Guild Wars 2

Kitarpa.8143:

For what god forsaken reason would anyone want to run anything but zerker in PVE? I can see if like, someone got upset over a Guardian not wanting to run zerker and getting kicked.. but any other class? Why? There is absolutely no logical legitimate reason other than wanting to be a special snowflake and take more time than needed to complete an instance.

This isn’t a kittening meta, it’s just logical.

I’m play meta zerker on all my pve character, doing speed run, trying to teach it to everyone that I can. But this is not a good attitude. Zerker is only a small part of a good run. I played with ppl (a couple in my guild) that don’t run zerker, but are able to do a good job with us. On the other hand i did run with full zerker meta pugs (or guild mates) that went terribly wrong.

There is nothing bad in taking some piece of knight or soldiers if you feel you need it. Not everybody know enough each encounter to reach quick enough, not everybody play their character on a regular basis, some ppl just run a dungeon smoothly without rush and I often like to run dungeon with these ppl.

In the end its all about fun. For me its fun to run with a full meta party to go as fast, but its also fun to play more relax with some friends or nicely ppl that I find from time to time with pugs.

For other ppl, they can’t stand to play with non zerker guys and others can’t stand to play with what they call elitist .

Still going here ey?

All modern MMO’s should eventually gravitate towards the following model (using gw2 as example)

- No stats on gear. Runes and sigils are fine (as long as its not flat + stat but an actual cool thing like on hit/crit or when using x skill y happens)
- No more having to carry a million weapons in your inventory as a guard that you constantly have to swap through inventory. Either force players to commit to one weapon set (this includes weapon switch as it is now ofc) or allow a sort of dropdown box ion UI where you can select any weapon you desire (out of combat) to easily switch rather than equip > dequip > reequip etc. Especially might stacking on Ele would go alot smoother if I didnt have to constantly have my inventory open at while casting might rotation switching out weapons. Place two weapon icons next to the skills or something with a drop down box that allow you to switch when OOC.
- Base everything on traits. Rather than having toughness and vitality. Have traits that reduce x type of incoming damage in y situation in z context. Then, whenever a fight/encounter/boss would require some sort of passive defense then simply switch the traits. Introduce alot more traits, 50 traits per line should be cool. Give people more niche options so that there is no overall meta but more a specific meta for each fight (or even better a number of different varied trait loadouts per fight depending on group comp or preferred strategy)

It will all come down to trait builds, rotation/build execution, individual player skill (positioning, reflexes, awareness, adaptation etc) and knowledge of encounters. And as it is already now, coordination, prepping, communication and planning.

Stats are an archaic concept dating from when people considered it a fun thing to have to allocate points everytime you leveled up. It was fun because you could let your mage take strength points instead of intelligence so you could create a battle mage!
Outdated if you ask me. In GW2 the cool thing is any class can fill any role. Or learn every roll rather. If you make fights that require a battlemage type character then introduce traits that allow players to switch to that playstyle for a specific encounter but at the same time if there is a fight where ‘zerk’ is better, let traits allow that too. Then, a character in an MMO becomes a tool of a player, an extension of their skills in the game. Rather than some kind of iconic warrior/mage/rogue. In an MMO that uses a system that I laid out here, a good player will be able to effectively use all styles of play that the traits and class design allow. A player that competes at the highest level of PvE will be able to actively adapt to any encounter.

A concern might be too much homogenization, but thats where class design and gimmicks come in to play. Just because an ele can share almost the same amount of different boons a guardian can, just because an ele can also condition clear and blind stuff, doesn’t at all mean they feel as the same class. Each have different mechanics. Attunements feels vastly different than guards. So even if you homogenize by getting rid of stats, basing everything on traits the uniqueness of classes remains. We will however have alot more balanced and varied gameplay, provided the encounters are also designed well enough that they don’t invalidate 49 out of 50 traits in a trait line.

This is the meta that Anet wants. The balance team likes where it is, and doesn’t want t make any changes, whether getting away from berserker or adding new skills and professions.

You have the perfect meta, Enjoy!

hybrid.5027:

IllegalChocolate.6938:

hybrid.5027:

IllegalChocolate.6938:

hybrid.5027:

IllegalChocolate.6938:

This right here.

Whether you guys like it or not, things are changing. You can accept the fact that it is changing and start taking steps to pad yourself from the impact so that your ideologies can survive in some shape or form or get left behind.

What point are you arguing for or against?

I am stating that what he said is factual.

EDIT: now that im re-reading my statement I can see how it can be confusing, ill try better next time.

So you believe, I take it, that it’s factual that the game is clearly moving in the direction of a trinity and the “zerker mentality people” should become comfortable with that future?

trinity in the sense of the trinity outlined by mike o brien in one of his blog posts of turning it into a more literal and not the classic holy trinity we are familiar with in games like WoW. I know that sounds confusing.

Anet has already stated in the beginning 2013 that they had planned to make small baby steps to address the dominance of power.

When looking at the types of enemies introduced in season 2, we can see there is “effort” to try and introduce variance of enemies slowly to get people warmed up for additional gradual changes. This is why we are recognizing sinister stats in certain situations while full power specs are still maintaining relevancy (I myself walk around in full berserker in silverwastes).

Ah, so you’re one of the many who misinterprets that blog post. His statement was that there won’t be defined roles, all players will be able to contribute “dps, support, control.” To take from that ancient blog post that they want hardened roles is wishful thinking.

though why someone would want to wish for something bad, I have no idea.

I did not misinterpret it, I am telling you that there is motive to make it a “harder” trinity(we see this perfectly in sPvP where high control specs generally are not zerker but a form of bunker) in conjunction with your statement in regards to where the game is moving(in reality the only thing that is moving is PvE, the trinity aspect that I speak of is already a valid setup in sPvP tournament matches, and a valid setup in WvW fights). You may see what I speak of once we see some of Dave Mark’s stuff (if it actually is functional over network).

