Guild Wars 2

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

http://www.guildwars2guru.com/news/960-class-balance-philosophies/

Necro

The necro boasts the highest natural health of all the caster classes, and also has death shroud to extend that life total even higher. While they don’t have some of the escape or damage reduction capabilities that other classes boast, they do have a lot of ways to win attrition fights. They have access to poison on multiple weapons, they are able to combine condition damage with raw damage, and they have multiple disables to interrupt enemy skills. Necomancers also have multiple movement disabling abilities, while allows them to chase down enemies who are low on health.

http://www.twitch.tv/guildwars2/b/496005243 @7:54

These Berserkers are still going to be the highest DPS in the game.

Hey, I told you I could link quotes from ANet if you wanted. Am I being dishonest, or are you grasping at straw for another scarecrow to knock down?

Wrong again. You are the one that chose to speak for ANET without quoting in the first place. I merely pointed that out. In no way is that a strawman. My statements were factual.
Also necros do have crippling abilities already, so that is in fact in line with what ANET said.

You said:
“ANet has stated that Necromancer is supposed to be an attrition profession and very difficult to get away from. Is it? No.?
ANET said:
“Necomancers also have multiple movement disabling abilities, while allows them to chase down enemies who are low on health.”

Those two statements are not the same. ANET never stated it would be very difficult to get away from necros. According to your quote ANET said necros have abilities that allow them to chase down enemies who are low on health, which for the most part is true.

It seems like you do nothing but misrepresent and strawman.
Your ideas are bad, your arguments are terrible, your statements are dishonest, and your ego won’t allow you to admit you’re wrong despite having your own lies laid out and dissected and debunked repeatedly.

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

http://www.guildwars2guru.com/news/960-class-balance-philosophies/

Necro

The necro boasts the highest natural health of all the caster classes, and also has death shroud to extend that life total even higher. While they don’t have some of the escape or damage reduction capabilities that other classes boast, they do have a lot of ways to win attrition fights. They have access to poison on multiple weapons, they are able to combine condition damage with raw damage, and they have multiple disables to interrupt enemy skills. Necomancers also have multiple movement disabling abilities, while allows them to chase down enemies who are low on health.

http://www.twitch.tv/guildwars2/b/496005243 @7:54

These Berserkers are still going to be the highest DPS in the game.

Hey, I told you I could link quotes from ANet if you wanted. Am I being dishonest, or are you grasping at straw for another scarecrow to knock down?

Wrong again. You are the one that chose to speak for ANET without quoting in the first place. I merely pointed that out. In no way is that a strawman. My statements were factual.
Also necros do have crippling abilities already, so that is in fact in line with what ANET said.

You said:
“ANet has stated that Necromancer is supposed to be an attrition profession and very difficult to get away from. Is it? No.?
ANET said:
“Necomancers also have multiple movement disabling abilities, while allows them to chase down enemies who are low on health.”

Those two statements are not the same. ANET never stated it would be very difficult to get away from necros.

JonathanSharp.7094:

So, quickly, on the design philosophy at play here (you can feel free to disagree, but this is what I feel):

We want the Thief to be the class that most “slips through your fingers”. Other classes like the Ele and Mes have some of it too (and rightly so), but if anyone is escaping a fight, that should be a slippery Thief.

The Necro, on the other hand, should be the dude you CANNOT get away from. It’s an attrition based class, so the idea is that if you lock horns w/ a necro, know what you’re getting into: you’re fighting a class that’s built for attrition. It can dot you, dps you, rip your boons, and severely hinder your movement. AND it also has the ability to soak up a lot of damage. So the longer the fight goes, the stronger the Necro should get. That’s the idea behind Death Shroud, but little escape ability.

So we don’t want that attrition class to also have great ways to escape. This used to be the case, and we felt the Necro was just too strong if it was great at attrition as well as movement/escape. We wanted the Necro to be more about attrition, and for other classes (Thief, Ele, Mes) to be more about escaping and mobility.

Hope that makes sense.

You were saying? I can keep going linking quotes if you like. My statements have been nothing but honest. I’ve done my research and am prepared to back up each and every statement I have made in this thread. Can you say the same?

I did not choose to speak for ANet. I chose to paraphrase what ANet stated.

You still have yet to give any evidence at all that my ideas are bad, or that I have ever been dishonest in this discussion. You claim I lie, and then continue claiming such when I present evidence to the contrary, despite having nothing to back up your own claims that I am being untruthful. You fail to acknowledge my points, instead making up inconsistencies with my arguments. I identify your arguments with ease (your only argument on the actual thread topic was found in your very first response to me, and it was clearly a personal opinion), and acknowledge and dispute them. You accuse me of using logical fallacies, but I can easily point to where you yourself have made several.

Are you sure you want to continue this debate?

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Zerker can be viable without being optimal (it is in PvP and WvW). I have no problems at all with all dungeon paths having a meta, and I don’t mind some of them being all zerk. I just dislike all of them being that way.

What you personally dislike or like is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. What matters is what the majority of the player base wants in an MMO game. And you obviously don’t speak for the whole player base.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

http://www.guildwars2guru.com/news/960-class-balance-philosophies/

Necro

The necro boasts the highest natural health of all the caster classes, and also has death shroud to extend that life total even higher. While they don’t have some of the escape or damage reduction capabilities that other classes boast, they do have a lot of ways to win attrition fights. They have access to poison on multiple weapons, they are able to combine condition damage with raw damage, and they have multiple disables to interrupt enemy skills. Necomancers also have multiple movement disabling abilities, while allows them to chase down enemies who are low on health.

http://www.twitch.tv/guildwars2/b/496005243 @7:54

These Berserkers are still going to be the highest DPS in the game.

Hey, I told you I could link quotes from ANet if you wanted. Am I being dishonest, or are you grasping at straw for another scarecrow to knock down?

