Is current meta a healthy one ?
i dont think the meta is healthy yet, but it;s getting there. it’s slightly less frustrating than it was 2 months ago. you can only push control point play so far. what we need is team DM. that should have been out first because the meta would have been a lot more exciting from the start.
boring stuff: guard bunks still top. eles are wrecking with ridiculous mobility, burst and survivability. roamer attrition/BS thieves. mesmers are just ok now.
bad stuff: necros, warriors and rangers are still bottom of the barrel (not necessarily useless, but UP in current meta for sure)
interesting stuff: necros are actually kinda good.
anyway, in the latest interview, Mr. Sharp seemed to have accepted the bunker as a legit role. i dont think bunkers are going away. and they shouldnt necessarily. if both stability and knockbacks were nerfed together, i think there’d be a lot less derping around on single points. but then we’d just be seeing more roamers >.<
Bunkers should be nerfed. They should just make them weaker rather than completely removing. Other professions seem to be quite balanced, which is not that good I think. GW 2 needs the “IWAY”, it needs something that new players can play to stand a chance against experienced ones. This way the more experienced team will always win no matter what, which is quite sad.
Overall I think ANet is happy with the meta but they know it still needs tweaking quite a bit but the meta promotes using a variety of professions and with continued balance changes all professions will be viable with multiple builds.
i dont think the meta is healthy yet, but it;s getting there. it’s slightly less frustrating than it was 2 months ago. you can only push control point play so far. what we need is team DM. that should have been out first because the meta would have been a lot more exciting from the start.
boring stuff: guard bunks still top. eles are wrecking with ridiculous mobility, burst and survivability. roamer attrition/BS thieves. mesmers are just ok now.
bad stuff: necros, warriors and rangers are still bottom of the barrel (not necessarily useless, but UP in current meta for sure)
interesting stuff: necros are actually kinda good.
anyway, in the latest interview, Mr. Sharp seemed to have accepted the bunker as a legit role. i dont think bunkers are going away. and they shouldnt necessarily. if both stability and knockbacks were nerfed together, i think there’d be a lot less derping around on single points. but then we’d just be seeing more roamers >.<
you want team DM but you flooded forum with QQ thief threads? really?
Overall I think ANet is happy with the meta but they know it still needs tweaking quite a bit but the meta promotes using a variety of professions and with continued balance changes all professions will be viable with multiple builds.
The meta doesn’t promote using a variety of professions.
If you see the top leaderboard, the meta is pretty defined around ele roamers, thief roamers, mesmer semi-roamers, necro glass cannon for support and some engie/war here and there.
The meta is pretty defined and there are no many viable builds to be competitive: you need extremes to be efficient.
If aNet is satisfied with current meta, then i definitively put too much hope into their balancing capabilities.
Overall I think ANet is happy with the meta but they know it still needs tweaking quite a bit but the meta promotes using a variety of professions and with continued balance changes all professions will be viable with multiple builds.
The meta doesn’t promote using a variety of professions.
If you see the top leaderboard, the meta is pretty defined around ele roamers, thief roamers, mesmer semi-roamers, necro glass cannon for support and some engie/war here and there.
The meta is pretty defined and there are no many viable builds to be competitive: you need extremes to be efficient.
If aNet is satisfied with current meta, then i definitively put too much hope into their balancing capabilities.
You named 6 out of 8 professions as being used but said it doesn’t promote a variety of professions. On top of that you didn’t mention a single bunker in that complaint I haven’t follow the pro scene but I am pretty sure bunkers are a big part of the meta. Overall the meta does promote a variety of professions but they need to work on their balance which will open it up to to more viable builds.
The meta is a balance of defenders and roamers while keeping in mind the secondary objectives and it is healthy.
EDIT: http://www.guildwars2guru.com/news/919-state-of-the-game-discussion-now-available/ listen to the first 5 minuets of this and ANet as well as representatives from the top teams will tell you that you are wrong
(edited by Thirsty.2875)
Can’t have a ‘meta’ while you have such flaws with overall class and combat design.
Are classes more powerful than another because of special mechanics or strengths/weaknesses? No, not really…they are powerful because they just HAPPEN to have easy and solid glass cannon/roamer/bunker builds, I think?
In fact I would say with a shift in a few abilities any class could become anything so I’m never sure why people are so focused on class X is overpowered. The problem is really much deeper and more awful than “class balance”…. it’s just pretty lackluster combat design which seems like it will only ever appeal to the kind of folks who like WoW Arena style play.
Can’t have a ‘meta’ while you have such flaws with overall class and combat design.
I would love to hear you elaborate on these flaws.
Ill tell you right now I enjoy bunkering. I love it, is it good for the game? Idk but I know a lot of people don’t like it. Personally I enjoy holding a node against 3+ people till help can come. I also really enjoy the roaming aspect.
