Guild Wars 2

BlaqueFyre.5678:

So what you are saying is you don’t want to bring to light the over/under used classes and have the possibility of forcing Devs to actually balance classes. Since with Profession locking it will make people play the safe Overtuned classes which will spotlight balancing disparities for this game mode.

The “disparities” are can be datamined by Anet without locking anything. The game already tracks win/loss rates by class and by MMR, and what counters what is common knowledge.

I have no idea why you think making it worse is somehow going to make it better. As long as locking is in place any class with clear counters will be unplayable.

BlaqueFyre.5678:

@Crinn Evan Said he was thinking of a Soft limit on class stacking which expands allowed amount as queu goes on, or did you miss that caveat?

You don’t understand what I’m concerned about. I don’t care about “stacking” because stacking is not the issue.

The issue is that if my necro gets put into a match against a Mesmer, a thief, a warrior, a AS LB druid, and a guardian. (all commonly queued classes in todays meta) I’m going to be 100% comp screwed and will be nothing but a rallybot for the enemy team the entire match.

I could queue my necro last season because I could swap off it I got comp screwed. I won’t be able to do that with prof lock so I won’t be able to play my main next season.

Locking Prof takes away agency away from me, I will not support having my agency taken away from me.

Ya’ll do realize that HoT had a prepurchase option available months before HoT launched and the sales from those prepurchases would have been on the pre-HoT quarter.

Artemis Thuras.8795:

Yes..
If we get the same restrictions as the tournys do regarding 1 of each class per team.

But they have not said or implied anything about doing that.

People are voting yes assuming that Anet is going to do something that Anet hasn’t said a word about doing. This is the exact problem we had with the solo vs team poll where people assumed that solo = separate team queue when it didn’t mean that at all.

Ithilwen.1529:

To remove class stacking, You would logically have to lock professions. I’m not sure why people are not seeing that.

Now, I realize that anet may not yet perceive the need to remove stacking. A couple of weeks of solid DH matches might make that clear to them though.

I’m not sure why you think people where swapping to stack. People use it to unstack bad comps. I’ve never seen people stack a comp intentionally.

People in this thread are trying to fix a problem that literally doesn’t exist.

chask.6028;

People live in this white and black world. Here comes anet with a solution to their problem, and having NO one capable of telling the future to predict the consequences they still assume it’ll have a devastating impact. Overwatch did it. JS.

Two problem with your post.
1) You’re assuming that there is a problem to begin with.
2) We don’t need to predict the future, all we need is basic understanding of how player pick classes.

Locked queues will enforce Warrior and DH stacks, because locked queues means that queueing on comp sensitive classes are a nonviable option because you don’t be able to correct if you get comp screwed.

Ya’lls solution to stacked warriors and DH is to incentivize playing warriors and DH. Brilliant.

Stand The Wall.6987:

like I said though if the rating gain was minimal I don't think everyone in bronze would suddenly ball up.

It doesn’t matter the rate it would still do it.

Also issue isn’t so much figuring contribution it’s integrating it with glicko2 without compromising glicko.
Having arbitrary modifiers to rating gain completely destroys glicko’s ability to function since the algorithm assumes that it isn’t be mucked with.

That said it may be possible to modify glicko to do so. Glicko functions similar to microsoft’s trueskill algorithm so it may be possible to solve that problem the same way the trueskill algorithm does. I’ve had some interesting discussions with a math nerd in my guild on doing just that.

ouch I don’t remember that, sounds painful. I definitely wouldn’t want to encourage that, and what I proposed wouldn’t I’m pretty sure.

You misunderstand the point I was making. Your system primarily promotes getting as many caps as possible. I was pointing out that winning is unrelated to the number of caps made, but rather how long your caps are held vs how many caps the enemy holds.

Stand The Wall.6987:

good point about zerging and multicapping, but isn’t this already a problem in lower tiers? if the rating gain from certain top stats was minimal I doubt it would affect much.

