Guild Wars 2

Windsagio.1340:

Simple question for you then; Presuming you’re not a top 1% or even a top 50% player, do you think silverwastes content is easier, harder, or the same for people in glass melee?

I don’t think Mordrems are harder than other monsters. They’re just newer.
After playing against them a bit you learn about their attacks and their animations and how to deal with them.

Right now my biggest issue with Silverwaste enemies are telling whether a teragriff will jump on me, or charge at me and the size of their charge hitbox.

Haishao.6851:

Windsagio.1340:

Simple question for you then; Presuming you’re not a top 1% or even a top 50% player, do you think silverwastes content is easier, harder, or the same for people in glass melee?

I don’t think Mordrems are harder than other monsters. They’re just newer.
After playing against them a bit you learn about their attacks and their animations and how to deal with them.

Right now my biggest issue with Silverwaste enemies are telling whether a teragriff will jump on me, or charge at me and the size of their charge hitbox.

It’s easier than that – cripple a terragriff it won’t charge and fall flat on its face. Then kaboom dmg and dead. It’s all about finding the active defense

Still conflating ‘hard’ with ‘harder’, it seems like. The teragriff’s have attacks you really need to actively defend, you can’t really say that for… any single non-elite risen or centaur?

Windsagio.1340:

Harper.4173:

Windsagio.1340:

Thaddeus.4891:

Windsagio.1340:

Hybrid; the trick is that despite what people tell you, nobody is on 100% of the time, everyone makes mistakes.

The problem to me is that the slider is way off, so it’s far too low-risk for most people to play pure dps, even with relatively high error rates.

I’m fine with a person that’s say 95% on being able to run pure dps stats (although they need to fix balance between dps types still), but it should be extremely challenging for someone who’s say, 50% on to complete that content in pure dps stats, or else we end up in the situation we’re in now.

If we’re in a place where people look in askance at the person who gears zerker, but then someone says ‘no wait that guy’s awesome he can totally do it!’ and that guy helps the group’s speed, that’s a perfect scenario, as far as I’m concerned.

If the top-end groups are all in pure zerk, because all of the players are good enough to live, that’s great, but it should be a serious quesiton and consideration in mid-level groups and pugs.

But that’s how the game already is. People that can survive in full zerk play full zerk, but a lot of ppl can’t so they use a mix of piece. That’s not ideal, but even when you check guide on the meta, there is often a small portion explaining what you can do if you can’t survive in full zerk, like adding more knight gear or things like that.

I got ppl in my guild of all level of skills. Some go zerker, melee, meta. Other use meta trait with some knight or valkyrie gear, other use ranged weapons.

The slider is far off, that’s why we’re even talking about ‘meta’.

Zerk is far safer than it should be (in most content), which is why we have ‘meta pugs’ demanding zerk rather than knight.

So how is better? How is having a knight meta better than a zerk meta?

How is eating a portion of the damage better than avoiding all of it?

How is having pug runs take longer any fun or good for anyone?

Do you honestly believe people would love it if their 10 minutes pug run would take 20 and also include a few wipes?
Do you think this would make the content more enjoyable and people more likely to return and do it over?

Forget the word ‘meta’ for a second.

I would like all gear to be a decision and a question.

The decision for pure DPS gear could be “I am confident I can keep myself alive and in combat in this gear”. The question could be "Is this person good enough to not waste our time by constantly eating dirt?

The decision is “I value speed and/or seeing big numbers over anything else” and the question is “Is the speed difference big enough for me to want to keep someone out of this group?”

The first set is harder to decide, true, but it’s also more meaningful and puts the pressure on a different track.

~~~

I’m sure people would try to enforce a different ‘meta’, but that’s back to the basic mindset problem, and the fact that the highly skilled groups would still be able (in theory) to run these crazy speed runs in pure dps would mitigate the ‘meta’ pressure on the midtier.

Those decisions and questions are not an either/or. Both are used now. Also, the pairs are not consistent. The first is a personal decision but a group evaluation question, the second pair is a group decision and a group question.

The first decision is made by every player who wants to do group content. There are two reasons that players of average skill get away with glass gear now. Habituation and might stacking. Also, what are the odds that someone who passes the glass gear check but dies constantly will be removed from the group if they plan additional paths, even if the group keeps him for the initial path?

The second pair is always going to be an issue no matter what gear set is king. And the answer — at least for those serious about speed — will always be, “Yes.” I remember one post from the CoF P1 farm days by a mesmer who was kicked from a repeat run group. When he asked why, he was told, “You didn’t knock the Slave Driver into the wall fast enough and were too slow getting us through the rolling fire balls.”

Then there’s that the effect of making dungeons harder on what you’re calling the mid-tier would be making it unlikely they’d be doing the dungeons at all. If that’s what you want, OK, but don’t pretend you’re doing those people a favor — because you wouldn’t be.

Windsagio.1340:

Harper.4173:

Windsagio.1340:

Thaddeus.4891:

Windsagio.1340:

Hybrid; the trick is that despite what people tell you, nobody is on 100% of the time, everyone makes mistakes.

The problem to me is that the slider is way off, so it’s far too low-risk for most people to play pure dps, even with relatively high error rates.

I’m fine with a person that’s say 95% on being able to run pure dps stats (although they need to fix balance between dps types still), but it should be extremely challenging for someone who’s say, 50% on to complete that content in pure dps stats, or else we end up in the situation we’re in now.

If we’re in a place where people look in askance at the person who gears zerker, but then someone says ‘no wait that guy’s awesome he can totally do it!’ and that guy helps the group’s speed, that’s a perfect scenario, as far as I’m concerned.

If the top-end groups are all in pure zerk, because all of the players are good enough to live, that’s great, but it should be a serious quesiton and consideration in mid-level groups and pugs.

But that’s how the game already is. People that can survive in full zerk play full zerk, but a lot of ppl can’t so they use a mix of piece. That’s not ideal, but even when you check guide on the meta, there is often a small portion explaining what you can do if you can’t survive in full zerk, like adding more knight gear or things like that.

I got ppl in my guild of all level of skills. Some go zerker, melee, meta. Other use meta trait with some knight or valkyrie gear, other use ranged weapons.

The slider is far off, that’s why we’re even talking about ‘meta’.

Zerk is far safer than it should be (in most content), which is why we have ‘meta pugs’ demanding zerk rather than knight.

So how is better? How is having a knight meta better than a zerk meta?

How is eating a portion of the damage better than avoiding all of it?

How is having pug runs take longer any fun or good for anyone?

Do you honestly believe people would love it if their 10 minutes pug run would take 20 and also include a few wipes?
Do you think this would make the content more enjoyable and people more likely to return and do it over?

Forget the word ‘meta’ for a second.

I would like all gear to be a decision and a question.

The decision for pure DPS gear could be “I am confident I can keep myself alive and in combat in this gear”. The question could be ""s this person good enough to not waste our time by constantly eating dirt?

The decision is “I value speed and/or seeing big numbers over anything else” and the question is “Is the speed difference big enough for me to want to keep someone out of this group?”

The first set is harder to decide, true, but it’s also more meaningful and puts the pressure on a different track.

~~~

I’m sure people would try to enforce a different ‘meta’, but that’s back to the basic mindset problem, and the fact that the highly skilled groups would still be able (in theory) to run these crazy speed runs in pure dps would mitigate the ‘meta’ pressure on the midtier.

Forget the word ‘meta’ for a second.

I would like all gear to be a decision and a question.

That’s the thing really – you can’t forget it. Every game has a meta. A best way of doing anything in that game.

People like me can’t just “forget” the word meta because we’re driven by the desire to do well, to do it fast and efficient.

The moment I pick up a new multiplayer game the first thing I do is I read up on optimal play strategy. There’s no “forget about it” option really.

The question you mention " is this person good enough" is irrelevant. You would simply take zerker players and if they died too much and din’t do their job you would kick.
That wouldn’t make me replace them with people in knight’s. It would make me want to replace them with better zerkers.

Regarding the speed difference – it’s not just about the speed, also about the smoothness and general way the run goes. No extra aggro, no dying, no wiping, no waiting, just burning and getting the rewards.
To me even time that’s under a minute matters.

Windsagio.1340:

@Hybrid; I really don’t have anything to say to that except ’you’re wrong’. You’re confusing a relatively lenient Margin of error in even the hardest content with no errors.

And you’re wrong. You’re confused about the margin of error. It only seems lenient because we have had two years experience solving these puzzles. Turn back the clock 2.25 years and tell how how lenient and forgiving Arah p1 was for people then who didn’t know all the tricks in the book.

