Guild Wars 2

ApplePearOrange.9281:

Let’s get more ascended sets for each encounter. Pure fun.

Builds are not limited to just gear, we already have groundwork in the form of changing traits/utilities of the fly.
While you are right that in the current state of gear progression (ie. that ascended exists) having multiple sets is completely unfeasible. The problem lies not in changeable specs being a bad idea, but ascended gear’s “exclusivity” shoehorning the player into one gear choice in the long run.
Giving ascended the ability to change stats wouldn’t be too shabby.

I do not approve of this it takes away the reason of getting legendary once again to purely cosmetic so no ascended are set in their stats thank you very much. There is really not much else they can do to make the legendary truely legendary if they do this except increase it’s damage to above ascended then you ascended fangirls will be mad so just no. Nice idea but I don’t want anet to go back on the shelf for me I like the wardrobe change it’s what brought me back that and the mega server.

(Guild Wars is my anet I don’t play their other titles)

ApplePearOrange.9281:

Even within the constraints of “dps + active mitigation” theres potential for a far more playstyles than we currently have.

- Specialist Zerkers: Even within zerker gear, there can be room for specialisation for AOE or Targeted damage.

You’d have to change the way skills work. Now, most attacks are tied to weapon choice, with AoE’s being mixed in with single target attacks on the same weapon. In order for specialist damage, there’d have to be weapons that did only AoE and only ST. Doubt this would happen.

ApplePearOrange.9281:

- Mixed Direct + Condition damage
- Glass cannon condition users

Hybrid builds already exist.

ApplePearOrange.9281:

- Power+Cond Duration executioner: Direct damage is based on targets condition stack.

The game already has vulnerability stacking, which does this.

ApplePearOrange.9281:

- Pain Inverters: Damage dealt based on damage taken, Vit/Tougness is now worth something.

Would affect WvW, where GC users already claim that the zerker nerf reduced direct damage to where Soldier builds have even more of an advantage than was previously the case. Also, reduced damage is one of the balancing factors for bunkers.

Harper.4173:

People asking for build diversity are failing to realize one simple fact.

The game has build diversity – you can use almost any build and any gear choice and still complete the game’s content with ease provided you are a mediocre player.

That aside people have to understand that there are two large categories in which the player base is divided.

The meta runners – People who run whatever meta is best in order to maximize their profits and waste as little time.

For this category you will never have " build diversity " because these people don’t care about build diversity and various builds. They care about getting loot fast and will run whatever gets them that loot the fastest. Assuming you can force diversity onto this group is silly. They play the game in a completely different way than your average player does and care about other things entirely.

The non-meta runners – This group is the classic " play how you want group " – they run whatever they like, play whatever build they choose and while they do care about rewards the core aspect of the game for them is not constituted by said rewards.

For this category the game already has build diversity because these players just play whatever they think up and like as builds and complete content just fine.

So how is GW2 lacking build diversity?

Let’s face it, this thread was, “I want to play healer in a meta group, so change the game to make that happen.” The same could be said about most of the similar threads.

Weregild.3596:

I DONT LIKE IT SO ITS TIRED AND ARCHAIC. You realize that RPG’s (guild wars 2 included!!!) have been using many of the same mechanics since the 70’s, right?

Sounds like the definition of archaic to me.

Asmodeus.5782:

Monsters should hit weaker and more often, that’s one simple and useful adjustment. You won’t be able to dodge it all – tough/vit/healing suddenly become needed in the team.

THIS! I am so tired of Champion Undead Chicken #5432 shooting you from out of nowhere with several 20k damage eggs.

This “problem” has existed in every MMO I’ve ever played. Part of the player base is okay with a variety of “good enough” options, but part of the player base gravitates toward whatever is widely agreed to be optimal. The good enough folks usually don’t usually lack options so much as they have a problem with other people not wanting any of their options but one, and they think a change of game mechanics can change that.

But for the optimal folks, there will always be one or maybe two optimal options regardless of how many changes are made to the game, because they don’t want options. They want predictable execution of finely tuned strategies for maximum efficiency. Even if multiple option are equally viable, the most efficient strategy is to standardize on one to maximize predictability and repeatability in new groups. No change of game mechanics is going to change that because it isn’t a mechanics issue, it is a player attitude issue.

Zerker wasn’t nerfed.

Critical dmg was decreased a little. Zerk has a place in the meta. All builds with critical dmg have suffered , Celestial was nerfed.

In the endif you do not like playing zerker, ten do something else, I also run other builds. see below. It doesn’t mean that zerk is the best. Also playing something other then zerk is not better or worse. they are all choices. when playing zerk you’ll kill faster, and when you have a good party you will roll trough most dungeon paths without problems. But this will be the same with any other build. you will roll through content with no problems, only with less DPS. so a little slower.

In the end that what it’s about, just speed of finishing content, the fastest genereated income.

Zerk in itself is not bad. nor are all opther builds. ppl being elitist are bad, but those zerkers you loath are not the builds you hate but the ppl playing them and making your life less pleasant.

haviz.1340:

Blood Red Arachnid.2493:

Having rapid attacks doesn’t mean that mobs will no longer have big, dangerous attacks that you need to dodge.

Having rapid attacks means your party requires now better sustain which means you are now forced to run certain builds because you won’t survive without them. How’s that going to increase build diversity? I can only see it would actually decrease it.

…

Blood Red Arachnid.2493:

I’m surprised so many people think that enemies having more sustained damage would make zerker gear obsolete. That wouldn’t be the case at all. GC gear would still be viable, because it will still kill enemies before they can generate a large amount of damage. The difference would be that now, zerkers will actually be risky to play, and more defensive gear would have to use active defenses to stay alive as well.

I should also add that, more durable sets would have longer in-combat time, which would make them more damaging in the long run.

The goal isn’t to “require” anything. The goal is to make PVE a bit harder in such a way that the strengths of passive defenses will finally show in PVE.

Blood Red Arachnid.2493:

The goal isn’t to “require” anything. The goal is to make PVE a bit harder in such a way that the strengths of passive defenses will finally show in PVE.

