?
That just doesn’t make sense. When your classes no longer follow your own class descriptions it’s time to understand that you’ve goofed up. So STOP thinking about new content, sit down, fix stuff, THEN move forward. Please, for all our sakes.
Umm if you think the elementalist doesn’t suffer because of it’s ‘perceived’ (and in my opinion falsely so) versatility, you don’t know the class very well.
(edited by Conncept.7638)
If everybody looked backwards, there would be no going forwards.
[snip]
Sounds really nice and progressive and all, but I would be more inclined to state it thus: If no one looked backwards, there would be no going forwards. It’s why we study history. It’s built into our very DNA and it’s how we learn. It’s why, as adults, we no longer need to stick our hands in fire to see if it will burn. And, it’s how we deal with “new” phenomena; we associate within an existing framework of meaning. So, an idealistic approach often sounds very progressive, it just doesn’t match up well with how things work in the world of shared human experience, meaning, it’s not how we work.
I’m with OP on this one. The state of the game calls for reflection and reconsideration and not a rush forward at a breakneck pace. Why? (asks the idealist), because we are not getting good results, and we want to know why so that we can produce good results.
I’d like for them to maybe focus on fixing the bugs with traits and abilities, as far as their attempts to balance the Engineer go. Then again, I’m of the opinion that it’s pointless to go balancing everything exhaustively when there are some fairly significant issues with the function of some classes, that aren’t directly related to balance (using Turrets as an example: Deployable Turrets, Turret AI), but that could cause a shift if they were corrected (for example, while Deployable Turrets mostly functions in PvP, to my knowledge it still lacks the Healing Turret’s toolbelt ability, which means the Engineer has one less healing ability than they should possess if they equip Deployable Turrets in order to be able to more strategically place turrets).
If everybody looked backwards, there would be no going forwards.
[snip]Sounds really nice and progressive and all, but I would be more inclined to state it thus: If no one looked backwards, there would be no going forwards. It’s why we study history. It’s built into our very DNA and it’s how we learn. It’s why, as adults, we no longer need to stick our hands in fire to see if it will burn. And, it’s how we deal with “new” phenomena; we associate within an existing framework of meaning. So, an idealistic approach often sounds very progressive, it just doesn’t match up well with how things work in the world of shared human experience, meaning, it’s not how we work.
I’m with OP on this one. The state of the game calls for reflection and reconsideration and not a rush forward at a breakneck pace. Why? (asks the idealist), because we are not getting good results, and we want to know why so that we can produce good results.
I will have to say that this was the first rational post by a skeptic I’ve ever seen.
Thank you for that, and I applaud you for being rational for once.
As for your breakneck pace accusation, I would say that it isn’t a matter of a breakneck pace, more-so that they are trying to make metered changes.
The whack-a-mole balancing style is obsolete, and it’s been proven not to be effective.
Metered changes are the new way to go, so it might seem as if it were going at a breakneck pace, when in fact it’s controlled.
Argue if you think i’m wrong.
Once again, I’m not a fanboy of anything, but just seeing how dedicated this talented dev team is, I want to support them. If they were at all wrong, I would ditch their boat immediately. Get my drift? I’m neutral. I’ve always been neutral, and I’ve never really cared about any particular company.
Purist, Idealist, and Theorist.
If everybody looked backwards, there would be no going forwards.
Your concept of realistic design, isn’t in fact realistic. What’s realistic is taking everything into account.
Did Everquest try and be realistic? No, it dared to push the boundaries.
If you only consider the boundaries, you’re not considering the third element that can be implemented as well, and the third element is in fact not a delusional concept, it is a realistic one.
The idea, is that there is a solution to everything, this has always been scientific.
Don’t believe the skeptics, if we only viewed skepticism as reality, there would be no desire to push science any further.
The idea behind scientific pursuit, has always been one of solving things.
If you were to believe all these cynical “realists” and skeptics, what would happen is we’d be stuck in the past, with no point of even advancing science any further.
As we can see, this is not the case, because science has always evolved.
Take Microsoft and Google for example, Microsoft focuses on the “traditional” scientific view and an ultra-realistic one. As a result, they’ve never been able to break boundaries.
Google focuses on breaking boundaries with its ultra-metrics. And they’ve succeeded in creating a mythical search engine no one has been able to replicate. They’ve essentially solved the problem of the search engine.
As you can see, if history has taught us one thing, it’s that we don’t believe in skeptics.
You talk about not having to be realistic, yet your ideals only apply to a realistic perspective.
It’s a simple truth that you need to fix before you build. A game as a whole matters as that, as a whole. Fauly aspects leave a sour taste and keep dragging the whole down until it starts affecting negatively.
It’s not about when Engineers will be fixed. It’s about that the unneeded changes show a lack of clarity in class development, something that is just bad because it works against trust and only goes to show lazy devleopers.
For instance, the nerf to elixir gun was too huge. Now Engineers can’t compare to other classes in overall PvE contribution or PvP.
And the nerf to grenades? Need I repeat what everybody else have said? Damage is related to how easy it is to actually do the damage. Numbers on a training dummy is useless data.
The entire flaw is that no one on the player side had the chance to test it before it was released and that we really don’t know anything about the class developer side or their competence.
Now THAT I can agree with.
Purist, Idealist, and Theorist.