EDIT: I should add that those types of specs are still required to contribute a form of damage in the fight and support very well, lending to the ancient blog post that everyone will be able to contribute it, as a matter of fact everyone is REQUIRED to contribute it to be successful, the focus is just entirely different based on how well the trait setup synergizes with the stat amulet of choice.

hybrid.5027:

IndigoSundown.5419:

You believe incorrectly. The OP’s initial complaint was about “lack of diversity” and being able to play as he wants. He does not seek to change people’s behavior by making a case for them accepting other builds as they are, he seeks to have the developer change the game so that a myriad of builds (he does not specify a build he plays) fit into the meta.

Seeking to have the game developer radically alter the game so your special snowflake build becomes meta… that’s about the most myopic thing I’ve ever heard.

Our views are somewhat parallel(mine and the OP), the community does not allow his desire for diversity to come into fruition. The fault is in the PvE content in itself which Anet has already acknowledged numerous times.

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/robert-hrouda-on-upcoming-changes-to-dungeon-mechanics/

http://intrinsicalgorithm.com/IANews/2014/04/now-consulting-at-arenanet-on-guild-wars-2/

Coupled with new AI consultants, the constant AI and game mechanic pilots in the living story episodes, and pretty much every single addition to the game that had nothing to do with berserker states, we can conclude there has been intent and still is to “radically alter the game” since 2013.

You don’t see this because the changes are themselves not “radical”. They are slowly ever so slowly coming into play and it is all over the place and not focused on content that you guys generally pay attention to which is dungeon content, this is why we are aren’t hitting a giant wall when everyone is in full offense in the silverwastes coupled with the zergy nature of it.

IllegalChocolate.6938:

Our views are somewhat parallel(mine and the OP), the community does not allow his desire for diversity to come into fruition.

Diversity of what?

And no, it isn’t at all obvious that they wanted harder roles. They have never said such a thing and none of the changes have shown that to be the case. Thats what you want so thats what you see. I believe the term for that is confirmation bias.

You see them hiring an AI expert or a raid designer and that leads you to believe that anet wants “harder roles.” Or, you know, it could just mean anet wants better AI and to implement raids within their current soft trinity game design.

hybrid.5027:

IndigoSundown.5419:

You believe incorrectly. The OP’s initial complaint was about “lack of diversity” and being able to play as he wants. He does not seek to change people’s behavior by making a case for them accepting other builds as they are, he seeks to have the developer change the game so that a myriad of builds (he does not specify a build he plays) fit into the meta.

Seeking to have the game developer radically alter the game so your special snowflake build becomes meta… that’s about the most myopic thing I’ve ever heard.

Hey, I’m just analyzing, not endorsing. That’s exactly what the OP is asking for — and some of the other posters in this thread and others that put forth similar requests. And yes, it does represent a degree of myopia.

hybrid.5027:

IllegalChocolate.6938:

Our views are somewhat parallel(mine and the OP), the community does not allow his desire for diversity to come into fruition.

Diversity of what?

And no, it isn’t at all obvious that they wanted harder roles. They have never said such a thing and none of the changes have shown that to be the case. Thats what you want so thats what you see. I believe the term for that is confirmation bias.

You see them hiring an AI expert or a raid designer and that leads you to believe that anet wants “harder roles.” Or, you know, it could just mean anet wants better AI and to implement raids within their current soft trinity game design.

I believe ANet is painfully aware of how players have talked about the game’s difficulty levels. This goes all the way back to the complaints about mob density and CC in Orr. I saw many comments to the effect that the mobs themselves were not a threat, which made the plethora of CC annoying rather than challenging.

In every addition or revamp of mobs in the persistent world thereafter, the mobs have been made a wee bit more difficult than the ones in at launch (i.e., after the mid-BWE mob emasculation). This started with Karka, and is currently at Mordremoth. The way they presented the Krait/Risen mob revamps was, iirc, “to make fighting these mobs more interesting.” No mobs added since convince me that that intent has changed.

So, I agree, I don’t think they are trying to make harder roles, but I do think they are trying to increase the amount of attention players need to pay to what mobs are doing (i.e., create better AI).

hybrid.5027:

IllegalChocolate.6938:

Our views are somewhat parallel(mine and the OP), the community does not allow his desire for diversity to come into fruition.

Diversity of what?

And no, it isn’t at all obvious that they wanted harder roles. They have never said such a thing and none of the changes have shown that to be the case. Thats what you want so thats what you see. I believe the term for that is confirmation bias.

You see them hiring an AI expert or a raid designer and that leads you to believe that anet wants “harder roles.” Or, you know, it could just mean anet wants better AI and to implement raids within their current soft trinity game design.

It can mean anything of course I will not dispute that but the introduction of different stat types of enemies along with the “nature” of the teragriff boss in the tangled paths episode coupled with the somewhat (but not so much) nature of the AoEs of the centaur in seeds of truth well, there is an attempt to diversify the behavior of AI and their statistical capability.

Better AI can help to blur the lines of what is the most efficient and fastest method of problem solving (one of the pillars of the zerker meta). If another meta in dungeons, succeeds in commandeering or sharing that very same pillar with proven results, a meta that may accept a high support oriented or high bunker oriented archetype, I have achieved success. This of course may not happen for a long time as we both know, no substantial support for dungeons will be coming soon.

EDIT: I think a lot of people were excited to see sinister stats. If it becomes widely used and utilized in a group scenario and solo, or just a very publicly recognized stat type in conjunction with a trait setup, it is a step in accepting other archetypes into the competitive field, therefore a small victory for me. Keyword of course is IF.

IllegalChocolate.6938:

EDIT: I think a lot of people were excited to see sinister stats. If it becomes widely used and utilized in a group scenario and solo, or just a very publicly recognized stat type in conjunction with a trait setup, it is a step in accepting other archetypes into the competitive field, therefore a small victory for me. Keyword of course is IF.

Sinister is great, thing is, conditions in a group setting simply isn’t going to happen because of the extremely poor implementation ANet has for their conditions. No one playing condition builds we still cap out bleeds in many different group setups. That means someone tries to play a bleed heavy condi build… they’re wasting their time.

