Guild Wars 2

hazenvirus.8154:

Max direct damage will likely still be the go to unless Anet radically changes current and future content to punish players who rely on proper positioning, dodging, and active defenses over passive stats and face tanking.

The problem is, none of these are really required in current PvE.

Dungeons: stack in the corner, spam 1.

Open world: spam 1.

World bosses (except Tri-wurm): Spam… wait for it… 1.

LS had some nice boss mechanics, none of them sadly reached a challanging level (on story mode – the centaur was nice in achie-mode solo).

NoTrigger.8396:

hazenvirus.8154:

Max direct damage will likely still be the go to unless Anet radically changes current and future content to punish players who rely on proper positioning, dodging, and active defenses over passive stats and face tanking.

and why would they do that?
why would they change it from rewarding good players for being good to rewarding bad players for being bad?

that doesnt make any sense and is beyond stupid.

Because an encounter with multiple strong solutions is more interesting than an encounter with a single overwhelmingly optimal solution. It’s certainly not easy to do, but it’s a worthwhile and important goal.

On the bolded part, the kind of thinking you’re expressing there is very basic to why this is difficult to discuss. It’s applying almost moral values to a design decision.

Sagat.3285:

ODB.6891:

Sagat.3285:

hybrid.5027:

I like how people are trying to solve the zerker “problem.” News flash: it’s not a “problem.” Glass cannon builds are the end result of a game with active defenses and classes who are self-sufficient on healing. Period. This is not only not a problem, it is actually a good thing and a step forward in MMO design.

If you really want to nerf zerker, introduce new content so challenging that the bad players who wear zerker and get carried by their DPS have to take off the zerker to survive. But be careful what you wish for.

OP mobs will change nothing,only way is either player like encounters(anything a player can do so should a mob) or removal of crit and improvements of condition cap.

I’m fairly certain that the only things mobs do not have in their toolkit of abilities in PvE are dodges and smart positioning. As far as removal of crit goes…if that’s okay to remove a core stat….then I guess that means its equally fair to remove toughness?

Sure 3 dps stats while 1 for the rest,genius even!! Again only 2 ways, look at pvp and wvw zerkers,also stop with single boss encounters, I need the devs to confirm what type of pve they want so I can stop…

Btw the toughness response had nothing to support it..core stat…sure.

Are you seriously going to argue that toughness is not a core stat of this game? Are you seriously saying that toughness is not a core component of survival gear? Anymore than crit or ferocity are core stats of dps gear? You have lost all objectivity and credibility if that is your assertion. Survival gear has 3 stats too….that work just as much in unison as dps stats work in unison for dps gear. What you guys seem to have a problem with is that your survival stats work for a different goal than dps stats work for. Dps stats work to kill mobs. Survival stats work to keep mobs from killing you. How is this a problem…when you consciously and intentionally choose your stats in this game. You don’t accidentally click to get a full set of survival stats anymore than you accidentally click to get a full set of dps stats. You get exactly what you were trying to get…why get mad about achieving your intended goal?

The point of my comment about removing toughness was to illustrate the hypocrisy of you mentioning removing critical damage. Clearly I hit a nerve with that, or you wouldn’t be making a completely ridiculous assertion that removing 1/3 of the stats from your gear choice was not equivalent to removing 1/3 of the stats from my gear choice. I think both choices are equally ridiculous and would achieve equal effect. It would go a long way to removing the safety net from survival gear and it would significantly reduce the speed clearing advantage of dps gear. Neither would be a good choice, as they both would significantly diminish the reason why people choose these respective options.

What it sounds like is you guys are wanting a GW2 uniform. Sounds like you want everyone in celestial gear. That is the only compromise that makes sense. Any other alternative is biased against one extreme or the other. Not that the presence of extremes are bad…since both extremes still get the same rewards…with more variety…which is what you guys profess to want.

Sagat.3285:

Sure 3 dps stats while 1 for the rest,genius even!! Again only 2 ways, look at pvp and wvw zerkers,also stop with single boss encounters, I need the devs to confirm what type of pve they want so I can stop…

Btw the toughness response had nothing to support it..core stat…sure.

Survivability has 3 stats as well. The very opposite of berserker’s or assassin’s gear is nomad’s.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

DeathPanel.8362

For the sake of enforcing build diversity you are basically suggesting a system that increases frustration and decreases fun.

There’s a reason why they didn’t go with the holy trinity for this game. Forcing people to have specific setups for specific encounters would just reintroduce all the traditional frustrations and annoyances that come with the old school MMOs.

The whole point of GW2 is to allow people to have their own builds and while not optimal still be able to experience most if not all the content. Forcing specific builds for specific encounters not only makes group formation tedious but promotes greater elitism with gear checks and role calls etc.

I don’t think you really thought about the consequences of what you espouse.

I have thought about the consequences of each of those ideas, which is why I maintain that they would all be good to the game.

For the first one, think about Husks. You can beat them easily enough with Zerker gear, but you do it significantly faster with a condition build instead. Since the meta is all about efficiency, a dungeon path with a Husk boss would trade out 1-3 Zerkers for condition builds instead; something that is currently completely absent from the dungeon meta. You can still complete the content with anything you like, so nothing is being forced on anyone, but now something is wanted that wasn’t before.

On the NPC escort idea, it depends on implementation. If the NPC does not attack anything and keeps moving regardless, the most frustrating parts of escort missions are solved (NPC backtracking or stopping and bugging out). Importance of different builds varies with enemy types, numbers, special buffs or debuffs, and even terrain. Again, any composition can complete the content, but what is most efficient may be something currently not seen in dungeons.

As for spread out ranged enemies, again, nothing is forced on the player. Perhaps a party decides to spread out and kill everything, or perhaps they run around the circle, killing each individual enemy much faster, but having to deal with the pressure from the rest that they can’t hit simultaneously. This one is nothing special mechanically, but it does require different tactics than “Guardian GS5+Ice Bow.” Different tactics are always good to require as it makes people think.

All three of these ideas favor something other than current dungeon meta. They do not require something other than current dungeon meta.

At the end of the day what you say essentially boils down to making mixed groups mandatory for beating content optimally, which is a solution looking for a problem that isn’t there.

The net result of your changes would be to make things unnecessarily more tedious and less fun because people would have to either swap characters and/or gear to optimally beat different content what they used to be able to beat optimally with their dedicated pve character with one gear setup that is well known. (ie one with zerker build in most cases)

Frankly I don’t care how easy content is or that I beat it in x% faster time with some builds over others. Pve content runs dry after the first 100 times you’ve done it no matter how interesting it can be. At that point the only thing left is to try to get it over with asap to minimize the tedium if you need to farm that content for additional loot. What you state will increase that tedium for me due to either making me swap characters or gear for specific encounters or take longer to beat with my pve char’s current gear with no tangible benefit whatsoever. What you don’t realize is your proposal simply results in a net increase in tedium and frustration and net decrease in fun at the end of the day.

rotten.9753:

Sagat.3285:

Sure 3 dps stats while 1 for the rest,genius even!! Again only 2 ways, look at pvp and wvw zerkers,also stop with single boss encounters, I need the devs to confirm what type of pve they want so I can stop…

Btw the toughness response had nothing to support it..core stat…sure.