Guardian-Blueprinted, Warrior- Grizzilli
[JCM] Guild: Ehmry Bay WvW
i dont think the meta is healthy yet, but it;s getting there. it’s slightly less frustrating than it was 2 months ago. you can only push control point play so far. what we need is team DM. that should have been out first because the meta would have been a lot more exciting from the start.
boring stuff: guard bunks still top. eles are wrecking with ridiculous mobility, burst and survivability. roamer attrition/BS thieves. mesmers are just ok now.
bad stuff: necros, warriors and rangers are still bottom of the barrel (not necessarily useless, but UP in current meta for sure)
interesting stuff: necros are actually kinda good.
anyway, in the latest interview, Mr. Sharp seemed to have accepted the bunker as a legit role. i dont think bunkers are going away. and they shouldnt necessarily. if both stability and knockbacks were nerfed together, i think there’d be a lot less derping around on single points. but then we’d just be seeing more roamers >.<
Ye necros tottaly UP… every team rolls one lately plus first focus is always on necro in teamfight becouse they are UP right ?
Ye necros tottaly UP… every team rolls one lately plus first focus is always on necro in teamfight becouse they are UP right ?
Not to disagree with you because necros aren’t underpowered but they will probably always be a good first target. They have high long term damage and low escape abilities so they are naturally a good target but they are also naturally tanky to try to balance this.
GW2 Professions have really little build variations with class mechanics. It’s mostly stats oriented so each profession simply plays a few certain ways based on stats alone, but the mechanics itself is kept really simple for most players (without much complex variations).
For example, a guardian is usually a bunker guardian… but can it build itself into a roamer like thief? Ehhh, no. A guardian is best at a bunker, that’s its main/only core mechanic option. It’s not that you can build him more tanky, less tanky, with more conditional effects, etc….. the point is that in an organized competitive match, nobody will run a guardian that can’t bunker.
That’s one build, one or 2 basic mechanics meta (for each class); and it’s making playing the game’s PvP extremely boring. But I know some people like this because they can actually grasp the complexity of dealing with other players in PvP…. ie. player see a guardian and they know if this guy doesn’t bunker; he’s not going to be effective. Or they see a thief… if he tries to stick around his party to get into teamfights, they know it won’t be as effective as taking advantage of roaming opportunities.
Those are the main problems with GW2 build variations with each class; you’re options are a) too minimal, and b) predictable to experienced player to a point they they’re gaining too much advantage from simply proper team-comp. rather than winning from the unpredictability of team fights (which requires more complex depth of team members synchronizing their skills, ability to position themselves well in every teamfight, etc.) I’m not saying GW2 doesn’t have some of that atm, but they desperately need more types of different fight scenrios/experiences for each individual classes (roamer doing picks on players & cape diff. points, support on teamfight, and point guarders seems to be the only 3 ways to win games atm… but sadly, not every class can switch to all 3 yet atm. If each professional can do all 3 roles ‘close to being equally viable’ but in different ways, that will make the PvP in this game a lot more interesting).
(edited by FluffyDoe.7539)
Hey! I run a squishy roamer guardian in paids =/
Back to the topic; I think the meta is fine, BUT, those rez signets and other res utilities are really making this game so frustrating and kitten
you want team DM but you flooded forum with QQ thief threads? really?
get over it. the thief, along with d/d ele’s and bunker guards, is out of hand. burst across the board is out of hand. you will see the thief getting nerfed in various ways on the 14th. you have to be mad ignorant to not see the imbalances. there’s plenty of productive discussion in the threads i created.
Hey! I run a squishy roamer guardian in paids =/
lol so do i!!
Ye necros tottaly UP… every team rolls one lately plus first focus is always on necro in teamfight becouse they are UP right ?
theyre just a little UP yes, for the reason poster above me mentioned. if the changes to LF gain via Gluttony are good, more builds might become viable. the glass cannon wellmancer can be dispatched easily.
(edited by nerva.7940)
The only thing I don’t really like about the current meta is the prevalence of glass-cannons (Thiefs and Mesmers are probably the most common ones).
Glass-Cannons are frustrating to play against, any kind of random numbers generater and procs make it more random in those short fights and they require less skill than other builds. Especially if the Glass-Cannons have stealth (which both Thief and Mesmer use), it becomes very hard to see them before they attack and almost 1-shot you (or 1-combo you), which shouldn’t be the case. At least you should be able to see the glass-cannon with good Map-awareness, if they have such powerful burst. Also, Mesmer and Thief Burst are too hard to kill (because of stealth, shadowsteps, blurred Frenzy and so on) for the DPS they deal and even though they are just 1 class each, probably every good teambuild needs to put in a lot of effort to be able to deal with them properly. Against Warrior, Power-Ranger, Power-Nec or Ele, I don’t need to put in any special skills/traits to be able to deal with them on most classes, which is kinda not how it should be and shows the obvious power of those burst-specs.