Wrong again. You are the one that chose to speak for ANET without quoting in the first place. I merely pointed that out. In no way is that a strawman. My statements were factual.
Also necros do have crippling abilities already, so that is in fact in line with what ANET said.

You said:
“ANet has stated that Necromancer is supposed to be an attrition profession and very difficult to get away from. Is it? No.?
ANET said:
“Necomancers also have multiple movement disabling abilities, while allows them to chase down enemies who are low on health.”

Those two statements are not the same. ANET never stated it would be very difficult to get away from necros.

JonathanSharp.7094:

So, quickly, on the design philosophy at play here (you can feel free to disagree, but this is what I feel):

We want the Thief to be the class that most “slips through your fingers”. Other classes like the Ele and Mes have some of it too (and rightly so), but if anyone is escaping a fight, that should be a slippery Thief.

The Necro, on the other hand, should be the dude you CANNOT get away from. It’s an attrition based class, so the idea is that if you lock horns w/ a necro, know what you’re getting into: you’re fighting a class that’s built for attrition. It can dot you, dps you, rip your boons, and severely hinder your movement. AND it also has the ability to soak up a lot of damage. So the longer the fight goes, the stronger the Necro should get. That’s the idea behind Death Shroud, but little escape ability.

So we don’t want that attrition class to also have great ways to escape. This used to be the case, and we felt the Necro was just too strong if it was great at attrition as well as movement/escape. We wanted the Necro to be more about attrition, and for other classes (Thief, Ele, Mes) to be more about escaping and mobility.

Hope that makes sense.

You were saying? I can keep going linking quotes if you like. My statements have been nothing but honest. I’ve done my research and am prepared to back up each and every statement I have made in this thread. Can you say the same?

A liar can claim he is honest all he likes. It doesn’t change the fact he is a liar. The discussions so far are ample evidence of how dishonest you are. All I’ve done is called for you to provide evidence when you didn’t before.

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Zerker can be viable without being optimal (it is in PvP and WvW). I have no problems at all with all dungeon paths having a meta, and I don’t mind some of them being all zerk. I just dislike all of them being that way.

What you personally dislike or like is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. What matters is what the majority of the player base wants in an MMO game. And you obviously don’t speak for the whole player base.

Majority over quality? So you telling that if the majority of players before release wanted hard trinity they should have implemented it? Majority want easy quick pve from Woodenpotatoes’ interview I heard otherwise from them. A company needs to identify who to follow and to avoid you don’t just blindly say follow the majority especially when most of the current population is made of a lot casuals.

Those who cares about the game are either on forums or promoting it.I don’t believe majority does that…

DeathPanel.8362:

A liar can claim he is honest all he likes. It doesn’t change the fact he is a liar. The discussions so far are ample evidence of how dishonest you are. All I’ve done is called for you to provide evidence when you didn’t before.

Please, give an example of where I’ve been dishonest and how you know. I’ve not bothered to link evidence that I had thought (apparently incorrectly) was common knowledge among the community. Some assumption of base knowledge is required for a debate, after all.

Given the primary topic of the thread is hypothetical situations, it is impossible to link extant examples that would back me up. Likewise, it is impossible to bring up examples that refute my argument. However, there are simple logical extrapolations that can be done simply by identifying why Zerker is optimal in all dungeons and why it is not in WvW and PvP, as well as where something other than Zerker is best in PvE and why it is so. I take this into account and can (and do) explain the reasoning behind my ideas and points.

When actual facts do need to be presented, I can and will present them. For example, your false claim that I claimed to solely determine what things were supposed to be in GW2. You have been trounced most thoroughly on that, yet you still insist on claiming you were right and I was lying, despite the fact I have hard facts backing me up.

You might want to give up trying to debate for a while.

Sagat.3285:

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Zerker can be viable without being optimal (it is in PvP and WvW). I have no problems at all with all dungeon paths having a meta, and I don’t mind some of them being all zerk. I just dislike all of them being that way.

What you personally dislike or like is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. What matters is what the majority of the player base wants in an MMO game. And you obviously don’t speak for the whole player base.

Majority over quality? So you telling that if the majority of players before release wanted hard trinity they should have implemented it? Majority want easy quick pve from Woodenpotatoes’ interview I heard otherwise from them. A company needs to identify who to follow and to avoid you don’t just blindly say follow the majority especially when most of the current population is made of a lot casuals.

This is a game played by players and ANET is a company who profits off the players. So it’s obviously smart to cater to the needs of the majority of players. There is no inconsistency in my statement.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

DeathPanel.8362:

A liar can claim he is honest all he likes. It doesn’t change the fact he is a liar. The discussions so far are ample evidence of how dishonest you are. All I’ve done is called for you to provide evidence when you didn’t before.

Please, give an example of where I’ve been dishonest and how you know.

I already provided repeated examples in this thread. The fact that you ignore them and keep on asking is in itself a dishonest statement.

This is getting out of hand.

Can i just say that anet have failed with necro meeting its design philosophy. They have always said its an attrition based class. But every part of its design is the opposite of attrition.

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

DeathPanel.8362:

A liar can claim he is honest all he likes. It doesn’t change the fact he is a liar. The discussions so far are ample evidence of how dishonest you are. All I’ve done is called for you to provide evidence when you didn’t before.

Please, give an example of where I’ve been dishonest and how you know.

I already provided repeated examples in this thread. The fact that you ignore them and keep on asking is in itself a dishonest statement.

Your “examples” are laughable. I just thoroughly disproved one with three links. The rest are, at best, attacking explicit opinion as “dishonesty”. Opinions cannot be dishonest, as they make no claim of truth. Neither can questions, as the truth comes from the answer.

