Guild Wars 2

Removing larger group queuing in ranked was a bad decision. Hopefully that comes back for next season. Solo queue is a complete crapshoot and only serves to appease whiners.

I’m wondering if they stopped the volatility and deviation calculations during placement. If they didn’t, that would explain a lot.

Kicker.8203:

What’s up with profession-based MMR? It used to be separate for each class you play. Is it taken out of the equation?

Because you’re not locked into your profession choice once the match is created, there’s no reason to use profession in matchmaking.

So you mean you’ll have to talk to teammates…. and play as a team… in a team game?

1v1 balance is important. Ignoring it causes tons of balance issues down the road.

However, 1v1 balance doesn’t have to be perfect; it just has to not be lop-sided.

Supreme.3164:

Why starting MMR so high? makes no sense whatsoever …

In Elo and Glicko, you start everyone at the midpoint in the rating scale. If everyone starts at 1200, then the max is 2400 (assuming min of 0).

In GW2’s current state, it’s nearly as dumb as possible from all the HoT power creep.

There needs to be a balance between strong players and strong teamwork. A strong player should be able to overcome poor teamwork. Strong teamwork should counter strong individuals with a weak team.

You realize those changes aren’t live until Tuesday, December 13.

The current “Rebound!” was a rush re-design shortly before HoT released.

Originally, “Rebound!” gave nearby allies a short-duration effect where the next ability used had a significantly reduced cooldown. That proved difficult to use well unless your group was extremely coordinated. When you could use it well, a large cooldown reduction on elites and other powerful abilities was exceptionally strong.

You should’ve just stuck with “nerf skills which do too much too often” mantra. Do that first, then look at what needs buffed. A lot of things which seem weak (like necro) are only weak because other stuff is stupidly powerful.

Reducing cooldowns in some cases is okay. Many abilities which weren’t used pre-HoT have excessive CDs. And raising cooldowns in many cases doesn’t fix some of the power creep. It only serves to ruin the feel of some builds or make the playstyle “spam everything and hide for a bit”.

What they really need to look at is the strength of the ability, how many things it does (damage, survival, CC), how easy it is to execute/counter, and the effect duration as well as the cooldown.

ANet actually considered this with the Surge of the Mists change. It was CC, somewhat strong damage, and an evade all in one. They cut out a lot of the damage and it’s in a better state for the game. If only other HoT stuff got the same treatment.

R O C.6574:

Yes. Shared main lane would totally change the way Stronghold plays.

They tried that in internal alpha tests. They didn’t like how it worked since the fight seemed to stalemate forever or just shift from side to side, but never finish.

Ithilwen.1529:

Based on what I’ve read, there seems to be a strong intent to talk the community into reversing on solo/duo after this season. I hope that’s not the case.

Why? The old solo queue was pretty terrible and was closest to the new system than Season1 thru Season4. It’s a team-based game; stopping teams from playing it competitively is silly.

I’m pretty certain there’s a design flaw in how the algorithm matches full teams with players, and that’s the cause of a lot of complaints.

I’d still like to know about preventing class stacking.

It’s not going to happen any time soon. First, you’d have to remove swapping characters at the start of a match. That makes a team with better role distribution a guaranteed win because no one can swap to create a well-rounded team. Second, it increases queue times and leads to worse matches since you have to skip over duplicate professions.

It’s more productive to balance the problems which make class stacking so powerful. Class stacking was actually discouraged for years prior to HoT because a diverse team was better.

Warcry.1596:

I prefer Stronghold to Conquest, but I think to make Stronghold better they should remove the initial starting supply.

Then the mode turns into a giant mess at the supply depot at the start. The initial supply was meant to prevent a need for all 10 players to rush the depot at the start.

ArthurDent.9538:

The complain about being all pve and no pvp just really isn’t true.

Play it with organized groups. It’s about dumping healing into the doorbreakers so they don’t die until the gates are down. It was easily done in the past with Tempest and Chronomancer. Once both doors are down, you don’t have to worry about anything but your lord and theirs. Whoever kills lord fastest wins.

ReaverKane.7598:

But is it the game mode’s fault? Or simply a apathetic community and lack of investment from Anet?

It’s partly the game mode, but it’s more ANet’s fault for not fixing stronghold’s numerous flaws. For example, archers are still useless. You simply push doorbreakers, which stay alive long enough to get through two doors. Then you just whittle down another PvE mob. No reason to dedicate time to fighting other players.

