Guild Wars 2

Alternative title: Do Burst Advocates want nothing but four Berserkers and one Support Guardian per team?

Now, we can all agree that Warriors are a bit on the OP side. They’re getting nerfed. Alright, let’s move on.

I stopped and looked at Hammer/Longbow Warriors for a second. I noticed that almost every choice in the build is aimed at survivability. Cleansing Ire + Burst Mastery. Traited stances for duration and Vigor on use. Triple stances, or two stances and an extra stability source that doubles as extra damage reduction. Lyssa runes with signet cooldowns. And of course the best healing source in the game with Healing Signet + Adrenal Health.

On top of all that, you’ll often see them run a Soldier’s Amulet. A Power based amulet when many people still complain about it being a condi meta (hint: It’s not. It’s a super tanky meta).

Currently Warriors and Guardians have the most damage and condition resistant builds in the game. They’re living the dream of being able to go into the middle of a team fight and get work done. And unlike with two Guardians fighting each other, with two Warriors one of them will eventually die.

But does anyone else remember the biggest issue back when the game was early and new, and Burst ruled the meta? It was the fact that there was no such thing as a sturdy/balanced build at the high end. It was go Burst, hit like a wet noodle, or go home. People didn’t enjoy Guardians being nigh-unkillable, but they didn’t enjoy the best builds being the ones that completely wiped out people in seconds, for the sake of newer players.

Hammer/Longbow Warriors are one of the first consistent damage Power builds to rule the meta. The closest before was Bunker Elementalist, but they were primarily Support focused like the Spirit Ranger we have today. Warriors are currently about heavy pressure, using powerful control effects like Pin Down or Earthshaker, and a broken area denial ability in Combustive Shot to bring people down.

Still, the build is a bit OP. It’s getting nerfed. But level of difficulty to play aside, do people really not want to see builds like this in the meta? If builds in GW2 were supposed to be about Damage, Control, and Support, doesn’t it make sense that the backbone of a team consist of those that can take hits while remaining a threat? And isn’t the primary way for an enemy to be a threat in any situation is through Damage, Control, or some combination of the two?

Warriors even served a similar purpose back in GW1, with pressure team comps pushing down on the enemy with a tanky frontline while the backline attacked with condition/hex pressure or spike damage.

I’d like to see more “Bruiser” type specs in the meta, but not with the same damage to sustain ratio that the meta hambow has.

Proven.2854:

Warriors even served a similar purpose back in GW1, with pressure team comps pushing down on the enemy with a tanky frontline while the backline attacked with condition/hex pressure or spike damage.

Absolutely not the same thing. The typical warrior setup in GW1 was a W/E evis shock war. It used its burst combo with frenzy stance (which doubled the damage the warrior took while increasing his attack speed). It would line up a spike with a knockdown via shock or bulls charge (both incredibly balanced skills in GW1) then spike them to hell via combo plus frenzy stance. He then would activate another stance, usually sprint or rush (preferably rush, which was another incredibly balanced skill) in order to cancel the frenzy stance and gain himself a speed boost. If team co-ordination went well, this spike would catch the opponent (mainly monks) offguard and easily down the opponent. Alternatively, the warriors would wait for the midline to shut down the monks and THEN spike.

The primary source of pressure was the slow ticking from apply poison via ranger in which the ranger would spread poison to many different targets by switching targets constantly. The best rangers would be able to do this and monitor the targets that they needed to shut down via their interrupts. It was a give and take and for a good ranger, and the best could find that equilibrium easily.

The important aspect was, during the spike of the warrior (which was a very short time), the warrior can get hit for double damage, greatly exposing them when they did their spike. If they over-extended too much, it usually meant a dead warrior. In other words, they weren’t the sustain monsters we see in GW2 today.

There are quite a few bruisers now. Bomb/nade engineer, any warrior build that uses healing signet, non-settler’s spirit ranger—they’re all pretty much bruisers. Even s/d thief is a type of sustained damage evasion-based bruiser. (d/p, obviously, is not.)

One of the glassiest builds being run currently is terror necro…heheh.

I agree that there were no middle-ground builds at launch, and a lot of people asked for them. I’m glad that there’s not a bunker/burst dichotomy any more. However, I don’t think hambow is special just because it’s a bruiser-type build.