Survivability has 3 stats as well. The very opposite of berserker’s or assassin’s gear is nomad’s.

Toughness for power,vitality for conditions which are useless in group pve,but what actually stacks conditions on you constantly enough to bring pvp like cleansing. You could argue power/toughness condi damage/vitality precision/heal …ferocity overlaps. Toughness is useless vs condition and vitality is very inferior vs direct damage.

Again only 2 ways,create pvp like encounters or gut down crit. If you oppose give me your way. It’s not like crit is a good mechanic anyway.

ODB.6891:

Sagat.3285:

ODB.6891:

Sagat.3285:

hybrid.5027:

I like how people are trying to solve the zerker “problem.” News flash: it’s not a “problem.” Glass cannon builds are the end result of a game with active defenses and classes who are self-sufficient on healing. Period. This is not only not a problem, it is actually a good thing and a step forward in MMO design.

If you really want to nerf zerker, introduce new content so challenging that the bad players who wear zerker and get carried by their DPS have to take off the zerker to survive. But be careful what you wish for.

OP mobs will change nothing,only way is either player like encounters(anything a player can do so should a mob) or removal of crit and improvements of condition cap.

I’m fairly certain that the only things mobs do not have in their toolkit of abilities in PvE are dodges and smart positioning. As far as removal of crit goes…if that’s okay to remove a core stat….then I guess that means its equally fair to remove toughness?

Sure 3 dps stats while 1 for the rest,genius even!! Again only 2 ways, look at pvp and wvw zerkers,also stop with single boss encounters, I need the devs to confirm what type of pve they want so I can stop…

Btw the toughness response had nothing to support it..core stat…sure.

Are you seriously going to argue that toughness is not a core stat of this game? Are you seriously saying that toughness is not a core component of survival gear? Anymore than crit or ferocity are core stats of dps gear? You have lost all objectivity and credibility if that is your assertion. Survival gear has 3 stats too….that work just as much in unison as dps stats work in unison for dps gear. What you guys seem to have a problem with is that your survival stats work for a different goal than dps stats work for. Dps stats work to kill mobs. Survival stats work to keep mobs from killing you. How is this a problem…when you consciously and intentionally choose your stats in this game. You don’t accidentally click to get a full set of survival stats anymore than you accidentally click to get a full set of dps stats. You get exactly what you were trying to get…why get mad about achieving your intended goal?

The point of my comment about removing toughness was to illustrate the hypocrisy of you mentioning removing critical damage. Clearly I hit a nerve with that, or you wouldn’t be making a completely ridiculous assertion that removing 1/3 of the stats from your gear choice was not equivalent to removing 1/3 of the stats from my gear choice. I think both choices are equally ridiculous and would achieve equal effect. It would go a long way to removing the safety net from survival gear and it would significantly reduce the speed clearing advantage of dps gear. Neither would be a good choice, as they both would significantly diminish the reason why people choose these respective options.

What it sounds like is you guys are wanting a GW2 uniform. Sounds like you want everyone in celestial gear. That is the only compromise that makes sense. Any other alternative is biased against one extreme or the other. Not that the presence of extremes are bad…since both extremes still get the same rewards…with more variety…which is what you guys profess to want.

Sure…

Sagat.3285:

Toughness for power,vitality for conditions which are useless in group pve,but what actually stacks conditions on you constantly enough to bring pvp like cleansing. You could argue power/toughness condi damage/vitality precision/heal …ferocity overlaps. Toughness is useless vs condition and vitality is very inferior vs direct damage.

Again only 2 ways,create pvp like encounters or gut down crit. If you oppose give me your way. It’s not like crit is a good mechanic anyway.

Sorry but vitality works against direct damage perfectly fine. Nomad’s gear provides so much passive defense you can go afk with your auto attack turned on and still kill a boss.

If you want to facetank damage you need more stats than just toughness. Would a tank work without a healer in a typical mmo? No.

NoTrigger.8396:

VodCom.6924:

Having condition glass canon builds viable could be nice. Just look at the “dungeon builds” section of metabattle.com . Compare it with roaming or ranked arena builds sections. It’s a bit empty isn’kitten That’s a problem

Just to make sure that nobody gets it wrong : the problem is NOT berserker. The problem is lack of variety.

metabattle….

glass canon condition builds are viable

…

With all due respect NoTrigger, condition builds are not viable in PvE group content right now.

You CAN play a condition glass canon build just like you CAN play AH hammer build and call it a day. However it does not mean they are “viable”. Why ?

Because for a roughly equal amount of risks taken by the players (i.e glass canon) the reward given is much lower. It takes twice as much (if not more) time to complete the same dungeon with a full glass canon party than with a direct damage party. And I’m not even talking about shoehorning trinity in the party (besides trinity has no place in this game and it’s good riddance).

Windsagio.1340:

NoTrigger.8396:

hazenvirus.8154:

Max direct damage will likely still be the go to unless Anet radically changes current and future content to punish players who rely on proper positioning, dodging, and active defenses over passive stats and face tanking.

and why would they do that?
why would they change it from rewarding good players for being good to rewarding bad players for being bad?

that doesnt make any sense and is beyond stupid.

Because an encounter with multiple strong solutions is more interesting than an encounter with a single overwhelmingly optimal solution. It’s certainly not easy to do, but it’s a worthwhile and important goal.

On the bolded part, the kind of thinking you’re expressing there is very basic to why this is difficult to discuss. It’s applying almost moral values to a design decision.

It really depends on what Anet wants for their challenging instanced content. If they want to make the dungeons more forgiving for new/bad players then buffing tank gear or making it relevant into the meta would meet that end. If however they want make content so difficult to the point where every mistake is instant death then they have to balance things with zerker, which means every other spec would be left in the dust.

VodCom.6924:

NoTrigger.8396:

VodCom.6924:

Having condition glass canon builds viable could be nice. Just look at the “dungeon builds” section of metabattle.com . Compare it with roaming or ranked arena builds sections. It’s a bit empty isn’kitten That’s a problem

Just to make sure that nobody gets it wrong : the problem is NOT berserker. The problem is lack of variety.

metabattle….

glass canon condition builds are viable

…

With all due respect NoTrigger, condition builds are not viable in PvE group content right now.

You CAN play a condition glass canon build just like you CAN play AH hammer build and call it a day. However it does not mean they are “viable”. Why ?