The community was skeptical of the mode because of it’s heavy PvE slant. They gave it the benefit of the doubt during beta weekends, but the worry became true when ANet did nothing to fix the major flaws which caused it to be so PvE-centric.

Also, stronghold is far more toxic than conquest. In stronghold, winning requires everyone to follow the same plan. When someone doesn’t cooperate, your team loses, and the blame game starts. In conquest, the strategy isn’t as clear-cut, and stronger players can carry for weaker and uncooperative players. As a result, there’s less animosity because there’s ambiguity in the cause of the loss.

Shadowstep.6049:

I have played thousands of games, forced 50% win rate does exist, no matter how devs attempt to deny it. It is painfully obvious if you played so many games and just have blowout after blowout (100-500, 500-100) matches over and over again. Not to mention, my team completely destroys enemy team – next match i teamed with players i just completely destroyed – THIS IS FORCED 50% win rate.

There is not a forced 50% win rate. You example does not support your claim and is actually an example of why pip-range matching failed miserably.

What was actually happening was that your pip range had relatively few people queuing. With a limited pool, the rating differential expands and you get teams both with a high deviation in rating. That makes the outcome a bit of a crap-shoot. The losing team loses rating and the winning team gains it. Next time, because the pool is still small, you get most of the same people. Since you won and your rating is higher, you’re more likely to get the lower people on your team – the ones who lost last time.

When you remove the pip restriction, you increase the pool, which reduces rating differential between teams and within teams, and reduces the chance of seeing the same players over and over. It also means that the system does less swapping of high and low players in order to try and balance teams.

LUST.7241:

Well, this brings me back on how heavily modified CSGO has become. There are a lot of variables (different than this game of course) that, over the course of their competitive reworks, have more accurately placed people closely into their true rankings.

The CS:GO MVP system seems like a good way to boost better players out of the middle of the bell curve.

So we have the use of rating to get a match, then the use of the outcome to update individual rating. You mentioned you’ll barely move in a close match. So, ideally, it should be giving you close matches VERY frequently (almost always) this season (unlike previous seasons), correct?

Yes. Remember that the player population isn’t infinite, so you can’t find a perfect rating match immediately. The initial look is within a fixed range and if you’ve been in queue for a few minutes, the differential expands. However, having one pool of players to check for similar ratings as opposed to 20% or less of that pool will allow for closer and quicker matches.

In that case, is the luck of the draw heavily based on how you placed in the placement matches?

Placement matches give you an initial rating. If it’s grossly inaccurate, you’ll either see win or loss streaks as you reach a better rating. In addition, Glicko2 tracks rating deviation and volatility. If you’re misplaced, your volatility is higher, so you’ll move further in rating with each game until you settle.

LUST.7241:

Say {insert known pro player here} plays his/her heart out but is super unlucky with how the matchmaking works and goes, in total Ranked games, 0 Wins 100 Losses. We all know he/she is beyond good. Will they be Legendary/Top 250? Or will the game just see “0 wins? Probably kitten. Bottom 10.”

What I am saying is:

• Is this system just another long grind to the top?
• Will it be a fair, “good players will be ranked high as they should, despite their solo W/L ratio”?
• Will the godly PvP players be 100% subject to the luck of the “unknown forced 50%” matchmaking algorithm?
• Is top 250 simply based on W/L luck streaks?

It seems like you’re only familiar with the terrible pip system of the first four seasons. Forget all about that.

With the new system, rank is directly tied to rating. Rating is tied to performance (win vs. loss in conjunction with your rating vs. the rating of opponents). You can only move up by winning [down by losing]. The higher [lower] you go, the stronger [weaker] your opponents become. Eventually you’ll reach a point where your rating stabilizes because you’re being matched with equally skilled players. Top players should be able to progress higher.

A big problem with the old system, which led to the “luck” feel was the use of pip range in matchmaking. This restricted the matching pool, which in turn caused the rating difference to expand as you sat in queue longer. By the time a game was started, a massive rating difference had developed and winning or losing became a crap-shoot. With a larger pool, the rating difference should be smaller, leading to closer games and more accurate rating calculations.