Windsagio.1340:

Still conflating ‘hard’ with ‘harder’, it seems like. The teragriff’s have attacks you really need to actively defend, you can’t really say that for… any single non-elite risen or centaur?

The vet subjugators during the balth chain would like to say hello.. And initiate your corpse into zhaitans army.

Windsagio.1340:

But this question is already in the game, are you playing with other people? I asked myself this question during the first 9months of the game. At some point it changed from I need AH build with knight gear to, I need AH build with zerker gear to, I need zerker gear with good dps trait. I asked this question and as I was getting better and known more about encounter the answer changed. Same with everybody I know. My friend asked this question and needed the 2 pieces or knight with Shake it Off and at some didn’t need it anymore. I got another that still need 3 pieces of Valkyrie on his Mesmer but can melee. I got another one that just can’t melee, so she use a range weapon most of the time. We talk about meta because that’s the optimal build, but everybody know that you need to be honest with yourself : can’t you survive in a meta build? If not add more defensive stats until you get better at it.

I said that already, but I’ll say it again. People were able to do fractal level 80+ in a time where AR could be high enough to do a difference and each agony attack was 1 shot dead (not down, dead). And they were able to do it in zerker (I only reached 60 myself if I remember correctly). There was never an harder content in the game ever, and I don’t think that there will be a content as in the game ever. Mostly because these fractal level 40+ were not intended by Anet in the first place, it was kind of a bug. But the best bug ever.

If you push the slider the situation will be the same. Some ppl will take longer to know new encounter and a larger portion of the community will run non meta, but the meta won’t change much. It will probably adapt, but won’t drastically change.

Silverwaste is a bit harder when you start, but it not more of a challenge now. I don’t know anybody, zero, nada, none, that needed to switch gear to do silverwaste.

CMM.6712:

Harper.4173:

MikeyGrey.2496:

Harper.4173:

All I ever wanted was that the people who don’t care about the way I play stay well clear of me and my parties and all is well. Sadly that does not happen. Even when I clearly post that I’m looking for people like myself.

Also – it’s not forcing it “on the entire community”. It’s not forcing it at all. You want to run with the groups of people who care about their time? play to their expectations.
You don’t? Nobody cares – just don’t interfere and make your own groups.

That, as you say, does not happen. In all likelihood, it will never happen. Unless lfg tool adds filters to only let certain gear/trait type in. But that would come with its own problems:

What if they change the armor with same skin but different stat? Have a system to continuously monitor gear throughout the instance. What if gear breaks? Require party members to ping repair canisters &/or additional sets of gear with required stat but differing skin. Now all that seems a bit drastic… but i would be ok with it. I have no intention of using such features. To each their own.

However, solutions like these are temporary at best. Ignoring/isolating the problem won’t make it go away. We do interact with each other as it is an mmo. Influence spreads across the whole game. I have seen parties trying to gather similarly geared toons for dynamic events (last i remember was during maw… not sure why though) in open world. While that in itself isn’t a problem as of yet, it does set a dangerous precedent. There is no way to not-interact during open world content short of map change and that isn’t always going to happen. Not bothering others is one thing but inconveniencing yourself for someone else’s convenience (regardless if it takes an hour or half a second) isn’t a choice for all… definitely not for me.

But why berserker? As many have pointed out before, meta (for lack of better word) will always be there. Zerkers wouldn’t get so much hate (or love… however you want to see it) if it wasn’t efficient everywhere. Yes…a skill or trait might be needed here & there… but for a vast, overwhelming majority of the time, its efficiency is unmatched. And even when it isn’t best, it is good enough to get through (when used by the right player). Such universal approach (combined with locked traits… curtsey of NPE changes and widespread appeal of zerk) renders experimenting/investing in anything else meaningless & gives it undue influence over all aspects of the game. I myself witnessed another new player geared all zerk simply because “everyone else doin it”.

IMHO, recent additions to the game have done much (compared to the past at least) to increase usefulness of other stats but much more is needed. Changes need to be implemented across the board. Also, active defenses need to be tied to your stat combo. As it is now, active damage mitigation has little-to-nothing to do with your build and it is good enough to decide the outcome of a fight. In its face, build diversity (apart from time differences) means nothing.

I can monitor if they switch armor to another set with different stats and same skin. The moment they get hit ( and they will) and I see their HP not going down hard enough ( and it won’t) I’ll know they pulled a fast one and kick with the fury of 1000 angry suns.

Same goes if the boss doesn’t melt properly – I’ll become suspicious and upon finding the culprit swift retribution will rain down.

You can play how you want in GW2. What you can’t do is trample of over people and trick them by not adhering to party requirements – I won’t stand for it.

Wow. I hope I never end up in one of your parties. God forbid the phone ring or I have to use the bathroom or turn away from the screen for a minute. This is what the game needs less of on display right here.

Seriously. I feel sorry for anyone who has ever had to play in this guy’s group. Clearly trust and control issues.

Draknar.5748:

CMM.6712:

Harper.4173:

MikeyGrey.2496:

Harper.4173:

All I ever wanted was that the people who don’t care about the way I play stay well clear of me and my parties and all is well. Sadly that does not happen. Even when I clearly post that I’m looking for people like myself.

Also – it’s not forcing it “on the entire community”. It’s not forcing it at all. You want to run with the groups of people who care about their time? play to their expectations.
You don’t? Nobody cares – just don’t interfere and make your own groups.

That, as you say, does not happen. In all likelihood, it will never happen. Unless lfg tool adds filters to only let certain gear/trait type in. But that would come with its own problems:

What if they change the armor with same skin but different stat? Have a system to continuously monitor gear throughout the instance. What if gear breaks? Require party members to ping repair canisters &/or additional sets of gear with required stat but differing skin. Now all that seems a bit drastic… but i would be ok with it. I have no intention of using such features. To each their own.

However, solutions like these are temporary at best. Ignoring/isolating the problem won’t make it go away. We do interact with each other as it is an mmo. Influence spreads across the whole game. I have seen parties trying to gather similarly geared toons for dynamic events (last i remember was during maw… not sure why though) in open world. While that in itself isn’t a problem as of yet, it does set a dangerous precedent. There is no way to not-interact during open world content short of map change and that isn’t always going to happen. Not bothering others is one thing but inconveniencing yourself for someone else’s convenience (regardless if it takes an hour or half a second) isn’t a choice for all… definitely not for me.

But why berserker? As many have pointed out before, meta (for lack of better word) will always be there. Zerkers wouldn’t get so much hate (or love… however you want to see it) if it wasn’t efficient everywhere. Yes…a skill or trait might be needed here & there… but for a vast, overwhelming majority of the time, its efficiency is unmatched. And even when it isn’t best, it is good enough to get through (when used by the right player). Such universal approach (combined with locked traits… curtsey of NPE changes and widespread appeal of zerk) renders experimenting/investing in anything else meaningless & gives it undue influence over all aspects of the game. I myself witnessed another new player geared all zerk simply because “everyone else doin it”.

IMHO, recent additions to the game have done much (compared to the past at least) to increase usefulness of other stats but much more is needed. Changes need to be implemented across the board. Also, active defenses need to be tied to your stat combo. As it is now, active damage mitigation has little-to-nothing to do with your build and it is good enough to decide the outcome of a fight. In its face, build diversity (apart from time differences) means nothing.

I can monitor if they switch armor to another set with different stats and same skin. The moment they get hit ( and they will) and I see their HP not going down hard enough ( and it won’t) I’ll know they pulled a fast one and kick with the fury of 1000 angry suns.

Same goes if the boss doesn’t melt properly – I’ll become suspicious and upon finding the culprit swift retribution will rain down.

You can play how you want in GW2. What you can’t do is trample of over people and trick them by not adhering to party requirements – I won’t stand for it.

Wow. I hope I never end up in one of your parties. God forbid the phone ring or I have to use the bathroom or turn away from the screen for a minute. This is what the game needs less of on display right here.

Seriously. I feel sorry for anyone who has ever had to play in this guy’s group. Clearly trust and control issues.

I feel sorry for anyone who has to lie their way into a good group.
I feel sympathy for those who have to deal with constantly kicking the lying scumbags.

If you join a group that is clearly not suitable for your “phiw”, expect to get kicked. If you cry a lake of tears, feel free to drown in it. It’s your problem, no one elses.

Also, harper is quite nice to have in a group.

I think I finally fold. You guys consistently declaring “there will always be a meta!” when you clearly don’t even know what a meta entails has gotten to me.

Windsagio.1340:

I think I finally fold. You guys consistently declaring “there will always be a meta!” when you clearly don’t even know what a meta entails has gotten to me.