Proven.2854:

…Still, the build is a bit OP. It’s getting nerfed. But level of difficulty to play aside, do people really not want to see builds like this in the meta? If builds in GW2 were supposed to be about Damage, Control, and Support, doesn’t it make sense that the backbone of a team consist of those that can take hits while remaining a threat? And isn’t the primary way for an enemy to be a threat in any situation is through Damage, Control, or some combination of the two?

The problem with warrior is that it can use damage, control, and support- and all at the same time. A little bit of each is okay. Some of two of them is okay. A lot of one of them but very little of the other two is okay. But warriors are able to get some to a lot of all three at once, which makes them an extremely formidable (and OP) force to have to deal with.

Yes, I would like to see builds in GW2 move more towards those three playstyles of damage, control, and support. It encourages far more skillful play, and gives a better goal for balance. The issue, however, is that we need to be able to balance professions so that they don’t get that Trinity of abilities, as Warrior does right now, so at the moment, that’s why warrior doesn’t fit into the build archetype that you seem to be looking at.

There are much better examples of bruisers and the control-DPS-support builds. Many S/D thief builds (though I would argue 10/0/0/30/30 the most since it doesn’t use 30 CS) are bruiser builds. They do a good deal of damage while remaining, technically speaking, tanky, and have just a slight sliver of support and control to back them up.

An elementalist build that I developed myself (note: that was just an early prototype, it’s changed significantly since it was first created) does a bit of all three, with emphasis on control via skills like Churning Earth, Gust, Static Field, and Icy Ground. However, to counteract that its direct support, in spite of what it may originally seem, isn’t huge, and its damage isn’t huge either, particularly given the overwhelming usage of the often disappointing auto-attacks in order to deal damage.

There are many other builds that I could link (guardian builds, engineer builds, etc), all of which are viable, and all of which follow this same trinity. However, in the current state of the game, some classes are able to get all the goodies concurrently while other classes get little to none of them.

I honestly do want to go back to the days of four burst and one bunker, it was the most enjoyable meta imo thanks to the twitch gameplay and skill involved in avoiding a burst combo or three.

Because of the game’s design combat only has two roles. DPS and Bunker. It only makes sense to spec in a way that makes you most efficient at that role. DPS is broken down into two sub-categories DD and Condi, so not everyone uses berserker but you are if you’re direct damage.

Being able to maximize reward and mitigate risk is the sign of a good player. Players that can maximize risk reward will be better if they are playing in Berserker gear as a DD. Because the best are able to get all the reward without any risk it only makes sense to run glass cannon.

NevirSayDie.6235:

There are quite a few bruisers now. Bomb/nade engineer, any warrior build that uses healing signet, non-settler’s spirit ranger—they’re all pretty much bruisers. Even s/d thief is a type of sustained damage evasion-based bruiser. (d/p, obviously, is not.)

One of the glassiest builds being run currently is terror necro…heheh.

I agree that there were no middle-ground builds at launch, and a lot of people asked for them. I’m glad that there’s not a bunker/burst dichotomy any more. However, I don’t think hambow is special just because it’s a bruiser-type build.

I’ll consider giving you S/D Thief but my issue is that they’re part of the Berserker or Trash crowd. Soldier and Valkyrie feel like the power based balanced amulets. The damage feels less sustained and more like a consistent set of spikes.

Bomb/Nade Engineer I won’t give to you though. For one, it’s a condition spec. For two, they feel like more of a kiting spec than a bruiser spec.

Assuming the nerfs to Warrior are large enough, it may end up being that HamBow is the only real bruiser spec afterward. It has the most synergy for defensive traits, which is what allows it to stay on the front line.

I don’t think it’s about a specific amulet but about having as little hard-counters as possible. In the glass meta there were far more match-ups and fights that were decided by clutch plays and less rock-paper-scissors etc. A mid fight with 3 glass classes is far more exciting to play at watch then warrior’s trying to outdps healing sig and spirit passives and necro’s applying some bleeds from a distance. From the glass perspective things were more balanced in the sense that a moment of tardiness could flip the match regardless of class. But ultimately it wasn’t that much different, the amount of viable meta builds hasn’t increased or decreased, it just changed into a more stale albeit forgiving format (for new players). I personally miss the old meta as this one is quite boring in comparison.