Summary:

• Pips are only for the reward system now. They no longer impact rank or matching. Pips can only be gained (not lost). Rewards through pips have a grind element.
• Rank/Tier is not a grind like the last 4 seasons. Matchmaking and ranking is done with rating. If a player is misplaced, they’ll win or lose a lot more and their rating will adjust appropriately.
• Tier is simply a name assigned to a range of numerical ratings. You can go up and down in tier.
• There is some decay in rating so that players can’t sit at the top all season.
• There was NEVER a forced 50% in effect. What happens is that when you’re at the correct rating and matched against players of similar rating, you’re expected to win 50% of your games. If your skill improves, you’ll start winning more and moving up.
• Win streaks are possible, even at the top, but aren’t nearly as prone to luck as they were in previous seasons.
• A top player should never have an awful win rate. If they’re losing more than winning, their rating will drop until they’re where they should be.

My only concern is that the solo/duo queue restriction will lead to “solo queue hero” behavior rather than true teamplay – the strong solo player will focus on winning fights rather than controlling nodes and helping the team.

theend.2137 is correct. GW2 PvP is a disaster, both from class design and from matchmaking. The design at least worked before HoT because no single build could excel at most aspects of PvP (damage, survival, etc).

Rolisteel.1375:

Move on to what? Which game?

If you want competitive PvP, don’t look to MMOs. MMOs always design for PvE first, since that’s where they get most of their audience. As a result, PvE power creep and bloat, and overall design burdens PvP design.

If you’re looking for something class-based, Overwatch or a MOBA is the closest you’re going to get.

People are focusing too much on the necromancer example. The point is that when GW2 was in its prime, all builds had trade-offs. You didn’t have CC, good survival, good damage, and good group support all in one bundle.

Can’t up-vote this enough.

This is the entire problem with GW2 and why it’s collapsed.

Original poster is pretty clueless. A lot of what he lists is what makes elite specs brain-dead OP. Ya, if you give defense or synergy to a profession where it was previously lacking without adding a different weakness, of course it’s better – and extremely overpowered.

• Warrior had a ton of builds prior to HoT. All were mostly balanced and pretty viable. The shifts came about due to ANet nerf/buffs than meta changes. You had axe+sh/GS originally then hambow, sw+?/longbow, longbow/GS, GS/mace+sh, etc. The sw+?/longbow builds were typically condition damage.
• Guardian virtue actives were used a lot even before HoT when traited with on-use effects. But the visual effect didn’t have a huge graphic so maybe you didn’t notice. F1 had on-demand blind. F2 had 3x condi clear. F3 is a clutch block and protection to all allies and often better than waiting for it to refresh.
• Rangers were decent before HoT, but needed a good player in order to perform. Someone who could do more than LB 4, LB 2. The main problem is that spirits got nerfed to the ground, traps mostly sucked, and shouts sucked back then too; you didn’t really have any good utilities.
• Necromancer normal death shroud is fine except the #2 could be better. Apparently it was a targeted teleport earlier in development, but was changed. The #5 applies torment and immobilize after time, which is pretty good.
• Scrapper still uses elixir gun heavily. Engineer will never get away from using at least one kit due to its design and the versatility of kits compared to other abilities.

@Cobrakon

You’re going a bit too extreme:

1. Yes, 1v1 needs to matter, but you’ll never be able to balance every decent build in GW2 in 1v1. One build will always have an advantage over another given equal skill. What you need to ensure is that one build doesn’t have an advantage without a disadvantage, the balance isn’t disproportionate, and that higher skill always beats lower skill regardless of the balance at even skill levels.
2. Individual skill can’t be the sole driver; group play has to matter. The team which works well together and are good mechanically should be able to beat a team of the best 1v1 players who have bad coordination.
3. Being able to carry is important, but it can only go so far. If it causes either of the first two to be violated, those should take precedence.

I don’t know why I try. Everyone intelligent quit GW2 PvP a while ago.

To re-iterate, the gameplay in PvP sucks. You’re not going to retain players until it stops sucking. Everything else is secondary. What new players can’t learn quickly is when to re-group and how to coordinate. You can’t make that into a tutorial.

The two main reasons for suck are:
1. Extreme power creep which makes face-rolling a handful of builds overly successful for most skill levels.
2. Bad matchmaking and rating system which can’t match similarly skilled players quickly.

The problem with PvP is that it doesn’t retain players because it’s so awful. Shiny wings brought in a ton, but most got frustrated and will never touch it again.