Overall I think ANet is happy with the meta but they know it still needs tweaking quite a bit but the meta promotes using a variety of professions and with continued balance changes all professions will be viable with multiple builds.
The meta doesn’t promote using a variety of professions.
If you see the top leaderboard, the meta is pretty defined around ele roamers, thief roamers, mesmer semi-roamers, necro glass cannon for support and some engie/war here and there.
The meta is pretty defined and there are no many viable builds to be competitive: you need extremes to be efficient.
If aNet is satisfied with current meta, then i definitively put too much hope into their balancing capabilities.
You named 6 out of 8 professions as being used but said it doesn’t promote a variety of professions. On top of that you didn’t mention a single bunker in that complaint I haven’t follow the pro scene but I am pretty sure bunkers are a big part of the meta. Overall the meta does promote a variety of professions but they need to work on their balance which will open it up to to more viable builds.
The meta is a balance of defenders and roamers while keeping in mind the secondary objectives and it is healthy.
EDIT: http://www.guildwars2guru.com/news/919-state-of-the-game-discussion-now-available/ listen to the first 5 minuets of this and ANet as well as representatives from the top teams will tell you that you are wrong
Oh yeah, i forgot aboutthe bunker.
Anyway you didn’t grasp what i was talking about: i was talking about BUILD diversity.
No accounting the fact that ranger/engie/warrior are not as viable as other classes, those 5-6 classes that create current “meta” go around always with the same builds.
One can say “well i’m playing this that is different from cookie cutters” but at the tops there are all players playing cookie cutters, or rather ALWAYS THE SAME BUILDS.
Oh yeah, let’s talk about the interview with aNet, where every player there is a roamer and 3/7 are playing thief.
Very representive, since i’m sure they totally dislike current meta
/sarcasm
(edited by Mrbig.8019)
glass cannons are just silly because, well, theyre not really glass. thieves and mesmers can more or less build for full damage because they can reset the fight whenever the hell they want. devs either need to allow attrition to occur and nerf burst all across the board, or just nerf invisibility for these two profs.
Overall, is the bunker-burst meta well accepted by the PvP community ?
Garbage, can’t stand it. Anecdotaly, in my PvP guild of 30~ active WvWers only 1 person does tPvP.
Overall, is the bunker-burst meta well accepted by the PvP community ?
Garbage, can’t stand it.
This guy nailed it.
Warriors, Rangers and, pretty much, Engineers are just not viable. That’s good? I don’t think so.
The game is reliant on Guardian bunkers, greatly limiting variety of builds.
Retaliation is too powerful, while there’s close to none boon removal in the game. Totally bollocks. A bad mechanic quickly conceived before release.
Thief burst is out of control, has been for a long time.
Mesmers are like two classes rolled into one. They have everything. Why? They’re also superior duelists and yes, duels happen a lot in tPvP.
Meta is bullkitten. It’s not really a Meta right now. The real competitive Meta evolves all the time, as people come up with counters against FotM builds, but this isn’t the case in GW2, here some classes are just better and some roles (yay Conquest) are mandatory, which means you will always need a bunker and a roamer. That’s why WoW failed as an e-sport, there was no Meta, the only thing that was breaking the mold were the balance patches, not players coming up with new tactics.
Overall, is the bunker-burst meta well accepted by the PvP community ?
Garbage, can’t stand it.
This guy nailed it.
Warriors, Rangers and, pretty much, Engineers are just not viable. That’s good? I don’t think so.
Engineers not viable, really ?
get over it. the thief, along with d/d ele’s and bunker guards, is out of hand. burst across the board is out of hand. you will see the thief getting nerfed in various ways on the 14th. you have to be mad ignorant to not see the imbalances. there’s plenty of productive discussion in the threads i created.
seeing imbalances and whining QQthreads on forums is different things.
as i say everytime to friends: play thief d/d cannon glass for a week in soloQ tourney and watch how simple is the class. then come back to your main and use what u learnt to outplay him.
get over it. the thief, along with d/d ele’s and bunker guards, is out of hand. burst across the board is out of hand. you will see the thief getting nerfed in various ways on the 14th. you have to be mad ignorant to not see the imbalances. there’s plenty of productive discussion in the threads i created.
seeing imbalances and whining QQthreads on forums is different things.
as i say everytime to friends: play thief d/d cannon glass for a week in soloQ tourney and watch how simple is the class. then come back to your main and use what u learnt to outplay him.
as i stated originally, get over it. the threads i created have a ton of meaningful discussion for the devs to sift through, whereas you’re whining about whining and wasting forum space. if you dont enjoy the discussions, dont participate.
d/d thieves are indeed simple. if youre truly my fan and if youre following all my threads, you’ll notice that i didnt create a thread called “how is BS not broken”. im bringing up real issues. im done arguing with you, back on topic.
these arguments about which class is better, more useful at doing what role, etc… is a result of the imbalance in professions core mechanics. It’s not that player doesn’t run different builds… (like roaming guardians and etc.), it’s just that when they do other roles they end up being less productive as other classes running the optimal builds (ie. squishy roaming guardian, go defend that point… oh wait, we don’t have a bunker guardian…. ^ let’s send our thief over to defend it against 3 people. Like that’s gonna go well~).
