Showing Posts For Art of Ecstasy.9201:
From a competitive standpoint, I actually want 800 points instead of 500 points. There’s not enough opportunity for comebacks right now, and it’s not quite as exciting for either team when you know you’re going to win so early!
This might actually be the dumbest post I’ve ever read
Work out the real damage formula and then go “oops, he’s right.”
Just a small math example of an axe warrior with 2500 attack power:
Lets assume an autoattack occures every second. (I know thats off, but it just to show the concept of Quickness).
It does 1000 damage per hit.
That would be 1000 dps.
That would be 0.4 damage per attack power.
He no adds 5 stacks of might (capped at 25), adding another 5*35 power so his attack power is now 2675.
He will now deal 1070 dmg.
It is now 1070 dps, which is a 7% increase.The second warrior uses the same setup but uses quickness instead.
His autoattack now occures every 0.5s instead of every second, but still deals 1000 damage.
So 2 attacks per second for 1000 damage, or 2000 dps, 100% more.Now lets see how many stacks of might that is. He basically doubled his attack power for auto attacks, so 2500 power. Might gives 35 power, so 2500/35 = 71.43 stacks of might. Does any wonder why there isn’t a skill which gives you over 70 stacks of might?
Yet those 70 stacks of might could be dispelled…
You failed to provide the proper damage formula, which makes your proof irrelevant. Your premises are not based on how the game actually works.
Let me illustrate why your proof means nothing by changing some numbers.
1. Assume that the warrior has 2500 power.
2. Assume that an autoattack occurs every second.
3. It does 50 damage per hit. (Where did your 1000 come from? Thin air?)
4. That would be 0.02 damage per attack power. (BY THE WAY, THIS IS NOT HOW DAMAGE WORKS IN THIS GAME)
5. He now adds 5 stacks of might (capped at 25), adding another 5*35 power so his attack power is now 2675.
6. He will now deal 50,000 dmg. (I pulled this number out of thin air because power is NOT attack damage in this game.)
7. That is a 1000x damage multiplier.
8. Conclusion: Might is far more powerful than quickness, which is only a 2x damage multiplier.
My proof is as valid as yours, because it is based on the same premises and the numbers that you pulled out of thin air are also pulled out of thin air.
Points to take away:
1. Power is NOT attack damage.
2. The “Attack” stat in the character sheet is an estimation formula ArenaNet uses to give you a nice number, and NOT your actual attack damage. (If you think about it, this is obvious when you realize that the Attack number is Power + Weapon Damage + Condition Damage, but condition damage does not affect autoattacks at all!)
3. You failed to consider armor.
4. You also did not consider AD ratios on the skills themselves.
5. Do some research on what the damage formula actually is, and come away a better theorycrafter!
edit: You may ask me, “but why does armor need to be considered when power is attack damage and quickness is attack speed? that’s pretty dumb!” Hint: Power is not attack damage and is actually tied into armor in the damage model. If you are comparing might (which increases power), that affects damage dependent on armor. However, attack speed does not have anything to do with armor. That is why they are two completely different things.
And also, the damage formula may not be currently available online in easy-to-read form. You may have to damage testing in Heart of the Mists to find out what it is, if you are truly interested in figuring out how the game is balanced.
(edited by Art of Ecstasy.9201)
I do agree that the game is not as fun as it could be right now, but I think that’s not so much a balancing design decision as it is the point you made in your first paragraph. People don’t play consistently or play well at all for objectives right now. And the feeling of playing with a “team” right now, the missing feeling you’re talking about, that feeling can’t develop without more knowledge of how to play properly being spread out. I think two things need to happen for the game to truly have depth – first, the community needs to have access to resources that teach them how to play well such as guides, videos, professional teams, and so on. Secondly, and very importantly, there needs to be a clear ranking system based on nothing except for win/loss. Currently, I think the problems and the anti-fun that we’re all sort of feeling with the game is not due to balance issues, but is more due to the fact that people both don’t know how to play well and are also disincentivized from playing well. A ranking system would address that, whether it’s Elo, MMR, or something else. So really, I think your concerns are real about this game not being as fun as it should be, but I think they’re misdirected and it’s not so much a balance issue as it is a reward system issue. Even LoL during its early days with no visible ranking system was still fun and team-like; the core difference being that the only thing that influenced your reward at the end of a game was whether your team won or lost the match. (Also, autobalancing does not exist in any competitive game, but that’s an entirely different thing – I feel like ArenaNet needs to add an option for 5v5 solo join matchmade games with no autobalancing.)