Again, provide an example with an explanation of how you know I am being dishonest. Explanation especially, please. I am rather patient, and as I already hunted down links from over a year ago, you are surely capable of finding something less than 48 hours old.

@spoj: Yeah, sorry about that. I’ll give him one reply and end it. I’m rather irked about the whole “slow burst” class that the Necro is myself.

DeathPanel.8362:

Sagat.3285:

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Zerker can be viable without being optimal (it is in PvP and WvW). I have no problems at all with all dungeon paths having a meta, and I don’t mind some of them being all zerk. I just dislike all of them being that way.

What you personally dislike or like is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. What matters is what the majority of the player base wants in an MMO game. And you obviously don’t speak for the whole player base.

Majority over quality? So you telling that if the majority of players before release wanted hard trinity they should have implemented it? Majority want easy quick pve from Woodenpotatoes’ interview I heard otherwise from them. A company needs to identify who to follow and to avoid you don’t just blindly say follow the majority especially when most of the current population is made of a lot casuals.

This is a game played by players and ANET is a company who profits off the players. So it’s obviously smart to cater to the needs of the majority of players. There is no inconsistency in my statement.

Can you specify what majority?? Most of the player base is not speaking anyway they just play and don’t care,those who care are either on forums or promoting it. You learm from other games previous mistakes first, that’s why we have no trinity or generic questing. Majority is quiet as the grave how is Anet supposed to know what they want?? Ever heard of what the game needs??

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Again, provide an example with an explanation of how you know I am being dishonest. Explanation especially, please. I am rather patient, and as I already hunted down links from over a year ago, you are surely capable of finding something less than 48 hours old.

You can scroll up on this thread in previous pages. Examples include your claim that just because something is discussed a lot means it’s a problem. I pointed out a lot of people discuss global warming is a hoax as well but that doesn’t make it a hoax. If you already hunted down a link from 2 years ago just to somewhat justify your statements you can surely go back a page or two. I’m not going to re-paste 5 pages of bad arguments from you each and every time you pretend you weren’t dishonest. I already rehashed your bad arguments several times already.

Sagat.3285:

Can you specify what majority?? Most of the player base is not speaking anyway they just play and don’t care,those who care are either on forums or promoting it. You learm from other games previous mistakes first, that’s why we have no trinity or generic questing. Majority is quiet as the grave how is Anet supposed to know what they want?? Ever heard of what the game needs??

You apparently don’t understand what I was talking about.

I simply stated ANET is best served by catering to the majority of players’ needs. I never stated I know for sure what those players’ needs are. I wouldn’t pretend to speak for others.

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Again, provide an example with an explanation of how you know I am being dishonest. Explanation especially, please. I am rather patient, and as I already hunted down links from over a year ago, you are surely capable of finding something less than 48 hours old.

You can scroll up on this thread in previous pages. Examples include your claim that just because something is discussed a lot means it’s a problem. I pointed out a lot of people discuss global warming is a hoax as well but that doesn’t make it a hoax. If you already hunted down a link from 2 years ago just to somewhat justify your statements you can surely go back a page or two. I’m not going to re-paste 5 pages of bad arguments from you each and every time you pretend you weren’t dishonest. I already rehashed your bad arguments several times already.

All right, something to work with. About time I got that from you.

Unfortunately for you, dozens, if not hundreds of threads all discussing the same topic indicates there is a problem (indications are not definite, remember). It may not be mathematical in nature, but there is definitely a problem. The base probelm that is discussed is the exclusion problem. People do not like to be excluded, whether by fact (not the case with dungeon metas, as meta is by no means required to complete content) or socially (here is the issue!)

The problem these threads all address (to varying degrees of success) is a social issue: people want to run dungeons, but because the LFG is dominated by “Zerk Only!” groups, the pressure to conform is quite real. This, in their minds, clashes hard with the “play how you want” philosophy of the game, whether correctly or incorrectly by ANet’s definition. There is also another semi-related faction that wants diversity in dungeons because they find diversity more fun. Yet diversity is socially stifled, and people look to ANet to try and change that.

ANet, however, has no control over the social aspect of the game. What they can do, however, is change the mechanics of the game. In this particular case, the social problem does arise from mechanics, so ANet can shape and largely (not completely) remove the problem. Not easily, but it is within their power. I say “not completely” because someone will always want to run a particular path, but not want to conform to the meta for that path. This would be true as long as different builds even exist, though.

The problem is real. It is just not the type of problem you thought. Plenty more aspects to the issue than I previously mentioned in this post, including (but not limited to) the highly skilled players that simply find the current dungeons too boring to deal with and the elitists (who may or may not actually be that good) who are arguably the source of the pressure in the first place.

The calls for killing the Zerker meta can be argued to go too far (and I agree that they do). The changes for altering the meta are rarely due to a mechanical or mathmatical problem (exception: conditions) or even a skill problem (dungeons aren’t that hard to complete in zerk gear), but rather a social problem.

So, how did you “know” I was being dishonest (I noticed you still lacked an explanation, rather mentioning your response)? I wasn’t. There is a problem with the current meta, and good luck trying to prove the problem I just spelled out isn’t real.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Again, provide an example with an explanation of how you know I am being dishonest. Explanation especially, please. I am rather patient, and as I already hunted down links from over a year ago, you are surely capable of finding something less than 48 hours old.

You can scroll up on this thread in previous pages. Examples include your claim that just because something is discussed a lot means it’s a problem. I pointed out a lot of people discuss global warming is a hoax as well but that doesn’t make it a hoax. If you already hunted down a link from 2 years ago just to somewhat justify your statements you can surely go back a page or two. I’m not going to re-paste 5 pages of bad arguments from you each and every time you pretend you weren’t dishonest. I already rehashed your bad arguments several times already.

All right, something to work with. About time I got that from you.

