Guild Wars 2

Deli.1302:

Advocating power creep. I thought only pvers did that.

It’s not strictly power creep. The reason that elite specs are powerful is because ANet have explicitly structured the trait system and the traits themselves to create synergies to benefit the elite specs. Only specific variations, usually one or two, of a class are at that class’s ‘peak power’. Other traitlines and skills can be buffed without fear of producing power creep.

Seems pretty easy to nerf, shave a second or two off the duration of Symbol of Blades. Maybe Symbol of Punishment as well. What was the duration of Smite pre-change?

Perma-orb with like, a half hour CD, would probably be pretty reasonable imo.

morrolan.9608:

There has been feedback to the effect that players who play during non US peak times would be extremely unhappy and would leave the game. This feedback was in response to the leaked document a while back with proposed new scoring changes including making points during prime time worth more.

Can you provide a source?

Outside of extreme circumstances, elite specs are unlikely to be toned down.

I think what you are likely to see is targeted improvements to core trees and abilities.

morrolan.9608:

The results have been equalised via skirmishes which is fair.

I don’t know what precisely you mean by this. It’s true that the impact of night-capping has been reduced in extreme circumstances but that doesn’t address the fundamental premise that population imbalances create imbalanced skirmishes and that those imbalanced skirmishes should provide less points than balanced skirmishes.

morrolan.9608:

Population disparity is not a scoring issue and attempts to address it via the current scoring system will just result in distortions and force players in non NA peak times away from the game because anet would be saying their contribution is literally worth less.

Population disparity is a scoring issue in that it creates unfairly disparate scores. I think what you mean to say is that the scoring problem is created by the population imbalance and not the other way around. Regardless, population disparity and the scoring problems it causes are a major factor in ANet’s decision making regarding WvW development, including the decision not to begin new tournaments.

morrolan.9608:

You’re still going to be outnumbered it won’t change that except because of players leaving the game.

I am curious to know how many players would actually leave as a result of increased impact of NA skirmishes. To the best of my knowledge, most guilds ignore it for the most part.

You are also assuming that it wouldn’t make a better game, and that being a better game would not in turn draw new players.

If your thesis is correct and that marginalizing the impact of offtime players would encourage them to leave the game, it stands to reason that introducing biases towards NA players would add NA players to the game- and NA players still comprise the vast majority of players on NA servers. Observing their proportions, a relatively minor drop of players across the other three timezones would create a larger boost in NA players.

morrolan.9608:

You’re still going to be outnumbered it won’t change that except because of players leaving the game.If its to be addressed via scoring then scoring has to completely change to be done via player activity such as capturing and defending as a number of players have suggested. This would reflect player activity in a timezone and be fair without marginalising the contribution of players.

But this would change nothing. If you have more players, you can simply attack and defend more objectives. If you have less players, you cannot. The only position which would result in an actual impact would be 100% control by one server, as it can no longer capture new objectives.

morrolan.9608:

Yes by all means marginalise the off NA peak time players and then see what happens.

Speaking as an OCX player, yes. When one server has 120 players and the other two servers have 50 players, the skirmishes should be marginalized because they are unfair.

The server with a drastic margin of players can still create enormous advantage- they are still earning more VP than their opponents and they can still paper and fortify objectives on enemy borderlands.

gavyne.6847:

Before calling Skirmish a success I’d like to see it run for more than a couple of weeks. Folks praised the return of DBL a success early on, but 2 weeks after red BL was queue-less in both kitten even during primetime on the weekends.

Definitely agree. It seems, at least to me, that population has spiked for both TC+KN and BG. (Not familiar enough with FA to say)

MaLeVoLenT.8129:

If anything 2 hours is too short not too long. Considering how long it can take to take a properly defended Tier 3 keep. Right now the social GW2 norm is to operate within 4 main time zones. We talk, NA, OCX, SEA and EU. I believe our skirmish system should use a similar format.

