Guild Wars 2

Wanted to bring this up as well:
When people try to talk about imbalance of some classes in 1v1 situations, the answer often seems to be ‘game is balanced around 5v5, not 1v1’.
Personally I think this is a BS answer. Game should be balanced in any setting (1v1, 3v3 and 5v5 situations).
It is just easier to hide severe imbalances of a class when you are talking about 5v5 (other team can also get that class and the fact that one or two classes in a group of 5 are overpowered gets toned down ‘on average’ so it does not look that bad), so there is this myth going around how they are balancing the game around 5v5.

And note, balances in different settings are not that difficult to achieve. It is not impossible to nerf 1v1 aspect of a class while buffing it in group setting or the other way around.

if the main purpose of pvp (and esport lol) of this game is 5v5, it must be balanced around 5v5 environment. it doesnt mean that 5v5 = teamfight 24/7, but it means that some class, some skill, some trait works better in a “not-1v1” fight

Who needs balance?

Just roll 3 shatter mesmers, 1 thief, and a guardian.

Shatter mesmers create the chaos, while the thief just picks people off. You’re either being shattered or stabbed in the back. The guardian stands on a point laughing like a beast until reinforcements come.

Agreed.Game is balanced when any class is given reasonable enough chance to beat any other class in 1vs1, which means win or lose is decided by skill and/or luck, not by what class you are fighting against.This balance is often hard to accomplish, but it should nevertheless be goal of every pvp dev in any MMO.

You are right that you can balance pretty well on multiple levels, but you are wrong in thinking you can make a large number of interesting classes that are balanced for 1v1…. sorry, the only way to really do that is to make classes mostly the same with cosmetic differences.

The ironic thing is, this game clearly IS targetting smaller fights (1-5 players per side) which is why they avoid support and healing roles and why they are so concerned about ‘bunkers’ even though its the only thing currently making their game interesting!

Totally agree with the OP, I can talk for the elementalist profession in particular, the incredible disparity between the number of d/d users and staff/scepter users is astonishing.
It’s much easier to hide obvious imbalances behind this " 5vs5 balance" lie rather than fix the problem

Shukran.4851:

if the main purpose of pvp (and esport lol) of this game is 5v5, it must be balanced around 5v5 environment. it doesnt mean that 5v5 = teamfight 24/7, but it means that some class, some skill, some trait works better in a “not-1v1” fight

Yes it’s ok to have trait/skills that works better in team fight, but you can’t always hope to stay in the back spamming aoe, sometimes you need to get your hands dirty in order to stay alive, but take a look at the ele staff, all attack skills are aoe and therefore slow to cast , therefore you become useless in a 1vs1 situation

Arheundel.6451:

Shukran.4851:

if the main purpose of pvp (and esport lol) of this game is 5v5, it must be balanced around 5v5 environment. it doesnt mean that 5v5 = teamfight 24/7, but it means that some class, some skill, some trait works better in a “not-1v1” fight

Yes it’s ok to have trait/skills that works better in team fight, but you can’t always hope to stay in the back spamming aoe, sometimes you need to get your hands dirty in order to stay alive, but take a look at the ele staff, all attack skills are aoe and therefore slow to cast , therefore you become useless in a 1vs1 situation

ele staff is quite awesome in tf.
it seems you are confusing strategy with balance.

I was going to say ‘play a class that is strong 1v1 if you want to be strong 1v1’, then I realised that every class except warrior can spec to be strong 1v1, and this thread is a complete waste of time.

Shukran.4851:

ele staff is quite awesome in tf.
it seems you are confusing strategy with balance.

Since the EA nerf S/D is way better in teamfights than staff. While at the same time being WAY better in 1v1 situations. Staff for ele is close to useless.

Akumu.7238:

Who needs balance?

Just roll 3 shatter mesmers, 1 thief, and a guardian.

Shatter mesmers create the chaos, while the thief just picks people off. You’re either being shattered or stabbed in the back. The guardian stands on a point laughing like a beast until reinforcements come.