Sinister very well may take over as the top solo option for some professions though.

anabasis.7346:

IllegalChocolate.6938:

hybrid.5027:

IllegalChocolate.6938:

Our views are somewhat parallel(mine and the OP), the community does not allow his desire for diversity to come into fruition.

Diversity of what?

And no, it isn’t at all obvious that they wanted harder roles. They have never said such a thing and none of the changes have shown that to be the case. Thats what you want so thats what you see. I believe the term for that is confirmation bias.

You see them hiring an AI expert or a raid designer and that leads you to believe that anet wants “harder roles.” Or, you know, it could just mean anet wants better AI and to implement raids within their current soft trinity game design.

EDIT: I think a lot of people were excited to see sinister stats. If it becomes widely used and utilized in a group scenario and solo, or just a very publicly recognized stat type in conjunction with a trait setup, it is a step in accepting other archetypes into the competitive field, therefore a small victory for me. Keyword of course is IF.

I find it funny that you are telling that to the same guy that theorycrafted the best warrior sinister build for PvE.

That’s actually very fantastic.

That means what I am saying is already happening.

I guess I will conclude my discussion efforts here.

I dont see how that equates to hard trinity but ok. Nor do i see how a build for solo/casual groups effects the meta.

spoj.9672:

I dont see how that equates to hard trinity but ok. Nor do i see how a build for solo/casual groups effects the meta.

The slow introduction of more and more different types of challenges will equate to more options being considered while reducing the overall “sudden” impact if disapproval becomes afoot.

If ever we see new dungeons that implements say the teragriff boss and its mechanics in a 5 man setting where conditions are the most efficient way to take care of the teragriff due to its high mobility and evasive uptime while the requirement for high power is needed to murder adds as they come up less they overwhelm along with soft but very noticeable suppression mechanics, well I think we can see this picture already.

As for the zerker meta, it can remain unaffected at the end of the day. The goal would be to allow many metas to be seen in the same light so that the content becomes more attractive to more different types of people. I’m sure the OP would be just as happy.

Filaha.1678:

They should just remove stats from gear and traits entirely or make everything Celestial.

Then everything comes down to your own skill and what skills you bring along with you.

No more “Must be zerker”! Now it’s “Must be good”!

That idea won’t fly. If there’s no diversity, people won’t play the game.

I play these games to build my characters in very specific ways. So far in every MMO I’ve played over the past decade, I’ve either been accredited with creating the “next best build” or have created and play it long before it was popularized by someone else.

By removing diversity, you seriously reduce the number of interested players, especially veterans, who wish to change their characters to better reflect the roles they wish to play. I know that if everything was changed to celestial, I would not even log in upon reading the announcement and would just uninstall the game as a whole unless reverted. Not to mention that this game was sold, hyped, and marketed on the sheer principle that it offered more diversity than pretty much every other game out there.

As I’ve iterated in many of my previous posts, meta strategies come from a game system being figured out like the parameters to a function, and from the optimization of those parameter inputs for the highest possible output. To get rid of a metagame? Infinite parameters (physically impossible), or one, in which case there is only one strategy to build the meta off of – which itself is counter-productive to the goal seeing as the goal of eliminating meta-strategies is to remove the single-optimized output, thus accomplishing the exact opposite of the goal in mind.

I go into further detail in this post of mine:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/This-Meta-has-to-end/page/18#post4621524

Balsa.3951:

this discussion feels meaningless

Meta = optimum play style dont means zerker even so it is in most cases. Buff a gear a new Meta will come.

I feel more ppl come here to look for a shoulder to talk about there bad dunguon expierence where they be kicked for comming with non optimal gear .

I myself had the worsed runs with non meta groups not bcs they play bad but bcs they dont understand the encounter and blameing ppl very fast for dying in a fight which would be over in 2 min with meta team but 15 minutes in a non meta where I was the only zerk and other proudly posting there Cleric gear and telling me to tank as a Guard…

So all in all Meta or not all we want is fun dunguon encounters whith interessting boss mechanics and a lot movement.

Do we want a certain class in a certain gear to do a dunguon? No but this is what could happen if we force anet to make more gear types be meta.

then u get your 20 minutes waiting for a Normad Ele and a Condition Guard

You sir are one of the few who seem to understand this concept and that why the problem lies entirely with dungeon design being based solely upon draining health bars; if dungeons weren’t only about killing fast, then we’d see pretty much all complaints stop.

There should be deadly shortcut methods created to allow for tanks and support players to get their party to bypass the content in the same time as it would for a full-DPS party to kill their way through. Some encounters should require say, a monster or boss to be required to be at low health rather than killed and then tanked for a period of time such that all berserker all the time may struggle and need to reset from accidentally killing the target. There are many systems that could be employed here as a resolution to encourage more diverse play.

If berserker was truly a game-breaking meta strategy, it would be universal to all content types. I assure you that WvW and PvP do not depend on berserker builds, and that in many cases, full-DPS is sub-optimal in both of these formats outside of very, very niche builds and strategies.

The interesting thing to me came up in the other thread; People arguing totally straightfaced that zerk is both the most skill-requiring and the most efficient play.

You can’t read that post and not think “Man this is so an ego thing”

Windsagio.1340:

The interesting thing to me came up in the other thread; People arguing totally straightfaced that zerk is both the most skill-requiring and the most efficient play.

You can’t read that post and not think “Man this is so an ego thing”

You weren’t interpreting that in its intended context, and I don’t think you fully comprehend why.

And try not to take concepts to extremes.

Windsagio.1340:

The interesting thing to me came up in the other thread; People arguing totally straightfaced that zerk is both the most skill-requiring and the most efficient play.

You can’t read that post and not think “Man this is so an ego thing”

I use to say similar things. To me the word efficient should include effort, and zerk gear certainly requires the most effort making it arguably not as efficient as some alternatives. What most people here mean when saying efficient is that it allows you to complete things faster. In that regard yes, it requires the most skill and you complete things the fastest.

It’s not an ego thing, it’s simply a fact that if you can manage in full zerk without dying constantly, you will complete things the fastest and if you’re looking at efficient use of time that will lead to the most rewards per time.

Now, there are plenty of egos going around but zerk gear being meta isn’t about that, it’s just cold hard facts.