I don’t think the 2-hour format should be adjusted. What I would be interested in seeing is increased VP during high-population time periods (i.e. NA is worth twice as many points as other time zones for NA servers, EU worth twice as much for EU servers).

Cecilia.5179:

Personally, I think bandwagoning would have a much harder time being a thing if they changed the pairings more frequently, but that would make Anet lose the money they net from people who pay to go where they will win.

Honestly I think they’d just transfer more, and give ANet more money. At the end of the day, the $6.25 to transfer to linkbait is for practically everyone quite trivial.

I would honestly love to see some releases by anet covering warscore:active population ratios from before the Skirmishes change and VP:active population after the change. I expect they’re already looking at this data in private but I think it would be very interesting to see whether skirmishes are helping or hurting.

Rotteny.8743:

People already stack without incentive anyway…

That’s not an excuse for more.

I believe they have plans to add a stack of reward points when a skirmish ends, and they’ve spoken about adding means to get the T2 weapons and armors.

I am very skeptical of actually tying your rewards to success in WvW. That would likely just promote heavy stacking.

Huskyboy.1053:

10 seconds recharge is too long. If I misuse a weapon skill, I now have recharge on that skill. That makes sense, it’s a reasonable punishment for the mistake. If I mistime/mistakenly swap weapons, for example swap Mesmer staff to sword/shield, I have 10 second recharge on all staff skills. Matters more for some professions than others (thief), but it’s a ridiculously long recharge duration that completely ruins a 1v1 if mistimed.

Changing the game because you keep fatfingering your buttons is a bad idea.

Huskyboy.1053:

On the other hand, why can you swap weapons in .25s? It should take 1.25-1.5s instead. A weapon swap should be slow and obvious to the opponent as it happens, not something that happens in the blink of an eye.

tl;dr It’s backwards, recharge is excessive, swap time should be much longer.

Why? Changing weapons changes the entire frame, posture and animation set of your character. It is one of the biggest tells in the game.

etsmith.9025:

So how exactly does this new scoring system stop overstacked servers from blowing up the score. … yeah . .it doesn’t need to go back to the drawing board

Is this a system problem or a BG problem? Seems like a BG problem to me.

Cerby.1069:

Apparently the winners of each week, as normally through normal warscore, get victory points of some unknown number as well.

So with skirmishes this normal victory point score will be augmented with the victory score generated from skirmishes. But we don’t know the rating scale or important winning the week is vs how important winning skirmishes is.

This is way too overcomplicated.

You get warscore as normal.
At the end of the skirmish, your warscore gets turned into VP depending on who has most warscore.
At the end of the week, most VP wins.

Here we go again…

If you are practicing against a version of a boss with detoothed mechanics, you are not practicing against the boss. You have no way of knowing which mechanics are important on a detoothed boss.

Why do you need a special practice mode when you can just practice in the existing raid mode?

I would be fascinated to see a season which only includes the ‘new’ maps; Nu Skyhammer, Nu Spirit Watch, Revenge on the Capricorn and Eternal Coliseum.

Pink Ninja Man.4375:

Have/will the World Bonuses get tweaked around this new scoring type. Right now on NA with the new Skirmish stuff displaying I noticed that the World Bonuses seem to be going off of the Skirmish score which makes most of the world bonuses impossible to obtain and the few ones that get obtained.

The World Bonuses are the buffs that everyone on the server(s) get when they reached a set amount of points for the week.

Chris made this post in response to that. In short, you still have the bonuses; they are just not visible through the WvW screen. Mouseover the WvW button in the top left to see your bonuses.

Rednik.3809:

Because this will widen raid playerbase, which is good in a lot of ways. Including actual possibility to continue raid development, instead of scrapping them due to low payoff from creating such niche content. You know that Ncsoft is pretty practical company when it comes to monetary decisions, right?

Unless it expands the entire playerbase (which it won’t; nobody is or would play GW2 for easymode raids) this is not correct. Development time is a finite resource, and ANet spending more of their limited resources than they currently do on raids is a lose for everybody. Most of the playerbase will never play raids; even most of the PvE playerbase will never play raids.