Get protection and weakness, hell go nuts and try to maintain frost aura too, get the appropriate slaying potion and you got 53% or 103% damage reduction without any stat spent on tougness or vitality …

Nerfing zerk means dps little lesser, you kill little longer, you dodge a little more. Nothing much.

Nerfing zerk is never a solution, the real problem is the game design. Do you need crowd control in dungeon? Nope, you don’t. Many of the skills are designed for pvp in mind. The entire game in fact, is designed to be a one-hit thing, a single player game that is given a multiple player mode.

@Indigo – this is not a trinity game, it will never be a trinity game – why are people still asking for the game to change for them instead of changing themselves or changing the game they’re playing ( going back to a traditional trinity MMO) ?

Morsus.5106:

One hit kills in dungeons are a major problem imo. Why bother healing in a fight with Kohler when if you don’t dodge he’ll one shot you? Healing won’t fix that.

Pro tip: Dodging fixes that problem.

Personally I like skills in which the only way to survive is to dodge. Dodge is there for a reason. Every profession has it.

This is by definition, a learn to play problem. More specifically, Learn to Dodge.

How about skills that do damage based on your/the enemy’s toughness/healing power/vitality/etc.?

Technically, zerker isn’t the easiest way to run dungeons. I remember a video at the start of this whole “nerf zerker because healing isn’t viable (however much of a non sequitur that is to begin with)” where the group actually did stack tanking stats, and went through some arah without ever dodging once. They all just facerolled everything. There were even eles in the group, and they didn’t die either.

ApplePearOrange.9281:

I love how people are just twisting each others words to suit their own needs.
Asking for build diversity is not the same asking for a trinity.
Asking for uses for non zerk is not the same as making zerk unviable.
Viability of defense stats it not the same as making full tank builds the meta.

Even within the constraints of “dps + active mitigation” theres potential for a far more playstyles than we currently have.
- Specialist Zerkers: Even within zerker gear, there can be room for specialisation for AOE or Targeted damage.
- Mixed Direct + Condition damage
- Glass cannon condition users
- Power+Cond Duration executioner: Direct damage is based on targets condition stack.
- Pain Inverters: Damage dealt based on damage taken, Vit/Tougness is now worth something.

The beauty of this game is that it allows for fluid roles.
In Gw2 the divide between full damage and full utility is a spectrum, not a game predefined option like in other MMO games.
The issue that people have is not that they cant tank or cant heal, but that anything other than the extreme end of the damage spectrum is rubbish.

I think this post pretty much summed up this thread and the issue perfectly. And as with most posts of that nature it went completely unaddressed by anyone. Probably because they knew there was no easy victory to be had here.

Harper.4173:

@Indigo – this is not a trinity game, it will never be a trinity game – why are people still asking for the game to change for them instead of changing themselves or changing the game they’re playing ( going back to a traditional trinity MMO) ?

As no one can really know, these are at best educated guesses…

• Entitlement — they paid for the game and think it should cater to their wishes.
• Going to another game might mean having to pay a sub, and lots of people prefer not to pay.
• Boredom — the game isn’t interesting, let’s see if we can stir something up on the forum.
• Unwillingness to change – this tendency is strong in many people. If they won’t change, their game should…. Also, many MMO players are trying to find the second coming of their favorite game. When a game they spent money on doesn’t measure up, they either bail, or – more likely – complain.

Alice.8694:

ApplePearOrange.9281:

I love how people are just twisting each others words to suit their own needs.
Asking for build diversity is not the same asking for a trinity.
Asking for uses for non zerk is not the same as making zerk unviable.
Viability of defense stats it not the same as making full tank builds the meta.

Even within the constraints of “dps + active mitigation” theres potential for a far more playstyles than we currently have.
- Specialist Zerkers: Even within zerker gear, there can be room for specialisation for AOE or Targeted damage.
- Mixed Direct + Condition damage
- Glass cannon condition users
- Power+Cond Duration executioner: Direct damage is based on targets condition stack.
- Pain Inverters: Damage dealt based on damage taken, Vit/Tougness is now worth something.

The beauty of this game is that it allows for fluid roles.
In Gw2 the divide between full damage and full utility is a spectrum, not a game predefined option like in other MMO games.
The issue that people have is not that they cant tank or cant heal, but that anything other than the extreme end of the damage spectrum is rubbish.

I think this post pretty much summed up this thread and the issue perfectly. And as with most posts of that nature it went completely unaddressed by anyone. Probably because they knew there was no easy victory to be had here.

Someone didn’t read the thread very well.

IndigoSundown.5419:

ApplePearOrange.9281:

Even within the constraints of “dps + active mitigation” theres potential for a far more playstyles than we currently have.

- Specialist Zerkers: Even within zerker gear, there can be room for specialisation for AOE or Targeted damage.

You’d have to change the way skills work. Now, most attacks are tied to weapon choice, with AoE’s being mixed in with single target attacks on the same weapon. In order for specialist damage, there’d have to be weapons that did only AoE and only ST. Doubt this would happen.

ApplePearOrange.9281:

- Mixed Direct + Condition damage
- Glass cannon condition users

Hybrid builds already exist.

ApplePearOrange.9281:

- Power+Cond Duration executioner: Direct damage is based on targets condition stack.

The game already has vulnerability stacking, which does this.

ApplePearOrange.9281:

- Pain Inverters: Damage dealt based on damage taken, Vit/Tougness is now worth something.

Would affect WvW, where GC users already claim that the zerker nerf reduced direct damage to where Soldier builds have even more of an advantage than was previously the case. Also, reduced damage is one of the balancing factors for bunkers.

Blood Red Arachnid.2493:

I’m surprised so many people think that enemies having more sustained damage would make zerker gear obsolete. That wouldn’t be the case at all. GC gear would still be viable, because it will still kill enemies before they can generate a large amount of damage. The difference would be that now, zerkers will actually be risky to play, and more defensive gear would have to use active defenses to stay alive as well.

Once again you chose to ignore the entire type of the content and form an opinion based on that. The bolded part only emphasis that. Unless you think that >2 minutes long fights in high scales fractals are not long enough to show that glass cannons are risky to play and despite popular belief they don’t kill before being killed in that kind of the content.

I should also add that, more durable sets would have longer in-combat time, which would make them more damaging in the long run.