Ironically i think its you who doesnt understand what the meta means in games.

1- We were promised dynamic and interesting gameplay.

2- We were promised build diversity and that any preferred play style would be at “least” viable.

3- What happened to anet’s original vision for their combat system? was it always to get rid of the trinity, and instead make ONE BUILD the optimal way to play?

4- Dungeons have become a stack fest; the camera moves at a dizzying pace and I can barely see anything other than a mash-potatoe mess of particle effects.

5- Now is either you’re a zerk or go home, to which yes I COMPLETELY understand that you can make your own LFG and such, but those who join a non-meta group are few and far between.

6- I only wonder what will happen to those new to the game, where they get harassed and kicked from a party just because they are not in the meta group?

7- The skill level of most of these speed runners is going from bad to worse; the boss just steps out of the “safe heaven” corner for two seconds and everyone is dead.

Aden Celeste.3650:

1- We were promised dynamic and interesting gameplay.

Which is done already. The content is old, thus less interesting.

2- We were promised build diversity and that any preferred play style would be at “least” viable.

3- What happened to anet’s original vision for their combat system? was it always to get rid of the trinity, and instead make ONE BUILD the optimal way to play?

Do you even know what you are arguing about here? Every build is viable. Period. And there is at least one optimal solution for everything. End of story.

4- Dungeons have become a stack fest; the camera moves at a dizzying pace and I can barely see anything other than a mash-potatoe mess of particle effects.

Than don’t stack maybe? Especially since it has literally no advantage to stack due to the FGS nerf apart from some los spots.

5- Now is either you’re a zerk or go home, to which yes I COMPLETELY understand that you can make your own LFG and such, but those who join a non-meta group are few and far between.

Exactly. Problem solved.

6- I only wonder what will happen to those new to the game, where they get harassed and kicked from a party just because they are not in the meta group?

Eventually they will either grasp the reasons of it or stay ignorant as happened numerous times in this and other threads as well.

7- The skill level of most of these speed runners is going from bad to worse; the boss just steps out of the “safe heaven” corner for two seconds and everyone is dead.

See above.

Draknar.5748:

CMM.6712:

Harper.4173:

You can play how you want in GW2. What you can’t do is trample of over people and trick them by not adhering to party requirements – I won’t stand for it.

Wow. I hope I never end up in one of your parties. God forbid the phone ring or I have to use the bathroom or turn away from the screen for a minute. This is what the game needs less of on display right here.

Seriously. I feel sorry for anyone who has ever had to play in this guy’s group. Clearly trust and control issues.

I’m sure Harper is understanding of things outside of one’s control. However, lying to get into a group is not one of those times.

If you were ever caught trying to use my group I’d use you back until the last boss and then dump you. I don’t think Harper himself is quite that evil, although he would be completely justified in doing so.

hybrid.5027:

Windsagio.1340:

@Hybrid; I really don’t have anything to say to that except ’you’re wrong’. You’re confusing a relatively lenient Margin of error in even the hardest content with no errors.

And you’re wrong. You’re confused about the margin of error. It only seems lenient because we have had two years experience solving these puzzles. Turn back the clock 2.25 years and tell how how lenient and forgiving Arah p1 was for people then who didn’t know all the tricks in the book.

Heck, I remember how many times I was downed in AC Story when I first did it. But never mind me, the same happened to a bunch of players before it was nerfed.

Carighan.6758:

hybrid.5027:

Guess you never heard of Ghost Pepper Poppers. They are the true easy mode in this game, at least in nighttime instances.

Well but that’s fair enough, isn’kitten
Could have other mobs which reflect all non-damaging conditions back to the player, for example. But different mob, different approach.

The point is to make sure that you cannot simply /melee-snooze every single mob, by interspersing mobs which are very very dangerous to that approach.

Got another one:

Assassin
Upon aggro, this mob stealthes, then moves towards a target player slowly but being invulnerable (you can in theory predict where they are but it doesn’t help you much), then dealing a single from-stealth attack which will down a berserker-geared player, just barely (is based on class, so it always downs a berserker player).
A small~medium amount of extra defense or Aegis will avoid it, and they take 10-15 seconds to be able to re-stealth.

Ofc, these mobs could appear in packs, or add during a boss-fight or fight versus another group of mobs. If they come as a pack, they’ll always try to target different players.

-snip-

Got a real non-anecdotal evidence for you. Bloody Victoria – No Feline/IP Dagger Thief Solo by rfdarko [DnT].

Have fun!

Edit to remind you that Bloody Victoria’s backstab can one-shot a zerk ele.

Every game has meta you cant stop that, if they “fix” this meta there will be another one.

Faux.1937:

Every game has meta you cant stop that, if they “fix” this meta there will be another one.

I’m really sick and tired of seeing this statement throughout this thread. So what? To all of you that have said as much on multiple occasions, so what? Does it in ANY WAY change or negate all the arguments against the current meta that were given in this thread?

I’m not asking you to agree with them. Just wish the lot of you would think about what you’re saying sometimes. “Better the devil you know…” — Is that it? Or is it more of your forum ‘finisher’ on anyone that may express negative opinions on the current meta?

Aden Celeste.3650:

blah blah blah blah blah
…..

7- The skill level of most of these speed runners is going from bad to worse; the boss just steps out of the “safe heaven” corner for two seconds and everyone is dead.

Waaah… hold it right there. So you say speed runners require no skills at all. Let me give you an example.

Caudecus’ Manor p3

• An average, play-how-I-want group finished it in about 18 minutes. Not bad, right?
• A speedclear group competing in real-time streaming finished it in 4:15 minutes. Well, you may argue that they have a better group comp and potentially 4 times higher DPS. Is it even possible??? If it was true, then why would people want to bash the meta when it is 4 times more efficient?
  But wait, we were talking about skills after all.
• The current world record of this path completion is 2:37 minutes!!!. Yep, the whole path was finished in the time that most pug requires to take down the turrets.
  It’s alright, I know you are shocked. But let’s take a deep breath and be honest. Speed clear requires skills. That is an undeniable fact.

Azhure.1857:

Faux.1937:

Every game has meta you cant stop that, if they “fix” this meta there will be another one.

I’m really sick and tired of seeing this statement throughout this thread. So what? To all of you that have said as much on multiple occasions, so what? Does it in ANY WAY change or negate all the arguments against the current meta that were given in this thread?

No, because people arguing against the meta can’t understand what they say.
Removing the best option would result in another best option. Simple as that.

I’m not asking you to agree with them. Just wish the lot of you would think about what you’re saying sometimes. “Better the devil you know…” — Is that it? Or is it more of your forum ‘finisher’ on anyone that may express negative opinions on the current meta?

You know, i can’t care anymore. We given plenty of suggestions, including the famous “make your own group and community” statements, but noooooo people just come here and complain about how they join in zerker parties and get kicked because they can’t match the requiremenets AND want to get carried. Seriously? I mean, seriously seriously? Guys come on, force some common sense on you and realize who is the enemy.
Only yourself. Change yourselves and the problem is gone.

Instead of removing zerk, why don’t anet buff the trash mob? Those who knw how/when to dodge will live, those who don’t will be forced to tweak their stats.

On the other side, Anet pls remove condi cap and buff healing power pls pls pls

kthxbye

Dalanor.5387:

Azhure.1857:

Faux.1937:

Every game has meta you cant stop that, if they “fix” this meta there will be another one.

I’m really sick and tired of seeing this statement throughout this thread. So what? To all of you that have said as much on multiple occasions, so what? Does it in ANY WAY change or negate all the arguments against the current meta that were given in this thread?

No, because people arguing against the meta can’t understand what they say.
Removing the best option would result in another best option. Simple as that.

I’m not asking you to agree with them. Just wish the lot of you would think about what you’re saying sometimes. “Better the devil you know…” — Is that it? Or is it more of your forum ‘finisher’ on anyone that may express negative opinions on the current meta?

You know, i can’t care anymore. We given plenty of suggestions, including the famous “make your own group and community” statements, but noooooo people just come here and complain about how they join in zerker parties and get kicked because they can’t match the requiremenets AND want to get carried. Seriously? I mean, seriously seriously? Guys come on, force some common sense on you and realize who is the enemy.
Only yourself. Change yourselves and the problem is gone.

I understand the frustration. Believe me, I do. Please just stick with your reasoning as to why you’re for the meta — not so much why those against it have no argument. They have just as much right to voice there argument as you do.

This thread has been rather difficult to follow because it seems its been all over the place… But while I am against the zerk meta, I am not upset with the LFG aspect. That is not what drew me to this thread. I’m against the zerk meta because it really gives no reason to be anything other than zerk in the current state of this game. There isn’t enough diversity. Before anyone attacks me again for that, please don’t. I know you don’t agree with me. The message has been received.