It’s like in any RTS game… you’re asking a support to kill towers and assassins to go in head-first into teamfights. CORE – MECHANICS – ISSUE, J. Sharp. If the next patch all that you’re going to do is tweak numbers on existing skills…. then I’m done with this game for good, because that’ll show me that you guys have no idea how skill balancing works or how to most effectively improve these skill-based game metas.
(edited by FluffyDoe.7539)
Oh yeah, i forgot aboutthe bunker.
Anyway you didn’t grasp what i was talking about: i was talking about BUILD diversity.
No accounting the fact that ranger/engie/warrior are not as viable as other classes, those 5-6 classes that create current “meta” go around always with the same builds.
One can say “well i’m playing this that is different from cookie cutters” but at the tops there are all players playing cookie cutters, or rather ALWAYS THE SAME BUILDS.
Oh yeah, let’s talk about the interview with aNet, where every player there is a roamer and 3/7 are playing thief.
Very representive, since i’m sure they totally dislike current meta
/sarcasm
Build diversity will come with balance and they know that is a huge priority now it is an issue in every game just look at League of Legends they are just now getting into a lot of item build diversity after being an incredibly popular and successful e-sport for years now.
I promise you each of those representatives on that interview are speaking on behalf of their team, they don’t play the game for hours every day just because they like and know one class and build and that isn’t why they are the top players/teams.
Oh yeah, i forgot aboutthe bunker.
Anyway you didn’t grasp what i was talking about: i was talking about BUILD diversity.
No accounting the fact that ranger/engie/warrior are not as viable as other classes, those 5-6 classes that create current “meta” go around always with the same builds.
One can say “well i’m playing this that is different from cookie cutters” but at the tops there are all players playing cookie cutters, or rather ALWAYS THE SAME BUILDS.
Oh yeah, let’s talk about the interview with aNet, where every player there is a roamer and 3/7 are playing thief.
Very representive, since i’m sure they totally dislike current meta
/sarcasm
Build diversity will come with balance and they know that is a huge priority now it is an issue in every game just look at League of Legends they are just now getting into a lot of item build diversity after being an incredibly popular and successful e-sport for years now.
I promise you each of those representatives on that interview are speaking on behalf of their team, they don’t play the game for hours every day just because they like and know one class and build and that isn’t why they are the top players/teams.
I would like to argue about something Lowell said about the thief :
backstab is fine : true
mug is not : also true, but this is definined only for D/D burst. S/D thieves already got nerfed to dust ( so were D/D dps pressure build) with no real reason, and mug is currently the only burst damage any S/D build would accomplish.
Nerfing mug would only polarize the thief more into D/D glass cannons or P/D condition spamming.
So any change to Mug would imply a huge balance around the thief.
Traits: lowell was also right about damage scaling and T1-2 traits scaling better than some other traits. Results ?
A thief will choose those traits ALL NIGHT LONG, and build always the same way.
You need huge rebalancing in order to make things right
If you do this with every class, you obtain huge meta shiftings, because suddenly things start to work, and some other things are not ALWAYS the best choice.
If we’re in the situation where classes are forced to build in this or that way in order to be viable ( in order to counter X or Y being too much on the strong side, like bunkers currently, or mesmers in 1vs1) then we have a problem.
If we have a problem, and also a huge one, then the meta is not healthy at all.
Overall, is the bunker-burst meta well accepted by the PvP community ?
Garbage, can’t stand it.
This guy nailed it.
Warriors, Rangers and, pretty much, Engineers are just not viable. That’s good? I don’t think so.
Engineers not viable, really ?
Just clearly worse than the other classes in the same roles. Of course, not as bad as Rangers and Warriors, that just can’t do anything in most of their builds.
Im very happy with tpvp at its currenet state, and am in general very impressed with arenanets work, tbh i dont understand why ppl cry so much about players optimizing builds and setups, but i guess noobs whill allways complain that they cant pick random traits and do just as good as someone who has put alot of thougts in his build…
I furthermore dont understand why several claim ranger and engi is useless, a trapranger can be a kittening pain in the kitten Same goes for bunker engineers who if played well can be insane strong. I do agree a bit on the warriors being a bit up tho, the rest of the classes seems pretty balanced to me, maybe thiefs a bit op only. Overall the game is in a prettty good spot as it is.