Because for a roughly equal amount of risks taken by the players (i.e glass canon) the reward given is much lower. It takes twice as much (if not more) time to complete the same dungeon with a full glass canon party than with a direct damage party. And I’m not even talking about shoehorning trinity in the party (besides trinity has no place in this game and it’s good riddance).

as i said there is a difference between viable and optimal.

viable = it works
optimal = it works best

that doesnt mean im against making condition dmg a better option in pve.
but saying it is not viable is simply wrong.

NoTrigger.8396:

as i said there is a difference between viable and optimal.

viable = it works
optimal = it works best

that doesnt mean im against making condition dmg a better option in pve.
but saying it is not viable is simply wrong.

The problem with that is that everything is viable in PvE. As I said some comments above, that is because of the increadibly easy PvE.

You cannot wear ‘wrong’ gear cause you can do any content in zerker, nomad and shaman with ease. Thus viable, is not really a word that’s applicable here.

“Yadayadayadazerkerrbadyadayadaplznerf”

No one is forced to run a specific set of gear under any circumstances. As far as I can tell, you can complete everything in this game using whichever stat combination you like. Naturally, people have become better since launch, therefore more people started using purely offensive stats for better kill-times/faster completion of content.
You don´t like the “active playstyle” associated with offensive stat combinations, or simply can´t pull it off? Fine. Use something else and stop bothering other people

/thread

I think a big problem is, that there is no real challenging dungeon content. As they said before, you can do the most dungeons, with a lot of different build. Ofc with zerk it works faster, as we all know. The only place where full zerk doens´t work all the time, are fractals, because there are some bosses who just need time, not pure dmg. But these are just are few and u can do them with full zerk groups. So if we had places like the underworld in Gw1, you would need atleast a tank and so on.

The same thing in the open world. Things are too easy and you can do them just by spamming 1. The only exception is the worm. You need specific role etc. and it doesn´t work with just spamming 1. This is content we need.

Sorry for my bad english

All this chit chat and yet no one recognizes that a team of good players can do EVERY dungeon without any armor, but a team of the “Dwayna” Players cant even imagine doing the same thing without their sacred Nomad gear.

Lets be honest and focused:
All about Nomad stats AKA almost every toughtness, Vitality and/or Healing power armor is 1. Useless. 2. Learning armor for new players 3. To min-max builds.

Why would someone use those stats? thats only for being lazy and not wanting to dodge and waiting till the other 4 players deal the damage just as most peple stay with Hodgins in the find the 5 scepters part just cause they dont know/care how to solo it (wich every class can so it unarmored so can be done in zerker gear) and a lot of other situations.

Anet made this game with the premise of getting rid of the trinity, yet they replaced it with Damage- Support duo. but please… Support does’nt mean permanet tanking or healing OMG. Support means giving boons, giving important debuffs to targets, cleansing, providing important fields acording to situation, blasting fields (Best combo finisher finisher BTW) tho enacing the whole or self survivality/cleraring time of Boss/dungeon/Challenge. Wich ALL, and i really mean.. ALL can be done with zerk stats wich im not saying every one and their mother should use but its not a bad synergy at all).

So just for the record saying PVT armor for TEQUALT is the way to go its not because Zerk is bad or something, its because 2/3 stats form zerk gear are not used VS TEQ int he zerg, so if only power is, lets get a little more pasive defences with PVT gear, Yet you can try and go Tank TEQ with your nomad gear, or go FUll Heal build and armor so you can think youre being of use in the zerg of 100+ people while you obiouly dont, and with only an ele with a waterffield can do more than you to the whole 100+ zerg (if at least 1person x team can blast it). Yet Zerk Stats are REALLY apreciated on the boats and turret defeces team.

Also another note, the dead bodies in the TEQ zerg fight arent from experieced Zerk people, they are form noob PVT, NOMAD and other stats includint the Zerk, its not about the gear, its a Learn to Play issue. Noobs are going to be NOOBS with PVT, Zerg Or Nomad gear. so even if a dead zerk does no damage. LOL an alive Cleric, NOMAD, PVT does almost the same damage :p

cyst.3108:

All this chit chat and yet no one recognizes that a team of good players can do EVERY dungeon without any armor, but a team of the “Dwayna” Players cant even imagine doing the same thing without their sacred Nomad gear.

Lets be honest and focused:
All about Nomad stats AKA almost every toughtness, Vitality and/or Healing power armor is 1. Useless. 2. Learning armor for new players 3. To min-max builds.

I think you are beating the wrong horse here. This is not about berserker vs nomad, this thread is about the question :

“Will HoT bring new content that will encourage people to use other stats sets than berserker ?”

Then the thread derailed into the usual discussion : “Is this normal/justified/fair/whatever that in PvE, the only optimal way of playing is to maximise direct damage inflicted by the team with the bare minimum active défenses to survive”

Now I see some of us are derailing the thread further to : “Players that want nomad to be as powerful as berserker are crazy”.

Let’s make this clear, asking for nomad to be as powerful as berserker is bullcrap. It’s not even a problem and no game designer in their right mind would push the game in such direction.

DeathPanel.8362:

At the end of the day what you say essentially boils down to making mixed groups mandatory for beating content optimally, which is a solution looking for a problem that isn’t there.

The net result of your changes would be to make things unnecessarily more tedious and less fun because people would have to either swap characters and/or gear to optimally beat different content what they used to be able to beat optimally with their dedicated pve character with one gear setup that is well known. (ie one with zerker build in most cases)

Frankly I don’t care how easy content is or that I beat it in x% faster time with some builds over others. Pve content runs dry after the first 100 times you’ve done it no matter how interesting it can be. At that point the only thing left is to try to get it over with asap to minimize the tedium if you need to farm that content for additional loot. What you state will increase that tedium for me due to either making me swap characters or gear for specific encounters or take longer to beat with my pve char’s current gear with no tangible benefit whatsoever. What you don’t realize is your proposal simply results in a net increase in tedium and frustration and net decrease in fun at the end of the day.

I would disagree with your assessment that encouraging mixed groups to do things optimally is “solving a non-existent problem.” The problem exists, whether you want to believe it or not. That’s why threads like this keep popping up in the first place. What you are saying is “because someone doesn’t like the Zerker playstyle, they can’t feel wanted.” They may actually be a better player than you, but because they don’t conform to your view, they are inferior.

Variety is good for a game. Different content having different optimal group combinations (professions, traits, skills, and yes, gear) is very good! You want to keep running 5-zerk speedruns? That’s fine, it just may not be the optimal choice in a new (or modified) path, but it still is in another. If you want to be optimal at everything, then you better invest yourself in getting prepared to switch to whatever is optimal.