Jelger.6758:

I don’t think it’s about a specific amulet but about having as little hard-counters as possible. In the glass meta there were far more match-ups and fights that were decided by clutch plays and less rock-paper-scissors etc. A mid fight with 3 glass classes is far more exciting to play at watch then warrior’s trying to outdps healing sig and spirit passives and necro’s applying some bleeds from a distance. From the glass perspective things were more balanced in the sense that a moment of tardiness could flip the match regardless of class. But ultimately it wasn’t that much different, the amount of viable meta builds hasn’t increased or decreased, it just changed into a more stale albeit forgiving format (for new players). I personally miss the old meta as this one is quite boring in comparison.

But can that happen in any balanced game with more than one type of damage?

One example I can make is FPS games. There, damage is damage and there’s generally one type. All other effects are there to supplement direct damage. Some games add twists here and there (like in Team Fortress 2) but all damage sources share one graph.

Another example comes from GW2’s PvE content. Since condition damage is seen as mostly useless, the entire game mode has degenerated into a simple scale of damage vs. survivability. And if you learn the encounters well enough, you can go all burst all the time.

But in many other games, you have two damage sources that are considered separate. They usually take the form of Physical and Magic damage. They’re put on different graphs as they both have their own attribute to boost them, as well as separate attributes to reduce them. Physical defense and Magical defense being separate armor stats are a very common mechanic in many RPGs.

But GW2 (and GW1 before it) was designed a bit different. The two damage sources are Power and Condition damage. Both of them hurt you differently and require different strategies. Both of them share many active methods of mitigation (blinds, aegis, dodge, hard CC, etc.) but also have a number differing methods of dealing with them, some active (utility skills) and some passive (toughness and traits). But you have to keep both in mind when making builds or at least prepare to use much of your common mitigation pool to deal with the one type of damage you’re weak to.

And personally, I love that they created a system like this rather than the basic Physical/Magical Attack vs. Defense you see in so many other RPGs.

It actually makes me wonder if Guardians will be run less if more classes get condition mitigation on the level of Cleansing Ire while still being able to get power damage done.

Proven.2854:

But can that happen in any balanced game with more than one type of damage?

GW1 had enchants, hexes, conditions, raw damage, armor piercing capabilities, evasions, stances, item bundles, and more. Any form of “hard counters” in that game were so highly circumstantial that it was a rarity to see them in any high level play. Every skill had a give and take. It’s what made builds in guild wars, guild wars. So yes, you can create a meta that puts hard counters on a back burner. In GW2, I don’t think it’s possible for them to even exist because of the structure of the game – many, if not all, need to be removed. Condition nukes also have to be toned down as well as it spawned this terrible meta.

To be honest, I’d rather play Dota than play this trash of a metagame right now.

K U T M.4539:

I’d like to see more “Bruiser” type specs in the meta, but not with the same damage to sustain ratio that the meta hambow has.

^ This.

It would be awesome to see a CC-focused build come into play with teams.

Chicago Jack.5647:

Proven.2854:

But can that happen in any balanced game with more than one type of damage?

GW1 had enchants, hexes, conditions, raw damage, armor piercing capabilities, evasions, stances, item bundles, and more. Any form of “hard counters” in that game were so highly circumstantial that it was a rarity to see them in any high level play. Every skill had a give and take. It’s what made builds in guild wars, guild wars. So yes, you can create a meta that puts hard counters on a back burner. In GW2, I don’t think it’s possible for them to even exist because of the structure of the game – many, if not all, need to be removed. Condition nukes also have to be toned down as well as it spawned this terrible meta.

To be honest, I’d rather play Dota than play this trash of a metagame right now.

Woah, woah, woah. Wasn’t the fact that hard counters were less needed because battles took place almost entirely in team fights, so people could specialize more? Similar to WvW, where there is a division in condition cleansing, condition pressure, power damage spiking, CC’ing, etc.?

When you get a variety of builds and you encourage 1v1 situations, unless both builds are extremely well rounded and/or built primarily for duels, you end up in situations where one person just can’t win against the other one.