But some ppl will allways find stuff to complain about rather than focusing on the loads of awsome stuff in this epic game, pretty sad really…
The meta is about as healthy as a kid with the chicken pox. Sure he isn’t dying but it sure as hell isn’t fun and there are going to be some big problems if you don’t get on top of it.
The problems are deeper than just class balance though, the format needs more adjustment and maps need some major improvement. Small maps with bad secondary mechanics that are all but ignored in combination with small capture points leads to heavy AoE pure team fight based comps; as long as that is a viable option it will be the only option without map/format changes.
I don’t really see the “meta” as being “unhealthy” whatever that means. I don’t see a problem with certain classes being better at certain things than other classes. I don’t have a problem with the bunker/glass dichotomy. What I do have a problem with is a lack of variety in maps and game modes and what appears to me to be an overall lack of incentives for participating at all levels of pvp.
So many people have absolute no idear whats going on in the meta.. ranger and warioir and engi not viable ? .. yea of course… last time i checked a team won some paids in araw with rangers as their mid point deffer… And not a gaurdian.. because their guardian was a glqss canon super mobile (1200 teleport gap close + 2x 600 gap closer teleports) roamer…
There is at least 2 viable builds for paid tpvp for each class…
… epic thats why we need observer mode… people dont have a clue
So many people have absolute no idear whats going on in the meta.. ranger and warioir and engi not viable ? .. yea of course… last time i checked a team won some paids in araw with rangers as their mid point deffer… And not a gaurdian.. because their guardian was a glqss canon super mobile (1200 teleport gap close + 2x 600 gap closer teleports) roamer…
There is at least 2 viable builds for paid tpvp for each class…
… epic thats why we need observer mode… people dont have a clue
And Squirtle beat Nerchio with Carriers this weekened at IPL, clearly Carriers are a fine unit and not the most underpowered and underused unit in all of Sc2. Like you said, “So many people have absolute no idear whats going on in the meta”.
Squirtle better player ? bad example
I would like to argue about something Lowell said about the thief :
backstab is fine : true
mug is not : also true, but this is definined only for D/D burst. S/D thieves already got nerfed to dust ( so were D/D dps pressure build) with no real reason, and mug is currently the only burst damage any S/D build would accomplish.
Nerfing mug would only polarize the thief more into D/D glass cannons or P/D condition spamming.
So any change to Mug would imply a huge balance around the thief.Traits: lowell was also right about damage scaling and T1-2 traits scaling better than some other traits. Results ?
A thief will choose those traits ALL NIGHT LONG, and build always the same way.You need huge rebalancing in order to make things right
If you do this with every class, you obtain huge meta shiftings, because suddenly things start to work, and some other things are not ALWAYS the best choice.
If we’re in the situation where classes are forced to build in this or that way in order to be viable ( in order to counter X or Y being too much on the strong side, like bunkers currently, or mesmers in 1vs1) then we have a problem.
If we have a problem, and also a huge one, then the meta is not healthy at all.
When they do their balancing (big balance patch in 7 days) we will hopefully start seeing more build diversity. That will not change the meta because things are working because the meta will still be a mix between bunkers and roamers it will change the flavor of the month profession builds but the meta isn’t going to change.
I really don’t think you understand what a meta is.
(edited by Thirsty.2875)
Overall, is the bunker-burst meta well accepted by the PvP community ?
Garbage, can’t stand it.
This guy nailed it.
Warriors, Rangers and, pretty much, Engineers are just not viable. That’s good? I don’t think so.
Engineers not viable, really ?
Just clearly worse than the other classes in the same roles. Of course, not as bad as Rangers and Warriors, that just can’t do anything in most of their builds.
Engineers are the best CC profession in the entire game, and in the top half in terms of support, and have more blast finishers than any other profession.
Only class that isn’t viable atm is ranger really, although they do have a rather strong 1v1 build.
Watched a stream of paid tournies yesterday. There wasnt a single ranger or warrior seen on any team for as long as I watched.
Beast mode
I would like to argue about something Lowell said about the thief :
backstab is fine : true
mug is not : also true, but this is definined only for D/D burst. S/D thieves already got nerfed to dust ( so were D/D dps pressure build) with no real reason, and mug is currently the only burst damage any S/D build would accomplish.
Nerfing mug would only polarize the thief more into D/D glass cannons or P/D condition spamming.
So any change to Mug would imply a huge balance around the thief.Traits: lowell was also right about damage scaling and T1-2 traits scaling better than some other traits. Results ?