Unfortunately for you, dozens, if not hundreds of threads all discussing the same topic indicates there is a problem (indications are not definite, remember). It may not be mathematical in nature, but there is definitely a problem.

For the hundredth time, just because a lot of people discuss some topic doesn’t mean something being discussed is a problem. Claiming that is a logical fallacy. It’s basically an offset of the argumentum ad populum fallacy.

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Again, provide an example with an explanation of how you know I am being dishonest. Explanation especially, please. I am rather patient, and as I already hunted down links from over a year ago, you are surely capable of finding something less than 48 hours old.

You can scroll up on this thread in previous pages. Examples include your claim that just because something is discussed a lot means it’s a problem. I pointed out a lot of people discuss global warming is a hoax as well but that doesn’t make it a hoax. If you already hunted down a link from 2 years ago just to somewhat justify your statements you can surely go back a page or two. I’m not going to re-paste 5 pages of bad arguments from you each and every time you pretend you weren’t dishonest. I already rehashed your bad arguments several times already.

All right, something to work with. About time I got that from you.

Unfortunately for you, dozens, if not hundreds of threads all discussing the same topic indicates there is a problem (indications are not definite, remember). It may not be mathematical in nature, but there is definitely a problem.

For the hundredth time, just because a lot of people discuss some topic doesn’t mean something being discussed is a problem. Claiming that is a logical fallacy. It’s basically an offset of the argumentum ad populum fallacy.

It means it is worth looking into, however. Something you clearly have not. If you did, you would realize the problem is a social one arising from mechanical actualities, and that it is indeed real.

Back in 1867, despite the fact that blacks were legal citizens of the US, do you think the majority of people thought they should have the right to vote? Do you think there wasn’t a problem then? That was also a social problem and, 8 years later, was constitutionally solved (socially, still not really fixed in full, even today).

The issue of the Zerker meta is in no way of comparable magnitude to ethnic suffrage, but it does share a similarity in that it’s a social problem that some people just don’t want to know exists, and so they deny it and any evidence related to it.

It is not comparable to an issue like global warming, which has quantifiable data associated with it and as such is not a social problem.

Now, I believe our debate has lasted long enough and done plenty to detract from the thread. I won’t be continuing, as I think the OP has a decent topic to discuss, even if it is slightly (just slightly) off, since the Zerk meta only exists in dungeons, which we haven’t yet heard anything about coming in Heart of Thorns.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

DeathPanel.8362:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Again, provide an example with an explanation of how you know I am being dishonest. Explanation especially, please. I am rather patient, and as I already hunted down links from over a year ago, you are surely capable of finding something less than 48 hours old.

You can scroll up on this thread in previous pages. Examples include your claim that just because something is discussed a lot means it’s a problem. I pointed out a lot of people discuss global warming is a hoax as well but that doesn’t make it a hoax. If you already hunted down a link from 2 years ago just to somewhat justify your statements you can surely go back a page or two. I’m not going to re-paste 5 pages of bad arguments from you each and every time you pretend you weren’t dishonest. I already rehashed your bad arguments several times already.

All right, something to work with. About time I got that from you.

Unfortunately for you, dozens, if not hundreds of threads all discussing the same topic indicates there is a problem (indications are not definite, remember). It may not be mathematical in nature, but there is definitely a problem.

For the hundredth time, just because a lot of people discuss some topic doesn’t mean something being discussed is a problem. Claiming that is a logical fallacy. It’s basically an offset of the argumentum ad populum fallacy.

It means it is worth looking into, however. Something you clearly have not. If you did, you would realize the problem is a social one arising from mechanical actualities, and that it is indeed real.

“Worth looking into” is not the same as “It is a problem” as you original stated. You obviously know how fallacious your arguments are after I’ve pointed it out and even cited the specific fallacy so you are dishonestly backtracking.

Just because a lot of people discuss something doesn’t mean it’s a “social problem”. You basically replaced one term with another yet still used the same fallacious argument.

This goes back to my posts a few pages back.

The usual suspects are consistently aggressive and clannish on this subject and consistently utterly incapable of compromise or even open discussion.

It’s notable because it’s so amazingly consistent. Same group, same arguments, same intractability.

My personal theory is that there’s a really really strong reinforcement loop going on and it causes weird reactions when people disrupt the loop with outside/conflicting opinions.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Well, why does Zerker not rule everything in PvP modes? Unpredictability, mitigation, and pressure. Mitigation and pressure are easily brought into PvE. For example, if you’re under Weakness, the damage from Zerker is not much higher than the damage from Soldier gear. It’s higher, sure, but that’s already a step toward making Zerker not “optimal” while remaining “viable.” Add in lots of low damage attacks that overwhelm active defense and Zerker may actually not be the optimal choice anymore. No enforcing of tanks/healers, but the amount of time a Zerker geared character would have to back off to recover may actually put them in second place for efficiency. Alternatively, you could have the ele (all speedruns have eles right now) switch to water attunement and the team blasts water fields to stay alive instead of fire fields to deal more damage. More durable builds may not need to do that tactic change, and then clear times become a bit more similar (how similar depends on a large number of factors).

The easiest change would just be high armor, low health enemies. Now Zerker is still viable, but “optimal” goes to a condition damage set (most likely Sinister) instead.

Alternatively, goals that aren’t “kill stuff” can provide different “optimals” as well.

Zerker can be viable without being optimal (it is in PvP and WvW). I have no problems at all with all dungeon paths having a meta, and I don’t mind some of them being all zerk. I just dislike all of them being that way.