I understand your opinion Azhure. The game could be more complex with more customization at the gear level. Personally I kind of enjoy the fact that it’s a bit more simple though. I have full customization of my tools through weapon, utility and trait selection with a bit from runes/sigil as well. My gear simply acts as a basic offense/defense slider.

This leaves me with only needing one gear set in PVE, and all the things I may want to tweak for different situations are more or less things I can do so easily, the exception being weapons and runes/sigils but I don’t really see myself wanting more than a couple combinations there (maybe str and scholar setup for Ele, and maybe 2-3 of any type of weapon per char). The main focus though is traits and utilities which I can change at any time without any restrictions other than having to be out of combat. That’s beautiful to me.

Azhure.1857:

Faux.1937:

Every game has meta you cant stop that, if they “fix” this meta there will be another one.

I’m really sick and tired of seeing this statement throughout this thread. So what? To all of you that have said as much on multiple occasions, so what? Does it in ANY WAY change or negate all the arguments against the current meta that were given in this thread?

I’m not asking you to agree with them. Just wish the lot of you would think about what you’re saying sometimes. “Better the devil you know…” — Is that it? Or is it more of your forum ‘finisher’ on anyone that may express negative opinions on the current meta?

I believe that rejoinder is primarily a response to the pie-in-the-sky kind of wishful thinking that making a game mechanics change would mean that players would stop selecting for certain criteria. Since human proclivity to select for efficiency isn’t going to change, then it would seem that pointing this out does negate that complaint.

It certainly does not apply to any suggestions for a specific new meta, just to the apparent willingness to believe that a mechanics change will change human nature.

Draknar.5748:

CMM.6712:

Harper.4173:

MikeyGrey.2496:

Harper.4173:

All I ever wanted was that the people who don’t care about the way I play stay well clear of me and my parties and all is well. Sadly that does not happen. Even when I clearly post that I’m looking for people like myself.

Also – it’s not forcing it “on the entire community”. It’s not forcing it at all. You want to run with the groups of people who care about their time? play to their expectations.
You don’t? Nobody cares – just don’t interfere and make your own groups.

That, as you say, does not happen. In all likelihood, it will never happen. Unless lfg tool adds filters to only let certain gear/trait type in. But that would come with its own problems:

What if they change the armor with same skin but different stat? Have a system to continuously monitor gear throughout the instance. What if gear breaks? Require party members to ping repair canisters &/or additional sets of gear with required stat but differing skin. Now all that seems a bit drastic… but i would be ok with it. I have no intention of using such features. To each their own.

However, solutions like these are temporary at best. Ignoring/isolating the problem won’t make it go away. We do interact with each other as it is an mmo. Influence spreads across the whole game. I have seen parties trying to gather similarly geared toons for dynamic events (last i remember was during maw… not sure why though) in open world. While that in itself isn’t a problem as of yet, it does set a dangerous precedent. There is no way to not-interact during open world content short of map change and that isn’t always going to happen. Not bothering others is one thing but inconveniencing yourself for someone else’s convenience (regardless if it takes an hour or half a second) isn’t a choice for all… definitely not for me.

But why berserker? As many have pointed out before, meta (for lack of better word) will always be there. Zerkers wouldn’t get so much hate (or love… however you want to see it) if it wasn’t efficient everywhere. Yes…a skill or trait might be needed here & there… but for a vast, overwhelming majority of the time, its efficiency is unmatched. And even when it isn’t best, it is good enough to get through (when used by the right player). Such universal approach (combined with locked traits… curtsey of NPE changes and widespread appeal of zerk) renders experimenting/investing in anything else meaningless & gives it undue influence over all aspects of the game. I myself witnessed another new player geared all zerk simply because “everyone else doin it”.

IMHO, recent additions to the game have done much (compared to the past at least) to increase usefulness of other stats but much more is needed. Changes need to be implemented across the board. Also, active defenses need to be tied to your stat combo. As it is now, active damage mitigation has little-to-nothing to do with your build and it is good enough to decide the outcome of a fight. In its face, build diversity (apart from time differences) means nothing.

I can monitor if they switch armor to another set with different stats and same skin. The moment they get hit ( and they will) and I see their HP not going down hard enough ( and it won’t) I’ll know they pulled a fast one and kick with the fury of 1000 angry suns.

Same goes if the boss doesn’t melt properly – I’ll become suspicious and upon finding the culprit swift retribution will rain down.

You can play how you want in GW2. What you can’t do is trample of over people and trick them by not adhering to party requirements – I won’t stand for it.

Wow. I hope I never end up in one of your parties. God forbid the phone ring or I have to use the bathroom or turn away from the screen for a minute. This is what the game needs less of on display right here.

Seriously. I feel sorry for anyone who has ever had to play in this guy’s group. Clearly trust and control issues.

You might want to read my follow-up post where i specifically answered his concerns.

Phones and other unforeseeable RL issues are not a problem. You type in that you have to brb because of whatever reason and nobody will mind or kick you.

If it doesn’t take absurdly long there’s no issue – the party will press on without you and there will be no issues.

The issues are when you sneak in a party where people don’t want you and you specifically go against their wishes and join anyway. That’s when you get kicked.

Iris Ng.9845:

Carighan.6758:

hybrid.5027:

Guess you never heard of Ghost Pepper Poppers. They are the true easy mode in this game, at least in nighttime instances.

Well but that’s fair enough, isn’kitten
Could have other mobs which reflect all non-damaging conditions back to the player, for example. But different mob, different approach.

The point is to make sure that you cannot simply /melee-snooze every single mob, by interspersing mobs which are very very dangerous to that approach.

Got another one:

Assassin
Upon aggro, this mob stealthes, then moves towards a target player slowly but being invulnerable (you can in theory predict where they are but it doesn’t help you much), then dealing a single from-stealth attack which will down a berserker-geared player, just barely (is based on class, so it always downs a berserker player).
A small~medium amount of extra defense or Aegis will avoid it, and they take 10-15 seconds to be able to re-stealth.

Ofc, these mobs could appear in packs, or add during a boss-fight or fight versus another group of mobs. If they come as a pack, they’ll always try to target different players.

-snip-

Got a real non-anecdotal evidence for you. Bloody Victoria – No Feline/IP Dagger Thief Solo by rfdarko [DnT].

Have fun!

Edit to remind you that Bloody Victoria’s backstab can one-shot a zerk ele.

Aye but BV isn’t invuln, you can still hit her with untargeted skills while she’s stealthed

Aden Celeste.3650:

1- We were promised dynamic and interesting gameplay.

2- We were promised build diversity and that any preferred play style would be at “least” viable.

3- What happened to anet’s original vision for their combat system? was it always to get rid of the trinity, and instead make ONE BUILD the optimal way to play?

4- Dungeons have become a stack fest; the camera moves at a dizzying pace and I can barely see anything other than a mash-potatoe mess of particle effects.

5- Now is either you’re a zerk or go home, to which yes I COMPLETELY understand that you can make your own LFG and such, but those who join a non-meta group are few and far between.

6- I only wonder what will happen to those new to the game, where they get harassed and kicked from a party just because they are not in the meta group?

7- The skill level of most of these speed runners is going from bad to worse; the boss just steps out of the “safe heaven” corner for two seconds and everyone is dead.

1- we have that.

2-we have that – almost any gear/build/profession combo can finish any content in this game.

3-this will always happen as long as you have more than one build. If you have 2 builds that differ – even if they’re almost identical- one will work better and one wont. So people will pick the one that works better even if it’s as low as 1% better. That’s how people are.

4-Dungeons are done for rewards. People stack because they’ve never heard of FGS#4 nerf.

5-So make your own guilds and play among yourselves. The fact that few people want to play a certain way does not give them any form of right to impede on other people’s parties and force themselves into parties where nobody wants them.

6-they will probably go meta or go PHIW.

7-You have no idea how speed clears work.

DaveGan.8065:

Draknar.5748:

CMM.6712:

Harper.4173:

You can play how you want in GW2. What you can’t do is trample of over people and trick them by not adhering to party requirements – I won’t stand for it.

Wow. I hope I never end up in one of your parties. God forbid the phone ring or I have to use the bathroom or turn away from the screen for a minute. This is what the game needs less of on display right here.

Seriously. I feel sorry for anyone who has ever had to play in this guy’s group. Clearly trust and control issues.

I’m sure Harper is understanding of things outside of one’s control. However, lying to get into a group is not one of those times.