You’re making a logical fallacy here. I mean, look at DotA 2 since you brought it up. It has Damage, Control, and Support mechanics, but things only really end up looking balanced in team fight situations. In lanes, you can very often end up in situations where one player can’t do much against another without using their tower/creeps/allies for added cover. Some Champions and builds are in a clear advantage against others in 1v1 situations.

K U T M.4539:

I’d like to see more “Bruiser” type specs in the meta, but not with the same damage to sustain ratio that the meta hambow has.

As I said before, we all think the Hammer/Longbow build is on the OP side. Can more people discuss past that?

You’d see a lot more balanced bruiser type builds if Arenanet would give us things like PvE Valkyrie’s (Power, Toughness, Crit) or altered Barbarian’s with Power as main stat instead of Vit.

Proven.2854:

Woah, woah, woah. Wasn’t the fact that hard counters were less needed because battles took place almost entirely in team fights, so people could specialize more?

Don’t get me wrong, people played hard counter cheese all the time in GW1. IWAY, Ranger spikes, Lightning orb spikes, etc. All of which had another from of hard counter cheese that could deal with them. The difference, and this is absolutely the key difference, is that a balanced build could beat all of them. Every single one. The problem with running a balanced build instead of a cheese, go ham build was that the balanced build required skill to play usually by out-maneuvering and outplaying the opponent by splitting effectively.

Secondly, the moment someone talks about how gw2 isn’t focused on fighting and instead about just capping points is the moment I tune out. There are plenty of team fights in gw2. 1v1’s are a rarity if a team knows what they are doing. Currently, warriors are a class that every team builds around. They are not just an addition to the team to contribute, they ARE the team. Everything is built around them right now. What’s worse is the warrior spec is so mind-numbingly, boringly easy to play. This is simply not fun to play or to play against. I, and I’m sure others, would be okay with it if it was challenging to play like a guardian can be, but it’s not.

The fundamental problem, and the key issue that you are missing, is that these hard counters make the game shallow, boring, and bland to play. My hambow warrior beats your spirit ranger! Yeah? Well my Necro beats your Engie! This isn’t fun when we have such a limited number of classes to play. Compounding the issue, these classes are super easy. Spirit ranger? Press 1 on your keyboard and move around a bit – done. Necro? Spam marks and fear and auto attack with scepter just keep at range – done. Warrior? Press one button called “i win” and proceed with pressing all your attack buttons. If you need to cleanse conditions? plop a huge AoE fire field on point – done. These counters works for games like pokémon – not a game aiming to be highly competitive. Its not super effective!

Proven.2854:

In lanes, you can very often end up in situations where one player can’t do much against another without using their tower/creeps/allies for added cover. Some Champions and builds are in a clear advantage against others in 1v1 situations.

And there are a lot of subtle things you can do to help mitigate/deal these counters. Again – this is the important part – those subtle things you can do are what makes the game interesting. They are called heros, btw, not champions.

Incurafy.6329:

I honestly do want to go back to the days of four burst and one bunker, it was the most enjoyable meta imo thanks to the twitch gameplay and skill involved in avoiding a burst combo or three.

There was skill involved in avoiding burst combos, true, but there was a massive imbalance between how much effort was involved in avoiding and executing these combos. Quite a few burst combos in this game have auto-facing, auto-tracking, and even gap closing properties— a common trait in tab-target based games. That’s a big reason why a large number of MMOs have a special pvp stat that happens to be survivability based: between pve scaling and basic mechanics, there’s always a lot of “free” damage coming out of your character that can easily be the deciding factor in matches instead of skill.

There’s a huge difference between the above and MOBAs/FPS games where you have to “earn” your burst damage since actual aiming is involved.

Personally, I don’t have any particular preference between a more bursty game style and games with an overall slower time-to-kill as long as it’s done fairly; I’ve enjoyed and done well at both styles of play. That being said, I feel that the previous burst meta was as dysfunctional as the current one.

I’d like to see more skill shots and clearer tells in the game weather the dev team goes more towards twitch style gameplay or a comparatively slower paced MMO model.

@ the OP: As you said already, middle-of-the-road kinda tanky kinda DPSy builds are already the dominant force in the meta right now, and most of the buffs/nerfs seem to be moving even further in that direction. I wouldn’t worry too much, if bruisers are your cup of tea…