A thief will choose those traits ALL NIGHT LONG, and build always the same way.You need huge rebalancing in order to make things right
If you do this with every class, you obtain huge meta shiftings, because suddenly things start to work, and some other things are not ALWAYS the best choice.
If we’re in the situation where classes are forced to build in this or that way in order to be viable ( in order to counter X or Y being too much on the strong side, like bunkers currently, or mesmers in 1vs1) then we have a problem.
If we have a problem, and also a huge one, then the meta is not healthy at all.
When they do their balancing (big balance patch in 7 days) we will hopefully start seeing more build diversity. That will not change the meta because things are working because the meta will still be a mix between bunkers and roamers it will change the flavor of the month profession builds but the meta isn’t going to change.
I really don’t think you understand what a meta is.
lol sorry but this is huge.
You probably have no idea about how a meta is set and how it evolves.
Simple example:
Bunkers gets nerfed, bunker is no more the optimal choice. In conquest, if bunker can’t hold a point reliably , bunker is no more the optimal choice.
No bunkers means more roamers ( first meta shifting): every team will go with a couple of DEFENSIVE (that is different from bunkers) dps pressure builds and other semiroamers/full burst, followed by team going 5/5 full roamers burst ( second meta shifting).
With full burst, people will start to build in order to maximize offense.
This will lead to a huge imbalance in the meta, till they nerf burst also.
With burst nerfed, people will start to run pressure builds, made to effectively last in a team fights without dying like an idiot in the first AoE spam ( third meta shifting).
This is what happened in GW1 ( the realm of pressure/control ) and EVERY CLASS could be played that way, with tons of different builds.
That was a healthy meta.
Till we reach the point of pressure meta ( where burst and bunkers still have a really good niche role), the meta will be boring and unhealthy, like it is currently.
Mrbig you are assuming an awful lot about how the professions will be balanced and how the “meta” is going to change. In conquest mode the meta is and I bet it will continue to be running a balanced group of bunkers and roamers. It will be the general strategy that is the most effective for most of the teams to win.
Flavor of the month team compositions will come and go but less likely to happen in a balanced game. GW1 was never balanced and would be impossible to balance which is why the flavor of the month teams were always dominant compositions. Guild Wars 2 doesn’t have the class/subclass to deal with so ever person doesn’t have access to the 1300 skills Guild Wars 1 had which means the game will be infinitely more balanced.
Mrbig you are assuming an awful lot about how the professions will be balanced and how the “meta” is going to change. In conquest mode the meta is and I bet it will continue to be running a balanced group of bunkers and roamers. It will be the general strategy that is the most effective for most of the teams to win.
Flavor of the month team compositions will come and go but less likely to happen in a balanced game. GW1 was never balanced and would be impossible to balance which is why the flavor of the month teams were always dominant compositions. Guild Wars 2 doesn’t have the class/subclass to deal with so ever person doesn’t have access to the 1300 skills Guild Wars 1 had which means the game will be infinitely more balanced.
That’s not the point.
the point is :
is bunkering burst fine ?
is every class able to bunker/burst as well ?
if the meta was going to be bunker/burst, then why do we have other weapon combinations ? ( necro axe, thief S/D or D/P, warrior swords, rifle, mace, OH mace and so on ? ).
Very few weapons were made for burst/bunkering purpose, and even less classes are able to bunker / burst at competitve levels, and even less one able to support/pressure at competitive levels.
With the current level of imbalance, it’s obvious people go with full burst/bunker, more than everything because there’s no other real option.
that’s why most teams will always run with ele/guard/thief/mesmer/necro.
This game will be balanced the day we see spike teams ( 5 ele, 5 necros etc) like we were able in GW, because it will mean that every class will be able to be played like you really want, and not like the meta imposes to you.
Your idea of balance and mine differs quite a bit I guess. I think of build diversity and think people can play multiple builds for each profession and have a role in the game. There is a place for pressure and support in the current meta and it will become more apparent with balance changes and every profession will have a place on a team with multiple builds but the overall strategy of a team will not change much because it is a fairly simple meta which promotes skill in the game over build wars.
You posted a question and I answered with my opinion on the topic. You proceed to tell me I am wrong and then either contradicted yourself or assume a lot about the future balance changes in all of your responses. I think we just have to agree to disagree about the meta and time will tell what will happen in this game.
Youre forgetting about one new role: bunker buster. Filled by necro. Overall I agree though. Not all profs can fill roamer, bunker, bunker buster or burst roles at the competitive level. But even if they could there wouldnt be enough build variety in the current meta.
I don’t think there’s anything inherently wrong with a meta that favors certain builds, but I think that there needs to be some changes to the game to prevent stagnation.
I think a lot of this comes from only having capture point type maps that favor bunker/roamer builds.