If you were ever caught trying to use my group I’d use you back until the last boss and then dump you. I don’t think Harper himself is quite that evil, although he would be completely justified in doing so.

No – I kick on sight. No point in putting myself and the “sneaker” through unnecessary grief.

Azhure.1857:

Dalanor.5387:

Azhure.1857:

Faux.1937:

Every game has meta you cant stop that, if they “fix” this meta there will be another one.

I’m really sick and tired of seeing this statement throughout this thread. So what? To all of you that have said as much on multiple occasions, so what? Does it in ANY WAY change or negate all the arguments against the current meta that were given in this thread?

No, because people arguing against the meta can’t understand what they say.
Removing the best option would result in another best option. Simple as that.

I’m not asking you to agree with them. Just wish the lot of you would think about what you’re saying sometimes. “Better the devil you know…” — Is that it? Or is it more of your forum ‘finisher’ on anyone that may express negative opinions on the current meta?

You know, i can’t care anymore. We given plenty of suggestions, including the famous “make your own group and community” statements, but noooooo people just come here and complain about how they join in zerker parties and get kicked because they can’t match the requiremenets AND want to get carried. Seriously? I mean, seriously seriously? Guys come on, force some common sense on you and realize who is the enemy.
Only yourself. Change yourselves and the problem is gone.

I understand the frustration. Believe me, I do. Please just stick with your reasoning as to why you’re for the meta — not so much why those against it have no argument. They have just as much right to voice there argument as you do.

This thread has been rather difficult to follow because it seems its been all over the place… But while I am against the zerk meta, I am not upset with the LFG aspect. That is not what drew me to this thread. I’m against the zerk meta because it really gives no reason to be anything other than zerk in the current state of this game. There isn’t enough diversity. Before anyone attacks me again for that, please don’t. I know you don’t agree with me. The message has been received.

So if instead of a zerk meta we had a knight’s with zerk accessories meta would that give more reason to be anything than knight’s with zerk accesories?

Would that be more diverse for you?

If the one build everybody plays is called something other than “zerk” would it be more fun for you?

Harper.4173:

So if instead of a zerk meta we had a knight’s with zerk accessories meta would that give more reason to be anything than knight’s with zerk accesories?

Would that be more diverse for you?

If the one build everybody plays is called something other than “zerk” would it be more fun for you?

No. It wouldn’t.
What would be more fun is if there were multiple ways of being optimal, not just one that had been finely narrowed down. Perhaps that is just a dream. But I would rather dream and fight for the possibility that it could happen…. rather than settle for what we have now.

My apologies if that frustrates some of you. That is the impression I’m getting.

I think what Azhure is saying is that it would be interesting if there were mechanics other than simply offense/defense that were based on gear. Like the idea of having less dodges unless you gear into Vitality. Or having healing power boost the power or duration of boons. Something along those lines (not necessarily those, just easy examples). Basically taking some of the elements of customization we see in traits and putting that type of things in the realm of gear as well.

We do see that in other games. I’m partial to support type roles. IN other games we did have some stat type things that would allow me to buff other characters more at a personal loss. We somewhat see this with the choice of say Scepter or Dagger builds for Ele instead of Staff. Or even Phalanx Strength Warrior. Gear plays no part in that though. And I believe that is what Azhure wants, is for gear to play more of a part in your overall role in the group rather than simply being the scale of offense vs defense.

I can see the desire for that, but agian, I personally woulnd’t want it as I like that the customization in this game is mainly in things that are quickly swappable instead of feeling the need to carry half a dozen sets of gear.

@Azhure

You have a logic deficiency if you believe there can be multiple equally optimal solutions to a problem. Ill assume this is just down to being blinded by fantasy. So dont take offense.

There can be multiple solutions. But they cannot be equal. One will always be superior in some aspects such as speed. Whereas others will be superior in aspects such as safety or consistency.

So to answer you. Yes what you want is just a dream and it will remain that way. Because it is logically impossible to realise your desire.

@ Jerus
Thank you. What you described is a good idea, at least for what I’m wanting — though I just don’t know how they would make it happen. Glass cannons may have little in the way of passive defense, true, but the fact remains that it is still easily compensated for with active defense. The same level of active defense as the other builds have access to.

Another idea I had was somehow scaling the different aspects of the Downed State with how severely one specs into Power, Prec., and Ferocity. It still keeps Zerker powerful, just maybe scales the risk high enough to balance it out a bit.

Again you have my thanks. Even though we don’t fully agree in this thread, you were still respectful in your post. Something that isn’t as common as it should be.

@ spoj
“Logic deficiency”. Insulting me is completely unnecessary.

Azhure.1857:

multiple ways of being optimal,

multiple ways, or optimal , pick one

NP Azhure, as I said I can see the desire, I just don’t agree that the gear issue needs to change.

@ spoj, I’d point out the Phalanx War + Staff Ele vs DPS war + Scepter Ele debate that went on a few weeks ago. While I think it’s generally accepted the DPS warrior option is better, at least on paper. I think it’s something that we all can accept is a reasonable debate to happen as especially in some situations Phalanx could be much more reasonable.

I think that’s the desire, while of course one option will always win out, the idea that there is such a clear cut winner is something that doesn’t necessarily have to happen. Again, I think the idea of this coming from things other than gear is fine, it’s how GW2 is built. But, the idea of multiple competitive Metas is something that can be interesting. Overall I think GW2 does a pretty decent job though. You can just look at the recent SEp1 race for proof, 3 different group compositions, and who would have guessed that the winning one would involve 2 mesmers?

It’s interesting that OP apparently thinks there is a zerker meta because people choose to play zerker over other options at a whim. That is, if they chose something else they would change the meta. In every game I’ve played all top players play essentially the same builds. Maybe with differing utility options for raid composition. Why? Because they are the best builds to play in terms of dps/survivability. Anet could change the meta in a heartbeat if they wanted, but then it would simply be a new meta. Players are simply responding to objective reality—i.e., someone has done the math.

I think true build diversity is a bit of a myth. Well, it exists for those who don’t min/max, but will never be widely represented in a game. What is being called a meta here will emerge, it’s a function of game design not player choice; it doesn’t much matter what it is.

Azhure.1857:

Harper.4173:

So if instead of a zerk meta we had a knight’s with zerk accessories meta would that give more reason to be anything than knight’s with zerk accesories?

Would that be more diverse for you?

If the one build everybody plays is called something other than “zerk” would it be more fun for you?

No. It wouldn’t.
What would be more fun is if there were multiple ways of being optimal, not just one that had been finely narrowed down. Perhaps that is just a dream. But I would rather dream and fight for the possibility that it could happen…. rather than settle for what we have now.

My apologies if that frustrates some of you. That is the impression I’m getting.

Optimal.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/optimal

There can never be more ways to be optimal because the concept in itself implies one way – one method, one way of doing things.
Some can be close to it but only one will be the optimal way because the concept itself implies it.

It doesn’t frustrate me that you want to fight for the things you believe in.
It frustrates me that I can’t seem to find a way to make you understand that there will always be a better way to do things – people will nail it down, fine tune it and do it.

There’s no way different builds can have the same level of efficiency whilst still being different.

If they’re different then they differ. If they differ then one will be easier/faster/better/more convenient and people will find it and make it the meta – the optimal way of doing that content.

If they’re not different then you have one way of doing things which is meta because it’s the only way.

So again – explain to me how you create variety inside a concept that revolves around the best way of doing something becoming the only way the community will do it.

Just to play devil’s advocate:

What if you had a boss with 4 hp and a party size of two.

Say the two highest damage dealers are Class X, and Class X has a fire attack that deals 2 damage and a water attack that deals 2 damage, everything else being the same.

So there are a few equally good ways to kill the boss. Class X1 can use fire while Class X2 can use water, or both can use fire or both can use water.

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Just to play devil’s advocate:

What if you had a boss with 4 hp and a party size of two.

Say the two highest damage dealers are Class X, and Class X has a fire attack that deals 2 damage and a water attack that deals 2 damage, everything else being the same.

So there are a few equally good ways to kill the boss. Class X1 can use fire while Class X2 can use water, or both can use fire or both can use water.

Good class design is all about trade-offs. There is the basic dps/suvivability trade-off. There is also the direct damage/damage over time trade-off. Arguments can be made for differing classes in team composition as they may bring unique utility. The broader topic implied in the thread, however, is more about sustained DPS (given the ability to stay alive). Whenever someone considers DPS, say, in raid parses it is largely around sustained damage; i.e., how much did this character contribute to achieving the goal, which is always about depleting an enemies HP before they deplete yours.

