A common complaint among the PVP community is the lack of viable builds. Why can’t PVP get ANY of the new runes, sigils and stat combinations that PVE continues to get? We haven’t had ANY new non-cosmetic items PVP since beta. Think about that- 14 months and nothing but fixing a few bugs, organizing runes/sigils and updating a few descriptions. For example, Mad King runes have been in the game for a year now and still aren’t available in PVP.
Additionally, why can’t the use of food and utilities be an option too? These things that are already in place in the game seem like easy solutions to helping create a little more diversity in PVP since “balancing” skills takes place at a slug’s pace and often creates more problems than it solves.
Please share any viable ideas you may have.
Diversity is the topic, and food could help with it. As far as balance goes, everyone should be able to have access to the same options of pvp foods/utilities.
The best way to increase viability is to improve the aspects that are lacking.
I know rangers best so…
Best way to increase viability would be to buff up currently lacking weapon types/traits. For example, Power Rangers. The GS is a great defensive weapon, has decent burst, but some terrible sustained. Buffing GS1 by 10% would work towards making the sustained damage better. The range damage modifiers on long bow if removed would also work quite well to increasing power ranger viability. Outside of that, moving traits around/ Condensing Traits.
Beast Master builds could be increased by making Shouts the beast master thing and buffing them accordingly. They could also make it so pets scaled off gear (really should happen) and beast masters simply had a higher percentage of their stats attributed.
Now, it doesn’t take much to overbuff and create the “power creep”, so thats best avoided. However some little changes can increase viability by a lot.
The best way to increase viability is to improve the aspects that are lacking.
I know rangers best so…
Best way to increase viability would be to buff up currently lacking weapon types/traits. For example, Power Rangers. The GS is a great defensive weapon, has decent burst, but some terrible sustained. Buffing GS1 by 10% would work towards making the sustained damage better. The range damage modifiers on long bow if removed would also work quite well to increasing power ranger viability. Outside of that, moving traits around/ Condensing Traits.
Beast Master builds could be increased by making Shouts the beast master thing and buffing them accordingly. They could also make it so pets scaled off gear (really should happen) and beast masters simply had a higher percentage of their stats attributed.
Now, it doesn’t take much to overbuff and create the “power creep”, so thats best avoided. However some little changes can increase viability by a lot.
the problem of rangers is they are forced to invest in wilderness. shouts are useless cause u cant combine them.
also rangers lack utilities. without trait a ranger has only 2 possibilities to remove conditions. 1 via healspring and 1 transfer it to the pet. another possibiliy would be using some pets, but there u have the problem of different stats on pets and usage of them.
A common complaint among the PVP community is the lack of viable builds..
No on in their right mind gives a kitten about build diversity.
There are already a over a dozen top tier builds to pick from, that’s EASILY enough to sustain a population.
The issue is that the vast majority of top tier builds suck balls to play.
Anet hasn’t shown a lick of interest in making builds more engaging to play (or maps more fun!!)… they only balance… balance out crappy gameplay…
That’s driven GW2 into the ground.
A common complaint among the PVP community is the lack of viable builds..
No on in their right mind gives a kitten about build diversity.
There are already a over a dozen top tier builds to pick from, that’s EASILY enough to sustain a population.
The issue is that the vast majority of top tier builds suck balls to play.
Anet hasn’t shown a lick of interest in making builds more engaging to play (or maps more fun!!)… they only balance… balance out crappy gameplay…
That’s driven GW2 into the ground.
A common complaint among the PVP community is the lack of viable builds..
No on in their right mind gives a kitten about build diversity.
There are already a over a dozen top tier builds to pick from, that’s EASILY enough to sustain a population.
The issue is that the vast majority of top tier builds suck balls to play.
Anet hasn’t shown a lick of interest in making builds more engaging to play (or maps more fun!!)… they only balance… balance out crappy gameplay…
That’s driven GW2 into the ground.