These are the exact mistakes that Blizzard made, and World of Warcraft actually has a legitimate reason to provide multiple modes (the ramping gear barrier and short-term nature of their raid content).

Hexinx.1872:

We should be happy about this, pot stirring on anets part. It may result in the exact same thing, that they can put minor changes into make drastic impacts (scarily both good and bad) but I’ll remain optimistic because they are ‘thinking’ about how to do things. And that’s the start people have wanted for many years.

Especially considering we can vote out things that don’t work.

Freeelancer.2860:

In short, how the hell do I make people in the most casual MMO ever to get off their bum and do something interesting for a nice reward and fun experience?

“Come find me” isn’t fun or interesting though. It’s the second most basic ‘giveaway’ you can do, beyond “whisper me first”.

If they are contributing to a map queue, I find it pretty disrespectful to other players.

If they’re in an area of strategic value- practically everywhere on EBG provides strategic value as a scout- and they complain about being killed, they’re in the wrong.

If someone wants to duel, they can do it south of the windmill on ABL, in OS, or not at all.

I think exactly replicating how the WvW trebuchet works could not be a terrible idea. You can rotate between rock and cow rounds to get a higher fire rate, you can fire only rocks or cows because they fit the situation, and you can throw the water fields on a long CD.

Hugh Norfolk.2798:

• If you could add one ammo type to the treb (poison shot, healy shot, etc.) what would it be?

If I had to pick one, it would be cowshot.

Hugh Norfolk.2798:

• How long (in seconds) do you think it should take the treb to turn from Home to Far?

I think the current spin time is reasonable. Playing home+far is, I think, a healthy strategy to have available for countering heavy Treb play.

Hugh Norfolk.2798:

• How long (in seconds) do you think a damage dealer (either physical or condi) should take to kill a treb?

This is somewhat difficult because the trebuchet still acts as a physical item with LOS. Either way, I think 15 seconds is fairly healthy for pure power if it acts as a LOS item, and less if it does not. Condi rampup can be more complicated between classes/builds and you probably have a better idea how that turns out.

Nocturnal Lunacy.8563:

Not awarding any kind of skilled groups or smaller servers or anything.

On the contrary, kill score will be drastically increased in relevance. If a guild group can reliably and efficiently murder zerglings, it can create score swings in the skirmish that would otherwise be irrelevant in the current state of WvW.

Creating advantages for smaller servers is a bizarre idea, but better organized and higher skilled servers will come out of the change better than they were before as the timezones that they can dominate will actually produce real differences.

I think

1. Treb should be susceptible to crits and condis
2. Teleport skills should drop the repair kit

Rising Dusk.2408:

• Unlike all other map mechanics, it doesn’t employ a player’s skill with their class to take advantage of the Trebuchet. This is actually a really bad thing, because it means you have to train yourself on the exact power-up levels to hit certain points or else you’re less than useless, and this is incongruous with all other maps. If it were up to me, I’d simply have three skills on the Trebuchet that target clocktower, windmill, and mansion and will do all of the work for you of hitting the point if pressed.

I disagree quite strongly. The trebuchet as is has a relatively low skill floor, and learning to hit the objectives is quite easy. Hitting secondary targets, destructible objects, and variations on each point is, IMO, a great way to ‘master’ Khylo- and if you don’t want to engage in mastery of the trebuchet, for 99% of players, it’s not necessary to master the mechanic.

Jerus.4350:

Also on the flip side, barely getting a win will result in far more points. Could be good or bad, a very close 2hour section will mean more than it previously did.

This is what I’m really keen about. Players in NA primetime have had a relatively negligible effect on the overall matchup; a server with a distinctly powerful NA team will actually be able to win weeks because of it.

