Guild Wars 2

I remember way back in GW1 where each balance update was alway accompanied by a detailed description of the reasons behind those changes, personally I’d love to see this in GW2, especially because It’ll show people how Anet really handle balance decisions, forum whining or precise information gathering?! In a way this would give also some sort of indication for future changes

I think just everyone wants to know the reasons behind nerfs and buffs…so it would be really appreciated, for old patches also…ppl don’t need to only know what have been nerfed or buffed, we need to know WHY, and i seriously think it’s a legit answer…we paid money for the game after all…so if something changes seems obvious to give us a reason over the “we looked after it and we nerfed it”

Right? If someone one day logs in and finds his build (S/D Dazelock in my case) totally destroyed by nerfs…and he spent time learning how to play it, or in the case of pve buying gear runes and so on just to make that build…well at last a CLEAR explanation is needed, why? Who decided it? On which basis? And so on..

Archaon.6245:

I think just everyone wants to know the reasons behind nerfs and buffs…so it would be really appreciated, for old patches also…ppl don’t need to only know what have been nerfed or buffed, we need to know WHY, and i seriously think it’s a legit answer…we paid money for the game after all…so if something changes seems obvious to give us a reason over the “we looked after it and we nerfed it”

Right? If someone one day logs in and finds his build (S/D Dazelock in my case) totally destroyed by nerfs…and he spent time learning how to play it, or in the case of pve buying gear runes and so on just to make that build…well at last a CLEAR explanation is needed, why? Who decided it? On which basis? And so on..

Same here.

S/D is still quite untouched by nerfs in PvE and WvW ( still a beast), but in PvP, the only decent alternative to burst thieves got totally destroyed by nerfs, without any real reason.

In GW they explained every single balance change, hell i can remember perfectly that sad day when they nerfed the sin into oblivion, because shadow form was clearly OP, and i understood, because the reason why they did it was explained PERFECTLY.

It just seems they’re not the same devs whose developed GW.

We’re waiting for an answer maybe…we’re not saying not to nerf or buff things…all we want is a crystal clear explanation attached to every single nerf or buff….are we asking too much? And before this topic goes down please share your opinions too while we’re waiting for a dev’s answer…because it seems that someone is just waiting for this post to be forgotten…imo..

I would also like to get explanations of the reasons for nerfs/buffs.

I don’t care for explanations too much, i would rather see hard data, like Valve does for TF2.

+1 , share your thoughts to let us understand your decisions.

On the other side: ( don’t want to defend a-net at all) but at the moment it seems like they have no ressources left for this. Wether it’s true or not, they really have to catch up the backwardness in aspect of pvp.

This is an amazing idea and it’s a pity it was lost between GW1 and GW2. I think it’d do a lot towards breaking the idea that they lack transparency, it wouldn’t take long (especially if the issue is such a large one that it warranted a nerf/buff – it’s not like the reason the nerf or buff occured isn’t clearly defined.) and best of all, it would clearly demonstrate what they’re thinking. If they had done the underwater balancing and said “Because it’s quite simple to change and tops off underwater combat, so that we can be done with it and move on to other things”/etc, I think it would have gone much better.

^ They did that on the 14th.
Underwater combat was changed to improve player interaction underwater and make it better as a whole. Not like it was news to anyone that Underwater combat was and is, underdeveloped.

Anyways they included general notes in the 14th update, so it’s not like we were left in the dark for their motives.

They were more defined in GW1, but as far as I can recall not at the start and not consistently. Would be nice to get more information however.

ensoriki.5789:

^ They did that on the 14th.
Underwater combat was changed to improve player interaction underwater and make it better as a whole. Not like it was news to anyone that Underwater combat was and is, underdeveloped.

So they made downed rangers unkillable with that dam pet healing bug, with everyone exploting it in hotjoin every single time as far as i can see xD To improve player interaction is not an answer…(Example) We made a change because Class A can overheal for 1000/sec while it should be 300…we want freakin’ numbers

Yeah, I’m inclined to agree. I didn’t know they’d explained the UW changes, but I’m not sure that’s specific enough. All that really says is “because we wanted to add to UW combat”, which really goes without saying because if they didn’t, they never would have made the changes.

mjharrison.3209:

I don’t care for explanations too much, i would rather see hard data, like Valve does for TF2.

This would be nice. For example, when engineer’s grenade 1 was nerfed by 30%, there was actually an explanation with it—“to balance out sigils being added to kits.” I didn’t even use grenades, yet it seemed like an odd explanation and I was left wondering what kind of data they had used to come to that conclusion.