Then roll a team of 2 engi, 2 thief and a warrior. Go in perma stealth to this loling guaridan and start knockin down the sucker while the warrior gib the whole team.

balance around XvX had its point in WoW, where it was XvX deathmatch and X players were always here to do their job… but in conquest, most fights are YvY where Y is anything between 1 and 5 with 5 having very low chance… so the game CANT be balanced around 5v5 imo because almost no fights are really 5v5… its big difference between 5v5 and 5 times 1v1

5v5 is actualy the way to do it. If every class had same ability to 1on1, then the ones with worse team contribution wont be taken. But if 1 class is amazing in teamfight and crappy in 1on1, you will take both best 1on1 and best teamfights class to balance it out.

To balance in 1v1, 3v3, or 5v5 is A LOT of work. Just putting it out there.

Schwahrheit.4203:

To balance in 1v1, 3v3, or 5v5 is A LOT of work. Just putting it out there.

It is actually not a lot of work once the proper feedback system is in place.
It works like this:
1. They FIRST need single match ranked que for all those modes.
2. Ranking must be by (account, class). (player can be to thief player but suck at warrior..it is obvious).
3. They need to define ‘balance’. I propose: balance means that in top X ranked players (let us say 100 or 500) class is fairly represented (in other words, if you can find only 3 warriors in top 100, then warriors need a buff until the percentage of warriors in top 100 is 1/“# of classeses”.
4. Then it is matter of tweaking the class:
A. It is easy to buff class for group play if it is balanced 1v1. You just start giving them more group utility. You can improve their elite (give them completely new one that would make them desirable in teams). You can improve some utility or give them completely new one that would be very good in group fights. You can take already good skill/utility . Some cool buffs that class has can be generalized to apply on nearby allies etc. Maybe you need to buff/nerf duration/potency of some combo fields…etc..just look at what is making some class too strong in certain setting and you will know what to hit.
B. To buff/nerf class for 1v1 is also simple: you play with class’ dmg on major skills, you buff/nerf their health pool, you buff/nerf their defense. Yes, it may take time, class may use skill_A, you nerf it, they just switch to skill_B which is still OP, well…nerf that as well until they are brought into line.

With objective metric of balance and proper feedback system, balancing is easy work in the context of control theory.

And there is no more drama on forums. If people whine (for buff or nerf), but class has fair representation in top 100, then you tell them:
(to buff seekers): Learning curve on this class may be more difficult than on other classes, but look at top 100 players (or top whatever), your class has fair representation.
(to nerf seekers): Top players of other classes learned how to deal with this class. No need for nerf, they have fair representation at top level.

Done….

Mufa.1326:

Wanted to bring this up as well:
When people try to talk about imbalance of some classes in 1v1 situations, the answer often seems to be ‘game is balanced around 5v5, not 1v1’.
Personally I think this is a BS answer. Game should be balanced in any setting (1v1, 3v3 and 5v5 situations).
It is just easier to hide severe imbalances of a class when you are talking about 5v5 (other team can also get that class and the fact that one or two classes in a group of 5 are overpowered gets toned down ‘on average’ so it does not look that bad), so there is this myth going around how they are balancing the game around 5v5.

And note, balances in different settings are not that difficult to achieve. It is not impossible to nerf 1v1 aspect of a class while buffing it in group setting or the other way around.

Balancing bunkers vs bunkers, dps vs dps, and trying to balance mixtures of the two would go really far. Even simply changing all trait lines so that when you stack precision in your trait lines it always gives more crit damage%. Which is not the case for all classes and makes some classes perform better than others.

Necromancer has to spend 60 points to get +300 precision and 30% more crit damage. Thiefs/warriors/mesmers spent 30 points. Very odd and there are other things that make no sense that happen across minor traits/major traits and structures of trait lines in general.

Mufa.1326:

Wanted to bring this up as well:
When people try to talk about imbalance of some classes in 1v1 situations, the answer often seems to be ‘game is balanced around 5v5, not 1v1’.
Personally I think this is a BS answer. Game should be balanced in any setting (1v1, 3v3 and 5v5 situations).
It is just easier to hide severe imbalances of a class when you are talking about 5v5 (other team can also get that class and the fact that one or two classes in a group of 5 are overpowered gets toned down ‘on average’ so it does not look that bad), so there is this myth going around how they are balancing the game around 5v5.