Do you even realize what it is that you are really trying to make happen? You are trying to eliminate the current reason a lot of players even do speed runs in instanced PvE. That reason is the speed/profitability ratio investment. What happens when a dungeon path is no longer profitable for zerk in regards to speed/profitability? I can answer that….zerk stops doing that content and finds something else that does provide a better speed/profitability ratio. That leaves all these nomads/clerics/sinisters/etc doing this content by themselves….in slow motion. Is that really what they want? I don’t think it is, otherwise they wouldn’t be spazzing out over not being “optimal” for this content. What they really want is to be forced upon zerk players so they can have faster runs. On the extremely unlikely chance ANET was to make such changes…what are you going to do then…follow zerk players to whatever next thing they choose to do for speed/profitability and complain about that too?

ODB.6891:

On the extremely unlikely chance ANET was to make such changes…what are you going to do then…follow zerk players to whatever next thing they choose to do for speed/profitability and complain about that too?

Exactly right. I’ve already pointed out that these people don’t realize the consequences of what they are asking for. To justify any change there should be a net positive result and I don’t believe their ideas would result in one.

Well the changes are happening, some of them are already announced and in the track.

And you know, I’d be willing to make a bet that it doesn’t please anet much that a lot of players run dungeons simply for the gold/hour payoff.

What happened to “play the way you want”? When ppl use meta, they play the way they want. Those who don’t use the meta, they play the way they want.
If players want to take their time, they shouldn’t expect to have the same rewards as those who practice and speedrun them every night.

While the content could’ve been designed better, right now it’s not. The ppl who cry about the zerker meta, they will cry about the next meta as well.
Players are not forced to play the zerker meta, but on the flip side, they must also reap what they sow, a slower pace.

Bunmaster.9734:

What happened to “play the way you want”? When ppl use meta, they play the way they want. Those who don’t use the meta, they play the way they want.
If players want to take their time, they shouldn’t expect to have the same rewards as those who practice and speedrun them every night.

While the content could’ve been designed better, right now it’s not. The ppl who cry about the zerker meta, they will cry about the next meta as well.
Players are not forced to play the zerker meta, but on the flip side, they must also reap what they sow, a slower pace.

People are being continually pressured to play a particular style, this isn’t optimal for that theory.

And for the umpteenth time, nobody left in this discussion is saying they should make zerker suck or directly nerf it, they just want more variety of styles to be optimal depending on the fight. Every question having the same answer is boring.

Windsagio.1340:

Bunmaster.9734:

What happened to “play the way you want”? When ppl use meta, they play the way they want. Those who don’t use the meta, they play the way they want.
If players want to take their time, they shouldn’t expect to have the same rewards as those who practice and speedrun them every night.

While the content could’ve been designed better, right now it’s not. The ppl who cry about the zerker meta, they will cry about the next meta as well.
Players are not forced to play the zerker meta, but on the flip side, they must also reap what they sow, a slower pace.

People are being continually pressured to play a particular style, this isn’t optimal for that theory.

And for the umpteenth time, nobody left in this discussion is saying they should make zerker suck or directly nerf it, they just want more variety of styles to be optimal depending on the fight. Every question having the same answer is boring.

At no point can you ever make the full damage builds not the most optimal. The only way that is feasible is by instituting what is basically a minimum health or armor tax that would negatively impact lighter armored and health classes.

Even if they make condition damage on par with power based damage there would still be no reason to run anything outside of Zerker or Sinister unless there is unavoidable damage and then that just makes classes like Warrior flat out better because they can afford to build for more damage. Who would take something like a Mesmer when they have to build defense and health just to not die when you can take another Warrior who can pump out more damage?

Ezekel.6394

At no point can you ever make the full damage builds not the most optimal. The only way that is feasible is by instituting what is basically a minimum health or armor tax that would negatively impact lighter armored and health classes.

Why do people say that? I mentioned in THIS VERY THREAD having a fight with a clock that cannot be shortened by hitting things harder.

That’s all it takes.

That’s why certain people hate the first Dredge fractal puzzle so much – killing the Dredge doesn’t make a difference, they just respawn. The fight tests your survivability, not your DPS.

Use some imagination before declaring what can’t be done. Especially when it’s already been done in game.

watch and learn.

all i can say to the people who are complaining about berserker gear, you dont understand how the combat system works or you simply refuse to understand it.

Nike.2631:

That’s why certain people hate the first Dredge fractal puzzle so much – killing the Dredge doesn’t make a difference, they just respawn. The fight tests your survivability, not your DPS.

people hate it because there are no real mechanics involved and its just a lazy way to design stuff. dredge are the perfect example for bad encounter and mob design.

ODB.6891:

Translation for statement #1….reward the player who invested in minimal damage gear with extra damage.

First it doesn’t have to be minial damage gear, it doesn’t even have to come from yourself. Secondly I don’t see how this is a problem, there have been mechanics in gaming that have worked around the principle of trading survivability for more damage, the easiest example is the zombie in the final fantasy series (healing a zombie does damage).

ODB.6891:

Translation for statement #2…die zerk die!

So asking for difficult content is bad? Good to know.

So I can feel better about my low damage gear choices.

And here is the assualt on my person. Just because I want more variety doesn’t mean that I try to feel better about my gear choices.

Windsagio.1340:

Well the changes are happening, some of them are already announced and in the track.

And you know, I’d be willing to make a bet that it doesn’t please anet much that a lot of players run dungeons simply for the gold/hour payoff.

Yeah but you can’t really do much else in dungeons except farm. There’s no such thing as replayability in pve dungeons in an MMO. No matter how fun a dungeon is it ceases to be fun after the 100th time. You can only mitigate it by doing things such as having randomly generated maps and/or mobs or continually come out with new dungeons which is not only infeasible but splits the player base thin.

Dungeons are just a means to an end in MMOs. The true replayability comes from rewards such as loot/skins and pvp. If they do anything to make dungeon runs take longer without an appreciable increase in reward people will most likely stop doing them and move on to something else more rewarding.

Tim.6450:

So asking for difficult content is bad? Good to know.