The goal isn’t to “require” anything. The goal is to make PVE a bit harder in such a way that the strengths of passive defenses will finally show in PVE.

Why in the living kitten would you ever make that more defensive set has higher damage potential when it is already easier to perform while wearing those sets? Another thing, passive defenses should never be encouraged in an action game because they don’t require any effort whatsoever by the definition.

To summarise, I’m not disagreeing with the first sentence but I believe your argumentation for it is uninformed at best.

I just think that the AI and NPC skills should be improved to the point that surviving in GC becomes something actually difficult, though not impossible.
Then people can choose defensive stats if the need to, rather than never needing to.

This game is called Guild Wars, why would anyone care what pug requirements are for some dungeons? It’s far too simple to run dungeons with a guild and skip all of the this or that is better than that nonsense.

1. Adjusting condition cap in dungeons so condition based builds aren’t kitten by it. Condition build become viable = more diversity = profit.
2. Adding “threat” system and making the AI slightly better so high damage dealing players are getting focused by bosses and thus are having harder time (I’ve read about threat system in gw2 before but i’ve never seen it work tbh)
3. Changing at least one encounter in every path in every dungeon to have type of damage that can’t be mitigated by dodging to make healing and boons more relevant (i am talking snowstorm in svanir fractal, homing missiles, melee attacks that can’t be dodged etc. )
4. Changing some of the bosses large abilities trigger from “cast every 5 minutes” to cast every “33% of health lost”. Assuming that it takes 5 minutes for a zerk group and 15 minutes for a normal group to take down one single boss it doesn’t change anything to a normal group but makes zerk group’s life harder because instead of one big hit they have to withstand 3 of them.
5. Adjusting traits, abilites and stats to a level where being full time supporter is not being laughed at, increasing impact of healing power and adding utility and healing skills that can be used to effectively support others (like guardian’s healing breeze but actually useful)
6. Adjusting traits, abilities and stats so being more sturdy doesn’t mean one can’t dodge… for example traits that increase threat making boss more likely to attack “the tank” or control abilities that involve getting hit to prevent damage on teammates.

1. I don’t think that’s a good idea. Adjusting the condition cap in the instanced world while doing nothing to the outside world will just lead to even more confusion. It doesn’t make much sense that the rules of the world change when you enter a dungeon.
2. So… do you mean that the bosses would be focusing on the highest DPS member? Or that the bosses would have some kind of tangible aggro mechanic?
3. Why? The last thing this game need is for any dungeon path to turn into “LF STAFF ELE 4 <XYZ>”.
4. That is only going to work if it’s possible to survive all of those abilities without using a utility to block it. Otherwise you just end up with an artificial timer on the boss based on your party’s cooldown and that is never a good thing. You would literally end up with people running in a circle, just waiting for their cooldowns so that they can burst a boss.
5. Why? There doesn’t need to be healers in this game. Your suggestion would only work if all professions were given at least a single spec where they can heal competitively.
6. Have you ever played a thief? Their two options for surviving stuff is stealth and evades. And they do the latter better than anyone else in the game, even though they have the lowest HP and the second lowest armor.

Really, to me it just seems like you want a system where the Holy Trinity exists. If not, you’ll have to come up with a feasible way of redoing the traits to a point where any profession can heal or tank if they so choose to. One of the big things that ANet has said over and over again is that they do not want to build a game where people are waiting around for that one profession that is absolutely necessary to do some piece of content. So you gotta use that as your basis for ideas like this.

Also, you would have to make it so that no piece of content requires to have a healer or a tank. Because if you don’t, you’re going to end up with the same situation of people sitting around waiting for tanks and healers. And no one should be forced to play a role they don’t want to in order to participate in content.

beGreen.4190:

Lack of Diversity is bad for every game, especially massively multiplayer one.
Before i get to QQ let me introduce myself

I’ve always played as healer or support in every kind of RPG game so when i started playing GW my first class of choice was guardian – just because it was labeled as a support and team player. -

I think you bought the wrong game:

Originally Posted by Jon Peters, Arenanet

Everyone has a dedicated slot on their skill bar where they must place a healing skill. These vary greatly and are an intimate part of the Guild Wars 2 build-making process, but ultimately they are your most efficient and reliable way to sustain yourself in battle. Why did we do this? Because we think it is a more interesting way to create sustained encounters for solo players AND groups while keeping players focused on themselves and their surroundings.

That is why we want to eliminate things that we felt were burdens on the game such as:

•Group LF Healer/Tank…
•Party wipes when you lose the wrong person.
•Watching the interface instead of the world.
•Playing with people because you have to, not because you want to.
•Being stuck in the same combat patterns over and over again.

If anything i am totally complaining about the ele new grandmaster traits that is totally against design.

Last time we had a post like this was from old school mmorpg asking to change game design for them and we got ascended equip….
No TY this is GW2.

P.S: also you are totally wrong.

Healing in PVE is useless since there are 1HitKO everywhere…
Zerkers in WWW are already subpar and underpowered.
So they are in PvP.

As a zerk ele in pve, wvw and tpvp whose new damage failed to break through a warriors passive regen (wvw) as he jumped around for minutes ..
Many feelings

IndigoSundown.5419:

Harper.4173:

@Indigo – this is not a trinity game, it will never be a trinity game – why are people still asking for the game to change for them instead of changing themselves or changing the game they’re playing ( going back to a traditional trinity MMO) ?

As no one can really know, these are at best educated guesses…

• Entitlement — they paid for the game and think it should cater to their wishes.
• Going to another game might mean having to pay a sub, and lots of people prefer not to pay.
• Boredom — the game isn’t interesting, let’s see if we can stir something up on the forum.
• Unwillingness to change – this tendency is strong in many people. If they won’t change, their game should…. Also, many MMO players are trying to find the second coming of their favorite game. When a game they spent money on doesn’t measure up, they either bail, or – more likely – complain.

1)But the majority of players in GW2 don’t want a trinity so the part that paid more money doesn’t want it. They are entitled to nothing of the sort really.

2)There are plenty of non-sub free to play trinity MMOs out there. Not having what to play does not justify changing this game into what they want.