But you don’t want to encourage that behavior. Besides there are better ways to figure contribution that are actually accurate to what wins the match.

isn’t winning with 1 cap impossible or at least a statistical anomaly? when I say cap I mean if its either controlled or neutral.

If you cap 1 point and keep 1 other point neutral the entire match you can in fact win with just that 1 cap. This actually happened back during s1 chronobunker meta.

Ithilwen.1529:

The reality is that people use swapping to stack dh and war. It’s been a plague for a couple of seasons now and it’s an exploit.

I’ve never seen that happen at any point. Ever.

And no class swapping is not a exploit, I don’t think you understand what a exploit is.

Ithilwen.1529:

It makes me truly sad to see so many people voting to KEEP exploiting and team stacking. It shows a real lack of sportsmanship in my opinion.

Nobody is using class swap to stack teams. People use it to UNstack teams because stacked team are 100% worse than balanced comps.

Also comp dependent classes like necro use it, since certain enemy comps are make necro literally unplayable.

Emdrix.6124:

if anything top stats should be removed and instead lower rating losss on closer games to force people to try hard till the match ends.

The problem with this is you would also have to reduce point gain for winning close games as otherwise you’d end up with rating inflation because you always be losing less points that you gain.

And before you say it, no reducing point gain for winning blowouts is not a good idea, because it would mean that exceptionally good players would progress slower than mediocre players since the mediocre players win by lower margins.

Vicky.4563:

Is there a SINGLE worker at Anet making these calls/decisions who placed at platinum? I need to know. This is just a terrible idea on so many different levels.

There was a Anet tag in HotM that had a legendary tag. I couldn’t find his account on the leaderboard, so I suspect that Anet accounts can’t get leaderboard spots.

Stand The Wall.6987:

martin.1653:

snipples

if you can think of any exploits to what I proposed I would like to hear them.

It promotes zerging and multicapping nodes. It’s also not representative of what wins a match because what wins a match is determined by how much value you get out of each cap not how many caps you have or how many people you have standing on caps.

You can win a match with as little as 1 cap.

The way a system would work is that it looks at how long a node is decapped and capped and rewards contribution points to the players responsible for capped/decapped it for as long as the node is decapped/controlled.

So if a node is decapped for 10 ticks then the guy that decapped it geets 10 contribution points. If it is fulled capped for 10 ticks then it grants 20 contribution, 10 for the points that the enemy didn’t get, and 10 for the points that your team got.

ok I’ve been trying that combo. It’s really flipping hard. I had to completely redo my binds just to pull it off.

It’s definitely a skill thing, and it’s much harder to do than Mesmer phase retreat exploits.

alchemyst.2165:

Because class swapping would be locked, it would force players to try and come up with more than just one build to suit different situations, allowing for build options to open up. It would encourage people to run more than just one build. Instead of swapping classes completely, players could run a different build to better suit the team’s needs instead.

No what would happen is players would look for the most self-sufficient build with the last amount of clear counters, and just always queue on that.

Locked class removes niche use builds because they are too comp sensitive. For example necro particularly condi necro would go extinct because it’s way to comp sensitive to work under a locked queue.

Supreme.3164:

You must mean this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1lFldCO3CM

What do you want me to say?

Well they burn a dodge, a weapon swap, and a weapon skill to do that. I don’t particularly see the issue.

Also mesmers can pull just as much bull with phase retreat.

But thanks for sharing the video so that all the warriors in the game will know this trick, I certainly didn’t know it and I’ve never seen anyone else do it either. Practicing it now!

Had this issue last week when queuing a 5 man. we got queue abandoned both when queuing as a guild team and when not queuing.

We dropped the group size to 4 and still had the issue, we then reformed the group (still as 4) and it worked.

Sins.4782:

which would probably be a nightmare to code, or forcing players into some terrible matches that were 90% decided at the start thanks to bad comp rolls.

This.

Under locked class, Warrior, Guardian, and ranger would be the only classes you’d want to queue on because those are the only classes that don’t get completely screwed over by certain comps.