At this point, the frequency of balance patches doesn’t matter. ANet is unwilling to make actual balance balance changes to reign in the heinous amounts of power creep which HoT introduced.

Right now, WoW PvP is better. GW2 has a much better combat system and used to be better than WoW by a lot, but the Devs let power creep get out of control.

It’s all up to the Devs to save their game at this point. Without Dev action, anything the community does is for naught. The community needs to drive them toward fixing the right things instead of leading them astray.

Developers

• Nerf Power Creep Elite specs are the biggest offender, but stat creep and increase in trait power from the June 2015 patch contribute as well.
• Stop balancing with amulets You can’t do it. Removing one to kill a powerful build ends up killing a few others, yet the same build remains in play with a different amulet. Put a proper stat system into PvP and fix balance by changing the overpowered abilities.
• League System Progression-based leagues have proven to be terrible time and again. Drop it and go with a skill-based league. If you want to have progression, then make it done through achievements and games played, possibly with a bonus to progression in higher skill levels.
• Rating and Matchmaking The algorithms are pretty terrible. Removing separation based on league will help, but the approach needs an overhaul.

Community

• Stop asking for new formats We had deathmatch in Courtyard, part of capture the flag in Spirit Watch, and then Stronghold. None have been close to working; it’s time to stop trying new things and fix stuff that’s closer to working. ANet has a bad habit of leaving things half-complete and going on to something else. Stop encouraging it.
• Solo Queue Stop asking for it. Vote “no” in the upcoming poll. It’s a waste of time. If their matchmaker worked properly, this wouldn’t be an issue. It’s just diverting resources instead of fixing a real problem.

GW2 PvP was somewhat popular. Then HoT power creep killed it. At the top end, people quit because elite specs are way too survivable compared to everything else and easy to faceroll. At the middle and bottom, players get farmed by builds like dragonhunter which offer great performance for relatively little skill.

sophiewhite.3149:

class stacking will always be a problem and there will always be easy builds.

Neither class stacking nor easy builds (to the extent that DH is easy) existed to anywhere near the degree it did for the first two years of the game. The pre-HoT trait revamp started it and elite specs are keeping it alive.

Fix the root cause, don’t dance around it. I’ll give you a hint how to do it: Don’t put someone in charge of profession design who can’t solo a forest boss.

Class stacking is a symptom of builds which are highly successful despite taking little skill to play.

Treat the cause, not the symptom.

Yasi.9065:

You know what that means, boys and girls?

Correct. The lower your mmr is, the easier your way to diamond in soloqueue.

Nicely done Anet. Nicely done.

Using season1 matchmaking, if you’re underrated, then you have an easier time progressing. That’s been known since before season1.

This is not a problem with MMR. Resetting MMR will not do anything. This is a problem with progression-based systems. In order to progress, good players need to face worse players. That’s what you saw in season 2 and 3 when MMR wasn’t used to match teams. The games were largely lopsided and not enjoyable.

With a progression-based system, you have two outcomes:

1. Match based on MMR. [season 1 and 4] Games are close and mostly enjoyable. However, progression is very slow, and the best way to progress is to exploit the system.
2. Match based on progress (tier/division). [season 2 and 3] Games are mostly blowouts and generally frustrating; blowout losses and even wins become boring after a while. All players progress; the better ones just progress faster. A frequent but mediocre player keeps pace with a less frequent good player (though the mediocre player spends more time playing).

Pick your poison. In both systems, tier/division is largely meaningless.

PvP sucks, so players feel frustrated.
When players feel frustrated, they’re more likely to take out their frustration on other players.

It’s human nature and you’d be hard-pressed to change that. Better to tackle the cause of the frustration instead.

akaCryptic.2389:

Would it reduce the power creep and passive carry?
Would it increase build diversity?

The answer to both is “not really”. You may see some gains, but you’d also see some powerful builds become even more cemented.

There was some power creep from the trait changes from the June 2015 patch, but the power creep comes predominately from elite specs. The 4 stat amulets aren’t helping either (more total stats).

The current trait system has major advantages over the old system, but ANet didn’t do a good job of capitalizing on those advantages.