I believe the zerker meta has to do with sustained damage (while staying alive) and that damage can be determined by math. So, apart from any given desired utility, there is no reason to not focus on zerker builds when composing a team. No gimmicky scenario is going to change this reality.

Raine.1394:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Just to play devil’s advocate:

What if you had a boss with 4 hp and a party size of two.

Say the two highest damage dealers are Class X, and Class X has a fire attack that deals 2 damage and a water attack that deals 2 damage, everything else being the same.

So there are a few equally good ways to kill the boss. Class X1 can use fire while Class X2 can use water, or both can use fire or both can use water.

Good class design is all about trade-offs. There is the basic dps/suvivability trade-off. There is also the direct damage/damage over time trade-off. Arguments can be made for differing classes in team composition as they may bring unique utility. The broader topic implied in the thread, however, is more about sustained DPS (given the ability to stay alive). Whenever someone considers DPS, say, in raid parses it is largely around sustained damage; i.e., how much did this character contribute to achieving the goal, which is always about depleting an enemies HP before they deplete yours.

I believe the zerker meta has to do with sustained damage (while staying alive) and that damage can be determined by math. No gimmicky scenario is going to change this reality.

I understand what you’re getting at, and I agree that in a complex game like this with trade-offs there is an optimal way to do things. But, and this is more aimed at the conversation Spoj was having, I don’t think there HAS to be an optimal way.

Perhaps a better example demonstrative of more tradeoffs:

Same situation as before, Class X can do 2 dps with fire or water and the Boss has 4 health and you get 2 party members. But now, what if Class Y can use a skill that causes Class X to do 2x dps?

So now you can bring 2x Class X to do 2 dps each for a total of 4, OR you can bring Class X and Class Y, and use Class Y’s support skill to allow Class X to do 4 dps.

In both scenarios the situation is the same: 4 dps, and yet the mechanism by which this was accomplished varies. So here there would be no optimal solution, but rather a variety of equally good solutions.

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Raine.1394:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Just to play devil’s advocate:

What if you had a boss with 4 hp and a party size of two.

Say the two highest damage dealers are Class X, and Class X has a fire attack that deals 2 damage and a water attack that deals 2 damage, everything else being the same.

So there are a few equally good ways to kill the boss. Class X1 can use fire while Class X2 can use water, or both can use fire or both can use water.

Good class design is all about trade-offs. There is the basic dps/suvivability trade-off. There is also the direct damage/damage over time trade-off. Arguments can be made for differing classes in team composition as they may bring unique utility. The broader topic implied in the thread, however, is more about sustained DPS (given the ability to stay alive). Whenever someone considers DPS, say, in raid parses it is largely around sustained damage; i.e., how much did this character contribute to achieving the goal, which is always about depleting an enemies HP before they deplete yours.

I believe the zerker meta has to do with sustained damage (while staying alive) and that damage can be determined by math. No gimmicky scenario is going to change this reality.

I understand what you’re getting at, and I agree that in a complex game like this with trade-offs there is an optimal way to do things. But, and this is more aimed at the conversation Spoj was having, I don’t think there HAS to be an optimal way.

Perhaps a better example demonstrative of more tradeoffs:

Same situation as before, Class X can do 2 dps with fire or water and the Boss has 4 health and you get 2 party members. But now, what if Class Y can use a skill that causes Class X to do 2x dps?

So now you can bring 2x Class X to do 2 dps each for a total of 4, OR you can bring Class X and Class Y, and use Class Y’s support skill to allow Class X to do 4 dps.

In both scenarios the situation is the same: 4 dps, and yet the mechanism by which this was accomplished varies. So here there would be no optimal solution, but rather a variety of equally good solutions.

Well as spoj will undoubtedly be happy to tell you, there will be an optimal solution by definition. So, by definition, there HAS has to be one optimal way to achieve a given goal, let’s say max DPS.

Because of the complexities of class design it is highly unlikely that you will end up with two identical classes in terms of anything—or with two sets of gear the same. Remember the trade-offs—you want them different. You want broadly comparable sustained damage across the board with classes, but it will never be exact. And the differences (trade-offs) with gear should never yield the same results. And, this optimal solution is a function of game design. Players will discover what works best and they will practice it. And, in terms of the current conversation, you will not obtain zerker results without wearing zerker gear.

Bottom line, games always work this way. Check out worldofwargraphs.com and take a look at what builds the top PvE players in the world (WoW) are running. They are all virtually the same except for utilities. There will always be a best way to build a character. Players will discover it, and there will be a shared ‘meta’.

Raine.1394:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Raine.1394:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Just to play devil’s advocate:

What if you had a boss with 4 hp and a party size of two.

Say the two highest damage dealers are Class X, and Class X has a fire attack that deals 2 damage and a water attack that deals 2 damage, everything else being the same.

So there are a few equally good ways to kill the boss. Class X1 can use fire while Class X2 can use water, or both can use fire or both can use water.

Good class design is all about trade-offs. There is the basic dps/suvivability trade-off. There is also the direct damage/damage over time trade-off. Arguments can be made for differing classes in team composition as they may bring unique utility. The broader topic implied in the thread, however, is more about sustained DPS (given the ability to stay alive). Whenever someone considers DPS, say, in raid parses it is largely around sustained damage; i.e., how much did this character contribute to achieving the goal, which is always about depleting an enemies HP before they deplete yours.

I believe the zerker meta has to do with sustained damage (while staying alive) and that damage can be determined by math. No gimmicky scenario is going to change this reality.

I understand what you’re getting at, and I agree that in a complex game like this with trade-offs there is an optimal way to do things. But, and this is more aimed at the conversation Spoj was having, I don’t think there HAS to be an optimal way.

Perhaps a better example demonstrative of more tradeoffs:

Same situation as before, Class X can do 2 dps with fire or water and the Boss has 4 health and you get 2 party members. But now, what if Class Y can use a skill that causes Class X to do 2x dps?

So now you can bring 2x Class X to do 2 dps each for a total of 4, OR you can bring Class X and Class Y, and use Class Y’s support skill to allow Class X to do 4 dps.

In both scenarios the situation is the same: 4 dps, and yet the mechanism by which this was accomplished varies. So here there would be no optimal solution, but rather a variety of equally good solutions.

Well as spoj will undoubtedly be happy to tell you, there will be an optimal solution by definition. So, by definition, there HAS has to be one optimal way to achieve a given goal, let’s say max DPS.

And, this optimal solution is a function of game design. Players will discover what works best and they will practice it. And, in terms of the current conversation, you will not obtain zerker results without wearing zerker gear.

Bottom line, games always work this way. Check out worldofwargraphs.com and take a look at what builds the top PvE players in the world (WoW) are running. They are all virtually the same except for utilities. There will always be a best way to build a character. Players will discover it, and there will be a shared ‘meta’.

That’s not the argument Spoj was making, I don’t think. Spoj was saying the word “optimal” means there will only be 1. He’s right. If an optimal solution exists, there will only be 1 because optimal means 1. But I didn’t see him make the argument that an “optimal” solution always exists. It doesn’t.

Edit: I’m mistaking arguments here. Harper was the one who said “optimal” only means one. He’s right. You and Spoj and wrong I think.

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Raine.1394:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Raine.1394:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Just to play devil’s advocate:

What if you had a boss with 4 hp and a party size of two.

Say the two highest damage dealers are Class X, and Class X has a fire attack that deals 2 damage and a water attack that deals 2 damage, everything else being the same.

So there are a few equally good ways to kill the boss. Class X1 can use fire while Class X2 can use water, or both can use fire or both can use water.

Good class design is all about trade-offs. There is the basic dps/suvivability trade-off. There is also the direct damage/damage over time trade-off. Arguments can be made for differing classes in team composition as they may bring unique utility. The broader topic implied in the thread, however, is more about sustained DPS (given the ability to stay alive). Whenever someone considers DPS, say, in raid parses it is largely around sustained damage; i.e., how much did this character contribute to achieving the goal, which is always about depleting an enemies HP before they deplete yours.

I believe the zerker meta has to do with sustained damage (while staying alive) and that damage can be determined by math. No gimmicky scenario is going to change this reality.

I understand what you’re getting at, and I agree that in a complex game like this with trade-offs there is an optimal way to do things. But, and this is more aimed at the conversation Spoj was having, I don’t think there HAS to be an optimal way.

Perhaps a better example demonstrative of more tradeoffs:

Same situation as before, Class X can do 2 dps with fire or water and the Boss has 4 health and you get 2 party members. But now, what if Class Y can use a skill that causes Class X to do 2x dps?

So now you can bring 2x Class X to do 2 dps each for a total of 4, OR you can bring Class X and Class Y, and use Class Y’s support skill to allow Class X to do 4 dps.