IllegalChocolate.6938:

As for the zerker meta, it can remain unaffected at the end of the day. The goal would be to allow many metas to be seen in the same light so that the content becomes more attractive to more different types of people. I’m sure the OP would be just as happy.

You cant have many metas. That simply doesnt make sense. You just want there to be less exclusion and more balanced standards for pug groups. But that has nothing to do with the meta. Thats just a result of the games current difficulty combined with player behaviour.

Like we have said. It probably wont change even if the game gets much harder. So in the end you will just have to solve the problem for yourself by creating your own groups.

Jerus.4350:

Windsagio.1340:

The interesting thing to me came up in the other thread; People arguing totally straightfaced that zerk is both the most skill-requiring and the most efficient play.

You can’t read that post and not think “Man this is so an ego thing”

I use to say similar things. To me the word efficient should include effort, and zerk gear certainly requires the most effort making it arguably not as efficient as some alternatives. What most people here mean when saying efficient is that it allows you to complete things faster. In that regard yes, it requires the most skill and you complete things the fastest.

It’s not an ego thing, it’s simply a fact that if you can manage in full zerk without dying constantly, you will complete things the fastest and if you’re looking at efficient use of time that will lead to the most rewards per time.

Now, there are plenty of egos going around but zerk gear being meta isn’t about that, it’s just cold hard facts.