So perhaps my suggestions don’t benefit someone as one-track-minded as you. You know, if you’re bored with dungeons, you could do something else. Many other players will welcome the change because their setup is now optimal for a small portion of content. Besides, perhaps in those mixed-paths, you play a Zerker setup that will still likely be vital to speedruns. Hey look! Now variety is encouraged and you still get to play what you’ve been playing for the last 2 years.

VodCom.6924:

I think you are beating the wrong horse here. This is not about berserker vs nomad, this thread is about the question :

“Will HoT bring new content that will encourage people to use other stats sets than berserker ?”

Then the thread derailed into the usual discussion : “Is this normal/justified/fair/whatever that in PvE, the only optimal way of playing is to maximise direct damage inflicted by the team with the bare minimum active défenses to survive”

Now I see some of us are derailing the thread further to : “Players that want nomad to be as powerful as berserker are crazy”.

Let’s make this clear, asking for nomad to be as powerful as berserker is bullcrap. It’s not even a problem and no game designer in their right mind would push the game in such direction.

This whole topic is beating the wrong horse. Berserker’s gear is used strictly for instanced content which isn’t present in HoT. Since in open world everyone is welcomed by this warm community as long as you contribute there is no issue of berserker’s gear. You play how you want and no one is going to force you because you cannot kick people from an open world content. Therefore, there won’t be any toxic community and everyone will be happy.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

I would disagree with your assessment that encouraging mixed groups to do things optimally is “solving a non-existent problem.” The problem exists, whether you want to believe it or not. That’s why threads like this keep popping up in the first place. What you are saying is “because someone doesn’t like the Zerker playstyle, they can’t feel wanted.” They may actually be a better player than you, but because they don’t conform to your view, they are inferior.

Variety is good for a game. Different content having different optimal group combinations (professions, traits, skills, and yes, gear) is very good! You want to keep running 5-zerk speedruns? That’s fine, it just may not be the optimal choice in a new (or modified) path, but it still is in another. If you want to be optimal at everything, then you better invest yourself in getting prepared to switch to whatever is optimal.

So perhaps my suggestions don’t benefit someone as one-track-minded as you. You know, if you’re bored with dungeons, you could do something else. Many other players will welcome the change because their setup is now optimal for a small portion of content. Besides, perhaps in those mixed-paths, you play a Zerker setup that will still likely be vital to speedruns. Hey look! Now variety is encouraged and you still get to play what you’ve been playing for the last 2 years.

Why something that’s easier to play should reward more? That’s not exactly a good design and we already have it (silverwastes > dungeons > fractals).

rotten.9753:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

I would disagree with your assessment that encouraging mixed groups to do things optimally is “solving a non-existent problem.” The problem exists, whether you want to believe it or not. That’s why threads like this keep popping up in the first place. What you are saying is “because someone doesn’t like the Zerker playstyle, they can’t feel wanted.” They may actually be a better player than you, but because they don’t conform to your view, they are inferior.

Variety is good for a game. Different content having different optimal group combinations (professions, traits, skills, and yes, gear) is very good! You want to keep running 5-zerk speedruns? That’s fine, it just may not be the optimal choice in a new (or modified) path, but it still is in another. If you want to be optimal at everything, then you better invest yourself in getting prepared to switch to whatever is optimal.

So perhaps my suggestions don’t benefit someone as one-track-minded as you. You know, if you’re bored with dungeons, you could do something else. Many other players will welcome the change because their setup is now optimal for a small portion of content. Besides, perhaps in those mixed-paths, you play a Zerker setup that will still likely be vital to speedruns. Hey look! Now variety is encouraged and you still get to play what you’ve been playing for the last 2 years.

Why something that’s easier to play should reward more? That’s not exactly a good design and we already have it (silverwastes > dungeons > fractals).

Who said it’s easier to play? For example, Sinister and Rampager’s gear are both significantly harder to play than Zerker due to split damage stats, but having the same lack of defensive stats. Yet neither are seen as “optimal.”

“Easier to play” varies drastically with content. For example, in most PvE, Zerker is the easiest thing to play because enemies don’t live long enough to actually do anything. Does this mean they shouldn’t be rewarded in open world? In comparison, Zerker is vastly harder to play in PvP scenearios. Should it be rewarded more than anything else, then?

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

So perhaps my suggestions don’t benefit someone as one-track-minded as you. You know, if you’re bored with dungeons, you could do something else. Many other players will welcome the change because their setup is now optimal for a small portion of content. Besides, perhaps in those mixed-paths, you play a Zerker setup that will still likely be vital to speedruns. Hey look! Now variety is encouraged and you still get to play what you’ve been playing for the last 2 years.

I don’t consider myself one-track-minded, but I still see a lot of problem with your suggestions. I agree that a couple of stuff could be changed to improve the game, but that doesn’t mean that your suggestion is good.

1) ‘’Boss with high armor to make condition viable’’. That will make direct dmg bad in some situation, while condition damage will only be good in specific situation. There is whole tread on fixing condition and these discussion are far better to improve the viability of condition than forcing their use in some specific situation. Condition and Direct damage should have their strength and weakness in all fight, not pigeon-holing condition into a very specific role against very specific enemies, while leaving it not so good in all the other situation. I agree with the goal to make condition a good choice, but not your method.

2) ‘’NPC escort where healing and cc is viable’‘. Replace healing by support and i’m on board, but it wouldn’t change anything to the situation in general. Making content that need more support and cc is alway great. But I will still prefer to give protection, reflect to the npc, while killing the stuff as fast as possible. As a side note : NPC are a source of frustration and bugs in dungeon, the less NPC are involve the better I feel. (Especially since Anet have a hard time fixing some of them)

3) ‘’Spread ranged enemies so you can’t stack them’’. We’ll use reflect, stack a portion of them with cc and dps them, go to the next group, use reflect, regroup them and kill them. It would be an interesting challenge, but good player will adapt by using the best tools they already know they are good.

You just propose 3 mechanics that they could and are even already in use, but in really small quantity. Number 1 is use in Triple Trouble, its nice when you have 100 ppl and you get 10-20 to do a specific task while the other are doing something else, in a dungeon with only 5 ppl, that could be a bit trickier to apply. Number 2, we have Hodgin for exemple that you need to keep alive. We use to have a support player to keep in alive, but now we just kill all of the burrow quickly (even in solo run). Number 3 we have the little spider in AC. Yes you can stack them, but most good group rush the boss, put reflect and kill the Queen, protecting themselves from the spiders. They could improve upon those idea, but that would change that good player will still use the build they use now, they will just bring 1-2 condition build where they would have decided to put high armor boss.

Honestly we have a nice middle ground solution for condi-damage already in the game.

Morderm Husks. Optimally they get killed by condi-damage but it’s still viable to kill them with power damage.