And note, balances in different settings are not that difficult to achieve. It is not impossible to nerf 1v1 aspect of a class while buffing it in group setting or the other way around.

That is what exactly i want to bring out in my previous post “Balance classes through Duel”. As Anet still adapt the paper scissor rock balancing system and don’t balance out classes in 1v1 setting, this game will never achieve high skill-cap level like any other e-sport game does.

In a tPvP scenario, people will tend to switch their class/build when they saw some hard-counter to their class on the enemies team. This, for sure brings a huge strategic play to the game. However, it also let players attribute their failure to their class more than to themselves – their skills; “When A class are meant to lose to B class, what can i do with my skill on this class? i better run another class who can deal with him”.

The lack of class balance and current game mechanism encourage players to attribute externally rather than internal. It encourage players to seek out solution via switching classes/build rather than improving their own skills. And i believe that is why even top tier player switching their class so often. Shouldn’t this be a problem that Anet need to look at when they wanted GW2 to become an e-sport game?

I would like to hear an actual argument as to why balance is supposedly the same regardless of player number.

tOss.9024:

I would like to hear an actual argument as to why balance is supposedly the same regardless of player number.

i suppose u never heard anything about sc2. it is balanced 1v1 and for the 2% of the community.. gl hf

Shukran.4851:

tOss.9024:

I would like to hear an actual argument as to why balance is supposedly the same regardless of player number.

i suppose u never heard anything about sc2. it is balanced 1v1 and for the 2% of the community.. gl hf

Rts =\= mmo in terms of balance. This is an entirely different type of balance with entirely different types of mechanics. That isn’t even an argument, you’re just arbitrarily throwing out another games name without any further evidence for your statement what so ever.

i havent played allot of sPvP but im somewhat into the meta. and as far as i am awere there will almost never occour 5v5 fights because the objective is to take objectives. sure it could occur some 5v5 sometimes when you are doing the bosses in the maps or altars as in the latest one. but generally the fights will be 1v1 ,1v2, 1v3 , 2v2, 2v3 or 3v3 everything over that will be happening more rarely and even then these 5v5 fights wont be that important. sure u might give the enemy a buff and some points but u gain that back from just being better in low number encounters. ( if this is how all in the team are speced) if we want to compare it with lol where a wonn teamfight after 40min mark can lead to victory in a so far even game. thats why the meta is around teamfights in lol. here however 1 team cant winn just by winning an lategame teamfight, the other team will just respawn and everything will be back at where it was before just having to retake all the points. the new map is great for a 5v5 encounter making that 1/game altar capture is vital… however that is only 1 teamfight. but the new map i think is a better map for competitive play. as there is an alternative to the capturepoints. in the rest there is basicly a 4v4 and with a treb on each side, witch is cool and all but still kinda meh.

I agree with the OP, the game should be balanced around 1v1, with each class also having certain useful team buffs/debuffs/synergy. With a slight buff to combo fields and ways for folks to access them, you would still see plenty of interesting teamwork. Arguing it is balanced around 5v5 is bs and would be harder to balance than 1v1, just imagine the variables… the 5v5 argument is usually rolled out to defend bunkers than are invincible on 1v1 or hold 2v1 for a very long time. The same could be applied to super burst with low health etc – oh yes the thief got you, but your teammate would finish him the next second. Both bad arguments, bad design, needs to be fixed.

1on1 balance doesn’t really ever perfectly exist.

In wow for example its patently not the case that all classes are balanced with each other, and sometimes even specs make the difference.

Sometimes class X speced X is going to have an advantage of class Y Spec Y. As long as a reasonable skill gap overcomes the gap the classes are relatively balanced.

YES in a perfect world perfect balance would be great, but it has never been acheived in any MMO or even league of legends etc.

The reason 5on5 shows balance better than 1on1, is coordination and teamwork and variation in specs means it becomes less of a rock paper scissors game than 1on1.

the difference of course is one of degree not kind. 5on5 is more likely to show which team is better than 1on1 is to show which player is better.
but over a large sample size 1on1 would still show you this. Especially if you knew the meta well enough to know who has the advantage. A player winning 4 out 10 matchs with a handicap in spec and class could well be considered better than his opponent who ‘should’ be dominating not merely winning.