Xillllix.3485:

- The middle part of the map is completely useless, and that’s fine, but why is it still there? Remove it completely.

noooo

bring back the mega laser

or add -something- there, it’s a fun area, there’s just nothing there

just get everyone to move to kaineng, bandwagon into t1 for 500 gems

Ben K.7329:

Wonder how feasible it is to set up mercenary servers for this sort of thing? Guild gets to play together, but ANet decides what server they’re playing for each relink.

this is what more than half of the servers are now. if you want to play the field, join one of the linked servers

I don’t think making drastic changes to the skills is necessarily a good idea. I don’t really want to see any of them change their raw functionality, as they each already fill a role. I also think that any attempts to strengthen Spectral skills will miss their mark as Spectral Mastery is a non-starter compared to Vital Persistence.

No, I’m pretty happy with GW2.

If you want to have an immune window, play a Warrior.

If necromancer is so bad, play something else. ANet have metrics.

Tadsoul.6951:

do youguys think blighters boon is worth taking if you don’t have spite?

Only if you are using Sigil of Strength and Runes of Durability, other boon-granting sigils (Agility/Battle), and a statspread with a very healthy amount of Vitality. I think if you want to play Blighter’s Boon you don’t want to play half-measures.

Anything else I would probably say you want to be using Deathly Chill for the sake of extra condition coverage.

Draco.9480:

here’s a kitten who defends the game the way it is.
It’s about making the game better and to give critics.

not an argument

Lurock Turoth.9085:

Just pointing out it looks like the OP is on TC, so everyone can pretty much ignore this thread as the usual TC care bear whine.

Looks like this response is from someone on BG, so everyone can pretty much ignore this post as a stackgate whine. :^)

nah i wouldn’t

honestly this just seems like a bait thread to get people to say “i don’t like race mixing” or something like that

because support in GW2 is a fundamentally different mechanic than it is in other games, and its a role that people like to fill

Draco.9480:

In World of Warcraft ya can buff 40 people.

if you prefer wow’s mechanics, play wow instead

Ballistic.2570:

2: Get rid of reward tracks: they draw in PvE players
3: Make gift of battle easier to get.. The reward track again draws in PvE players.
4. Stop putting in incentives for PvE players…. Seriously, they just want to karma train and I suspect they are not geared properly for WvW.

So basically you want WvW to be a 5v5
nty

aristotle.2813:

What do you call such people? WvW snobs?

Elitists.

Silv.9207:

HOW?? O.o

Careful application of strategy and understanding how dragonhunters work.

Silv.9207:

The shield last 7 seconds, that skill corrupt 3 boons and have a CD of 15 sec.

Shield lasts 5 seconds. Bulwark is a bad trait.

Silv.9207:

if traited in virtues, we can think that the guardian have more or less stability, protection, retalation. Corrupting them we obtain: 1 sec of fear, 3 stacks of vulnerability and 3 of confusion. Our best damage can be, more or less, 2k if he use skills. but he can also active F2 and heal the exact 3 conditions we just corrupted.

Chill from Fear, Bleed and Vulnerability from Chill.

Silv.9207:

Then… fear don’t interrupt F3 shield…
What did we obtained with that perfect move? 2k of damage with 7 seconds while we’re unable to hit our enemy? We can have a build with unblockable Marks, then we’re able to use our marvelous staff skills to inflict damage. more or less… nothing? Staff skills are the worst damage skills of the entire game, we use it only why grant LF with AA and have a send back condition and a fear skill.

I didn’t say that you’d be able to immediately destroy the guardian. You’re blowing out his tools. Dragonhunters use their F3 shield as an opportunity to apply damage uninterrupted; your unblockable tools prevent that.

Corrupt Boon plays a key role by removing their stability and allowing you to further disrupt their offensive by tooting at them with your warhorn. You can also use the fear window provided by the corrupted Stability or your unblockable Staff 5 to give you an opportunity to apply Death Shroud’s fear.

Silv.9207:

Tell me how that make us a Dragonhunter Killer, please. Expecially why a DH can simply active it another time using the elite and make again all out damage a waste, simpli why out of the RS we’re totally unable to inflict any decent damage. Also corrupting boons.