3)The game being boring is your personal opinion. If they find the game boring perhaps the game is not for them. There are a lot of players (myself included) who don’t find it to be boring. Also most GW2 players agree that the trinity is boring and unnecessary.

4)That’s probably it – eventually I hope they’ll either accept it and change or simply give up. Tired of these threads and the same people asking for WoW 2.0.

LordByron.8369:

•Being stuck in the same combat patterns over and over again.

This one stood out to me. True, we aren’t really stuck per say (In the same way that can start a mission in GW1 without a monk or ritualist, or take an MM to a mission without exploitable corpses), but unless you’re clear with your intentions and your party is okay with it, you’ll likely end up having to suck it up and employ to the game’s universal optimal attack pattern. I think we’d see a lot less of these Zerk threads if that was addressed.

dancingmonkey.4902:

Morsus.5106:

One hit kills in dungeons are a major problem imo. Why bother healing in a fight with Kohler when if you don’t dodge he’ll one shot you? Healing won’t fix that.

Pro tip: Dodging fixes that problem.

Personally I like skills in which the only way to survive is to dodge. Dodge is there for a reason. Every profession has it.

This is by definition, a learn to play problem. More specifically, Learn to Dodge.

If everything in the game can be dodged, why would you ever want a healer or a tank? That’s the problem I’m referring to, as I have no problem dodging Kohler. And I doubt shouting “Learn to dodge!” is gonna res my pugs after all but me wipe :/

Morsus.5106:

dancingmonkey.4902:

Morsus.5106:

One hit kills in dungeons are a major problem imo. Why bother healing in a fight with Kohler when if you don’t dodge he’ll one shot you? Healing won’t fix that.

Pro tip: Dodging fixes that problem.

Personally I like skills in which the only way to survive is to dodge. Dodge is there for a reason. Every profession has it.

This is by definition, a learn to play problem. More specifically, Learn to Dodge.

If everything in the game can be dodged, why would you ever want a healer or a tank? That’s the problem I’m referring to, as I have no problem dodging Kohler. And I doubt shouting “Learn to dodge!” is gonna res my pugs after all but me wipe :/

It’s more that even if you have a healer or a tank, dodge should still be required to a certain degree as the baseline active defense.
Going full tank is still the easiest way, it’s just a lot slower, as it should be.

Dual.8953:

LordByron.8369:

•Being stuck in the same combat patterns over and over again.

This one stood out to me. True, we aren’t really stuck per say (In the same way that can start a mission in GW1 without a monk or ritualist, or take an MM to a mission without exploitable corpses), but unless you’re clear with your intentions and your party is okay with it, you’ll likely end up having to suck it up and employ to the game’s universal optimal attack pattern. I think we’d see a lot less of these Zerk threads if that was addressed.

Do you know that a non existent PvE issue already harmed WWW badly?

Even if its true zerker didn t lose much dps due to runes and sigil buffs, its even more true that there was a huge power creep for bunkers and conditions.

And yet the only issue is not healing….is the fact that WARRIOR and GUARDIANS (<== even support) are monopolizing LFG in PVE.

Now that war got back with even more dps than before and mesmer is bugged even more a fast look at LFGs will tell you what is the real problem of PVE.

LordByron.8369:

Dual.8953:

LordByron.8369:

•Being stuck in the same combat patterns over and over again.

This one stood out to me. True, we aren’t really stuck per say (In the same way that can start a mission in GW1 without a monk or ritualist, or take an MM to a mission without exploitable corpses), but unless you’re clear with your intentions and your party is okay with it, you’ll likely end up having to suck it up and employ to the game’s universal optimal attack pattern. I think we’d see a lot less of these Zerk threads if that was addressed.

Do you know that a non existent PvE issue already harmed WWW badly?

Even if its true zerker didn t lose much dps due to runes and sigil buffs, its even more true that there was a huge power creep for bunkers and conditions.

And yet the only issue is not healing….is the fact that WARRIOR and GUARDIANS (<== even support) are monopolizing LFG in PVE.

Now that war got back with even more dps than before and mesmer is bugged even more a fast look at LFGs will tell you what is the real problem of PVE.

Sorry, what does that have to do with anything in my post? (Not even saying Zerks is the problem)

Harper.4173:

IndigoSundown.5419:

Harper.4173:

@Indigo – this is not a trinity game, it will never be a trinity game – why are people still asking for the game to change for them instead of changing themselves or changing the game they’re playing ( going back to a traditional trinity MMO) ?

As no one can really know, these are at best educated guesses…

• Entitlement — they paid for the game and think it should cater to their wishes.
• Going to another game might mean having to pay a sub, and lots of people prefer not to pay.
• Boredom — the game isn’t interesting, let’s see if we can stir something up on the forum.
• Unwillingness to change – this tendency is strong in many people. If they won’t change, their game should…. Also, many MMO players are trying to find the second coming of their favorite game. When a game they spent money on doesn’t measure up, they either bail, or – more likely – complain.

1)But the majority of players in GW2 don’t want a trinity so the part that paid more money doesn’t want it. They are entitled to nothing of the sort really.

2)There are plenty of non-sub free to play trinity MMOs out there. Not having what to play does not justify changing this game into what they want.

3)The game being boring is your personal opinion. If they find the game boring perhaps the game is not for them. There are a lot of players (myself included) who don’t find it to be boring. Also most GW2 players agree that the trinity is boring and unnecessary.

Hey, I never guaranteed that the speculative reasons I posted would indicate that the posters were being logical. After all, a lot of human behavior isn’t.

The entitlement issues I see and hear about in real life lead me to believe that many consumers don’t give a rat’s behind for anyone but themselves. Some folks think that being a customer means the seller should bend over backwards to give them what they want. As one brief example: A woman’s two kids are tearing open packages in a drugstore and strewing merchandise on the floor. When confronted about her children’s behavior, her response was, “I’m a customer, you have to let them do what they want.” Insisting that ANet go back to square one in order to change GW2’s combat to be what “they” want – regardless of what ANet advertised — is small potatoes by comparison to such behavior.

In my opinion, high DPS of zerker build is not the true problem here.