In both scenarios the situation is the same: 4 dps, and yet the mechanism by which this was accomplished varies. So here there would be no optimal solution, but rather a variety of equally good solutions.

Well as spoj will undoubtedly be happy to tell you, there will be an optimal solution by definition. So, by definition, there HAS has to be one optimal way to achieve a given goal, let’s say max DPS.

And, this optimal solution is a function of game design. Players will discover what works best and they will practice it. And, in terms of the current conversation, you will not obtain zerker results without wearing zerker gear.

Bottom line, games always work this way. Check out worldofwargraphs.com and take a look at what builds the top PvE players in the world (WoW) are running. They are all virtually the same except for utilities. There will always be a best way to build a character. Players will discover it, and there will be a shared ‘meta’.

That’s not the argument Spoj was making, I don’t think. Spoj was saying the word “optimal” means there will only be 1. He’s right. If an optimal solution exists, there will only be 1 because optimal means 1. But I didn’t see him make the argument that an “optimal” solution always exists. It doesn’t.

Edit: I’m mistaking arguments here. Harper was the one who said “optimal” only means one. He’s right. You and Spoj and wrong I think.

Can you point to a propositional statement of mine that is wrong?

Raine.1394:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Raine.1394:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Raine.1394:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Just to play devil’s advocate:

What if you had a boss with 4 hp and a party size of two.

Say the two highest damage dealers are Class X, and Class X has a fire attack that deals 2 damage and a water attack that deals 2 damage, everything else being the same.

So there are a few equally good ways to kill the boss. Class X1 can use fire while Class X2 can use water, or both can use fire or both can use water.

Good class design is all about trade-offs. There is the basic dps/suvivability trade-off. There is also the direct damage/damage over time trade-off. Arguments can be made for differing classes in team composition as they may bring unique utility. The broader topic implied in the thread, however, is more about sustained DPS (given the ability to stay alive). Whenever someone considers DPS, say, in raid parses it is largely around sustained damage; i.e., how much did this character contribute to achieving the goal, which is always about depleting an enemies HP before they deplete yours.

I believe the zerker meta has to do with sustained damage (while staying alive) and that damage can be determined by math. No gimmicky scenario is going to change this reality.

I understand what you’re getting at, and I agree that in a complex game like this with trade-offs there is an optimal way to do things. But, and this is more aimed at the conversation Spoj was having, I don’t think there HAS to be an optimal way.

Perhaps a better example demonstrative of more tradeoffs:

Same situation as before, Class X can do 2 dps with fire or water and the Boss has 4 health and you get 2 party members. But now, what if Class Y can use a skill that causes Class X to do 2x dps?

So now you can bring 2x Class X to do 2 dps each for a total of 4, OR you can bring Class X and Class Y, and use Class Y’s support skill to allow Class X to do 4 dps.

In both scenarios the situation is the same: 4 dps, and yet the mechanism by which this was accomplished varies. So here there would be no optimal solution, but rather a variety of equally good solutions.

Well as spoj will undoubtedly be happy to tell you, there will be an optimal solution by definition. So, by definition, there HAS has to be one optimal way to achieve a given goal, let’s say max DPS.

And, this optimal solution is a function of game design. Players will discover what works best and they will practice it. And, in terms of the current conversation, you will not obtain zerker results without wearing zerker gear.

Bottom line, games always work this way. Check out worldofwargraphs.com and take a look at what builds the top PvE players in the world (WoW) are running. They are all virtually the same except for utilities. There will always be a best way to build a character. Players will discover it, and there will be a shared ‘meta’.

That’s not the argument Spoj was making, I don’t think. Spoj was saying the word “optimal” means there will only be 1. He’s right. If an optimal solution exists, there will only be 1 because optimal means 1. But I didn’t see him make the argument that an “optimal” solution always exists. It doesn’t.

Edit: I’m mistaking arguments here. Harper was the one who said “optimal” only means one. He’s right. You and Spoj and wrong I think.

Can you point to a propositional statement of mine that is wrong?

Yes. “There will be an optimal solution by definition.” I think that should read:

If an optimal solution exists, the solution will be singular by definition.

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Raine.1394:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Raine.1394:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Raine.1394:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Just to play devil’s advocate:

What if you had a boss with 4 hp and a party size of two.

Say the two highest damage dealers are Class X, and Class X has a fire attack that deals 2 damage and a water attack that deals 2 damage, everything else being the same.

So there are a few equally good ways to kill the boss. Class X1 can use fire while Class X2 can use water, or both can use fire or both can use water.

Good class design is all about trade-offs. There is the basic dps/suvivability trade-off. There is also the direct damage/damage over time trade-off. Arguments can be made for differing classes in team composition as they may bring unique utility. The broader topic implied in the thread, however, is more about sustained DPS (given the ability to stay alive). Whenever someone considers DPS, say, in raid parses it is largely around sustained damage; i.e., how much did this character contribute to achieving the goal, which is always about depleting an enemies HP before they deplete yours.

I believe the zerker meta has to do with sustained damage (while staying alive) and that damage can be determined by math. No gimmicky scenario is going to change this reality.

I understand what you’re getting at, and I agree that in a complex game like this with trade-offs there is an optimal way to do things. But, and this is more aimed at the conversation Spoj was having, I don’t think there HAS to be an optimal way.

Perhaps a better example demonstrative of more tradeoffs:

Same situation as before, Class X can do 2 dps with fire or water and the Boss has 4 health and you get 2 party members. But now, what if Class Y can use a skill that causes Class X to do 2x dps?

So now you can bring 2x Class X to do 2 dps each for a total of 4, OR you can bring Class X and Class Y, and use Class Y’s support skill to allow Class X to do 4 dps.

In both scenarios the situation is the same: 4 dps, and yet the mechanism by which this was accomplished varies. So here there would be no optimal solution, but rather a variety of equally good solutions.

Well as spoj will undoubtedly be happy to tell you, there will be an optimal solution by definition. So, by definition, there HAS has to be one optimal way to achieve a given goal, let’s say max DPS.

And, this optimal solution is a function of game design. Players will discover what works best and they will practice it. And, in terms of the current conversation, you will not obtain zerker results without wearing zerker gear.

Bottom line, games always work this way. Check out worldofwargraphs.com and take a look at what builds the top PvE players in the world (WoW) are running. They are all virtually the same except for utilities. There will always be a best way to build a character. Players will discover it, and there will be a shared ‘meta’.

That’s not the argument Spoj was making, I don’t think. Spoj was saying the word “optimal” means there will only be 1. He’s right. If an optimal solution exists, there will only be 1 because optimal means 1. But I didn’t see him make the argument that an “optimal” solution always exists. It doesn’t.

Edit: I’m mistaking arguments here. Harper was the one who said “optimal” only means one. He’s right. You and Spoj and wrong I think.

Can you point to a propositional statement of mine that is wrong?

Yes. “There will be an optimal solution by definition.” I think that should read:

If an optimal solution exists, the solution will be singular by definition.

Those two things say the SAME THING.

You want to know why? Because there is optimal solution for EVERYTHING

Seera.5916:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Raine.1394:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Raine.1394:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Raine.1394:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Just to play devil’s advocate:

What if you had a boss with 4 hp and a party size of two.

Say the two highest damage dealers are Class X, and Class X has a fire attack that deals 2 damage and a water attack that deals 2 damage, everything else being the same.

So there are a few equally good ways to kill the boss. Class X1 can use fire while Class X2 can use water, or both can use fire or both can use water.

Good class design is all about trade-offs. There is the basic dps/suvivability trade-off. There is also the direct damage/damage over time trade-off. Arguments can be made for differing classes in team composition as they may bring unique utility. The broader topic implied in the thread, however, is more about sustained DPS (given the ability to stay alive). Whenever someone considers DPS, say, in raid parses it is largely around sustained damage; i.e., how much did this character contribute to achieving the goal, which is always about depleting an enemies HP before they deplete yours.

I believe the zerker meta has to do with sustained damage (while staying alive) and that damage can be determined by math. No gimmicky scenario is going to change this reality.

I understand what you’re getting at, and I agree that in a complex game like this with trade-offs there is an optimal way to do things. But, and this is more aimed at the conversation Spoj was having, I don’t think there HAS to be an optimal way.

Perhaps a better example demonstrative of more tradeoffs:

Same situation as before, Class X can do 2 dps with fire or water and the Boss has 4 health and you get 2 party members. But now, what if Class Y can use a skill that causes Class X to do 2x dps?

So now you can bring 2x Class X to do 2 dps each for a total of 4, OR you can bring Class X and Class Y, and use Class Y’s support skill to allow Class X to do 4 dps.