No, I’m a necro main. If I go into a match and see 2 warriors, a thief, a Mesmer, and a guardian on the other team I want to have the option to switch off to something that isn’t going to be a free kill the entire match.

Profession locking makes niche builds and classes unplayable.

If profession locking goes through, I will be forced into perpetually playing warrior, since necro is too situational to queue with in a locked queue.

Ben Phongluangtham.1065:

Abelisk.4527:

What do you think? Should top stats affect rating loss/gain? What if by gaining all top stats in a losing team the player loses no points at all?

No. I don’t want to encourage people to go after top stats over winning the game.

It’s entirely possible to quantify a player’s contribution towards the win condition. The current stat system does not do that however. Plus such a system would be beyond the understanding of a lot of players, which would leave said players feeling cheated since they would not understand the results.

DeceiverX.8361:

I’m not opposed to the necromancer having options for damage, but the shroud mechanic as it is, like other durable specs, forces it to not be a top-tier damage-dealer by design for the sake of game balance.

Shroud is only as strong as your ability to replenish it. Your Life Force gain has a fixed upper limit. Your damage taken has no upper limit.

Necros have the worst survivability in pvp specifically because we cannot replace LF as the rate at which we lose it.

But hey we are invincible in story mode dungeons.

EHP is a terrible argument. Survivability is trivial in PvE, people run 11k HP thieves and Eles in raids and t4 fractals with zero survivability issues. In PvP necros keel over dead because cannot handle focus, because oh right our defensives don’t scale.

Shroud is a parlor trick that impresses nobody.

Cevni.2049:

Crinn.7864:

Cevni.2049:

xev.9476:

Some fanciful stories here. Damaging player AoE has been capped at 5 since beta; support/healing AoE originally had no cap, and was later capped at 5. Culling had nothing to do with any of this, and was still a problem for over a year after support/healing AoE was capped at 5.

Oh, well good that at least one of the players that did play back then is honest, thank you for pointing out that most of what they wrote is complete bs

There is still no evidence that unlocking hit caps is somehow less computationally expensive.

I cannot imagine how you could possibly set up a system where grabbing 5 players is more expensive than running damage calculations on a unrestricted number of players.

There is also no proof that it wouldn’t, I told several reasons why there is good cause to believe that it would indeed benefit the servers. Some of them I believe not even you can argue against, such as that no AoE caps would lead to shorter fights which in turn would lead to less lag.

No that would lead to a lot of lag for a short period of time, rather than minor lag for a long period of time.

Also WvW doesn’t need shorter fights, we already spend 90% of our time loitering as is.

RIP forum bug, it was too soon.

DeceiverX.8361:

the most innately durable professions in the game provide top-tier damage.

Lol.

Necro defensives are non-scaling. Great against things that deal low damage like trash mobs, terrible against anything with real dps.

Ardid.7203:

I can’t understand people who say they “don’t like cats(or dogs(or spiders))”

I’m extremely allergic to cat and dog dander.

Daishi.6027:

and power shatter needs buffs.

No it really doesn’t. Builds that 100-0 in <1s through death shroud with less telegraph than a thief do not need buffs.

Besides the spec seems to be coming back into meta, since I’ve seen more power mesmers in the past week than I have seen condi mesmers.

The only thing I know of that is basic, easy to use, and free is the built in window’s Movie Editor software that comes with most Windows installs.

However if you are serious about making videos you are going to want more professional software, but those are neither free nor easy to use.

Most free video editors don’t do much beyond cutting and adding/removing sound.

Yannir.4132:

That’s not exactly true. Overwatch totally killed all of it’s competition. I’m thinking of a specific one but I can’t remember its name for the life of me.

Overwatch killed off TF2, but then again TF2 was ancient by shooter standards. Moreover Overwatch is identical to TF2 in terms of target audience and gameplay style.
Anytime you have two games as similar as TF2 and Overwatch are, one of them is going down.