So I can feel better about my low damage gear choices.

And here is the assualt on my person. Just because I want more variety doesn’t mean that I try to feel better about my gear choices.

Without the return of the trinity no gear with non dps survival stats will ever be optimal. (I include condition as a dps stat in this context) Also ANET’s philosophy seems to be geared towards focusing on active skills and defenses. You can see this from their explanation on why they are changing stability.

Also if you ask for more difficult content for the sake of difficult content then yeah it’s bad. The real question should be to ask for more fun content.

Tim.6450:

First it doesn’t have to be minial damage gear, it doesn’t even have to come from yourself. Secondly I don’t see how this is a problem, there have been mechanics in gaming that have worked around the principle of trading survivability for more damage, the easiest example is the zombie in the final fantasy series (healing a zombie does damage).

Currently, you’re trading survivability for damage. I think that’s what you’re describing.

DeathPanel.8362:

Without the return of the trinity no gear with non dps survival stats will ever be optimal, (I include condition as a dps stat in this context).

Can you prove this ? That the only way for optimal play is to have gear with no non dps stats, no matter the design of the encounter as long we have no holy trinity?

DeathPanel.8362:

Also ANET’s philosophy seems to be geared towards focusing on active skills and defenses. You can see this from their explanation on why they are changing stability.

Knowing when to use your active defense and when not to is very important. You can incorporate such things in an encounter . Passive defense can be used to allow specific hits to be taken at higher frequency.

DeathPanel.8362:

Also if you ask for more difficult content for the sake of difficult content then yeah it’s bad. The real question should be to ask for more fun content.

Fun and difficult are not mutually exclusive, my favorite example is the marionette.

rotten.9753:

Currently, you’re trading survivability for damage. I think that’s what you’re describing.

I’m going on a stretch here and think you’re talking about the fact we sacrifice defensive stats on our gear for more damage. The difference is that I want that trade to happen outside of the build, but in the mechanics of the encounter and in such a way that having some survivability in your own build (like gear) can be traded at a higher damage then you would have if you traded that survivability in your build.

the only “dead zerkers” are the noobs who don’t know how to dodge or learn the fights they are doing.

once a fight is learnt and tactics are nailed down it will be zerkfest on most bosses. unless it requires condition dmg for certain parts. then it will be 2 groups. 1 zerk and the other condi.

again the only dead zerker is a bad zerker

NoTrigger.8396:

all i can say to the people who are complaining about berserker gear, you dont understand how the combat system works or you simply refuse to understand it.

For what I sincerely wish would be the last time: NO. We get it. The complaint IS NOT THAT ZERKER IS THE RIGHT RESPONSE TO EXISTING CONTENT. The complaint is that the 1-dimensional “kill it faster” encounter design is mind numbingly BORING.

Nike.2631:

That’s why certain people hate the first Dredge fractal puzzle so much – killing the Dredge doesn’t make a difference, they just respawn. The fight tests your survivability, not your DPS.

NoTrigger.8396:

people hate it because there are no real mechanics involved and its just a lazy way to design stuff. dredge are the perfect example for bad encounter and mob design.

Are you KIDDING? The first fight in the Dredge fractal is one of the most technical fights in the game. And that’s because 2 people have to withstand a beating without dodge roll god-modeing while someone has to get in position without drawing agro, all while “hur hur kill-em, kill-em faster!” DOESN’T WORK.

That it doesn’t disintegrate when exposed to the meta that pervades the game is a good thing, not “bad design”.

Tim.6450:

I’m going on a stretch here and think you’re talking about the fact we sacrifice defensive stats on our gear for more damage. The difference is that I want that trade to happen outside of the build, but in the mechanics of the encounter and in such a way that having some survivability in your own build (like gear) can be traded at a higher damage then you would have if you traded that survivability in your build.

So if I use soldier’s gear I could sacrifice its innate survivability to get even more damage than berserker’s? So that, not only you would have higher survivability but you could change it to have a higher damage potential than purely glass cannon builds. Am I getting that right?

Nike.2631:

Are you KIDDING? The first fight in the Dredge fractal is one of the most technical fights in the game. And that’s because 2 people have to withstand a beating without dodge roll god-modeing while someone has to get in position without drawing agro, all while “hur hur kill-em, kill-em faster!” DOESN’T WORK.

That it doesn’t disintegrate when exposed to the meta that pervades the game is a good thing, not “bad design”.

You don’t have to withstand anything there.

Nike.2631:

Ezekel.6394

At no point can you ever make the full damage builds not the most optimal. The only way that is feasible is by instituting what is basically a minimum health or armor tax that would negatively impact lighter armored and health classes.

Why do people say that? I mentioned in THIS VERY THREAD having a fight with a clock that cannot be shortened by hitting things harder.

That’s all it takes.

That’s why certain people hate the first Dredge fractal puzzle so much – killing the Dredge doesn’t make a difference, they just respawn. The fight tests your survivability, not your DPS.

Use some imagination before declaring what can’t be done. Especially when it’s already been done in game.

Exactly, people hate what basically becomes a run away from the enemy for a set period of time until they die fight. You are not even fighting the enemy at that point, just avoiding red circles.

Also even the Dredge fractal is still done in Zerker, because even if you were wearing Soldier gear your still going to die if you stand in the fire.

Tim.6450:

DeathPanel.8362:

Without the return of the trinity no gear with non dps survival stats will ever be optimal, (I include condition as a dps stat in this context).

Can you prove this ? That the only way for optimal play is to have gear with no non dps stats, no matter the design of the encounter as long we have no holy trinity?