A common complaint among the PVP community is the lack of viable builds..
No on in their right mind gives a kitten about build diversity.
There are already a over a dozen top tier builds to pick from, that’s EASILY enough to sustain a population.
The issue is that the vast majority of top tier builds suck balls to play.
Anet hasn’t shown a lick of interest in making builds more engaging to play (or maps more fun!!)… they only balance… balance out crappy gameplay…
That’s driven GW2 into the ground.
Nice, insulting through generalizations… I don’t think you pay attention to the forums enough then if that’s the way you feel. People are complaining pretty regularly about the lack of viable builds for their professions and don’t like being “forced” into certain builds without gimping themselves. Maybe a dozen builds are indeed enough to sustain a population, but that doesn’t mean that players are happy about it. Simply adding things to PVP that are already in the game could help mix it up a bit. I do agree that many of these top tier builds aren’t healthy for PVP, but there are plenty of other topics discussing this point.
I do agree that many of these top tier builds aren’t healthy for PVP, but there are plenty of other topics discussing this point.
The points overlaps…
There is no point in adding in more build diversity if Anet doesn’t improve how any specs play, or else it’s basically gambling. You’ll get a few new random specs in the top tier, whether it hurts (spririt ranger, S/D thief, stun warrior) or helps (?) is entirely up to a roll of the dice… the point is to improve gameplay (that’s the point of every change) and a random chance at a mild improvement, that’s a kittenty thing to place your bets on.
I mained a ranger months and months back, I feel your pain.
It’s kittenty that some classes will only have like 1-2 builds, but yeah, if the build(s) are actually extremely well made (spririt ranger was a deep and engaging sort of setup), it’d stop tonnnnnnnnns of the QQ.
A common complaint among the PVP community is the lack of viable builds..
No on in their right mind gives a kitten about build diversity.
There are already a over a dozen top tier builds to pick from, that’s EASILY enough to sustain a population.
The issue is that the vast majority of top tier builds suck balls to play.
Anet hasn’t shown a lick of interest in making builds more engaging to play (or maps more fun!!)… they only balance… balance out crappy gameplay…
That’s driven GW2 into the ground.
I disagree with you 100%. Knowing that there are only 2 thief builds that even have a chance in TPvP (one of which is considered generally superior) is disappointing.
In other games I’ve played, there were usually 5 or 6 different builds, per class, that were considered powerful and versatile enough to PvP with. They each brought different skills and tools, leading to a more fun, varied game.
If you’re a thief and haven’t
pre-ordered HOT at this point,
save yourself the money and don’t bother.
In other games I’ve played, there were usually 5 or 6 different builds, per class, that were considered powerful and versatile enough to PvP with. They each brought different skills and tools, leading to a more fun game.
So you’re saying, because a game had 5-6 builds per class and was good, a game has to have 5-6 builds per class to be good?
Yes different skills and tools to pick from helps a game.
There is a kitten ton of room to work that into 16+ builds.
You seem to have missed the core of the post though and instead took away that I feel “this games doesn’t need more diversity in gameplay”
Which is completely off… what I’m saying is that the game needs diversity in gameplay, and the best (by leaps and bounds) way to go about it is to adjust/tweak/redo existing weapons/mechanics/exc. to be more engaging and make gameplay more dynamic.
There is no point in quantity if it’s all terribly made, the specs out there right now seem so boring and undiverse because they are boring and undiverse… that’s not an issue with the number of specs, but quality of them… so far Anet doesn’t care a drop about making specs engaging, only making more boring and undiverse specs viable which won’t change anything in the slightest.
(yet increase build diversity…)
In other games I’ve played, there were usually 5 or 6 different builds, per class, that were considered powerful and versatile enough to PvP with. They each brought different skills and tools, leading to a more fun game.
So you’re saying, because a game had 5-6 builds per class and was good, a game has to have 5-6 builds per class to be good?