There has, however, been a series of games coming out in recent years that have been eating away at GW2 PvP by simply doing it better. The aforementioned 2 games, Overwatch and For Honor.

New titles always chip away at older titles, this is universally true for all games in all genres. MMORPGs are the most resilient to this effect, but it still occurs.

ESO has been stepping up and massively improving their PvP. IMO, PvP needs variety at this point. Stronghold and Deathmatch failed because ANet didn’t make it appealing to go there, and didn’t follow up with more maps for the game mode. A single map barely qualifies as a mode altogether.

There is no real evidence that more mode variety equals more population, moreover mode variety tends to cause a number of design issues, example: Classes being stupid OP in stronghold but meh in conquest, which makes balance a nightmare.

Also if you are trying to make a competitive community variety is actually your enemy because competitive formats require consistency. It’s why Mobas like Paragon only have 1 mode.

Other games companies seem to be doing so much more in the same time period as ANet, and I keep wondering how that happens. Engine limitations maybe?

I don’t see this. SW:TOR and Wildstar’s development has fallen way behind Anet. ESO and WoW are the only real contenders. WoW because it’s archaic engine requires minimal manpower to make content for. (the higher fidelity a game is, the more manpower development needs) ESO’s Devs are definitely going full tryhard, but I doubt that game will ever be much more of a threat to GW2 than it was launch.

I wish Anet would do more for non-ESL competitive tournys, but outside of that I have no complaints. Necro buffs would also be nice, but whatever.

SaltAndLight.4652:

These conversations always comes back to Helseth. A player of his caliber could carry in solo queue using just about any class. He just happens to prefer Mesmer and post videos about it.

On personal experience I still agree that a well played Mesmer and thief are the best carry classes, without them being helseth.

FrostDraco.8306:

Crinn.7864:

FrostDraco.8306:

That won’t change ANYTHING because mesmer sword STRIPS BOONS on auto attack. That would just cement mesmers further and do NOTHING for necro.

Boss pulses 3 boons.

What now mesmers

This would just hurt necro even more as boon corrupt only affects one boon every 3 auto’s for scepter, while mesmer strips a boon every auto.

The only thing this would benefit is power necro’s taking wells, but wells have a short duration and a long cd, which defeats the point.

Mesmer only boonstrips on third auto.

Realistically making a boss that advantages necros would be fairly easy.

→boss pulses many boons
→VG style 3 way split but with each of the three adds having a boon that needs stripped with no way to double up adds like you do in VG.
→Boon gives huge advantage when corrupted. I.e boon corruptions into some effect that gives +20% damage taken to boss, or boon corrupts into 40 stacks of burn for 20 seconds. Incentivizes corrupting boons over stripping them.
→Boss is actually a pack of 20 D/F aurashare eles

Cevni.2049:

xev.9476:

Some fanciful stories here. Damaging player AoE has been capped at 5 since beta; support/healing AoE originally had no cap, and was later capped at 5. Culling had nothing to do with any of this, and was still a problem for over a year after support/healing AoE was capped at 5.

Oh, well good that at least one of the players that did play back then is honest, thank you for pointing out that most of what they wrote is complete bs

There is still no evidence that unlocking hit caps is somehow less computationally expensive.

I cannot imagine how you could possibly set up a system where grabbing 5 players is more expensive than running damage calculations on a unrestricted number of players.

Terrorsquad.2349:

Win-trading also happens in SoloQ, as many players already discussed and displayed for currency.

Yes, but that was riskier. Team-queue would take out all of the risk because during off hours you’d have a almost guaranteed chance of getting matched against your wintrading partners. Moreover you would not have the problem of your wintrading partners getting paired with you instead of against. Worse still with 5man wintrades there are no pugs around to witness and whistleblow.

I support being able to queue teams, but team-only queue is just a exploit waiting to happen.