Because without tanks and healer roles you can’t have pve content that requires someone gear in defensive gear, at least not the type of content that don’t frustrate people. (ie bosses that have massive 1-2 shot kill undodgeable abilities unless you gear soldiers and other someone to heal you in cleric gear while you taunt boss as is in traditional trinity)

When content can be done with any gear the obvious logical result is that the gear which gives you the most dps wins out as the optimal. The only thing that making content harder in order to discourage this will do is make builds and group setups more restrictive and exclude people who otherwise want to play with fun builds.

Knowing when to use your active defense and when not to is very important. You can incorporate such things in an encounter . Passive defense can be used to allow specific hits to be taken at higher frequency.

Irrelevant. My point is about ANET’s philosophy, not what passive dense is. I don’t need you to rehash something I already know. Your statement in no way refutes mine.

Tim.6450:

Also if you ask for more difficult content for the sake of difficult content then yeah it’s bad. The real question should be to ask for more fun content.

Fun and difficult are not mutually exclusive, my favorite example is the marionette.

I didn’t say fun and difficult are mutually exclusive.
Also note that the marionette world boss was done by zergs of people with a vast variety in gear choice including many that are sub level 80 using just junk gear. Proving that the zerg meta isn’t remotely an issue in even your own example.

rotten.9753:

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Zerker can be viable without being optimal, just like every other gear set in the game is viable without being optimal. In no way does it force anyone to play a certain way, so long as it’s viable.

If zerker (or any glass gear like sinister) isn’t optimal, what’s the point of running a glass gear without a proper reward? It’s like fractals vs open world. The former is much harder and doesn’t even reward you proportionally.

It is possible to design content where no single build is optimal, and the recognized meta contains several builds for every class, that are all at a level so relatively close to each other, that experience with a specific build is more important than slight differences that could (or could not) be proved by math.
Case in point – GW1 meta. Yes, there were good builds and bad builds, but there were no single build that could blow all others out of the water. Well, not after Ursan nerf anyway.

Miku Lawrence.6329:

Tim.6450:

Miku Lawrence.6329:

People secretly want Defense gear to reward as much as Damage gear.

Correct, I do want this to happen, not in all encounters but in some. We have this diversity and I’m not happy to one gear/build is defined as training gear.

Do you see the issue within my words? Reread please.

Hint : People secretly want 0 damage gear to reward as much as 100% damage gear.
People want that 0 = 100

Look at what you wrote, and see that it also means that people want 0% survival gear to be worth as much as 100% survival gear. Also 0=100.

You trade defense for offense logic but can we agree conditions need to at least to work. If the content is challenging enough pure dps is not optimal look at pvp and wvw.

Sagat.3285:

If the content is challenging enough pure dps is not optimal look at pvp and wvw.

Both of those game modes have people that use zerkers, not all classes benefit from celestial in sPvP, and plenty of backliners use zerkers in WvW.

From my point of view, my problem with the zerker meta is that is fun… only for zerkers. People who want to play anything else are likely to be blamed or even kicked because their builds aren´t the optimal choice. I fell that some zerk players don´t want a change because it could mean that runing zerker would be less easy or optimal. I m ok with the zerk role, it shouldn´t be nerfed to the ground but I think there should be a change to make the rest of the builds viable.

What iI mean is : If you want to play zerker you should be able to play it as well as if you run another build. If only one build is the useful one is not fair for the people who run anything else.

Astralporing.1957:

It is possible to design content where no single build is optimal, and the recognized meta contains several builds for every class, that are all at a level so relatively close to each other, that experience with a specific build is more important than slight differences that could (or could not) be proved by math.
Case in point – GW1 meta. Yes, there were good builds and bad builds, but there were no single build that could blow all others out of the water. Well, not after Ursan nerf anyway.

GW1 had healers, so it is worlds of difference between GW1 and GW2. You had to have healers in GW1, outside of running cheesy builds like perma SF or 55hp monk. In fact you basically needed two healers in GW1, at least past Prophecies.

I would love for there to be more optimal builds in GW2, but outside of making condition damage better people are still going to run Zerker/Assassins in dungeons/fractals. The only way to make “full support” builds optimal is to make them required. The only way to make “tanky” builds optimal is to make them required, and even then without real aggro mechanics it doesn’t really matter how tanky you are if you can’t protect your DPS. If a group running all Zerker/Assassins can succeed then it will always be the most optimal because they will get it done quicker.

Tim.6450:

ODB.6891:

Translation for statement #1….reward the player who invested in minimal damage gear with extra damage.

First it doesn’t have to be minial damage gear, it doesn’t even have to come from yourself. Secondly I don’t see how this is a problem, there have been mechanics in gaming that have worked around the principle of trading survivability for more damage, the easiest example is the zombie in the final fantasy series (healing a zombie does damage).

ODB.6891:

Translation for statement #2…die zerk die!

So asking for difficult content is bad? Good to know.

So I can feel better about my low damage gear choices.

And here is the assualt on my person. Just because I want more variety doesn’t mean that I try to feel better about my gear choices.

Regardless of what happens in some game…other than the one we are playing…in what universe would it be okay to have higher or even similar damage output for a gear set designed for maximum passive personal safety/survival…versus one that sacrifices all passive personal safety/survival in favor of maximum damage output? I can’t see how that could possibly be justified. You made your bed, lie in it? Or make a new bed? Stop asking to lie in zerk’s bed when you don’t want to make that bed. What kind of compensation should zerk get out of that trade…more survival? I’m pretty sure we aren’t asking for that. Even if it were acceptable to completely even out the playing field on damage and survivability in instanced PvE, they already have that option…its called celestial. If either side wants celestial…they should earn/purchase it.