So, of course i agree in principle balance is important. But balancing for 3on3/5on5 etc is easier. And therefore more attainable, and in the process 1on1 gets a little bit closer to balanced also.

Although perfect 1v1 balance can never exist in a game where classes have different abilities, if you keep tweaking and eventually get it near 50% chance in 1v1, then the skill of the player can overcome a minor imbalance of 1-5%.

It’s not 1v1 or 5v5, they balance around the conquest game mode. I think they are trying to put each class in certain roles based around this game mode, i.e. bunker, roamer, etc.

Specific XvX balancing is for deathmatch type games.

Jason Segel.2908:

Necromancer has to spend 60 points to get +300 precision and 30% more crit damage. Thiefs/warriors/mesmers spent 30 points. Very odd and there are other things that make no sense that happen across minor traits/major traits and structures of trait lines in general.

Warrior also has to spend 60 points.
Trees are:
- Precision + Condi Dmg
- Crit Dmg + Burst Skill Dmg (completely useless stat)

Skyro.3108:

It’s not 1v1 or 5v5, they balance around the conquest game mode. I think they are trying to put each class in certain roles based around this game mode, i.e. bunker, roamer, etc.

Specific XvX balancing is for deathmatch type games.

Every time someone says they balance game around conquest mode my stomach starts to turn,because that is the stupidest thing i have ever heard.What happens when new mode is introduced like CTF? How you gonna balance the game around conquest AND CTF for example?Or are you saying 1 game mode with different maps is all we get from GW 2? I would rather have 3 game mods on the same map than 1 game mod on 15 maps.Just blance the game around 1vs1 (or try to do so to the best of your ability) and give us more pvp modes that are actually fun to play before its too late and you end up with your few “top teams” playing on empty servers.

That is why ranking needs to be:
By (account, class, game mode, group setting)
( so you will have separate ladders for 1v1 deathmatch, 5v5 deathmatch and 5v5 conquest….etc). (and account will have separate ranking for its thief play and for its guardian play)
where by ‘game mode’ i mean: conquest, or death match, … or whatever
and group setting I mean: 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, 5v5.
All those rankings need to be separate in order to provide good feedback that is mandatory for balancing.
Then if class is blanced in death match, but imbalanced in conquest, they can investigate why and tone down or buff the class appropriately in conquest mode.

this is possibly the only mmo that would have a shot at supporting 1on1 deathmatch. I feel however it would come to be dominated by mesmers.
Maybe im wrong though, be interesting to get data from ladder representation.

The reason they dont balance for 1v1 is because they dont have 1v1 as an “OFFICAL” play mode.

They use the 5v5 because its easier FOR THEM to balance on that sort of aspect, not that its impossible on a 1v1. There are ways.

Right now tPvP is constructed of 5v5, stationary point-defense strategies. Theres is no Death Match to inspire adjustment of damage proportionally along the classes. There is not Capture-The-Flag to do the same to class utility/usability.

They’re very focused on the combo system and 5v5s in tPvP because its alot easier to limit their options and begin to step foot into eSports like that then come out with 4 modes of games to balance for and adjust classes for.

Unfortunately with the limited balancing staff and the fact that Anet is primarily interested new content and expanding its game/advertising. That its ok to be “sub-par” for right now.

It really sucks for professions too, classes that havent had alot of time spent with developers often have limited build options and are often trapped between certain trait lines that would almost leave them without a real tPvP purpose without.

They’re no-trinity type sPvP has really just evolved for a specialized purpose of each class. Fighting a thief/warrior/elementalist is also the same through out each match. Very rare deviation from cookie cutters builds. And with that deviation, it usually requires alot more skill to be used by the player to make up for the ease-of-use for cookie cutter aspects.

IMO….

Each profession needs like 3-4 “Cookie Cutter Specs”. Along with that they need to take into account which stats they’ll be desiring in certain builds and why… and whether or not they’re armor sets to facilitate that style of play.

I’ve come up with builds that simple just wont work without certain stat combinations that they just dont have in this game.