Thoughts?
I think a comparison between dota and objective based MMO PvP …
The point that an aspect of competition that makes it interesting is the resolution of conflict over time is one I agree with. I think you’re right about that, but if I may go and apply the concept to sPvP – the score in football is kept by the number of points scored by each team. How the individual teams go about getting those points isn’t much of a concern for the involvement of the fans watching the game. Of course, fans like to see strategy and tactics, but it doesn’t matter too much which ones are used! Some strategies are more action-intensive than others, but at the end of the day, all that matters is the score. Consequently, if one team can win against another team by scoring better using a gank-heavy strategy than a defensive strategy, even though on the surface it seems that it’s not as good a measurement of team play, doesn’t it still mean that overall the gank-heavy team played better than the other team? Perhaps it does take something away from the other aspect of a Team v. Team game, but I believe it also adds something at the same time. While a metagame revolving around roaming isn’t very good at showcasing different players’ ability to play well in teamfights, one revolving around teamfights is similarly not very good at showcasing a player’s ability to influence the map with his team. Differing strategies will then be more fun or less fun depending on personal preference, and I don’t think a roaming metagame has anything wrong with it or is any less of a team strategy.
If boxing matches ended in 20 seconds, it would make boxing a boring sport. Resolution over time with plenty of chances for “come-backs” is important to the health of a sport. But I don’t think quick-ending matches being bad is applicable to quick deaths being bad. The reason is if a match ended in 20 seconds or if the game is definitively over then there’s no reason for a fan to keep watching. But death is not the same thing as losing in an objective-based game. The only thing that really brings you closer to losing is the actual objective itself, or points. If capturing points were so valuable that teams reached 500 points in 20 seconds, it would not be a very exciting or competitive game. On that I agree with you, and personally I would like to see the game end at 800 or 1000 points instead of 500, but I don’t agree that the analogy extends to dying in the game. You say, “ideally you want a balance where battles are decided before it gets boring not so quickly that they don’t have a chance to take shape”. I would argue that the rate that battles are decided at does not matter so much as the rate that the “match” is decided at, which is more analogous to the football score or boxing match length. And the match is not decided by battles, but by control of points. Plenty of people die in far less than 10 seconds in many competitive spectator sport games, yet it doesn’t seem to matter to fans. In MOBA games, being caught out of position by a DPS enemy can lead to dying in less than one or two seconds, or almost instaneously. That doesn’t detract from the fun of the game! (Except for the person that died.) That’s because the true tension and resolution of tension toward an outcome that builds and resolves over time, as you put it, relate not to the battles directly but the objectives.
[5000 character limit – split post in half]
Two points. Keep in mind here that I’m not a “quickness is bad” person. I’m a “there’s something off about the PvP in general” person.
First, you’re certainly not meant to win a 1 v 2 against players of equal skill – at least not in normal circumstances. You should, however, be able to put up a fight and ideally survive long enough for help to arrive. In the current state of the game, you really can’t at equal skill level. The time to kill is just too short, the way CC and DPS increase per additional player is too exponential, etc.
Second, I think you’re overestimating how many CC breaks, mitigation – basically, defense in general – every class can bring. Some have it far better than others, for example Engineers with a 15 second cooldown break immobilize versus Rangers without any way to break immobilize. As it is, this area of the game isn’t quite balanced. This isn’t to say that every class doesn’t have some way to deal with every thing they’ll face, but some will still run dry on these options far, far more quickly, and some need to sacrifice far, far more in their overall build to get these options than others.
I personally don’t think the time-to-kill is too short in a 1v2. I think it’s too long, but that’s a difference in our opinions of what makes a game competitive. I feel like players should not be able to “call for help” and fend off until reinforcements arrive, and instead they should be punished for not proactively being in the right position. Perhaps that is my bias from DotA and LoL speaking though, where in those games if you were in a 1v2 during most of the early stages of the game, you either escaped or died within a couple of seconds. Certainly not enough time for players from other parts of the map to come reinforce for you. So that first point is a difference in what we believe makes a game more competitive and more fun as a spectator sport. I believe that if fights were more survivable 1v2, it would be both less fun to watch and less competitive.