The true problem is, as a build also known as “Glass Canon”, zerker build should be a high RISK/high RETURN choice in the game which only a limited part of well-skilled player could master, but in the current version, I dont think the risk of running a zerker build is high enough comparing with the return it could bring. It’s simply hard to consider a meta build as a high risk choice, if it is so, most people would not tend to use it.

Zerkers do not die enough/or face the risk of dying in PVE even if they are not that well-skilled. In dungeons, faster runners just stack together and DPS the boss as quick as the can, or find some spot the glitch the bosses so that the bosses can not damage them.

This situation makes the game really boring.

Personally, even if Anet can not provide some resolution for the zerker issue, at least they should punish the stackers.

Benjamin.2748:

In my opinion, high DPS of zerker build is not the true problem here.

The true problem is, as a build also known as “Glass Canon”, zerker build should be a high RISK/high RETURN choice in the game which only a limited part of well-skilled player could master, but in the current version, I dont think the risk of running a zerker build is high enough comparing with the return it could bring. It’s simply hard to consider a meta build as a high risk choice, if it is so, most people would not tend to use it.

Zerkers do not die enough/or face the risk of dying in PVE even if they are not that well-skilled. In dungeons, faster runners just stack together and DPS the boss as quick as the can, or find some spot the glitch the bosses so that the bosses can not damage them.

This situation makes the game really boring.

Personally, even if Anet can not provide some resolution for the zerker issue, at least they should punish the stackers.

Why do people stack?

• Because in order to benefit from buffs — the game’s coordination mechanic — they have to.

Why do people stack in melee?

• Because melee does more damage.

Why do people pull mobs into certain areas, stacking them?

• Because most melee attacks cleave.

Why do people glitch bosses?

• Because it’s faster, and after doing dungeons for 20 months, the thrill is gone.

Why is the risk of using zerker too low?

• It isn’t. I’ve lost count of the groups that glitch the Spider Queen because they either don’t have the skill or don’t want to have to use skill to avoid her attacks. That last pretty much kills the lack of risk thing. There are plenty of zerkers whose play is mediocre at best, but who get by on glitches and memorization. If you think zerker has too little risk, go fight Pvt users in WvW. Let’s not confuse, “The dungeons are easy because people can run them in their sleep.” with “The dungeons are easy because GC risk is too low.” I remember when people were figuring out the dungeons. They were quite a bit harder then.

Why would a build not be meta if the risk is high?

• It would. Remember that the meta is driven by the best players, the ones who crunch the numbers and have the skill to pull things off.

It goes deeper than just glitched bosses. If it was, then risk would go down and not up by bringing bunker builds (from the horse, aka dungeon runners, mouth about the risk aspect).

The basic mob design violates the inherent tradeoffs that PVP (WVW included) has, because they are pretty much bags of health with a periodic spike attack.

A spike attack specifically designed to make tanking (aka bunker, given the explicit lack of any taunt or other aggro manipulation save stealth) futile. This to “prompt” players to utilize dodge and similar defensive mechanics.

Pretty much the core mechanics of the game is designed around SPVP, but PVE ignores or goes out of its way to violate this every chance it gets.

IndigoSundown.5419:

Benjamin.2748:

In my opinion, high DPS of zerker build is not the true problem here.

The true problem is, as a build also known as “Glass Canon”, zerker build should be a high RISK/high RETURN choice in the game which only a limited part of well-skilled player could master, but in the current version, I dont think the risk of running a zerker build is high enough comparing with the return it could bring. It’s simply hard to consider a meta build as a high risk choice, if it is so, most people would not tend to use it.

Zerkers do not die enough/or face the risk of dying in PVE even if they are not that well-skilled. In dungeons, faster runners just stack together and DPS the boss as quick as the can, or find some spot the glitch the bosses so that the bosses can not damage them.

This situation makes the game really boring.

Personally, even if Anet can not provide some resolution for the zerker issue, at least they should punish the stackers.

Why do people stack?

• Because in order to benefit from buffs — the game’s coordination mechanic — they have to.

Why do people stack in melee?

• Because melee does more damage.

Why do people pull mobs into certain areas, stacking them?

• Because most melee attacks cleave.

Why do people glitch bosses?

• Because it’s faster, and after doing dungeons for 20 months, the thrill is gone.

Why is the risk of using zerker too low?

• It isn’t. I’ve lost count of the groups that glitch the Spider Queen because they either don’t have the skill or don’t want to have to use skill to avoid her attacks. That last pretty much kills the lack of risk thing. There are plenty of zerkers whose play is mediocre at best, but who get by on glitches and memorization. If you think zerker has too little risk, go fight Pvt users in WvW. Let’s not confuse, “The dungeons are easy because people can run them in their sleep.” with “The dungeons are easy because GC risk is too low.” I remember when people were figuring out the dungeons. They were quite a bit harder then.

Why would a build not be meta if the risk is high?

• It would. Remember that the meta is driven by the best players, the ones who crunch the numbers and have the skill to pull things off.

Basically I agree with your post. The most beneficial solution becomes Meta. People are zerkering and stacking because those behavior can bring them maximum benefit with no doubt.

The problem is, is that what we/or game designers want?

You have pointed out that, zerker stakers with melee attacks have the most advantages in dungeons, which bring the question, was Anet attempting to make ranged weapons weaker in dungeons? Were ranged weapons designed only for PvP or WvW?

You also pointed out that many players stack because then don’t have or don’t want to have the skills to kill bosses like Spider Queen by other methods, but from my point of view, game designers have designed Spider Queen to challenge specific skills of players, for example, quick react on venom fields, if those challenges can be avoided with no/or very low cost, either it is a bug, or at least a failure of game designing, for the former, abusing of in-game bugs is against Term of use, and for the latter, those failures should be fixed.

At last, for the argument regarding META builds, my theory is based on the risk-return balance, since many of other forumers have pointed out, the ultimate target in PvE is to kill mobs which makes zerker build has the highest return in game, so it should bear the highest risk in game as well. If build diversity works well, there should be players who like the high risk-high return builds like zerker build, and players who like the low-risk-low return builds like bunker build, and those who like the various build lying between those two build. If almost players choose to pick the same high risk-high return build in a game, we should have enough reason to believe that the risk is not high enough, or the return is too high, and I think the game designers from Anet believe the latter(Actually I am not very sure, maybe they just think it is too much easier to lower the return from zerker gears than modifying the whole dungeon machanism).