TL;DR: This game needs more diversity, in sPvP gameplay options, in build balance, stat combinations, and rework of the purposes of each class (more purposes, not enough right now. No trinity in this game only Duality (Bunker vs Glass)

Khyras.8021:

Skyro.3108:

It’s not 1v1 or 5v5, they balance around the conquest game mode. I think they are trying to put each class in certain roles based around this game mode, i.e. bunker, roamer, etc.

Specific XvX balancing is for deathmatch type games.

Every time someone says they balance game around conquest mode my stomach starts to turn,because that is the stupidest thing i have ever heard.What happens when new mode is introduced like CTF? How you gonna balance the game around conquest AND CTF for example?Or are you saying 1 game mode with different maps is all we get from GW 2? I would rather have 3 game mods on the same map than 1 game mod on 15 maps.Just blance the game around 1vs1 (or try to do so to the best of your ability) and give us more pvp modes that are actually fun to play before its too late and you end up with your few “top teams” playing on empty servers.

So far ANet hasn’t said anything about new game modes unfortunately. I do think new games modes would be fun and bring back more of the casual audience even if they don’t fully support it with rankings and tourneys and such. I am hoping they give the users a lot of customization in custom servers to create different game modes but I know that is just a pipedream.

But the point remains that there if very very little reason to balance 1v1 unless your official game type is 1v1 deathmatch. In no other scenario does it make sense. Even CTF you’re going to have spec/classes specifically for this role which has little to do with 1v1 balance. It’s quite simple from a game design perspective, you fit the classes in certain roles and balance those roles around your supported game types whether that be conquest, CTF, or deathmatch. And even in deathmatch you would balance around team vs team, not 1v1. I don’t get why people don’t understand this. Was the medic in TF some 1v1 juggernaut?

Skyro.3108:

Khyras.8021:

Skyro.3108:

It’s not 1v1 or 5v5, they balance around the conquest game mode. I think they are trying to put each class in certain roles based around this game mode, i.e. bunker, roamer, etc.

Specific XvX balancing is for deathmatch type games.

Every time someone says they balance game around conquest mode my stomach starts to turn,because that is the stupidest thing i have ever heard.What happens when new mode is introduced like CTF? How you gonna balance the game around conquest AND CTF for example?Or are you saying 1 game mode with different maps is all we get from GW 2? I would rather have 3 game mods on the same map than 1 game mod on 15 maps.Just blance the game around 1vs1 (or try to do so to the best of your ability) and give us more pvp modes that are actually fun to play before its too late and you end up with your few “top teams” playing on empty servers.

So far ANet hasn’t said anything about new game modes unfortunately. I do think new games modes would be fun and bring back more of the casual audience even if they don’t fully support it with rankings and tourneys and such. I am hoping they give the users a lot of customization in custom servers to create different game modes but I know that is just a pipedream.

But the point remains that there if very very little reason to balance 1v1 unless your official game type is 1v1 deathmatch. In no other scenario does it make sense. Even CTF you’re going to have spec/classes specifically for this role which has little to do with 1v1 balance. It’s quite simple from a game design perspective, you fit the classes in certain roles and balance those roles around your supported game types whether that be conquest, CTF, or deathmatch. And even in deathmatch you would balance around team vs team, not 1v1. I don’t get why people don’t understand this. Was the medic in TF some 1v1 juggernaut?

Agreed.

Also, maybe not 1v1, but a pair of medics were/are an unstoppable killing machine. xD
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDwphqM6CmU

daydream.2938:

this is possibly the only mmo that would have a shot at supporting 1on1 deathmatch. I feel however it would come to be dominated by mesmers.
Maybe im wrong though, be interesting to get data from ladder representation.

If they end up dominating 1v1 deathmatch then they need to be toned down (major builds they would use to dominate it would need toning down) (same with any other class). I agree with your ad-hoc assessment that mesmers need to be toned down but maybe we are wrong, the point is that we will not know until they provide objective ways to measure this.
And let us not pretend it is a problem to balance class 1v1. You can do that simply by playing with the dmg of the skills that major builds use.
Note that ranking at multiple levels would then help you investigate what builds top players use so you can also know what they do not use so you can buff those builds (weaponsets)