Asking for difficult content is not bad in anyway. What is bad is asking for changes to be made to specifically penalize other players out of jealousy, attempts to force your inclusion into their groups, etc. And for the record, that was not a personal attack on you. I don’t know you and you haven’t said anything offensive to me…so I have no reason to do that. By “So I can feel better about my low damage gear choices”, I was referring to anyone who intentionally picks low damage gear and then expects/demands/lobbies for the benefits of the opposite gear choice….especially at the expense of those who did pick that opposite gear choice. I can definitely understand why you would perceive my response negatively, because things like that sound bad when you see the literal interpretation of what a statement like you made means. Its like two people walking into a car dealership. One buys a sports car and the other buys a mini van. Obviously they can both get from point A to point B on the same road. One is clearly going to be capable of doing it faster and likely with less emphasis on safety features. The other is going to be more utility oriented and family friendly..more emphasis on safety features. After purchase…is it acceptable for the mini van customer to start demanding that things be done to penalize the sport car customer for not having access to as many safety features…so they will have to switch to a mini van too? Would it be acceptable for the mini van customer to demand an engine upgrade for free to be able to reach the driving speeds of the sports car customer? In my opinion, there’s nothing wrong with either purchase choice, you get what you intentionally purchased or you were a very bad customer who did not bother to research your purchase choices before purchase. What you are asking for is not variety. You are asking for ANET to design anti-zerk encounters to force a new meta. Why would they do that to their customers who did choose a perfectly valid option…just like you did…and are not filling up the forums with complaints like this?

Lazaar.9123:

Sagat.3285:

If the content is challenging enough pure dps is not optimal look at pvp and wvw.

Both of those game modes have people that use zerkers, not all classes benefit from celestial in sPvP, and plenty of backliners use zerkers in WvW.

But you don’t see a zerg with only backline and is very rare to see a spvp team with 5 zerkers.

xDudisx.5914:

Lazaar.9123:

Sagat.3285:

If the content is challenging enough pure dps is not optimal look at pvp and wvw.

Both of those game modes have people that use zerkers, not all classes benefit from celestial in sPvP, and plenty of backliners use zerkers in WvW.

But you don’t see a zerg with only backline and is very rare to see a spvp team with 5 zerkers.

And I did not state such.

xDudisx.5914:

Lazaar.9123:

Sagat.3285:

If the content is challenging enough pure dps is not optimal look at pvp and wvw.

Both of those game modes have people that use zerkers, not all classes benefit from celestial in sPvP, and plenty of backliners use zerkers in WvW.

But you don’t see a zerg with only backline and is very rare to see a spvp team with 5 zerkers.

The reason being that it is not optimal. You do, however, see groups with all soldiers, or all celestial, etc. You don’t see zerk players demanding a content or game design change to “fix” that. Why is that? Why is it so hard to accept that everything in every game mode may not be optimal for your gear set up? Why is it so important for players not in zerk gear to chase zerk players around trying to force themselves into zerk groups? Its not even like there are many zerk only groups anymore. I know I haven’t seen one in a very long time…and I pug in LFG nearly every day.

Ezekel.6394:

Astralporing.1957:

It is possible to design content where no single build is optimal, and the recognized meta contains several builds for every class, that are all at a level so relatively close to each other, that experience with a specific build is more important than slight differences that could (or could not) be proved by math.
Case in point – GW1 meta. Yes, there were good builds and bad builds, but there were no single build that could blow all others out of the water. Well, not after Ursan nerf anyway.

GW1 had healers, so it is worlds of difference between GW1 and GW2. You had to have healers in GW1, outside of running cheesy builds like perma SF or 55hp monk. In fact you basically needed two healers in GW1, at least past Prophecies.

And? Did that somehow invalidate what i said? Was it the presence of healers that suddenly made possible for multitude of builds in non-healer roles to exist (in healer roles as well)?
I don’t think so.

Astralporing.1957:

Ezekel.6394:

Astralporing.1957:

It is possible to design content where no single build is optimal, and the recognized meta contains several builds for every class, that are all at a level so relatively close to each other, that experience with a specific build is more important than slight differences that could (or could not) be proved by math.
Case in point – GW1 meta. Yes, there were good builds and bad builds, but there were no single build that could blow all others out of the water. Well, not after Ursan nerf anyway.

GW1 had healers, so it is worlds of difference between GW1 and GW2. You had to have healers in GW1, outside of running cheesy builds like perma SF or 55hp monk. In fact you basically needed two healers in GW1, at least past Prophecies.

And? Did that somehow invalidate what i said? Was it the presence of healers that suddenly made possible for multitude of builds in non-healer roles to exist (in healer roles as well)?
I don’t think so.

I think his point was apples versus oranges. A game that requires the presence of specific roles versus one that does not.

Astralporing.1957:

Ezekel.6394:

Astralporing.1957:

It is possible to design content where no single build is optimal, and the recognized meta contains several builds for every class, that are all at a level so relatively close to each other, that experience with a specific build is more important than slight differences that could (or could not) be proved by math.
Case in point – GW1 meta. Yes, there were good builds and bad builds, but there were no single build that could blow all others out of the water. Well, not after Ursan nerf anyway.

GW1 had healers, so it is worlds of difference between GW1 and GW2. You had to have healers in GW1, outside of running cheesy builds like perma SF or 55hp monk. In fact you basically needed two healers in GW1, at least past Prophecies.

And? Did that somehow invalidate what i said? Was it the presence of healers that suddenly made possible for multitude of builds in non-healer roles to exist (in healer roles as well)?
I don’t think so.

Yes, it invalidates what you said because GW1 was much to different to GW2 to compare the way builds work. It isn’t a good example because it is comparing apples to oranges.

The only way to make Zerker not the most optimal choice is to either invalidate the fact that Zerker does more damage or to fundamentally change the way active defense works to make passive defense required.

Now there is plenty of room to expand builds by improving weapon skills and adding more utilities. What you can’t do is make armor with passive defense or healing power do the same damage as Zerker without breaking the game.

First of all, gw1 had no gear stats. So any comparison to gw2 prequel is invalid.