Ya’ll do realize that a team-only queue would be exploited to no end during offhours right? Wintrading team-only queues would be so easy.

shadowthejedi.3089:

Anet is going all in on PVE content. With For Honor released, the PVP scene is as good as dead. Season 6 will be minuscule in comparison

I doubt it. For starters there has never been a case of 1 games release killing off another game. Second, For Honor is a nice game but it gets really repetitive gameplay wise.

Cevni.2049:

3. Prioritizing is a very heavy operation for a computer, this would not be needed without AoE caps.

I doubt it prioritizes anything. Server most likely grabs the first 5 players in hitbox and doesn’t give a crap about anyone beyond that.

Moreover damage calculations are going to be way more expensive computationally than selecting players.

Jugnificent.2061:

master.1607:

Necromancer
Cant kill anything. Necro is most useless pvp class since release.

While I agree with the common opinion that necros should not seek out 1v1 fights, this is just flat out wrong. Warrior is pretty much the hardest counter to necro, but every other class (in builds that I see in ranked) is beatable.

Warrior is actually one of the easier matchups of the current common classes. Mesmer, AS LB druid, and Thief are total shutouts any for necro. A rev that knows what he is doing is a shutout for power necro, and a uphill fight for condi necro.
Warriors are generally a shutout but it depends heavily on circumstance, condi necro can get traction on a warrior if he can get a corruption chain going.

Ele, Engi, and DH are easier fights for necro, but they will usually end up a draw. DH will typically win against a necro but it’s not a shutout.

“beatable” is a terrible term. Everything is beatable, that doesn’t mean that hardcounters don’t exist.

Careful now. Hip players are supposed to bash “espurts” not request it.

mrauls.6519:

Can’t wait to find out the reason why

random bug was causing skritt to appear in conquest matches and kill everyone.

FrostDraco.8306:

That won’t change ANYTHING because mesmer sword STRIPS BOONS on auto attack. That would just cement mesmers further and do NOTHING for necro.

Boss pulses 3 boons.

What now mesmers

mrauls.6519:

Crinn.7864:

mrauls.6519:

It sounds like we have to do extra work because we lack the keybinds I’m suggesting. I want one keybind, not multiple to get the job done properly

What keybind are you suggesting that we don’t already have?

What?? I suggested 4 we don’t already have…

What is easier – using two binds that you use already, or having to make a new keybind for that action.

Our Keyboards are already crowded with various targeting binds, weapon stow, about face, interact, etc, etc. Adding more binds just makes it more difficult.

mrauls.6519:

It sounds like we have to do extra work because we lack the keybinds I’m suggesting. I want one keybind, not multiple to get the job done properly

What keybind are you suggesting that we don’t already have?

Zenith.7301:

If you removed PS from warriors, they’d still be brought because banners are ridiculously OP as well, and instead of 2 PS you’d bring a revenant for 10 might to the group and the chrono would signet of inspiration the might into the group while eles provide a permanent fire field in lava font for any of your group to fill the gap.

If you bring a rev, you either replace your warrior with it and lose banners and EA, or you replace a Ele with it and lose said ele.

Without Phalanx Strength groups have to utilize distributed might generation, and under distributed might generation, self-might becomes a valuable capability rather than a irrelevant one.

mrauls.6519:

Crinn.7864:

mrauls.6519:

2. Stomp target

• Interact does too many things. If a downed ally and enemy and a bundle are all on the ground in the same exact spot, only RNG knows what action your character will take when you press your interact keybind.

You can fix this issue by targeting/clicking the object you want to interacting with. Interact always prioritizes what you have targeted. If a downed enemy is next to a downed friendly and you target the enemy you will stomp, if you target the friendly you will rez.

That’s cool and adds an element of skill to choosing/prioritizing the right action to take in a given situation, but if ANet wants that to be the thing we do, then they need to make it easier to click an ally or enemy when their bodies are piled up on one another. Enemies can also screw with your click targeting if they stand over the bodies. Do you think the current fix you described is reasonable given what I just said?

There are keybind options for targeting allies, and keybinds for targeting enemies. There are ways to target downs without clicking.