It relates to the meta discussion though because “It’s best if you’re a very good player (scaling to content difficulty)” is very different than “It’s best always ever” which is how people treat the zerk meta discussion.

~~~

If that’s the case than the zerk meta can hurt dungeon participation because a person can end up in a spot where to get into content they’re not ready for they have to gear zerk to get a group, but they’re not ready to run the content in zerk so they lose badly, get discouraged (and no doubt heavily insulted) and quit doing the content.

Which ties to my main theory: In pug situations the zerk meta is harmful because it has a chilling effect on what we have for harder content. Private party is a whole different case, people can run how they want.

spoj.9672:

IllegalChocolate.6938:

As for the zerker meta, it can remain unaffected at the end of the day. The goal would be to allow many metas to be seen in the same light so that the content becomes more attractive to more different types of people. I’m sure the OP would be just as happy.

You cant have many metas. That simply doesnt make sense. You just want there to be less exclusion and more balanced standards for pug groups. But that has nothing to do with the meta. Thats just a result of the games current difficulty combined with player behaviour.

Like we have said. It probably wont change even if the game gets much harder. So in the end you will just have to solve the problem for yourself by creating your own groups.

You can’t have many metas for a specific thing but you could have different metas for different things. I think that’s what he was trying to say. Like imagine all enemies in TA were made to be a lot tougher so condi was powerful throughout it. The Meta would likely be to create a team utilizing a lot of condi right?

I wouldn’t complain about that… however I do like that gear isn’t something we are looking to change constantly in the current situation. Gear doesn’t swap nearly as easy as weapons, traits, and utilities.

@WIndsagio:
Wearing zerk should be the goal. Just because you usually only see zerk parties advertising doesn’t mean that you have to in order to get a group. How many times does it need to be said? Start your own group! They fill fast honestly.

spoj.9672:

IllegalChocolate.6938:

As for the zerker meta, it can remain unaffected at the end of the day. The goal would be to allow many metas to be seen in the same light so that the content becomes more attractive to more different types of people. I’m sure the OP would be just as happy.

You cant have many metas. That simply doesnt make sense. You just want there to be less exclusion and more balanced standards for pug groups. But that has nothing to do with the meta. Thats just a result of the games current difficulty combined with player behaviour.

Like we have said. It probably wont change even if the game gets much harder. So in the end you will just have to solve the problem for yourself by creating your own groups.

Yes you can. It depend on what you need for a specific situation. For example in fractal and for some dungeon, decreasing your dps to keep Master of Consecration as a Guardian will be the best choice. Some trait or skill become useless depending on your party composition. For exemple, no need to put 6 in air as a Elementalist if your party already cap vulnerability.

Of course you can have a really strict definition of meta which will only include 1 composition and 1 collection of build, but that will likely change depending on which dungeon you do and what strategy you are going for.

Meta is a loosely term and not everybody agree with its definition.

If im not mistaken he meant many metas such as compositions using some defensive stats. I was simply meaning a single meta as in full glass. But obviously within that it is vastly different for each individual instance. The meta is always going to be full glass of some sort for each path. Anything that isnt, isnt a meta. The only way it would be different is to force hard trinity and make glass gear impossible to survive in. Which will destroy the game.

What i was getting at is meta is the wrong term for him to use. Because he simply wants less picky LFG descriptions.

I shall now state confessions of one who mains a condi necromancer(working on making a hybrid).

First of all, let me state to the zerk fans, I’m on your side. You all are allowed to set up your zerk only no necros groups as much as you want. I won’t join your group and you won’t ever have to deal with me. Good? Good! I prefer grouping with my guildies anyways. (“We’re not skipping these Coffie, they might drop precursors!” -Zagerus)

However, what really kittens me off is when I join a pug with no indication that you want to do all zerk, all stacking and then complain to me, a profession who stinks at stacking, about my survivalbility and dps. This meta has formed a community that assumes that if you are not full berserker stacker, you must be brain dead or something.

I don’t have the gold, farming time, or inventory space to keep 2 entirely different play styles for WvW and PvE, but I have 2 hours to do an Arah run where my BiP/Epedemic/putrid mark combo melts groups of enemies to 50% before my warrior friend has finished his leap and feast of corruption that hits bosses like a truck(can’t wait to get my sinister armor for that).

Yet is all rendered moot with everyone with their blocks and vigors who insist on stacking, dieing while stacking, and dieing while skipping since their glassy and poorly timed a single dodge.

I guess what I’m trying to point out here is that I understand why the meta is what it is, and there is nothing wrong with full zerk groups. The problem is more about people trying to go full beserker, not creating specified beserker only groups, mess up with it (easy to do), blame the nonzerkers for their lack of dps, and start preaching their agenda on how full zerk is the only thing viable. You have to admit, at least that is a problem, even if it is just a minor community based one.

Meanwhile, my experience with full zerk is multiple failed aether blade runs and the first one I’ve ever completed involved 2 pugs, a full soldier warrior, me as a condimancer, and a condi ranger who admitted that she didn’t know if her armor was suited for her build, she just liked the look of it. We beat it in an hour with that charr guy being the only problem.

Sorry for a long post with no much of a point. I’m just letting everyone know what I at least assume is the OP’s point of view.

dlonie.6547:

Yumiko Ishida.3769:

I’m reviving my old house guild for this purpose. House Ishida [Ishi] North Amercian Megaserver. PVX/RP for those that are tired of all this meta crap.

Yay!!! \o/

Mind if I refer like-minded individuals to your guild? If that sounds good, make a thread in the guild recruitment page and PM me the link — I’ll refer posters in the dungeon forums to it (we see a lot of these types of players posting). This could help ease the frustrations of a lot of players who are looking for a non-meta guild.

Let’s turn this loser thread into a win.

How is this coming, by the way? I’d love to be able to start referring non-meta players to ya. Shall I just give them your IGN and have them ask you for an invite?

Coffietire:

Jerks are lame. They’re on both sides, zerks joining non zerk groups and trying to impose their play style. And non zerks joining zerk groups and trying to impose their views and play style.

It goes both ways. People are often jerks, and there’s not much to do about that.

Can we at least all agree that players joining glass-only parties with non-glass gear and players joining anything goes, any gear parties and/or full clear parties and trying to enforce glass gear and/or skipping are both problems? Assuming we’re all reasonable human beings, that should be a no-brainer. The thing is, that behavior is rooted in the idea that people have preferences. Disregarding others wishes is a problem with people, not with the most efficient approach to beating instanced content in a game.

For the sake of discussion, let’s assume Anet decided to make everything equal (ignoring how unlikely that is). No differences in performance based on any of the numbers underlying game mechanics. All professions can do everything. Gear has no affect on performance. Any player can duplicate the results of any other player no matter what they choose for traits, weapons or utility skills.

Regardless that this would be kitten-awful boring, there would still be exclusionary behavior. To eliminate that behavior, you’d also have to eliminate skill as a factor.

Coffietire.2783:

I guess what I’m trying to point out here is that I understand why the meta is what it is, and there is nothing wrong with full zerk groups. The problem is more about people trying to go full beserker, not creating specified beserker only groups, mess up with it (easy to do), blame the nonzerkers for their lack of dps, and start preaching their agenda on how full zerk is the only thing viable. You have to admit, at least that is a problem, even if it is just a minor community based one.

Those people are called idiots. And they are in every group of players, I met people who would comment on people going down as filthy zerkers and how they would be carried all the time.

You know what’s a cool thing? That you can avoid meta fanatics as well as idiots by doing one simple thing: playing with people you know.

IndigoSundown.5419:

To eliminate that behavior, you’d also have to eliminate skill as a factor.

This is what some people want.

DeceiverX.8361:

if dungeons weren’t only about killing fast, then we’d see pretty much all complaints stop.

I’d just like to point out that dungeons aren’t really about killing fast. What’s happening is that people want to grind cash fast, and, as a result, running dungeons fast becomes a goal of its own. The meta isn’t really about running dungeons quickly, it’s a gold/hour calculation.

Your general point makes sense though.

DeceiverX.8361:

if dungeons weren’t only about killing fast, then we’d see pretty much all complaints stop.

Twilight Arbor Aether Path says hello.

spoj.9672:

If im not mistaken he meant many metas such as compositions using some defensive stats. I was simply meaning a single meta as in full glass. But obviously within that it is vastly different for each individual instance. The meta is always going to be full glass of some sort for each path. Anything that isnt, isnt a meta. The only way it would be different is to force hard trinity and make glass gear impossible to survive in. Which will destroy the game.

What i was getting at is meta is the wrong term for him to use. Because he simply wants less picky LFG descriptions.

A viable solution is to implement organic AI that is akin to actual players choice of itemization and stat types. Situational difficulty is one of the more ideal ways to balance things out without taking anything away from anyone.

In this environment, Full glass comps can still suffice and tanky people still require as much if not more active play to achieve their current objective.

I am also using the term correctly as per oxford which means for the most part a “collaborative dictative of information for the sake of sending a specific message”.

The zerker meta is a dictative that for the most part states what you believe in.
The balance meta obviously dictates its own things
The nomad meta dictates its own things.

If you are referring to “high efficiency gaming” in which min maxing is part of its mindset. It is a “meta” itself but not what the noun “meta” means.

Its well established that meta in gaming has nothing to do with the actual definition. :P

In this environment, Full glass comps can still suffice and tanky people still require as much if not more active play to achieve their current objective.

And in this case full class comps would be the meta and all others wouldnt. So my original statement still stands.

Jerus.4350:

Coffietire:

Jerks are lame. They’re on both sides, zerks joining non zerk groups and trying to impose their play style. And non zerks joining zerk groups and trying to impose their views and play style.

It goes both ways. People are often jerks, and there’s not much to do about that.

This is true, however, one problem is easier to solve than the other. Fixing the non-glass joining a full glass party is as easy as “ping gear.”

The other issue is a bit more complicated. When my guildies are offline and it’s time to pug, I got to face mixed groups with some being full glass. Nothing wrong with full glass, but these people, with +5k AP, don’t know how to play the dungeon or as an individual glass build (correct use of active defense, positioning, and when to use what attacks) outside the “kill it before it charges it’s laser” with many not even knowing about said laser because the whole community is steeped in their ways.

The result is rage quits, regroups, and a dungeon run on an easy path that now takes 2 hours rather than the 1 hour it takes for any typical path involving mixed groups and a little bit of teaching involved.

spoj.9672:

Its well established that meta in gaming has nothing to do with the actual definition. :P

In this environment, Full glass comps can still suffice and tanky people still require as much if not more active play to achieve their current objective.

And in this case full class comps would be the meta and all others wouldnt. So my original statement still stands.

You are more than welcome to provide a detailed analysis with proof that high glass setups are the most dominate in an organic environment.

Oh wait, you can’t.

I can prove to you otherwise.

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/the-abjured-take-the-world-tournament-series-in-beijing-china/

go take a look at the setups everyone used.

Coffietire.2783:

Jerus.4350:

Coffietire:

Jerks are lame. They’re on both sides, zerks joining non zerk groups and trying to impose their play style. And non zerks joining zerk groups and trying to impose their views and play style.

It goes both ways. People are often jerks, and there’s not much to do about that.

This is true, however, one problem is easier to solve than the other. Fixing the non-glass joining a full glass party is as easy as “ping gear.”

The other issue is a bit more complicated. When my guildies are offline and it’s time to pug, I got to face mixed groups with some being full glass. Nothing wrong with full glass, but these people, with +5k AP, don’t know how to play the dungeon or as an individual glass build (correct use of active defense, positioning, and when to use what attacks) outside the “kill it before it charges it’s laser” with many not even knowing about said laser because the whole community is steeped in their ways.

The result is rage quits, regroups, and a dungeon run on an easy path that now takes 2 hours rather than the 1 hour it takes for any typical path involving mixed groups and a little bit of teaching involved.

Quoted for Emphasis.

This hits a really important point. The “Zerk Meta” question isn’t about high difficulty play with high skilled players, it’s about low difficulty play with a random assortment of players.

