Guild Wars 2

I am creating this thread because “You cant balance the game around 5vs5” thread was closed by moderator, i feel this is an important issue to discuss and would like to see one of pvp devs respond to it.Here is my comment made in closed thread that describes my thoughts on the issue:

“Well here is why i think 1vs 1 balance is imperative.I may be wrong, but this is why i think.
Lets first make things very simple and assume there are only 2 classes in the game : mesmers and warriors.Now, to balance mesmer and warrior all you have to do is make sure that 1 class has no unfair advantage over the other, and that outcome of the fight is decided by skill and/or luck only.To do that you cannot, for example, give mesmer unremovable elite like MOA.Why? because it incapacitates warrior for 10 seconds which more than enough for burst mesmer to burn him down with warrior having no chance to defend himself.So, all you have to do is balance mesmers vs warriors skills, traits sigils etc.
Now lets move on to 5vs5 balance (very similar to what we have now imo).
You give mesmer MOA elite because, after all game is, or should be, 5vs5 balanced and there are other people to “save” you even if you get MOAd.What happens?
Example scenario: 5 mesmers vs 5 warriors, mesmers pop 3 clones each no warrior can find real target and they get MOAd and killed 1 by 1 like chickens.
So you, once again, need to find the way to balance that encounter, presumably by removing MOA elite and toning down that clone spam ( exactly what you need to do in 1vs1 balance).But it dont stop there you also need to test and balance every possible 5vs 5 scenario to be able to call the game 5vs5 balanced,for example:1 warrior 4 mesmers vs 5 mesmers, 2 warriors 3 mesmers vs 5 mesmers, 2 warriors 3 mesmers vs 2 warriors 3 mesmers etc list is endless.
This is why i view 5vs5 balance as an impossible thing to do even if there were only 2 classes in the game and there are 8 atm to work with.
Again, maybe i am wrong but this is my opinion.”
Feel free to comment.

FPS are for perfect balance. With the amount of utilities and builds in this game someone will always destroy someone else because of decisions made before the fight even started. That’s why they don’t want dueling, that’s why they balanced based on team-play where they can assume the team has access to global abilities.

There are so very many confusing skills.
Guardians:
For example invincible spirit weapons. Or different skills (many guardians skills) that interrupt your dodge.
Ranger:
God mod underwater.
Thief:
Rendering bug
Channeling on stealth
bs|hs|caltrops
Warrior
Omfg aoe damage is concentrated in a single weapon.
Elem
Permabuff
d/d aura god mod
firegrab instadeath

Agreed.

In response from the other thread.

@braxxus
I’m affraid it will be impossible to add the option to balance around 1v1 in a team based game such as Guild wars 2

It’s really not. That’s just a cop-out excuse for lazy balancers.

… relying on our team is what pvp in a MMo should be all about.

No. That’s just an opinion. And many other people disagree. Being forced to peen-suckle other people isn’t good. Being FORCED to rely on other people, which you cannot rely on, is alienating a large population of players who don’t want to deal with the egos, the politics, the immaturity and all of the other crap.

Again, 1v1 removes way to much options and build viability. It becomes mostly a dps race and who can pop their defensive cooldowns first and let not forget line of sight. In other words… bunker with a lot of surviviability… and glass canon with good mobility. That’s exactly what we want to avoid!

That’s exactly what we have now, and we’re not even remotely close to 1v1 balance.
1v1 balance doesn’t remove build viability, it promotes it. It also in an ideal world promotes more middle of the ground builds opposed to extremes.
There’s no reason to keep perpetuating the mmo myth that “balance is impossible” especially at the individual level. After all they did just fine with thieves, mesmers and ele’s when it comes to 1v1 viability along with solid group functionality. So it is possible.