Sprinkle new content with enemies like them in and while condi-damage will be a very real point of discussion in speedclearing, a PuG group could still get away with just using power damage but could appreciate a condi-friend joining and making those enemies a little easier to kill.

Strange you mention spider queen in AC as an example of my third suggestion, since every time I’ve seen it done has been to LoS it by the stairs and just burn everything in that one spot. Pretty sure the little spiders are melee anyway, making this a really bad example. Caudecus Manor has a better example with the snipers, but those are all clumped together making reflects and AoE simple. The best example is the Harpy fractal, though that is artificially made harder due to effectively being a jumping puzzle.

As far as condition builds vs. direct damage builds, they really can’t make them equal, as that would defeat the purpose of variety. Each is best against different things. The only problem is that what condition builds are best against don’t show up anywhere in dungeons right now. So having a mix of enemies with high and low armor is the best solution.

Why do I propose mechanics that are already in use? Because they work. Not only do they work, but they don’t force anything in particular. They just aren’t done often enough (not at all for 2/3* , only one path for the third) in dungeons. Hodgins is not a particularly great example of an NPC escort, IMO. Compare him to say Dolyaks in WvW (who virtually never bug out). Main difference? Dolyaks never stop moving and never contribute in combat. Protecting Dolyaks from would-be yakslappers is a challenge for sure.

*:Fractals aren’t a dungeon path

The little spiders spit poison, they are range, not melee. Like I said, ppl can all bring them in one shot, but it’s not the best strategy. I don’t like care what bad pugs are doing, some of them are taking a tank and an healer, other are not able to complete a path under 45min. You can use reflect to protect yourself from the little spider while fighting the boss and its far more efficient strategy.

As far as condition vs direct dmg, here what should be the ideal situation. Direct Damage is fast but have ultimately less dps potential than condition. It’s best against trash and veteran. Condition damage have a ramp up time, but at their peck they have a better dps than direct damage. They would be ideal against legendary bosses and some champion. That would be an ideal, but a lot of things need to be fixed for that, and I don’t know if anet will do it.

rotten.9753:

VodCom.6924:

snip

This whole topic is beating the wrong horse. Berserker’s gear is used strictly for instanced content which isn’t present in HoT. Since in open world everyone is welcomed by this warm community as long as you contribute there is no issue of berserker’s gear. You play how you want and no one is going to force you because you cannot kick people from an open world content. Therefore, there won’t be any toxic community and everyone will be happy.

I’m not sure all content will be open world. They are expanding on the whole idea of megabosses that’s for sure, but I believe they’ll expand fractals and dungeons as well.

NoTrigger.8396:

snipped

Well… that was insanely combative…

And you’re arguing against points that I’m not even making.

First of all, I’m not looking at gear, I’m looking at style. There’s a tendency to aggressively and obsessively defend the gear and accuse others of attacking the gear as if that’s the line in the sand.

Secondly, I at least have been pretty clear that yes, a new meta would emerge: To quote myself from a post above “The zerker problem is people”. It’s the need to exclude and obsess over minor optimizations that makes this a discussion outside of honestly somewhat vague design refinements.

Thirdly, there’s a platonic ideal for the design (which I"m going out of the way to admit is impossible, and extremely difficult to even approach), which is that all approaches are potentially desirable for encounters. It’s partially due to the social issues, but this is not the current state in GW2. Any designer worth their salt would want to fix it.

it’s not about punishing good or bad players or rewarding bad or good players, it’s about maximizing the variety of play and encounter

Lifestealer.4910:

Windsagio.1340:

NoTrigger.8396:

hazenvirus.8154:

Max direct damage will likely still be the go to unless Anet radically changes current and future content to punish players who rely on proper positioning, dodging, and active defenses over passive stats and face tanking.

and why would they do that?
why would they change it from rewarding good players for being good to rewarding bad players for being bad?

that doesnt make any sense and is beyond stupid.

Because an encounter with multiple strong solutions is more interesting than an encounter with a single overwhelmingly optimal solution. It’s certainly not easy to do, but it’s a worthwhile and important goal.

On the bolded part, the kind of thinking you’re expressing there is very basic to why this is difficult to discuss. It’s applying almost moral values to a design decision.

It really depends on what Anet wants for their challenging instanced content. If they want to make the dungeons more forgiving for new/bad players then buffing tank gear or making it relevant into the meta would meet that end. If however they want make content so difficult to the point where every mistake is instant death then they have to balance things with zerker, which means every other spec would be left in the dust.

There are plenty of ways to change the style without simply making it easier. Any quick ‘solution’ I can think of is wrought with problems, but you can see where they’re going with the changes:

They’re limiting extremely strong defensive abilities (stability)
They’re making CC in general weaker (and sometimes almost entirely disabled) vs bosses, and most importantly removing first hit CC.

They’re doing system changes to hit some of the thigns that make zerker burns so effective right now without nerfing the zerker stat set (and without making things easier or more forgiving).

It’s the best way to go on it, I’d hope we’d all agree.

Argon.1563:

For a long time, Berserker has been looking shady for open world content. It started getting sketchy to run it around the time of the Tequatl Rising update, and from then on, more content has been released that has made it less viable. Now we’ve seen the stuff in HoT, if I see anybody in my open world parties to do world bosses/events running Berserker, in HoT, they’re getting kicked. Im not picking up corpses off the floor for half of HoT.

I think Berserker will still be good in dungeons, but for open world content: Not appropriate, not viable, buy a real armour set.

I zerk at Teq…. I just change my traits and dodge… I almost never die. It will always be able to be played no matter what. I dont need other armors that is what traits are for.

I would actually like it better if there was only 6 stat sets at max, 1 for each t6 mat, it would make balancing the game easier and more able to open up different contents for better game play.

Windsagio.1340:

NoTrigger.8396:

snipped

Well… that was insanely combative…

And you’re arguing against points that I’m not even making.

You have to understand that NoTrigger and others have had this argument with random dudes for years and sometimes bad habits and frustration take the better of them.

Also, not everyone has a clear view of what is going on. Saying the actual lack of variety of optimal builds is bad because it is the result of a bad game design decision makes sense. It is a constructive opinion that I personnaly share.

However, more childish people claim the meta is bad because it does not correspond to the way they are playing. In other words, some people want to change the meta instead of adapting themselves. Arguing with these people (who often claim that “because everything should be completed by everyone, every gear/build should be equally effective”) is like arguing with a wall. It’s frustrating.

There is a consensus on this “more variety of optimal builds is better for everyone”. Even though there will always be a “best build/party setup”, there could be alternative setups that would be almost as effective as the optimal one. I would be delighted to see the game moving to this direction. Keep berserker the way it is and make condition glass canon parties almost as effective.

Now the true problem is : how do you implement this without breaking the servers nor breaking PvP ?