No. That’s a very simplistic way to misinterpret my comment. If I meant to say a game must have 5-6 builds per class to be good, I would have just said that.
Yes different skills and tools to pick from helps a game.
There is a kitten ton of room to work that into 16+ builds.
You seem to have missed the core of the post though and instead took away that I feel “this games doesn’t need more diversity in gameplay”
Which is completely off… what I’m saying is that the game needs diversity in gameplay, and the best (by leaps and bounds) way to go about it is to adjust/tweak/redo existing weapons/mechanics/exc. to be more engaging and make
gameplay more dynamic.
There is no point in quantity if it’s all terribly made, the specs out there right now seem so boring and undiverse because they are boring and undiverse… that’s not an issue with the number of specs, but quality of them… so far Anet doesn’t care a drop about making specs engaging, only making more boring and undiverse specs viable which won’t change anything in the slightest.
(yet increase build diversity…)
And I still disagree. Your suggestion seems to be “make the existing 1 or 2 specs much more versatile”…which still leaves players with 1 or 2 builds to choose from, which to me is boring. I don’t want to play a jack of all trades, I want to play a focused class. I want my decision to feel like they matter, not be running the same spec as half the population because it has so many options covered.
I’d prefer if I had 5 specs to choose from, each with varying levels of focus in different areas, with different strengths and weaknesses, so it feels like my choices matter.
If you’re a thief and haven’t
pre-ordered HOT at this point,
save yourself the money and don’t bother.
While I think diversity has opened up slightly, the ritual of manually changing my traits, runes, sigils, weapons is a bit monotonous. A template of sorts to help speed this process up could encourage people to switch and fiddling around with their builds.
On a similar note, having a ‘-’ option to re-allocate a few trait points instead of ALL the trait points, would be a very neat feature to implement. The only complication that it would need to be ‘locked’ for WvW/PvE.
No. That’s a very simplistic way to misinterpret my comment. If I meant to say a game must have 5-6 builds per class to be good, I would have just said that.
A game had 5-6 builds per class.
You liked it.
That doesn’t mean games haven’t also succeed with fewer builds and you would have liked them more.
If your quote doesn’t mean 5-6 builds/class is important to a good game… there isn’t much if any meaning in it, short of that a game can work with that many builds
which still leaves players with 1 or 2 builds to choose from, which to me is boring. I don’t want to play a jack of all trades, I want to play a focused class. I want my decision to feel like they matter, not be running the same spec as half the population because it has so many options covered.
engaging, or even dynamic, doesn’t mean jack of all trades
Those two words are actually entirely irrelevant from it.
If you can’t find decision in GW2 skill setup, 8 classes netting 16+ build styles (i mean if the builds were each well made.. yada yada..) that work…
Then you’re talking out your kitten .
Sure it’s nice to have more, anyone can respect and enjoy more, and games should expand to have more, for the sake of more personalization…
But by no means will it make or break a game (for the vast majority of gamers)…
GW2 is broken.
Build diversity isn’t directly a cause.
If/when we get more game modes, I think build diversity will open up. If you aren’t forced to fight on a point, things could change drastically.
Builds such as ranged support (staff ele) would probably be completely viable in a capture the flag format, for example, which is seen as a wasted slot in our current game mode.
What the developers are doing is increasing build diversity. However, it’s happening so slowly that it’s hard to notice. It started with the Necro buff. They created the condi meta to counter the power meta. Then they created the currently-OP warrior to counter that meta (somewhat). Hopefully the next set of changes will shift the meta in a different way.
If you do this 4 or 5 times what starts to happen is we start to get a meta-“rock-paper-scissors” game:
comp2 beats comp1
comp 3 beats comp2
comp4 beats comp3
comp1 beats comp4
etc.
The problem is adjusting the OP professions to still be viable, depending on the composition.
The only complication that it would need to be ‘locked’ for WvW/PvE.