The PvE side of the game has been receiving plenty of content to keep things new and interesting, but sPvP has only really gotten 1 new map that’s not much different from the current ones, so the experience hasn’t changed much for the PvP focused player base.
Your idea of balance and mine differs quite a bit I guess. I think of build diversity and think people can play multiple builds for each profession and have a role in the game. There is a place for pressure and support in the current meta and it will become more apparent with balance changes and every profession will have a place on a team with multiple builds but the overall strategy of a team will not change much because it is a fairly simple meta which promotes skill in the game over build wars.
You posted a question and I answered with my opinion on the topic. You proceed to tell me I am wrong and then either contradicted yourself or assume a lot about the future balance changes in all of your responses. I think we just have to agree to disagree about the meta and time will tell what will happen in this game.
The only one assuming on “future balance changing” is you.
You’re the one saying “with the future balance patch…pressure…dps…more relevant…stuff”, i’m just saying the meta is stagnant and so it will remain without drastic changes.
Everyone said the same thing you’re saying about 14th november balance patch, and we all know what effectively changed ( lol, i can still remember Jon Peters on ranger forums saying " we know signet and 80% of ranger stuff is not viable, we’re planning to change it a way or another" and then 14th november balance patch come, and ranger changes were "unecessary buff to greatsword + “fixed animation because it was bleah” and all rangers were like “WTF ?!?!?” )
The dps pressure /support role is already filled with the necro, and no other class can come close to it, just like nerva said:
Youre forgetting about one new role: bunker buster. Filled by necro. Overall I agree though. Not all profs can fill roamer, bunker, bunker buster or burst roles at the competitive level. But even if they could there wouldnt be enough build variety in the current meta.
I’m saying the meta is unhealhty because it is stagnating, you’re saying it is healthy because aNet wants it to be like this, or because conquest always works like this ( that is also not true).
Mrbig you are assuming an awful lot about how the professions will be balanced and how the “meta” is going to change. In conquest mode the meta is and I bet it will continue to be running a balanced group of bunkers and roamers. It will be the general strategy that is the most effective for most of the teams to win.
Flavor of the month team compositions will come and go but less likely to happen in a balanced game. GW1 was never balanced and would be impossible to balance which is why the flavor of the month teams were always dominant compositions. Guild Wars 2 doesn’t have the class/subclass to deal with so ever person doesn’t have access to the 1300 skills Guild Wars 1 had which means the game will be infinitely more balanced.
That’s not the point.
the point is :
is bunkering burst fine ?
is every class able to bunker/burst as well ?
if the meta was going to be bunker/burst, then why do we have other weapon combinations ? ( necro axe, thief S/D or D/P, warrior swords, rifle, mace, OH mace and so on ? ).
Very few weapons were made for burst/bunkering purpose, and even less classes are able to bunker / burst at competitve levels, and even less one able to support/pressure at competitive levels.
With the current level of imbalance, it’s obvious people go with full burst/bunker, more than everything because there’s no other real option.
that’s why most teams will always run with ele/guard/thief/mesmer/necro.
This game will be balanced the day we see spike teams ( 5 ele, 5 necros etc) like we were able in GW, because it will mean that every class will be able to be played like you really want, and not like the meta imposes to you.
You might be misremembering what spike meant; if so, this response isn’t really relevant. In case that’s so, spike = burst, essentially. Spike teams didn’t necessarily stack a profession (other than monks, because only really gimmicky team builds could get away without monks). Eurospike for example was double derv, double mes at most. Be Team spike was double ranger. Generally speaking a spike that could afford to stack a profession usually indicated that the spike build was ridiculously overpowered since the versatility lost from deviating from a more conventional build was normally too much. Admittedly, if GW1 had more than 1 and kinda another (eventually two and kinda another) pressure classes, it’s possible that this might not have been the case.
Mrbig you are assuming an awful lot about how the professions will be balanced and how the “meta” is going to change. In conquest mode the meta is and I bet it will continue to be running a balanced group of bunkers and roamers. It will be the general strategy that is the most effective for most of the teams to win.
Flavor of the month team compositions will come and go but less likely to happen in a balanced game. GW1 was never balanced and would be impossible to balance which is why the flavor of the month teams were always dominant compositions. Guild Wars 2 doesn’t have the class/subclass to deal with so ever person doesn’t have access to the 1300 skills Guild Wars 1 had which means the game will be infinitely more balanced.
That’s not the point.
the point is :
is bunkering burst fine ?
is every class able to bunker/burst as well ?
if the meta was going to be bunker/burst, then why do we have other weapon combinations ? ( necro axe, thief S/D or D/P, warrior swords, rifle, mace, OH mace and so on ? ).
Very few weapons were made for burst/bunkering purpose, and even less classes are able to bunker / burst at competitve levels, and even less one able to support/pressure at competitive levels.