The only time piling is a problem is if you want to interact with a bundle since bundles can’t be cycle targeted.

Third Degree Ember.6430:

I haven’t read all the replies, but has anyone brought up a possible compromise?

What if you could have the option of using an amulet that has exotic stat combinations that are fixed (otherwise, use only their own gear)?

Players who have ascended gear can still use their gear. Players who want to mix/match/customize can still customize. New players can easily get into the game mode, and older players can toy around with other stat combinations (i.e. I’ve never played condi, but I could certainly try it out at little cost and decide whether I’d like to invest in an ascended set.).

This would obviously upset the economy a bit, but having less start up costs could improve the wvw population a ton.

That kinda defeats the point. The point was to kill the arbitrary gear grind that WvW has and put everyone on a even field.

mrauls.6519:

2. Stomp target

• Interact does too many things. If a downed ally and enemy and a bundle are all on the ground in the same exact spot, only RNG knows what action your character will take when you press your interact keybind.

You can fix this issue by targeting/clicking the object you want to interacting with. Interact always prioritizes what you have targeted. If a downed enemy is next to a downed friendly and you target the enemy you will stomp, if you target the friendly you will rez.

Cynz.9437:

Yeah, it bothers me as well. However, if i recall correctly (i might be wrong though), a dev said that condis have higher priority than direct damage for the kill credit, e.g. if condi and power war attack boss, the condi war will get the credit in most cases.

No that not how it works.

It’s not possible for the boss to die from two things simulteaously. Damage is applied FIFO so it’s not possible for it to die from both condi and power at the same time, one will always occur first.

Also the RNG condi problem only happens in a very specific circumstances. Specifically the boss has to die from a condi that both teams have applied stacks of. That’s extremely uncommon, particularly given that condi classes are rarely sent to beast due to long dps ramp up time.

Why just skyhammer? It’s no different in terms of rank point gain than any other map.

Also the point of rank 20 is that you need 20 ranks of pvp experience. Doing unranked to get rank 20 is exactly what you are supposed to be doing.

I don’t get what is being complained about. Is this some indirect complaint about alt spamming the leaderboards?

I think the real problem is that the OP was trying to 1v1 with a necro – the class that has 0 winning matchups and is completely dependent on party support to do anything.

Also guys if you look at the image the OP provided, he was trying to deal with the condis, he had both dagger #4 and Well of Power on CD. Necro simply doesn’t have the tools available to deal with the shatterspam.

That said a power Mesmer would have just deleted him without any chance for him to counter.

shadowthejedi.3089:

lmao anyone who suspected this wasn’t a bug is hilarious. We all know anet is pushing classes into certain roles and somehow making the LB virtually useless is one of the things on the table. People complain about how ranger is a braindead class but what viable options do most rangers have but to be a sit on point beast master? try for damage and u get rolled. try for condi and yur just a thief with a more potent sb.

the fact that a bug is the only thing that makes the core ranger weapon viable is beyond comical for me. this game’s genre is a comedy.

LB has been considered meta ever since s5 happened, and will continue to be meta as long as Ancient Seeds exists.

Zenith.7301:

Because said classes that don’t self generate might also have benefits like shadow step, stealth, reflection, hard CC, and burst. Things a necro doesn’t have.

Necro brings transfusion, CPC, and amazing self-survivability. (for pve anyways)

If necro was DPS competitive while retaining it’s might stacking capabilities there would be no reason not to run quintuple necros for fractals and dungeons, since necro would be blowing everything else out of the water.

If you remove necro might gen to compensate now you’ve gutted every Blighter’s Boon build in sPvP and WvW because Anet isn’t going to skill split something as fundamental as boon generation.

If you want to make necro raid competitive you should petition to get Phalanx Strength removed, since that trait is what is enforcing the entire raid meta.

If two classes do the same damage with might, but one can’t generate might and the other can, which is better? The one that generates might.

The fact of the matter is that the entire rest of the game exists, and in the entire rest of the game being able to self generate might is of massive benefit.