Aveneo.2068:

Asmodeus.5782:

Monsters should hit weaker and more often, that’s one simple and useful adjustment. You won’t be able to dodge it all – tough/vit/healing suddenly become needed in the team.

THIS! I am so tired of Champion Undead Chicken #5432 shooting you from out of nowhere with several 20k damage eggs.

Mobs should hit hard as players do in WvW :|

Benjamin.2748:

Basically I agree with your post. The most beneficial solution becomes Meta. People are zerkering and stacking because those behavior can bring them maximum benefit with no doubt.

The problem is, is that what we/or game designers want?

You have pointed out that, zerker stakers with melee attacks have the most advantages in dungeons, which bring the question, was Anet attempting to make ranged weapons weaker in dungeons? Were ranged weapons designed only for PvP or WvW?

You also pointed out that many players stack because then don’t have or don’t want to have the skills to kill bosses like Spider Queen by other methods, but from my point of view, game designers have designed Spider Queen to challenge specific skills of players, for example, quick react on venom fields, if those challenges can be avoided with no/or very low cost, either it is a bug, or at least a failure of game designing, for the former, abusing of in-game bugs is against Term of use, and for the latter, those failures should be fixed.

At last, for the argument regarding META builds, my theory is based on the risk-return balance, since many of other forumers have pointed out, the ultimate target in PvE is to kill mobs which makes zerker build has the highest return in game, so it should bear the highest risk in game as well. If build diversity works well, there should be players who like the high risk-high return builds like zerker build, and players who like the low-risk-low return builds like bunker build, and those who like the various build lying between those two build. If almost players choose to pick the same high risk-high return build in a game, we should have enough reason to believe that the risk is not high enough, or the return is too high, and I think the game designers from Anet believe the latter(Actually I am not very sure, maybe they just think it is too much easier to lower the return from zerker gears than modifying the whole dungeon machanism).

If you’re asking if the situation in which players get the most benefit with the least investment of time is what the community wants I think that the current state of PVE pretty much answers that.
People want rewards, they want them quick and they want them easy. That will never change.

Ranged weapons were designed as a low-risk low-reward alternative to melee, which also might bring some utility. Ranged in a way is here to take some pressure off if you’ve taken too much damage or if you’re a new player and can’t quite handle your dodges properly – then you should range.

Ultimately – the ideal situation is that you learn that boss/ encounter by heart and be able to melee it using your dodges on time to be able to stay alive while dealing maximum damage.

At the beginning of the game people weren’t so experienced with the content and melee was considered suicide, people made threads asking for melee to be “buffed” in some way.
20 months later most good players know each major encounter by heart and no longer need to range, since they’ve got the fight memorized.

Regarding the spider queen – regardless of stacking if all 5 members of your party go into melee mode she will stop doing her poison aoe attack. It’s not a glitch or a bug – it’s the mob reacting and adapting to the range at which it is being engaged.

There are other bosses in the game that react to the player’s position and means of engagement.

Going full melee vs the spider queen simply makes her attack in melee as well.

Also there are bosses in the game whose mechanics discourage melee and reward ranged combat against them. Similarly the spider queen does the opposite – it rewards a melee engagement while punishing range.

A lot of bosses in GW2 punish melee with swooping 1-hit-kill attacks, while ranged players are much less punished through this mechanic.
I find it odd how people consider that a boss whose mechanic punishes ranged instead of melee is broken or glitched.

The return ( aka rewards) from zerker gear is not much higher than other gear sets.

The risk is high – but because full zerker teams are usually composed of good players that know what they are doing people feel that it must be too low risk.

Most players do not run zerker in dungeons. Most players can hardly dodge properly or stay alive.

digiowl.9620:

It goes deeper than just glitched bosses. If it was, then risk would go down and not up by bringing bunker builds (from the horse, aka dungeon runners, mouth about the risk aspect).

The basic mob design violates the inherent tradeoffs that PVP (WVW included) has, because they are pretty much bags of health with a periodic spike attack.

A spike attack specifically designed to make tanking (aka bunker, given the explicit lack of any taunt or other aggro manipulation save stealth) futile. This to “prompt” players to utilize dodge and similar defensive mechanics.

Pretty much the core mechanics of the game is designed around SPVP, but PVE ignores or goes out of its way to violate this every chance it gets.

Honestly? I do feel that risk goes way down in dungeons when playing a bunker build – for the player playing that build. The risk that increase by bringing one bunker is that risk enjoyed by the other players in the party, assuming they are not also bunkers. Slower kills impact GC builds — bunkers are designed with sustain in mind.

Regarding bunkers and massive hits… as one of the game’s main mechanics is active defense, I don’t know that it’s outside the pale to encourage everyone, regardless of build, to dodge these.

It is certainly true that more builds seem to be desirable in sPvP or WvW than in PvE. However, there really aren’t any non-viable builds in PvE, whereas I believe there are in PvP.

Finally, GW2 might be a very different game if balance was based on PvE, or if PvE played more like PvP (as it did in some parts of GW). Would that make it a better game? The most likely true answer is that some would prefer it that way, while some would prefer it remain as it is.

Dalanor.5387:

Blood Red Arachnid.2493:

The goal isn’t to “require” anything. The goal is to make PVE a bit harder in such a way that the strengths of passive defenses will finally show in PVE.

Get protection and weakness, hell go nuts and try to maintain frost aura too, get the appropriate slaying potion and you got 53% or 103% damage reduction without any stat spent on tougness or vitality …

The thing is, currently you don’t need to do that, since you can avoid most of the attacks. Though I imagine that pure zerker groups would utilize weakness and protection more. Heck, even cleanses, since many faster-attacking mobs will have condis. Of course, there would also be more use for heal to remove damage, and more trait/utility allocation to damage if you have some defensive stats. It would almost be as if things were balanced…

haviz.1340:

Once again you chose to ignore the entire type of the content and form an opinion based on that. The bolded part only emphasis that. Unless you think that >2 minutes long fights in high scales fractals are not long enough to show that glass cannons are risky to play and despite popular belief they don’t kill before being killed in that kind of the content.

