Guild Wars 2

sorry won’t happen, this game was designed with sPvP in mind, look at the “evolution” between mechanics of gw1 and 2, active combat systems like enchantments and hexes are removed in favor of autonomous systems like boons that suffer from something I like to call “just stack it” syndrome, instead of encouraging trade offs and decisions, the game encourages mindless stacking, just stack boons, stack conditions, stack on top of each other, stack materials, stack wars 2.

GW1 was a balancing nightmare, everyone knew it. To counteract this problem they designed this game with “balance” in mind at the expense of active gameplay, and threw in a dodge mechanic to tide us over.

That being said, the condition nerf will come and it will be ugly, so brace yourselves

Ah for god sake,

Spvp has 3 developers.
Everyone else is working on pve content like SAB and living story.
Honestly the accusations on gw2 forum are really hard to believe sometimes.

Just to make things clear, the fact that ANet doesn’t want to split the skills into 3 types(PvE,WvW,SPvP) is holding the balance back for everyone.

PvErs don’t want big changes ‘cause it took time and money to build their character, WvW same thing.
SPvP players doesn’t want big changes because they have not been tested properly and they just change the meta making other than the current proffesions OP and just whacking the balance around, never succiding it.

So stop bashing PvP and WvW because everybody wants to split these 3 modes when it has to do with balance.

Astralporing.1957:

Meglobob.8620:

Jon Sharp posted recently that they would NOT be splitting balance updates between sPvP, PvE and WvW because it takes too much time, effort and is too costly to do.

That was about oncoming ranger nerfs. Of course, Necro did get a split.

No…he was not only talking about Rangers (it is very weird Ranger skills NEVER get split), he was talking more about the future and they can’t/won’t split skills because it takes too much time, effort and is costly to do.

Btw https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/pvp

Read that part of the forum and you see about 80% of all the threads are NERF this skill/trait/class. PvP players are trying to destroy every class by NERFING them to the ground, that apparently is the balance they are looking for. The worse thing is Anet listens to them above all other players…

showatt.9413:

Spvp has 3 developers.
Everyone else is working on pve content like SAB and living story.

You don’t really need all that many people dedicated to looking over the spreadsheet data and juggling the numbers (PvP balancing, what the thread is about), occasionally calling in someone to make adjustments to the maps.

You do need more than that to put out actual large-scale content (eg, Super Adventure Box).

Small thread necro. Regarding new weapon sets, they honestly should just rename/reanimate existing weapon set skills. Some should still make sense, for example guardian’s staff #2: Orb of Light into rifle #2: Acupuncture Bullet or something.

Saves them from brain aneursym in balancing stuff for content or new spvp map :/

natsos.3692:

Just to make things clear, the fact that ANet doesn’t want to split the skills into 3 types(PvE,WvW,SPvP) is holding the balance back for everyone.

PvErs don’t want big changes ‘cause it took time and money to build their character, WvW same thing.
SPvP players doesn’t want big changes because they have not been tested properly and they just change the meta making other than the current proffesions OP and just whacking the balance around, never succiding it.

So stop bashing PvP and WvW because everybody wants to split these 3 modes when it has to do with balance.

But why 3 types? Most of us just want 2 types of skill splitting PvE and sPvP, lets face it WvW is a zerg fest no 1 man will make a difference (other than the Sheppard) its pretty much PvE in ways.

When the devs think that the player base wants 3 whole unique types I can understand why they’re just like eff-that. Just splitting PvE and sPvP is more realistic and practical in the long run.