~~~

Also, I at least would agree that people joining ‘zerk only’ groups as non zerks are being a big part of the problem. That in and of itself somewhat deals with the whole discussion, except I’d still make an argument that zerk at low levels is damaging dungeon play and participation.

I’ve met the people that Coffie’s talking about too, the ones that can only function in set-circumstance full-zerk full-stack, and they’re a serious problem to a group… even if they’re not insisting that others conform. A player that’s napping all the time because they can’t adapt to the group’s specific dynamics is far more of a detriment than someone offering somewhat subpar dps ever will.

I don’t get all this bull about ‘zerker is not always the best option for everyone becuz if you are not good enough to run zerker you’re gonna do more wrong than good’ <- loosly
quoted.

This again shows a blatant lack of knowledge about gw2 PvE. Almost all content is gw2 is trivial and cake because total mastery of the dungeon and boss mechanic > individual player skill. Good teamwork + coordination and communication is also > individual player skill. That’s why I get annoyed when I see these guides saying ‘i recommend knights or soldiers for starting out’ lol. Makes no sense at all. If the team functions properly as a whole, you will almost never go down. You will be under blocks/blinds/invuln/evades most of the fight. Or at the very least for the important telegraphed attacks. If all else fails you can also dodge. GW2 is very forgiving when it comes to twitch reflex responding to stuff that happens. Inexperience might make you down more often in the beginning but that is more because of an inexperience with the game as a whole. It does not have any relation to what type of stats you run on your gear. Most pug parties fail at stupid stuff like Old Tom cuz they have never even attempted to read up on the fight. They die at the poison cuz no one knows what to do. Lack of knowledge is what kills most pugs, not difficulity of content. At the end of the day, alot of stuff can be studied intensively to a point where you could almost complete most content eyes closed. Alot of boss attacks are so telegraphed you try to execute your dodge with your toes and still have time left to reach your keyboard with your hands and dodge when your toes let you down. It’s like arguing getting an A+ on a test is due to skill. It is not. Anyone can get an A+. It might differ how much time each individual needs to spend but anyone can get it. The same goes for GW2. Anyone can complete all the content provided they study, learn and practice, but most importantly, find a group of likeminded competitive PvE’rs.

When all these stars align, playing with zerker will feel the same as any other possible stat selection. You don’t need to be more careful or more alert with zerk as opposed to other stats because if the group functions properly a large part of all damage you take is negated entirely. And since the stats on your gear have no effect on how well you are able to press buttons the point is essentially moot. At the same time, at the absolute highest levels of play, you will get downed instantly by alot of crap no matter what gear you wear.

TL;DR
There is no such thing as ‘you should use zerker if you are able to stay alive in it as it then becomes the most efficient way to play’. If you die in zeker you either A) don’t know how to properly play the game itself, using different gear won’t change that. Have not found a group of likeminded individuals that are coordinated, organized and communicative or C) Have not properly studied, learned and practiced the specific boss/dungeon mechanic and applied the correct rotations/comps/tactics.

If your group wipes, look at that TL;DR. The problem is most likely one of those 3 points. Instead of trying to solve that by lowering your DPS for passive stats that any kitten boss will smash through regardless, try to improve on one or all of those 3 points. Everyone can learn. There must be willingless to learn though. Outside of a severe lack of general affinity with gaming I cannot imagine any well argumented reason why one would be better off not using zerk because of ‘lack of skill’.

The difference between ‘elitists’ is not that we are such better gamers, but that we are willing to go the extra mile to excel in this game. Nothing more, nothing less. Anyone can walk that mile.

Windsagio.1340:

Also, I at least would agree that people joining ‘zerk only’ groups as non zerks are being a big part of the problem. That in and of itself somewhat deals with the whole discussion, except I’d still make an argument that zerk at low levels is damaging dungeon play and participation.

I’ve met the people that Coffie’s talking about too, the ones that can only function in set-circumstance full-zerk full-stack, and they’re a serious problem to a group… even if they’re not insisting that others conform. A player that’s napping all the time because they can’t adapt to the group’s specific dynamics is far more of a detriment than someone offering somewhat subpar dps ever will.

People are wired to repeat behavior that worked. If Joe uses tactic X the first time he does content Y, he’ll repeat the tactic every time. If it doesn’t work, Joe assumes the failure is a result of other people not doing their part. After all, he was doing the same things he did that time it worked, especially when he can see they’re not stacking with him. This behavior pattern is not limited to glass-wearing average to below-average skill LFG randoms. Any behavior can become ingrained in this fashion, not just stack n’ burn.

The real issue is relative skill in execution. Poorly executed kite n’ range, or wolf-pack melee/range also fail dungeons. Skilled players can make up for skill deficiency in some other group members regardless of gear or tactic chosen. Unskilled players dirt-napping are a drag on a group progress regardless of how they got that way or what gear they’re wearing.