With the current level of imbalance, it’s obvious people go with full burst/bunker, more than everything because there’s no other real option.
that’s why most teams will always run with ele/guard/thief/mesmer/necro.
This game will be balanced the day we see spike teams ( 5 ele, 5 necros etc) like we were able in GW, because it will mean that every class will be able to be played like you really want, and not like the meta imposes to you.
You might be misremembering what spike meant; if so, this response isn’t really relevant. In case that’s so, spike = burst, essentially. Spike teams didn’t necessarily stack a profession (other than monks, because only really gimmicky team builds could get away without monks). Eurospike for example was double derv, double mes at most. Be Team spike was double ranger. Generally speaking a spike that could afford to stack a profession usually indicated that the spike build was ridiculously overpowered since the versatility lost from deviating from a more conventional build was normally too much. Admittedly, if GW1 had more than 1 and kinda another (eventually two and kinda another) pressure classes, it’s possible that this might not have been the case.
that’s not what i was referring , i know spike=burst ( not exactly, bu whatever).
the point i was trying to make is that in GW spike builds could be achieved by almost every class, and those very classes could run a totally different build and cover a totally different role.
This is not possible in GW2 due to current class design and imbalances, and without drastich changes, there’s not very much space to evolve.
Squirtle better player ? bad example
And the players who won a paid with a ranger tank weren’t?
Mrbig you are assuming an awful lot about how the professions will be balanced and how the “meta” is going to change. In conquest mode the meta is and I bet it will continue to be running a balanced group of bunkers and roamers. It will be the general strategy that is the most effective for most of the teams to win.
Flavor of the month team compositions will come and go but less likely to happen in a balanced game. GW1 was never balanced and would be impossible to balance which is why the flavor of the month teams were always dominant compositions. Guild Wars 2 doesn’t have the class/subclass to deal with so ever person doesn’t have access to the 1300 skills Guild Wars 1 had which means the game will be infinitely more balanced.
That’s not the point.
the point is :
is bunkering burst fine ?
is every class able to bunker/burst as well ?
if the meta was going to be bunker/burst, then why do we have other weapon combinations ? ( necro axe, thief S/D or D/P, warrior swords, rifle, mace, OH mace and so on ? ).
Very few weapons were made for burst/bunkering purpose, and even less classes are able to bunker / burst at competitve levels, and even less one able to support/pressure at competitive levels.
With the current level of imbalance, it’s obvious people go with full burst/bunker, more than everything because there’s no other real option.
that’s why most teams will always run with ele/guard/thief/mesmer/necro.
This game will be balanced the day we see spike teams ( 5 ele, 5 necros etc) like we were able in GW, because it will mean that every class will be able to be played like you really want, and not like the meta imposes to you.
You might be misremembering what spike meant; if so, this response isn’t really relevant. In case that’s so, spike = burst, essentially. Spike teams didn’t necessarily stack a profession (other than monks, because only really gimmicky team builds could get away without monks). Eurospike for example was double derv, double mes at most. Be Team spike was double ranger. Generally speaking a spike that could afford to stack a profession usually indicated that the spike build was ridiculously overpowered since the versatility lost from deviating from a more conventional build was normally too much. Admittedly, if GW1 had more than 1 and kinda another (eventually two and kinda another) pressure classes, it’s possible that this might not have been the case.
that’s not what i was referring , i know spike=burst ( not exactly, bu whatever).
the point i was trying to make is that in GW spike builds could be achieved by almost every class, and those very classes could run a totally different build and cover a totally different role.
This is not possible in GW2 due to current class design and imbalances, and without drastich changes, there’s not very much space to evolve.
But that wasn’t really true in GW1 (at least not in high-level play the competitive format, GvG). At some point or another, probably almost every profession had a briefly viable spike build consisting of stacking that profession (I don’t recall any for monks, warriors, dervishes, or rangers; smiting was overpowered pressure at its best, and warriors, dervishes, and rangers didn’t have the emanagement for using utility spells from other professions). But these were only briefly viable because for such a build to be viable even in GW1 required its spike to be ridiculously strong. I can’t think of a single meta in the time I played GW1 (around factions release until a while after EotN) where multiple builds running more than three of the same profession were viable. I limit it to more than 3 because until you ran more than 3, you didn’t sacrifice much compared to more balanced setups, particularly if the three were just your midline.
Honestly, I think this might be an advantage of having professions that can’t do everything well in that it provides a bit more buffer against imbalances. It’s probably possible for a 5 thief team to be viable without risking it becoming ridiculous if changes make thieves a bit too strong, but thieves being too strong could break the game less if running three or four of them severely handicaps your team than if it were reasonable to run five of them, depending on how exactly they were too strong.