This is so far off the ball I don’t even know where to begin. First, you are omitting things about fractals: bosses don’t have higher attack rates in high levels, so everyone kites the bosses around shamelessly while dodging their slowly paced big telegraphs. For the regular enemies, they only take a two minutes… “if you’re by yourself or duoing”https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBEU72AeQzg maybe. Otherwise, berserker gear does exactly what I say it does: kills enemies before they can stack up too much damage. I guess you are assuming that people mean zerker accomplishes this by facetanking enemies with raw DPS. No, they kill quicker because the few attacks an enemy makes, the few active defenses it takes to fend them off.

Second, you’re being hypocritical about ignoring content by cherry picking the only portion of the game that suits your argument, and then completely ignoring anything inconvenient to that argument.. When you have a bunch of players hiding behind a wall of reflection, do you honestly think that the time limit on that wall doesn’t make faster kills a better option?

Third, this argument doesn’t even make sense. Are you saying high level fractals means that no one anywhere else should have more rapid attacks? How does one jump to that conclusion?

Why in the living kitten would you ever make that more defensive set has higher damage potential when it is already easier to perform while wearing those sets? Another thing, passive defenses should never be encouraged in an action game because they don’t require any effort whatsoever by the definition.

Again, I don’t even know where to begin here. First, giving enemies more rapid attacks will make things harder on defensive sets. It will make things harder on everyone. Passive defenses just happen to hit not as hard with such a change IF and only IF they learn to dodge/block. If they don’t, the defensive gear won’t have enough HP to survive the big hits they used to facetank from bosses.

Second, performance in those sets is limited only to those who can’t dodge/block yet. Once someone knows how to use active defenses, it becomes easier to run high damage gear than tanky gear. Third, the whole “there should be no passive defenses” is a meaningless notion pulled out of thin air, is completely wrong since passive defenses don’t mean passive play, and completely ignores the whole point of stat selection as a whole: preferences in play.

RoRo.8270:

Nerf zerker more so we can spend another 10mins on boring bosses with massive health pools

Wouldn’t it make sense to then simply give more power, not damage, to control setups.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Unshakable

That seems, at least to me, to be why berserker is simply the best setup.

Blood Red Arachnid.2493:

This is so far off the ball I don’t even know where to begin. First, you are omitting things about fractals: bosses don’t have higher attack rates in high levels, so everyone kites the bosses around shamelessly while dodging their slowly paced big telegraphs. For the regular enemies, they only take a two minutes… “if you’re by yourself or duoing”https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBEU72AeQzg maybe. Otherwise, berserker gear does exactly what I say it does: kills enemies before they can stack up too much damage. I guess you are assuming that people mean zerker accomplishes this by facetanking enemies with raw DPS. No, they kill quicker because the few attacks an enemy makes, the few active defenses it takes to fend them off.

You just linked a video which start shows what I’ve been saying. Two people abusing known fact that you don’t trigger fast melee attacks of archdiviner (and other bosses I had in mind) if you stay at >130 range (which you can even with 130 range weapons). the ele has 300 range and the warrior starts meleeing only when the boss channels his attacks and doesn’t retaliate. Otherwise, warrior ranges with a longbow. I’m pretty sure he’s proud of that. Mobs are being killed easily because certain classes can permanently blind them. I’d like to see how you kill dredges without kittenload of defense received most commonly from a guardian.

Fractal bosses attack faster and hurts more, thus they are more risky than faceroll dungeons bosses and the whole idea of kill before being killed is wrong and anyone claiming otherwise is either not experienced enough or simply ignorant. Just ask anyone from the top pve guilds why might stacking as an ele is harder. Answer: because bosses attack too fast and it’s harder to complete a single autattack chain to get the blast from LH without interrupting yourself by constant dodging.

Second, you’re being hypocritical about ignoring content by cherry picking the only portion of the game that suits your argument, and then completely ignoring anything inconvenient to that argument.. When you have a bunch of players hiding behind a wall of reflection, do you honestly think that the time limit on that wall doesn’t make faster kills a better option?

There are two instances where people complain about zerker dominance, dungeons and fractals. You chose to ignore 50% of that content and call my hypocritical? Also, I didn’t know you can reflect melee autoattacks (those are the hardest part of fractal bosses).

Third, this argument doesn’t even make sense. Are you saying high level fractals means that no one anywhere else should have more rapid attacks? How does one jump to that conclusion?

I’m saying that rapid attacks will not change anything you want to achieve by proposing this nonsense.

I completed fotm 80 with no guardians or mesmers to hide behind and certain encounters had a lot of pressure on your team. The fights took more than 5 minutes. Now anet adds more rapid attacks and I am forced to wear defensive gear and trait defensively in order to survive because those passive things are the only thing that counters steady pressure. I can still complete the content but it’s easier for me because I depend on something that’s passive and works in the background without my contribution and now I have no choice in build diversity because I’ve been forced to run specific builds. Way to go, perhaps I should start creating threads how bunkers are OP and brainless to play?

Blood Red Arachnid.2493:

Again, I don’t even know where to begin here. First, giving enemies more rapid attacks will make things harder on defensive sets. It will make things harder on everyone. Passive defenses just happen to hit not as hard with such a change IF and only IF they learn to dodge/block. If they don’t, the defensive gear won’t have enough HP to survive the big hits they used to facetank from bosses.

Harder because now you have to get more passive defense? Currently, you can facetank hardest hitting bosses in the game with a dodge key disabled, those “one shots everywhere” myth is getting annoying as kitten. They cant just add more rapid attacks, they have to move part of the offense from bigger hits to rapid autoattacks (because average folks will whine how game became hard) which, again, will achieve nothing whatsoever, except obligatory passive defense or sustain. Everyone loves passive defense, pvp-ers are delighted everytime meta is heavy bunkerish. People didn’t buy this game to tank, if you did, well, I don’t know what to tell you.

Second, performance in those sets is limited only to those who can’t dodge/block yet. Once someone knows how to use active defenses, it becomes easier to run high damage gear than tanky gear. Third, the whole “there should be no passive defenses” is a meaningless notion pulled out of thin air, is completely wrong since passive defenses don’t mean passive play, and completely ignores the whole point of stat selection as a whole: preferences in play.