If you’re in anti-meta groups you may be noticing the dead guys who want to stack more than you do those who face-plant while using other tactics. There are probably more of them, for one thing. For another, they’re likely more vocal.

Someone who dies during kite n’ range is less likely to blame the rest of the group if he can see they’re also kitin’ ‘n rangin’. Also, he’s likely busy blaming the game. “Kitten it, I know I dodged that! Stupid game!” or “Stupid boss, aggro onto one of those other guys!”

IllegalChocolate.6938:

spoj.9672:

Its well established that meta in gaming has nothing to do with the actual definition. :P

In this environment, Full glass comps can still suffice and tanky people still require as much if not more active play to achieve their current objective.

And in this case full class comps would be the meta and all others wouldnt. So my original statement still stands.

You are more than welcome to provide a detailed analysis with proof that high glass setups are the most dominate in an organic environment.

Oh wait, you can’t.

I can prove to you otherwise.

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/the-abjured-take-the-world-tournament-series-in-beijing-china/

go take a look at the setups everyone used.

… Organic environment = “who can sit in this spot the longest”… interesting…

@Coffie & Wind
I’ve caught myself cursing the low DPS before, but I never rage in group, just to myself and to my computer screen. I usually catch myself though, as it’s not the lack of DPS that is to blame for my death, I generally screwed up, “but the thing should be dead already!” is the only thing I can say, but it wasn’t and I don’t have the right to complain.

One that catches me often is COE p1. That burning + the teeth, if I don’t dodge correctly, condi cleanse, and heal at the right times then I’ll die eventually, however if I do all of those perfectly I can solo it without too much trouble on my Engi. The last time I played (like 2-3 weeks ago) I did just that. First encounter, screwed up died, cursed, calmed down and swore I’d do better. Second one dodged most things, ate one, healed, we were fine. Last boss, it was like 2 of us left up at half health on Alpha, we finished it off with ease

Zerkers often blame people because, well, yeah we can burn through HP bars so fast that it’s hard to screw up if you know the basics and can avoid the big hits. As DPS lowers those medium hits become something to be concerend with too. For instance Subject alpha, in a high DPS group you don’t really have to dodge in p1, you can eat the teeth and still kill it in time. In a normal PUG zerk group though you’ll want to dodge the teeth or you’ll eventualy go down. In a lower DPS PUG group though I’m going to have to dodge some of the burning or condi cleanse it as my heal alone won’t deal with the attrition especially if I miss 1 teeth dodge.

I type this out not as an excuse for zerkers to be a bunch of pricks, just in the hopes that you’ll understand why they can be frustrated, if you’re use to not having to concern yourself with some attacks it’s frustrating when you die to them is all. But a good player will kitten the situation and realize what he has to do.

Jerus.4350:

IllegalChocolate.6938:

spoj.9672:

Its well established that meta in gaming has nothing to do with the actual definition. :P

In this environment, Full glass comps can still suffice and tanky people still require as much if not more active play to achieve their current objective.

And in this case full class comps would be the meta and all others wouldnt. So my original statement still stands.

You are more than welcome to provide a detailed analysis with proof that high glass setups are the most dominate in an organic environment.

Oh wait, you can’t.

I can prove to you otherwise.

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/the-abjured-take-the-world-tournament-series-in-beijing-china/

go take a look at the setups everyone used.

… Organic environment = “who can sit in this spot the longest”… interesting…

I didnt even think that post was worth a response. Bringing PvP into it like it proves me wrong in a PvE discussion….

IndigoSundown.5419:

Windsagio.1340:

Also, I at least would agree that people joining ‘zerk only’ groups as non zerks are being a big part of the problem. That in and of itself somewhat deals with the whole discussion, except I’d still make an argument that zerk at low levels is damaging dungeon play and participation.

I’ve met the people that Coffie’s talking about too, the ones that can only function in set-circumstance full-zerk full-stack, and they’re a serious problem to a group… even if they’re not insisting that others conform. A player that’s napping all the time because they can’t adapt to the group’s specific dynamics is far more of a detriment than someone offering somewhat subpar dps ever will.

People are wired to repeat behavior that worked. If Joe uses tactic X the first time he does content Y, he’ll repeat the tactic every time. If it doesn’t work, Joe assumes the failure is a result of other people not doing their part. After all, he was doing the same things he did that time it worked, especially when he can see they’re not stacking with him. This behavior pattern is not limited to glass-wearing average to below-average skill LFG randoms. Any behavior can become ingrained in this fashion, not just stack n’ burn.

The real issue is relative skill in execution. Poorly executed kite n’ range, or wolf-pack melee/range also fail dungeons. Skilled players can make up for skill deficiency in some other group members regardless of gear or tactic chosen. Unskilled players dirt-napping are a drag on a group progress regardless of how they got that way or what gear they’re wearing.

If you’re in anti-meta groups you may be noticing the dead guys who want to stack more than you do those who face-plant while using other tactics. There are probably more of them, for one thing. For another, they’re likely more vocal.

Someone who dies during kite n’ range is less likely to blame the rest of the group if he can see they’re also kitin’ ‘n rangin’. Also, he’s likely busy blaming the game. “Kitten it, I know I dodged that! Stupid game!” or “Stupid boss, aggro onto one of those other guys!”

Absolutely in agreement

I’d say there’s a difference though, in that one of these styles has inappropriate cultural force behind it.

I’m sure we’d agree that a good player needs to know when to kite and when to stack and how to adapt to the builds and composition of the party.

Additionally a good player should adapt (I’ve seen so many times of people dying in a stack instead of dodging out) to when a scenario breaks down, which happens to even the best players.