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Who said it’s easier to play? For example, Sinister and Rampager’s gear are both significantly harder to play than Zerker due to split damage stats, but having the same lack of defensive stats. Yet neither are seen as “optimal.”

You play it the same, they both lack defensive stats.

“Easier to play” varies drastically with content. For example, in most PvE, Zerker is the easiest thing to play because enemies don’t live long enough to actually do anything. Does this mean they shouldn’t be rewarded in open world? In comparison, Zerker is vastly harder to play in PvP scenearios. Should it be rewarded more than anything else, then?

In most pve anything is good as long as you get a gold medal which isn’t hard to accomplish. And it’s easier to afk with an autoattack enabled with a defensive gear.

VodCom.6924:

I’m not sure all content will be open world. They are expanding on the whole idea of megabosses that’s for sure, but I believe they’ll expand fractals and dungeons as well.

Yes, we’ll get story mode instances as well. But you shouldn’t count on any new dungeons or fractals since that content was abandoned long time ago. Just check the newest interviews about that topic.

Anet focuses on an open world content where cooperation is forced and where everyone is happy. And a happy customer spends money happily.

rotten.9753:

VodCom.6924:

I’m not sure all content will be open world. They are expanding on the whole idea of megabosses that’s for sure, but I believe they’ll expand fractals and dungeons as well.

Yes, we’ll get story mode instances as well. But you shouldn’t count on any new dungeons or fractals since that content was abandoned long time ago. Just check the newest interviews about that topic.

Anet focuses on an open world content where cooperation is forced and where everyone is happy. And a happy customer spends money happily.

I’ve heard about some fractal mastery(ies) not so long ago, so I’m not ruling out new fractals yet.

The release format of dungeon with a story + 3/4 explorable paths all in one was a bad decision. Takes too much development ressource and leaves the door opened for bugs and glitches. However the approach they took with the molten alliance factory and aetherblade retreat was a good one IMO. Just one path, clear objective, no story path that nobody does. It’s like an XXL fractal without agony.

VodCom.6924:

Windsagio.1340:

NoTrigger.8396:

snipped

Well… that was insanely combative…

And you’re arguing against points that I’m not even making.

You have to understand that NoTrigger and others have had this argument with random dudes for years and sometimes bad habits and frustration take the better of them.

Also, not everyone has a clear view of what is going on. Saying the actual lack of variety of optimal builds is bad because it is the result of a bad game design decision makes sense. It is a constructive opinion that I personnaly share.

However, more childish people claim the meta is bad because it does not correspond to the way they are playing. In other words, some people want to change the meta instead of adapting themselves. Arguing with these people (who often claim that “because everything should be completed by everyone, every gear/build should be equally effective”) is like arguing with a wall. It’s frustrating.

There is a consensus on this “more variety of optimal builds is better for everyone”. Even though there will always be a “best build/party setup”, there could be alternative setups that would be almost as effective as the optimal one. I would be delighted to see the game moving to this direction. Keep berserker the way it is and make condition glass canon parties almost as effective.

Now the true problem is : how do you implement this without breaking the servers nor breaking PvP ?