• Mutual Exclusion The new system can force you to choose a trait and at the same time exclude you from having another. Mutual exclusion allows for powerful or unique traits which would have been problematic in the old system (too many possible trait pairings).
• No "Low Hanging Fruit The biggest problem with the old system was that many traits were lower in the lines but still relatively strong. That caused the same lower traits to always be taken and make most high tier traits unappealing because you had to give up multiple strong lower tier traits. Each trait needed to not only compete within its line, but with every other line; balance is extremely hard to achieve like this.
• Trait Line Cohesion Another problem with the old trait system was that most trait lines didn’t or couldn’t develop a theme(s). ANet didn’t want one aspect of a profession becoming far too strong. In addition, the low-hanging fruit problem made trait line themes – usually requiring going to grandmaster – less appealing.

So the idea is sound, but here’s where the execution went wrong:

• More total traits You used to have 14, but now you have 18. 4 additional traits is bound to power creep. Hindsight being 20/20, ANet should have considered reducing the number of traits per line, possibly on a trait-line basis (e.g. one may have 4, another may have 6).
• Trait consolidation Lots of weaker traits were rolled into a single trait, which basically gave you the equivalent of additional old traits.
• Limited use of mutual exclusion Very few traits which should compete with each other did not. In fact, ANet originally had two strong elementalist arcane traits being mutually exclusive, but changed their stance after lots of whining.
• Underdeveloped themes There was a lot of potential to re-arrange scattered traits and make them work together in a single line, but they were left scattered.

@OP

Get a clue and take off your optimism blinders.

1. The PvP team only controls PvP systems. The problems lie with profession design, which is a different team. That team has done next to nothing in the last 9 months to reign in out of control elite specs. Any changes they do make just crap on the profession as a whole, despite many better suggestions coming from the forums. That sounds like the opposite of listening and trying.

2. See #1. Removing amulets doesn’t fix the problem of elite specs having far too much sustain. Defensive amulets were fine for two years and now that HoT hits, they’re overpowered? Shaving profession abilities doesn’t work when they’re extremely out of whack.

3. It’s been 8 months since HoT released, and elite specs are still blatantly broken in PvP. It’s not like in the past where something was a little stronger. Huge balance gaps need to be fixed faster.

4. See #1 and #3. The problem is something the profession design team needs to fix. That team obviously doesn’t understand the problem, or doesn’t have the balls to nerf or overhaul the elite specs. In fact, toward the end of HoT beta, the “failed” elite specs like dragonhunter were just buffed to ridiculous levels instead of fixing the flawed design, which created a lot of the problems we have now.

The PvEers will deny it forever, but elite specs have the same problems in PvE as PvP. Too much sustain and too much dmg such that in most cases, they’re forced. Not a huge need to split when they need nerfed in both.

The massive power creep from HoT killed GW2 PvP. Not fun to play and sure as hell not fun to watch.

Sorry, but you can’t discuss build diversity without talking about balance. The overarching reason for low build diversity is that elite specs are way too strong.

On your ideas:

Stat System
Amulets are too rigid. However, customization of every gear piece is too tedious and allows for too much min/maxing for pure survival or condi. A happy medium would be to split amulets into multiple items of 3-stat combos and let players mix and match. It’s good enough and ANet still has control. For example, ANet could do amulet + 2x ring and allow double defensive stat only in the amulet slot.

Old Trait System
No. The new trait system is a better design. It allows for more mutual exclusion, which allows traits to be more unique or interesting. It also allows better synergy in a line for a style of gameplay. Both of those lower permutations and make the job easier for the developers. ANet just did a poor job of using either of those strengths when they re-designed the system.
The main problem with the new trait system is having a few too many traits. Consider breaking the 3 minor, 3 major paradigm. Maybe some lines have only 2 minors to compensate for more powerful major traits.

Destroy Meta Battle
LOL No. Meta Battle has nothing to do with lack of diversity. It just allows for the playerbase to propagate builds in a week rather than a few weeks. We had “meta” builds long before MetaBattle.

They need just an MMR system. No reset needed. Tie rewards to your MMR (either current at the end of the season or highest MMR during)

The pip system is flawed to its core. The only way the pip system works is for good players to beat bad players and take their pips. However, pips can’t be zero-sum (only pip transfers), otherwise no one could progress. This is why you need safety nets and win streaks; they create pips. As more pips are added to the pool, players can progress further by transferring pips up the food chain.