By pushing the zerker meta so hard in these low level groups (with content where you can stack very safely) you end up with people who can’t play out of ‘meta’ and are never forced to learn… especially when combined with the human nature elements you mentioned.

~~~

Skoigoth.9238:

Threads like this one really amaze and annoy me. They pop up every week, rapidly explode, with a big portion of people talking past each other, throwing around the same old arguments again and again, and yet I still don´t understand why exactly some people think the established meta is supposedly bad for the game.

So, if any of those people could concisely and in a structured manner explain to me why purely offensive, high-risk/high-reward stat combinations being the core of optimized builds is wrong, it would be greatly appreciated.

Well I suppose I’m different than most of the Anti-Meta people in this thread. I’m not here for its effect on community and/or the LFG tool.

No I’m actually against the Zerk Meta because of what you have in bold. Its untrue and I think you and I know it. It is low-risk/high-reward and not the other way around. That is my gripe with it.

Azhure.1857:

It is low-risk/high-reward and not the other way around. That is my gripe with it.

Serious question, what gear set gives a higher risk than zerker?

Azhure.1857:

Skoigoth.9238:

Threads like this one really amaze and annoy me. They pop up every week, rapidly explode, with a big portion of people talking past each other, throwing around the same old arguments again and again, and yet I still don´t understand why exactly some people think the established meta is supposedly bad for the game.

So, if any of those people could concisely and in a structured manner explain to me why purely offensive, high-risk/high-reward stat combinations being the core of optimized builds is wrong, it would be greatly appreciated.

Well I suppose I’m different than most of the Anti-Meta people in this thread. I’m not here for its effect on community and/or the LFG tool.

No I’m actually against the Zerk Meta because of what you have in bold. Its untrue and I think you and I know it. It is low-risk/high-reward and not the other way around. That is my gripe with it.

The only place this is true is lower level dungeons where the scaling allows you to kill things before they can even attack back. Get out into Arah and Fractals and you’ll see a big difference, or even COE, you’re not going to see Alpha going down in a single IB4.

Azhure.1857:

Skoigoth.9238:

Threads like this one really amaze and annoy me. They pop up every week, rapidly explode, with a big portion of people talking past each other, throwing around the same old arguments again and again, and yet I still don´t understand why exactly some people think the established meta is supposedly bad for the game.

So, if any of those people could concisely and in a structured manner explain to me why purely offensive, high-risk/high-reward stat combinations being the core of optimized builds is wrong, it would be greatly appreciated.

Well I suppose I’m different than most of the Anti-Meta people in this thread. I’m not here for its effect on community and/or the LFG tool.

No I’m actually against the Zerk Meta because of what you have in bold. Its untrue and I think you and I know it. It is low-risk/high-reward and not the other way around. That is my gripe with it.

I would say it is still riskier than a tanky setup. As numerous videos have shown, tanky setups take longer and therefore allow for more mistakes, but they also give you the ability to cover up these mistakes. I will take the liberty of interpreting your statement a little, please feel free to correct me though: If you mean that dungeons are too easy and that the risk that comes with a full berserker party is too small, then I agree.

In comparison to other builds, it is still the riskiest approach though.

Azhure.1857:

Skoigoth.9238:

-snip-

Well I suppose I’m different than most of the Anti-Meta people in this thread. I’m not here for its effect on community and/or the LFG tool.

No I’m actually against the Zerk Meta because of what you have in bold. Its untrue and I think you and I know it. It is low-risk/high-reward and not the other way around. That is my gripe with it.

As Jerus already pointed out correctly, what you said really only “somewhat” applies to low level dungeons and trash fights, because you can burn through mobs without much effort.

And still, even in low level dungeons (e.g. TA – level 55) I regularly see people playing glass cannon builds getting wrecked by mobs such as Malrona or Leurent, because they didn´t pay enough attention to the fight and/or are just not very experienced.

Then take a high level dungeon such as Arah and classic PUG-buster encounter such as Lupicus – arguably one of the more difficult encounters in GW2.
Then have a full clerics warrior, playing terribadly (on purpose, as stated in the description btw.), semi-afk facerolling poor Lupi solo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKO11Y55DTM

Now tell me, how is glass cannon gear “low-risk” compared to this.

dlonie.6547:

Serious question, what gear set gives a higher risk than zerker?

Rampager´s/Sinister probably

dlonie.6547:

Azhure.1857:

It is low-risk/high-reward and not the other way around. That is my gripe with it.

Serious question, what gear set gives a higher risk than zerker?

What are you risking when wearing zerk gear and specced towards damage? Where is this “high risk” that you speak of? It isn’t “no risk” but it IS “low risk” still.

Zerk = low risk/high reward
Most other specs = low risk/low reward

You mean:

Zerk = low risk/high remard
Other specs = lower risk/low reward

Which can be translated to:

zerk = high risk/high reward
other specs = low risk/low reward

Difficult concept to grasp. I know. /s

Well high risk is subjective I guess but there’s no arguing that zerker is HIGHER risk than say, Nomads or clerics facerolling.

Or he means:

Zerk is No risk/High reward
Non-Zerk is No risk/High Reward

Trivial content is trivial.

Zerk it up!

fishball.7204:

Well high risk is subjective I guess but there’s no arguing that zerker is HIGHER risk than say, Nomads or clerics facerolling.

Personally I only see the risk to zerkers/glass players in PvP/WvW environments. PvE and dungeons? Not so much. Oh so your dungeon took 2 minutes longer than you wanted? * sad face * Oh you died 3 times at this event? * pout * That’s just horrible.

IllegalChocolate.6938:

spoj.9672:

Its well established that meta in gaming has nothing to do with the actual definition. :P

In this environment, Full glass comps can still suffice and tanky people still require as much if not more active play to achieve their current objective.

And in this case full class comps would be the meta and all others wouldnt. So my original statement still stands.

You are more than welcome to provide a detailed analysis with proof that high glass setups are the most dominate in an organic environment.

Oh wait, you can’t.

I can prove to you otherwise.

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/the-abjured-take-the-world-tournament-series-in-beijing-china/

go take a look at the setups everyone used.

I honestly wouldnt quote the spvp meta as healthy for the game at all. Celestial and bunker setup is about as cancer as it gets and it should stay away from any other game mode.

Its still more risk than going for passive defence. How do you not see that? o_o

So the risk vs reward is working correctly. But the max risk isnt high enough. Thats true. But thats nothing to do with the meta.