It’s shades of religious or political ‘debate’ on any number of websites, where you expect people to continually fall back on comfortable rote arguments and comfortable rote outrage. It really shouldn’t have any place in discussing game design.

~~~

As my second post above, I honestly really like the way Anet is approaching the problem. They’re addressing issues that make the berzerker style too safe and too easy so that it’s a high risk/high damage style instead of a high damage/low risk if you know the expected patterns’ style.

They’re also trying to make it so high DD isn’t the best way to kill always, but I’m sure we’ll agree they’ve had a harder time with that. They had to nerf the mordrem hounds, and husks end up being just dull as fight opponents.

Windsagio.1340:

They’re also trying to make it so high DD isn’t the best way to kill always, but I’m sure we’ll agree they’ve had a harder time with that. They had to nerf the mordrem hounds, and husks end up being just dull as fight opponents.

No worries, I’m sure they’ll get their retaliation back but only in instanced content ^^

VodCom.6924:

I’ve heard about some fractal mastery(ies) not so long ago, so I’m not ruling out new fractals yet.

The release format of dungeon with a story + 3/4 explorable paths all in one was a bad decision. Takes too much development ressource and leaves the door opened for bugs and glitches. However the approach they took with the molten alliance factory and aetherblade retreat was a good one IMO. Just one path, clear objective, no story path that nobody does. It’s like an XXL fractal without agony.

Last gamecon they said that aether dungeon was way too much work and that we shouldn’t expect any new dungeons for now. They sacked the dungeon guy like 1,5 years ago.

Interesting. The OP was actually about defiance and blind. However, the word “Zerker” was used.

It’s a magic word really.

We’ve heard all sorts of incantations like “Hocus Pocus” and “Abracadabra,” but none have been as powerful as the word “Zerker.”

It LITERALLY summons scrolls and scrolls full of text.

Argon.1563:

For a long time, Berserker has been looking shady for open world content. It started getting sketchy to run it around the time of the Tequatl Rising update, and from then on, more content has been released that has made it less viable. Now we’ve seen the stuff in HoT, if I see anybody in my open world parties to do world bosses/events running Berserker, in HoT, they’re getting kicked. Im not picking up corpses off the floor for half of HoT.

I think Berserker will still be good in dungeons, but for open world content: Not appropriate, not viable, buy a real armour set.

Thanks for posting your views here. Now I don’t have to actually encounter someone as unpleasant as you in-game. puts on block in-game

rotten.9753:

Sagat.3285:

Toughness for power,vitality for conditions which are useless in group pve,but what actually stacks conditions on you constantly enough to bring pvp like cleansing. You could argue power/toughness condi damage/vitality precision/heal …ferocity overlaps. Toughness is useless vs condition and vitality is very inferior vs direct damage.

Again only 2 ways,create pvp like encounters or gut down crit. If you oppose give me your way. It’s not like crit is a good mechanic anyway.

Sorry but vitality works against direct damage perfectly fine. Nomad’s gear provides so much passive defense you can go afk with your auto attack turned on and still kill a boss.

If you want to facetank damage you need more stats than just toughness. Would a tank work without a healer in a typical mmo? No.

As long as heal are enough toughness+healing+dodge is enough to “tank” direct damage. Back to topic look at pvp, there is variation there that’s the best example of what pve should be like,already posted the only 2 solutions. If they don’t care I just need them to confirm that we will have that version of “challenging” content so I can stop being in those threads and maybe wait for next expansion.

Stop trying to counter me and share your way of creating diversity in pve.

Sagat.3285:

Stop trying to counter me and share your way of creating diversity in pve.

Why do you need a diversity in auto attacks? Because that’s the content we’re getting with HoT. An open world content where diversity is already achieved. Just ask people on map chat on any map. There’s plenty of diversity there. Stop focusing on the abandoned content where the small toxic minority dwells.

rotten.9753:

Sagat.3285:

Stop trying to counter me and share your way of creating diversity in pve.

Why do you need a diversity in auto attacks? Because that’s the content we’re getting with HoT. An open world content where diversity is already achieved. Just ask people on map chat on any map. There’s plenty of diversity there. Stop focusing on the abandoned content where the small toxic minority dwells.

Do dungeons have some of that diversity,how is HoT not open world,are they putting the old content in a coffin? There is diversity in AA btw and open pve is majority but is it quality? All mmos that listened and promoted casualization failed eventually, even those who started challenging(not hardcore) only reason WoW is still a thing is because it’s a blizzard franchise, they have fans from other games like diablo and wildstar. BDO dropped in charts and population despite those pretty graphics,look at The Order 1886.. All those games have 1 thing in common you believe they would be different than the failures before,start great,turn around on their original fans,fail,create more hype for the next possible difference.

Just let them confirm what kind of pve content they want to promote with words or content and I shall stop and maybe wait for next expansion. I do wonder what are they looking up to.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

I would disagree with your assessment that encouraging mixed groups to do things optimally is “solving a non-existent problem.” The problem exists, whether you want to believe it or not. That’s why threads like this keep popping up in the first place. What you are saying is “because someone doesn’t like the Zerker playstyle, they can’t feel wanted.” They may actually be a better player than you, but because they don’t conform to your view, they are inferior.

You have yet to show why it is a problem. You just asserted it.

And I’ve never stated “because someone doesn’t like zerker playstyle, they can’t feel wanted”. I don’t even know where you came up with that.

The point is simple. Right now every build is VIABLE in pve, but only specific builds are OPTIMAL.

What you want to do is to make it mandatory to have different OPTIMAL builds for different content.

This results in no change for those players who want to just be viable with their soldiers , condi, or mix-match gear because they will still be going to dungeons and other battles with them regardless.

However this will result in the OPTIMAL players now having to swap characters/gear prior to different encounters, which is a net increase in tedium and frustration with no tangible benefit.

A simple benefit analysis shows your argued changes will lead to a net decrease in fun and no real benefit.

rotten.9753:

Last gamecon they said that aether dungeon was way too much work and that we shouldn’t expect any new dungeons for now. They sacked the dungeon guy like 1,5 years ago.

I knew they didn’t like the way the original dungeon format at release, but for me that aether dungeon was worth the effort.

Sad story I guess

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

I would disagree with your assessment that encouraging mixed groups to do things optimally is “solving a non-existent problem.” The problem exists, whether you want to believe it or not. That’s why threads like this keep popping up in the first place. What you are saying is “because someone doesn’t like the Zerker playstyle, they can’t feel wanted.” They may actually be a better player than you, but because they don’t conform to your view, they are inferior.

You have yet to show why it is a problem. You just asserted it.

And I’ve never stated “because someone doesn’t like zerker playstyle, they can’t feel wanted”. I don’t even know where you came up with that.

The point is simple. Right now every build is VIABLE in pve, but only specific builds are OPTIMAL.

What you want to do is to make it mandatory to have different OPTIMAL builds for different content.

This results in no change for those players who want to just be viable with their soldiers , condi, or mix-match gear because they will still be going to dungeons and other battles with them regardless.

However this will result in the OPTIMAL players now having to swap characters/gear prior to different encounters, which is a net increase in tedium and frustration with no tangible benefit.

A simple benefit analysis shows your argued changes will lead to a net decrease in fun and no real benefit.

The fact we are even having this conversation shows that it is a problem. Why is it a problem for different content to have different optimal strategies? One would think that’s what is supposed to be the case.

You claim that it would increase frustration for players who don’t want to change anything for different content. Yes, this is what you are arguing, and yes, it is true. However, it is not a reasonable thing to design around.

I claim that making different content have different optimal strategies will improve the game for everyone. You don’t want to change from 5-zerk? Fine, stick with the content where that is still the optimal choice. You want to do new/changed content with a 5-zerk group? Fine, you can do so. You want to do all new/changed content kitten -zerk and have that be optimal? How selfish can you be? You already have content where that is optimal and you are in no way barred from doing the new stuff that way.

In the meantime, many, many others could get content where they are optimal. Players actually wanting to do everything in the optimal manner recognize that they will have to change things up then if new content gets introduced.

Stagnation has never helped a game, but that is exactly what you are advocating.

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

I would disagree with your assessment that encouraging mixed groups to do things optimally is “solving a non-existent problem.” The problem exists, whether you want to believe it or not. That’s why threads like this keep popping up in the first place. What you are saying is “because someone doesn’t like the Zerker playstyle, they can’t feel wanted.” They may actually be a better player than you, but because they don’t conform to your view, they are inferior.

You have yet to show why it is a problem. You just asserted it.