In both scenarios the situation is the same: 4 dps, and yet the mechanism by which this was accomplished varies. So here there would be no optimal solution, but rather a variety of equally good solutions.

Well as spoj will undoubtedly be happy to tell you, there will be an optimal solution by definition. So, by definition, there HAS has to be one optimal way to achieve a given goal, let’s say max DPS.

And, this optimal solution is a function of game design. Players will discover what works best and they will practice it. And, in terms of the current conversation, you will not obtain zerker results without wearing zerker gear.

Bottom line, games always work this way. Check out worldofwargraphs.com and take a look at what builds the top PvE players in the world (WoW) are running. They are all virtually the same except for utilities. There will always be a best way to build a character. Players will discover it, and there will be a shared ‘meta’.

That’s not the argument Spoj was making, I don’t think. Spoj was saying the word “optimal” means there will only be 1. He’s right. If an optimal solution exists, there will only be 1 because optimal means 1. But I didn’t see him make the argument that an “optimal” solution always exists. It doesn’t.

Edit: I’m mistaking arguments here. Harper was the one who said “optimal” only means one. He’s right. You and Spoj and wrong I think.

Can you point to a propositional statement of mine that is wrong?

Yes. “There will be an optimal solution by definition.” I think that should read:

If an optimal solution exists, the solution will be singular by definition.

Those two things say the SAME THING.

You want to know why? Because there is optimal solution for EVERYTHING

I’ve shown examples above about how there can be two equally good solutions. Can you please refute those examples?

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Seera.5916:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Raine.1394:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Raine.1394:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Raine.1394:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Just to play devil’s advocate:

What if you had a boss with 4 hp and a party size of two.

Say the two highest damage dealers are Class X, and Class X has a fire attack that deals 2 damage and a water attack that deals 2 damage, everything else being the same.

So there are a few equally good ways to kill the boss. Class X1 can use fire while Class X2 can use water, or both can use fire or both can use water.

Good class design is all about trade-offs. There is the basic dps/suvivability trade-off. There is also the direct damage/damage over time trade-off. Arguments can be made for differing classes in team composition as they may bring unique utility. The broader topic implied in the thread, however, is more about sustained DPS (given the ability to stay alive). Whenever someone considers DPS, say, in raid parses it is largely around sustained damage; i.e., how much did this character contribute to achieving the goal, which is always about depleting an enemies HP before they deplete yours.

I believe the zerker meta has to do with sustained damage (while staying alive) and that damage can be determined by math. No gimmicky scenario is going to change this reality.

I understand what you’re getting at, and I agree that in a complex game like this with trade-offs there is an optimal way to do things. But, and this is more aimed at the conversation Spoj was having, I don’t think there HAS to be an optimal way.

Perhaps a better example demonstrative of more tradeoffs:

Same situation as before, Class X can do 2 dps with fire or water and the Boss has 4 health and you get 2 party members. But now, what if Class Y can use a skill that causes Class X to do 2x dps?

So now you can bring 2x Class X to do 2 dps each for a total of 4, OR you can bring Class X and Class Y, and use Class Y’s support skill to allow Class X to do 4 dps.

In both scenarios the situation is the same: 4 dps, and yet the mechanism by which this was accomplished varies. So here there would be no optimal solution, but rather a variety of equally good solutions.

Well as spoj will undoubtedly be happy to tell you, there will be an optimal solution by definition. So, by definition, there HAS has to be one optimal way to achieve a given goal, let’s say max DPS.

And, this optimal solution is a function of game design. Players will discover what works best and they will practice it. And, in terms of the current conversation, you will not obtain zerker results without wearing zerker gear.

Bottom line, games always work this way. Check out worldofwargraphs.com and take a look at what builds the top PvE players in the world (WoW) are running. They are all virtually the same except for utilities. There will always be a best way to build a character. Players will discover it, and there will be a shared ‘meta’.

That’s not the argument Spoj was making, I don’t think. Spoj was saying the word “optimal” means there will only be 1. He’s right. If an optimal solution exists, there will only be 1 because optimal means 1. But I didn’t see him make the argument that an “optimal” solution always exists. It doesn’t.

Edit: I’m mistaking arguments here. Harper was the one who said “optimal” only means one. He’s right. You and Spoj and wrong I think.

Can you point to a propositional statement of mine that is wrong?

Yes. “There will be an optimal solution by definition.” I think that should read:

If an optimal solution exists, the solution will be singular by definition.

Those two things say the SAME THING.

You want to know why? Because there is optimal solution for EVERYTHING

I’ve shown examples above about how there can be two equally good solutions. Can you please refute those examples?

Your example wasn’t realistic. Give a realistic situation that could pop up in a game and we’ll talk.

Seera.5916:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Seera.5916:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Raine.1394:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Raine.1394:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Raine.1394:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Just to play devil’s advocate:

What if you had a boss with 4 hp and a party size of two.

Say the two highest damage dealers are Class X, and Class X has a fire attack that deals 2 damage and a water attack that deals 2 damage, everything else being the same.

So there are a few equally good ways to kill the boss. Class X1 can use fire while Class X2 can use water, or both can use fire or both can use water.

Good class design is all about trade-offs. There is the basic dps/suvivability trade-off. There is also the direct damage/damage over time trade-off. Arguments can be made for differing classes in team composition as they may bring unique utility. The broader topic implied in the thread, however, is more about sustained DPS (given the ability to stay alive). Whenever someone considers DPS, say, in raid parses it is largely around sustained damage; i.e., how much did this character contribute to achieving the goal, which is always about depleting an enemies HP before they deplete yours.

I believe the zerker meta has to do with sustained damage (while staying alive) and that damage can be determined by math. No gimmicky scenario is going to change this reality.

I understand what you’re getting at, and I agree that in a complex game like this with trade-offs there is an optimal way to do things. But, and this is more aimed at the conversation Spoj was having, I don’t think there HAS to be an optimal way.

Perhaps a better example demonstrative of more tradeoffs:

Same situation as before, Class X can do 2 dps with fire or water and the Boss has 4 health and you get 2 party members. But now, what if Class Y can use a skill that causes Class X to do 2x dps?

So now you can bring 2x Class X to do 2 dps each for a total of 4, OR you can bring Class X and Class Y, and use Class Y’s support skill to allow Class X to do 4 dps.

In both scenarios the situation is the same: 4 dps, and yet the mechanism by which this was accomplished varies. So here there would be no optimal solution, but rather a variety of equally good solutions.

Well as spoj will undoubtedly be happy to tell you, there will be an optimal solution by definition. So, by definition, there HAS has to be one optimal way to achieve a given goal, let’s say max DPS.

And, this optimal solution is a function of game design. Players will discover what works best and they will practice it. And, in terms of the current conversation, you will not obtain zerker results without wearing zerker gear.

Bottom line, games always work this way. Check out worldofwargraphs.com and take a look at what builds the top PvE players in the world (WoW) are running. They are all virtually the same except for utilities. There will always be a best way to build a character. Players will discover it, and there will be a shared ‘meta’.

That’s not the argument Spoj was making, I don’t think. Spoj was saying the word “optimal” means there will only be 1. He’s right. If an optimal solution exists, there will only be 1 because optimal means 1. But I didn’t see him make the argument that an “optimal” solution always exists. It doesn’t.

Edit: I’m mistaking arguments here. Harper was the one who said “optimal” only means one. He’s right. You and Spoj and wrong I think.

Can you point to a propositional statement of mine that is wrong?

Yes. “There will be an optimal solution by definition.” I think that should read:

If an optimal solution exists, the solution will be singular by definition.

Those two things say the SAME THING.

You want to know why? Because there is optimal solution for EVERYTHING

I’ve shown examples above about how there can be two equally good solutions. Can you please refute those examples?

Your example wasn’t realistic. Give a realistic situation that could pop up in a game and we’ll talk.

I gave two examples. Neither were realistic?

Edit: You know what, I don’t even care if either were realistic or if the video game industry ever strives for perfect balance, my only point was that it was possible.

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

I’ve shown examples above about how there can be two equally good solutions. Can you please refute those examples?

The fewer the variables in any comparison, the more likely it is that you might find parity between options. The more variables you introduce, the more likely it is that one option will be better. Within the very narrow range of your example, your premise cannot be refuted. However, the premise is of limited use in the discussion.

Might it be possible to have as many variables as one finds in a five-player MMO grouping and still have two equally good options? Theoretically possible, sure. Realistic, not so much. Given the amount of skull and spreadsheet work to arrive at two such equal options when proponents of all of the other myriad options will still kvetch, not worth the effort.