As to your second point, perhaps you are right – I’ve never played a Ranger. The question is then, is it acceptable for some classes to have less escapes in exchange for the ability to do other things better? Specifically related to quickness, is the variety in roster large enough for there to be “counter-picks” in the game and still have it be balanced? There’s 8 professions in the game, but there’s also many different weapon sets and utility sets that each profession can take. How many truly unique “load-outs” do you have in GW2? Is that number enough for there to be counter-picking and not have a stagnant metagame?
To illustrate what I mean, imagine a game that only had two classes, A and B. If A had a move that would nearly one-shot B and B had no good way to deal with it, everyone who played the game to win would have to always pick A. The variety wouldn’t be enough to make that an interesting game. If you added another class, C, then you’d have three classes on the roster and increases the number of classes by one, but the number of match-ups would increase exponentially (going from 1 to 3 in this case). When enough classes are added, at a certain point, the number of possible match-ups becomes so large that it is acceptable to leave some interactions between classes (say, a Lightsaber-Warrior vs BlasterGun-Ranger) broken or harder to deal with than you’d like. If most interactions between the classes are fair enough that it’s balanced and allows for skill to differentiate whether one team wins over another, then it’s not necessary to fix certain broken interactions.
I’m not saying that the current implementation of the “give-classes-burst-damage” mechanic (ie. quickness) is perfect, but I wanted to clarify that the reason I believe it’s a good mechanic is because it allows for a more exciting spectator sport and a more competitive TEAM game and that even if it wasn’t fair in some situations, the overall health of the game benefits from having it in the game as it is now.
If you have differing thoughts on why quickness detracts from the health of the game (whether that is the competitiveness of the game, the potential eSports nature of the game, or anything else), please let me know! I’m always interested in learning something new.
oh by the way what you said here?
“And really takeing 50% more damage for 4 sec is nothing. Just use it when you know your not getting focused. Its so short of a time that the other team does not have the ability to react and use that 50% to their advantage.”
i have found out the problem. you have the reflexes of a rock. anet does not balance around rocks.
Ah so you have no arguments and are back to attack fellow posters. I will take this as a no. Again for the reading impaired.
until your hit with someone using quickness there is very little indication that they have it on. So that takes time off of that. Than you have to say in “you fill in what you use” to tell other members what is going on. You have to tell them who and what. Next your team has to react to this information. Again all this takes time. Than your team has to wait for their current actions to finish (or get out of it). Again takes time. All of witch means that the window of time you have to take advantage of that weakness gets smaller and smaller.
It is very hard, who am i kidding, impossible to take any thing you say seriously when you make statements like this.
Oh I get it, you just run bots in your spvp games.
do you really think people are like that on voice comms? clearly you have not ever played a game of tournament in a organized setting.
person a: HELLO SIR I AM BEING ATTACKED I BELIEVE HE IS USING QUICKNESS. I WOULD LIKE ASSISTANCE PLEASE
person b: UNDERSTOOD I WILL ASSIST.
person a: ALAS I HAVE PASSED.
person b: OH NO :’(
here’s what really happens:
person a: lol this guy frenzied.
person a: and he’s dead
person b: what akitten lol
i will literally cancel my account if you can stream your tournament history from in-game and you have even 10 wins. TEN WINS. this is how confident I am that you have no clue what is going on
Brave man, but a confident man!
I also think quickness is not a problem. Animation-based combat makes evading attacks, even quickness-boosted ones, easy enough that it’s not a big deal. It’s like people don’t have experience playing games where reflexes are required. And by reflexes, I mean 0.4sec or less reaction time, which is easily achievable. The instant their quickness animation starts, you should be able to mitigate all but the first hit or two of their attack.
The negative effects of quickness are largely null and void. In most cases the damage recipient is cc’d or otherwise unable to attack back, in which case taking increased damage for a few seconds doesn’t mean anything when you aren’t getting hit. And likewise, having your dodge bar not refill when you don’t need to dodge isn’t detrimental at all.
How hard is the quickness instagib to pull off? Not hard at all. No lengthy combo chains or buff prerequisites are required. How much do you get out of it? An insta gib kill as long as it lands. Ect.
The risk vs reward is all off. Double Dagger Ele’s for example have to at least set up a combo chain over a few seconds with the possibility of multiple attacks getting blocked or otherwise not landing to do similar damage. While other classes can just pop quickness and hit 1 button with better results.