I have pointed out a few resons why one can consider the actual situation disappointing, just browse a few of my posts in this thread.

I said this before and I’ll repeat it again : nerfing berserker is a nonsense. However, buffing condition and deeply reworking how conditions interact in a party is important if one wants to have a variety of optimal or roughly optimal builds/party setup.

3/4 of the stats sets are irrelevant for PvE, some are for good reasons (Nomad is irrelevant in PvE for a good reason : you don’t need to be this tanky) some are for bad reasons (Sinister is irrelevant for a bad reason : your fellow players will overwrite your bleed stacks thus lowering your dps).

If we could have just 1/2 of irrelevant stat sets (i.e the tankier ones) that would be an amazing progress in variety. More variety means it takes a bit longer to get bored of content, players can find a playstyle adapted to them more easily.

The actual situation can be fine for you. However, what if we could keep the builds you love and play relevant while opening new opportunities for optimal play ? WvW and sPvP feature rich and varied meta builds, why can’t PvE have the same variety ?

Windsagio.1340:

Jerus.4350:

Ahh yeah… well that’s the old “pillar guard” type build. The whole Valor tree doesn’t benefit anyone but you much for defense (extra toughness from strength in numbers is all). Personally I dropped that as an option for me when I got frustrated with the inconsistency of toughness agro mechanics. Hammer with the honor tree traits are a variation that can make for a nice smooth ride for the group though, theory crafting of course you can do other stuff, but like I said I was just curious what build you were talking about, thanks for posting.

The weird thing is that the aggro is actually shockingly consistent. You’re right though, the honor tree is mostly balls. The only real reason to go into it at all is that AH makes tanking possible because of the massive passive heal.

I am wondering why the aggro has been so consistent tho’, I figured the build doesn’t get used for DPS reasons but if people have threat issues that makes more sense, I just wonder why that hasn’t been a problem when I’ve seen it, do fracs have modified aggro tables?

Sorry for late response. First you mean “valor” tree is mostly balls Honor is awesome with hammer.

As for aggro, I used to run this, it was great on say TA at that first Wurm Room, I could stand on the hill ranging the wurms and doing periodic passes through to clear blossoms a wurm or two ahead of the group. This kept all the spit off them and on me, It was awesome, made for simple clean runs. However… it only worked like 3/4 times. The other time I’d be standing there with my thumb in my bum for a wurm or two hoping to get agro and failing before I jumped in and did some poor damage.

Then you have bosses like the Robot in COE, he is almost always going to stick to the ele like glue. HP, Toughness, Damage, doesn’t matter he’ll seek out the ele, by that I mean we tried putting on Toughness gear for the guard, no go, tried putting hp gear on Ele thinking maybe he was targetting lowest health, no go, tried having the ele simply not attack after tagging it once just to be on the list, nope still got agro. That robot hates Ele’s.

It just really seems like there is a lot of different rules for agro. For my Engi I get a lot of agro from the Ettin in the uncatagorized fractal, I run full assassin, no toughness of any kind addition. I’m told toughness is quite helpful for his agro though.

If I could have reliably held agro with a pillar guard even on just certain bosses, it’d be worth it to me, but the fact that at best i was getting like 3/4 success rates back when i was doing it (I wasn’t doing all content at the time) just had me give it up.

Thaumanova Anamoly agrees with you, now that I think of it ><

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

I would disagree with your assessment that encouraging mixed groups to do things optimally is “solving a non-existent problem.” The problem exists, whether you want to believe it or not. That’s why threads like this keep popping up in the first place. What you are saying is “because someone doesn’t like the Zerker playstyle, they can’t feel wanted.” They may actually be a better player than you, but because they don’t conform to your view, they are inferior.

You have yet to show why it is a problem. You just asserted it.

And I’ve never stated “because someone doesn’t like zerker playstyle, they can’t feel wanted”. I don’t even know where you came up with that.

The point is simple. Right now every build is VIABLE in pve, but only specific builds are OPTIMAL.

What you want to do is to make it mandatory to have different OPTIMAL builds for different content.

This results in no change for those players who want to just be viable with their soldiers , condi, or mix-match gear because they will still be going to dungeons and other battles with them regardless.

However this will result in the OPTIMAL players now having to swap characters/gear prior to different encounters, which is a net increase in tedium and frustration with no tangible benefit.

A simple benefit analysis shows your argued changes will lead to a net decrease in fun and no real benefit.

2 Things… firstly, as a disclaimer, I really like playing Zerker. If there were options in pve I’d probably still choose zerker for all my toons. Secondly, if conditions stacking was fixed in pve they could be equally viable in PVE. Although I’m not sure how they work I’d love to see how this simple benefit analysis… sounds like a first year project management chapter.

VodCom.6924:

The actual situation can be fine for you. However, what if we could keep the builds you love and play relevant while opening new opportunities for optimal play ? WvW and sPvP feature rich and varied meta builds, why can’t PvE have the same variety ?

Really because smart AI is both very difficult to do and very annoying to the players.

PvE is about learning and patterns with a small amount of reaction/controlled randomness.

PvP is about build (hard meta) and very rapid situational reactivity.

Neither skillset is better or more important than the others, but they’re extremely different sets, and to some degree have very different appeals.

Also, as there’s been some discussion, expectations are different. For PvE there’s actually a fairly high expectation of success. you master PvE.

You can’t effectively master PvP unless you’re the best player in the world. If matchmaking worked perfectly you’d eventually average out your win/loss if you play enough.

Windsagio.1340:

VodCom.6924:

The actual situation can be fine for you. However, what if we could keep the builds you love and play relevant while opening new opportunities for optimal play ? WvW and sPvP feature rich and varied meta builds, why can’t PvE have the same variety ?

Really because smart AI is both very difficult to do and very annoying to the players.

PvE is about learning and patterns with a small amount of reaction/controlled randomness.

PvP is about build (hard meta) and very rapid situational reactivity.

Neither skillset is better or more important than the others, but they’re extremely different sets, and to some degree have very different appeals.

Also, as there’s been some discussion, expectations are different. For PvE there’s actually a fairly high expectation of success. you master PvE.

You can’t effectively master PvP unless you’re the best player in the world. If matchmaking worked perfectly you’d eventually average out your win/loss if you play enough.

I am pretty sure this doesn’t hold true for 100% pve player,the in between player will want simple pve so he can gear up fast for pvp but in GW2 it doesn’t work like that. C9 and Vindictus don’t have easy pvp but players still enjoyed it,sure they are not open pve but I fail to see how easy pve helps mmos or players especially in GW2’s case.

I’m not sure what kind of mmos you came from but did that ever helped? Look at EVE online,old game still boosting up players,Lineage 1 really old game most played in Korea. There is not even open pvp in pve or grinding for pvp gear… what’s the excuse to promote walk in park blindfolded pve? Where is the red post at?? I am not understanding this …do the devs believe it will help the game…don’t they read forums or reviews of GW2’s pve?

Again how does it help or has it ever been proven to help?

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

I would disagree with your assessment that encouraging mixed groups to do things optimally is “solving a non-existent problem.” The problem exists, whether you want to believe it or not. That’s why threads like this keep popping up in the first place. What you are saying is “because someone doesn’t like the Zerker playstyle, they can’t feel wanted.” They may actually be a better player than you, but because they don’t conform to your view, they are inferior.

You have yet to show why it is a problem. You just asserted it.

And I’ve never stated “because someone doesn’t like zerker playstyle, they can’t feel wanted”. I don’t even know where you came up with that.

The point is simple. Right now every build is VIABLE in pve, but only specific builds are OPTIMAL.

What you want to do is to make it mandatory to have different OPTIMAL builds for different content.

This results in no change for those players who want to just be viable with their soldiers , condi, or mix-match gear because they will still be going to dungeons and other battles with them regardless.

However this will result in the OPTIMAL players now having to swap characters/gear prior to different encounters, which is a net increase in tedium and frustration with no tangible benefit.

A simple benefit analysis shows your argued changes will lead to a net decrease in fun and no real benefit.

The fact we are even having this conversation shows that it is a problem. Why is it a problem for different content to have different optimal strategies? One would think that’s what is supposed to be the case.

No, the fact that we are having this conversation shows that we are having a conversation. You still haven’t actually substantiated your argument with any evidence.

Different content aside from pve already has different optimal strategies. The scope of this discussion is around pve. You are advocating for additional optimal builds for different pve content when it isn’t needed and would just increase frustration and tedium as I’ve explained already.

And no, one does not necessarily think that is supposed to be the case because that is subjective. You are not the sole arbiter of deciding what is supposed to be or not.

You are the one advocating for the change therefore it’s incumbent on you to backup your assertions with evidence rather than just sophistry, which is what you’ve been throwing out so far.