They really don’t. I don’t blame them either. Here’s why:

• Too much power creep, so PvP is mostly spamming abilities with almost no skill. It’s not fun.
• No reward to go after, so why try?
• Have to grind a daily for backpiece. Either win quickly, and if you can’t, lose quickly.

If it wasn’t for that last part, they probably wouldn’t play ranked at all.

Cyninja.2954:

Entire thread, and people aren’t even in agreement of if the current meta is balanced or not.

It’s balanced and it’s not. That’s because there’s two different definitions of “balance” being used.

The first view looks at whether there is roughly equal representation among professions/builds. In season3, most professions have one build which is deemed to be viable. This is a relative balance.

But there are flaws in relative balance. If every profession had an ability to one-shot every other profession, it’s balanced by the first view. But generally, that’s not fun. Look no further than season1, where multiple builds could live forever. By the first view of balance, it was pretty good. But it wasn’t fun at all.

The second view of balance, which the OP is using, finds a somewhat absolute point which is good and fun. It then compares all professions/builds to that point in addition to each other. This view sees power creep and a lack of fun because every viable build is capable of performing with a minimum forethought of skill use.

Kolly.9872:

In any other game jack of all trades can do anything, but they do it worst than any damage or defence focused build. Usually splitting stats is never the best idea. Only on gw2, things seem to work in a different way.

GW2 doesn’t have “jack of all trades”. They let power creep get out of control and you have “master of all trades”.

See if by some miracle the July 12 balance patch significantly nerfs elite specs. If not, quit for good.

I’m done with hoping beyond hope that ANet will ever properly balance brain-dead OP elites. Their current profession design team hasn’t shown any promise, nor has ANet announced any changes to its composition.

And no, you can’t have my gold.

It’s not a bunker build problem. Bunker builds have been around for years and were fine. They could survive for a while, but you had to manage cooldowns well, and they typically hit like a wet noodle.

The problem is HoT specs having too much easy to access defense abilities which makes them hard to while playing a relatively offensive build.

No details have been released on how OW calculates the magnitude of rating gains/losses, other than it uses many factors besides rating difference. I’ve read a few reports that it’s under-rewarding support roles (groups which always play together have their support player end up with a lower rating after placement).

And no one is saying OW’s matching will be perfect. Just that GW2’s system has a lot of problems. OW was brought up because it has similar challenges for ranked play, rating, and matchmaking and has done a much better job addressing them.

Let me summarize the thread:

OP: Condi dmg builds are too strong, nerf it.
Rebuttal: Power builds are just as OP as condi, don’t nerf condi.

Truth: “Meta” power builds and condi builds are both OP and both need nerfed.

From this post for the June 2015 overhaul:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/June-23-Specialization-Changes/first

Boon to condition conversion and condition to boon conversion has been standardized and its functionality changed. Skills which convert boons and conditions now randomly select from all boons and conditions on the target instead of taking the last applied.

This doesn’t explicitly list condition removal or boon strip – only conversion – but players guessed that they would all share the same mechanics and after some testing found that all boon and condition removal was random. There may be discussion in that threat somewhere.

@ TheGrimm.5624

Pretty much spot-on.

Sorry, but you continue to display a lack of understanding.

1. Picking a popular whine post from the forums does not in any way mean it’s accurate or correct.
2. This is the first time OW has assigned rating to players. GW2 assigned initial ratings over 3 years ago. GW2 rating has stabilized years ago. OW needs a couple weeks.
3. GW2 leagues are a progression system, not a rating system. They don’t accurately represent skill. Numerous posts have explained this already. OW is a rating system only. You can’t equate GW2 tiers with OW rating.
4. OW has a system for determining player contribution on a team when adjusting rating. It should help to filter out the good players who are stuck with lesser teammates and get them boosted a bit to proper ratings. Ranked play has been out for about 3 days in OW. Anyone complaining now based on personal experience is clueless.
5. In a team-based game, players who queue as a well-organized team more often should be ranked higher. However, the matchmaking in OW does account for groupings and tries to play you against similarly grouped enemy teams (less chance for a full team vs. full solo) and so far, it seems to be working a lot better than it does in GW2. That should allow good players who queue solo to climb as high as other good players who queue solo.

There are a handful of builds which stack conditions too quickly for little effort. If it required more setup, it wouldn’t be so much of a problem.

Power builds typically doesn’t have these problems as the setup is more obvious or harder to pull off.