This is not a 1v1 game. It is a 5v5 game. 1v1, nobody should be able to kill you with a quickness burst. In larger battles, you have teammates. If you instantly drop, either you made a mistake or your team did. And it’s much easier to blame the team than to blame yourself.
In a sense, GW2 is still very behind other games. It hasn’t even evolved yet to blaming teammates for everything that goes wrong, because people still think this is a 1v1 game. When the importance of the other nine players is recognized, then instead we will see complaints about baddie teammates.
I’m almost always on the side of “learn to play with the system you’re in”, instead of asking for changes and such. In fact, I believe GW2 is probably the best MMO I have ever played – since Ultima Online.
But I think I agree with this thread. Quickness seemed strange to me when I first saw it, and when I first tried it I was shocked to see the amount of damage I could dump with it.
I do not think it should be removed from the game, though. I think it needs to be adjusted. Perhaps it should always have a significant drawback, such as Frenzy (50% increased damage taken).
Whatever the case… I am just posting here to say that I agree that Quickness in it’s current state doesn’t feel right.
Quickness was already nerfed once. The time was reduced from 6s to 4s.
The downside to quickness is that the player cannot heal, recieve heals, or even recieve the benefits from any type of invulnerability (like ranger Signet of Earth-traited). When the class using quickness is utilizing it, they are open to any damage for 4secs without the ability to heal, and for thieves, I would assume the ability to stealth as well.
Understand quickness!
Warriors take 50% increased damage during Quickness instead of not being able to heal, and Thieves lose all endurance and cannot regain endurance (read: cannot dodge) during Quickness.
Also, Warriors’ quickness lasts 5 seconds, not 4. The tool-tip is broken on it. The trait is also broken on it and does not increase the quickness stance duration.
Reading this thread is hilarious. It’s reminiscent of all the threads in other competitive PvP games complaining about “broken” abilities that for some reason real competitive players never have a problem with.
If we take the complaints in this thread and see what they look like in League of Legends, a very similar competitive game (5 players on each side, winning is about objectives and not kills though kills help, and a limited set of abilities for each player), it becomes evident that quickness is not a problem. The complaints boil down to “This skill does too much burst damage to me and I can’t avoid it when my defensive skills are on CD because I’ve already used them!”
Well, if it’s a 1v1, then you used your defensive skills at the wrong time for the wrong crowd control. You should know that their class carries quickness – why did you use your escape on a soft cc?
If it’s 1v2, you are meant to lose given equal skill levels. This is a team game.
If it’s an even matchup, and then suddenly another enemy sneaks into the fight and kills you and that’s not fair because you didn’t see him coming so all your defensive skills are on cooldown, you were ALSO meant to lose. You got ganked. The extra enemy roamed. What you can do with that is either have your team take an objective since the extra enemy had to sacrifice position for that, or have them roam as well/follow the roamer.
Quickness is not broken because you can’t defend against it when you’ve already used all of your escapes. This is a team game, and you are not meant to be able to 1v2 or 1v3 yourself. You should also understand that positioning, map control, and map awareness are still relevant in this game. When you only have five players, every single player is about as important as you. Every single enemy is also as important as you. That doesn’t mean skill doesn’t matter, because skill is what wins you the game, but it does mean that you can’t faceroll this game 1v5 as a solo superstar and expect to win. If you want to do that, play a game where there are no teams. If you want to get better, figure out how to build for whatever is stopping you from winning the game (note: you do not build for kills or fighting, you build for winning the game) and realize that there are nine other players in the game who might be at least as good as you.
Also, 8v8 is not competitive and should not be balanced around if GW2 is to become an eSport.
edit: Every class has two dodges for free that regenerate with time. My warrior can take Shield Stance, Endure Pain, and Fear Me on top of that. My mesmer can take Phase Retreat, Chaos Armor (Staff 4 Chaos Armor has a 100% chance of proccing Protection), several Aegis procs, multiple sources of Evasion/Distortion, and multiple sources of Reflection. Many classes have 5+ ways to mitigate or avoid damage completely. You can easily dodge Quickness, and other threatening abilities, as long as you have the map awareness to know when to fight and when to not fight.
(edited by Art of Ecstasy.9201)
I had 550 gems and bought a Black Lion Salvage Kit, which worked. I used the other 250 gems to buy a set of 5 Mystic Stones, but the stones were never delivered to me and does not show up in recent purchases. The gems were deducted and now I am missing 250 gems.