I don’t even know how to respond to so much misinformation here. Passive defense by definition means passive play. Anet should just completely abandon the whole idea of stats, otherwise we will continue to have roleplayers, who cannot grasp simple concepts of active gameplay, constantly whining how it’s not fair that more risky gameplay is more rewarding.

An advice for you: drop your necro and make an elementalist or a thief. Maybe it would change your perspective.

GSSBlunaspike.4153:

Wouldn’t it make sense to then simply give more power, not damage, to control setups.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Unshakable

That seems, at least to me, to be why berserker is simply the best setup.

Because control skills are tied to your stats. Everytime I use deep freeze on the boss to stun him for 5 seconds, I could have stunned him for 10 seconds if only I had different armour.

Blood Red Arachnid.2493:

The thing is, currently you don’t need to do that, since you can avoid most of the attacks. Though I imagine that pure zerker groups would utilize weakness and protection more. Heck, even cleanses, since many faster-attacking mobs will have condis. Of course, there would also be more use for heal to remove damage, and more trait/utility allocation to damage if you have some defensive stats. It would almost be as if things were balanced…

Again, you can avoid most of the attacks in dungeons. Try that in fractals, there’s a reason why people use weakness consumable and permanent protection from a hammer guardian there. Answer: because you cannot avoid most of the attacks.

Aeolus.3615:

Aveneo.2068:

Asmodeus.5782:

Monsters should hit weaker and more often, that’s one simple and useful adjustment. You won’t be able to dodge it all – tough/vit/healing suddenly become needed in the team.

THIS! I am so tired of Champion Undead Chicken #5432 shooting you from out of nowhere with several 20k damage eggs.

Mobs should hit hard as players do in WvW :|

The problem is not hit hard or not hit hard, but hit hard yet have the health to rival a bunkered up warrior or necromancer. And thanks to the hard cap on conditions, this focus on health as the “difficulty” favors direct damage sources. This again favors crit heavy builds.

IndigoSundown.5419:

digiowl.9620:

It goes deeper than just glitched bosses. If it was, then risk would go down and not up by bringing bunker builds (from the horse, aka dungeon runners, mouth about the risk aspect).

The basic mob design violates the inherent tradeoffs that PVP (WVW included) has, because they are pretty much bags of health with a periodic spike attack.

A spike attack specifically designed to make tanking (aka bunker, given the explicit lack of any taunt or other aggro manipulation save stealth) futile. This to “prompt” players to utilize dodge and similar defensive mechanics.

Pretty much the core mechanics of the game is designed around SPVP, but PVE ignores or goes out of its way to violate this every chance it gets.

Honestly? I do feel that risk goes way down in dungeons when playing a bunker build – for the player playing that build. The risk that increase by bringing one bunker is that risk enjoyed by the other players in the party, assuming they are not also bunkers. Slower kills impact GC builds — bunkers are designed with sustain in mind.

Regarding bunkers and massive hits… as one of the game’s main mechanics is active defense, I don’t know that it’s outside the pale to encourage everyone, regardless of build, to dodge these.

It is certainly true that more builds seem to be desirable in sPvP or WvW than in PvE. However, there really aren’t any non-viable builds in PvE, whereas I believe there are in PvP.

Finally, GW2 might be a very different game if balance was based on PvE, or if PvE played more like PvP (as it did in some parts of GW). Would that make it a better game? The most likely true answer is that some would prefer it that way, while some would prefer it remain as it is.

The problem is that the difference between a bunker build and a zerker build is one extra spike hit. Meaning that you can miss one dodge in a bunker, but you can’t miss any in a zerker. But because of the sharp tradeoff between survivability and DPS, you need to dodge maybe 10x as many spikes in a bunker build as you need to in a zerker build.

Never mind that stack and down state allow for rapid recovery of fellows, with or without bunker builds, in part because no build elements affect recovery time.

haviz.1340:

GSSBlunaspike.4153:

Wouldn’t it make sense to then simply give more power, not damage, to control setups.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Unshakable

That seems, at least to me, to be why berserker is simply the best setup.

Because control skills are tied to your stats. Everytime I use deep freeze on the boss to stun him for 5 seconds, I could have stunned him for 10 seconds if only I had different armour.

Err, condition duration is perhaps the second hardest stat to come by after boon duration.

One thing i would wish for is that we would actually see that recharge on the mob skills slow down when under chill. Right now all you see is that they turn a blue tint and some slight particles, but otherwise you have no idea if it does any good at all.

At least with professions, all default recharge times are listed somewhere.

haviz.1340:

Blood Red Arachnid.2493:

Again, I don’t even know where to begin here. First, giving enemies more rapid attacks will make things harder on defensive sets. It will make things harder on everyone. Passive defenses just happen to hit not as hard with such a change IF and only IF they learn to dodge/block. If they don’t, the defensive gear won’t have enough HP to survive the big hits they used to facetank from bosses.

Harder because now you have to get more passive defense? Currently, you can facetank hardest hitting bosses in the game with a dodge key disabled

Only “evidence” i have seen of that is some videos of glitched bosses, in particular one that had to rely on the clearly OP warrior healing signet even after the glitch.

digiowl.9620:

Only “evidence” i have seen of that is some videos of glitched bosses, in particular one that had to rely on the clearly OP warrior healing signet even after the glitch.

http://youtu.be/b2VhmwLwvrM

haviz.1340:

digiowl.9620:

Only “evidence” i have seen of that is some videos of glitched bosses, in particular one that had to rely on the clearly OP warrior healing signet even after the glitch.

http://youtu.be/b2VhmwLwvrM

Clarify one thing for me, are they all running HP heavy builds or just the elementalist we get the POV of?

We were all running things like clerics/pvt/apoth. The video was to demonstrate how op passive defence is and how easy the game becomes when you stack that much passive defence.

It would be OP if one guy could carry the whole group like that via a HP build. It is hardly any more OP than the all zerker stack and spike groups. The problem is that you either have to go one extreme or the other, as mixing the two goes down the drain fast.