Because you don’t understand how dragonhunters work. They need specific situations in order to be able to safely apply their damage. F3 shield is one of them.

Silv.9207:

Don’t say that we’re able to kill a DH why that’s more or less impossible. With a simple pull/knockback combo with the sword wall trap a DH can inflict us insane damage, plus all the other LB skills (true shot inflict 6k of damage, just to say). A good DH will kill any necromancer he find in his way really really easy with insane damage, CC, immunity and blocks, with also a good healing ability.

If you are having trouble with specific abilities opening CC chains or applying large amounts of damage, try using the Dodge button.

Silv.9207:

I did tonight 6 match in Ranked and I don’t find Any necromancer in my or the enemy team. just me.
There’s a reason why everyone play ranger, dh, reve, warrior and thief, don’t you think?

Because people like you don’t know how to play against them, giving them easy wins. Some classes are great for eating noobs.

BlaqueFyre.5678:

Let’s see whenever you corrupt fury which can be done with 3 different skills, then there is signet of spite, well of darkness, Nightfall, deathly swarm… And there are a few more….

Necros don’t have great access to blind in the current state of the game. Sig of Spite and Well of Darkness are pretty bad. Nightfall is the only good skill on greatsword, which is otherwise horrible, and deathly swarm can’t fit into modern builds.

Dawdler.8521:

Well you see the problem here is that you’re not supposed to have that kind of variety and options in the same game mode. We have sPvP, thats an option for those wanting small scale PvP. We have EoTM, thats variety under a different set of rules than WvW.

But sPvP is the exact example that you don’t want to use, because Stronghold is miles away from Conquest yet they are both considered equally valid gametypes for the purposes of Ranked play.

DBL is just a different map. It has the same structure for scoring, with slightly different attributes for the locations which are relevant to the scoring. If you were to apply the same standards to ranked sPvP, which should be the most stringent gametype available, there would only be one ranked map available for play at any one time (every single map and their objectives have different properties)- but we have four, and a second gametype entirely.

Dawdler.8521:

WvW is supposed to follow the same basic rules. EB is the gold standard – keeps protected by towers (and towers protected by the keeps). ABL trim down the scale and split the map into a defender area (garri+its two towers) and attacker area (keeps+their single tower) but it still follows the exact same mantra of connected objectives. That thin red thread that make you see the logic of the design.

DBL… well we dont even know wtf kind of rules it follows because it sure isnt WvW. None of the objectives are connected and its like a kitten 3-way split that doesnt give defenders any advantage.

These are arbitrary map design elements that don’t have any bearing on the core mechanics on the map. Towers give score. Keeps give score. They both still provide strategic advantages, just different ones.

Here are the rules for a WvW map:
There are three teams in competition
There are objectives which give points

Here are the rules for a Borderlands map:
It has three keeps
It has four towers
It has six camps

DBL meets all of these criteria. It’s a qualified WvW Borderlands map.

Isn’t this exactly what the Bandit Bounties, Ley-Line Anomalies, Bloodstone-crazed Beasts and now Seis are for?

No, these are all bad changes.

If you want to make death magic a better line, it is better to directly target the tree’s weak traits i.e. make soul comprehension something that isn’t kitten .

Jana.6831:

It isn’t because I’m able to move faster on the vanilla maps, the DBL has got too many obstacles – the spawn alone is placed unfortunate as is NC – I can’t just run to NC to save it or to get some supply, it’s a journey.

If you know how to move around the map, you will have no difficulty reaching your targets in similar timeframes to what you would have on ABL. This is why I said that technical skill is required to navigate the map. If you understand how to move through the keeps and the north section you will be able to reach north camp quite quickly from either Garri or your spawn.
Besides, why do you think your DBL north camp should be as easy to defend as ABL north camp, considering it’s not as important to upgrade your objectives and supplies more PPT?

Jana.6831:

It’s better to be 2+ so you can either be rezzed if you died or your ally can rush to that camp to save it.

Of course it’s better to have more people. It always is and always has been. To say this is an acute weakness of DBL is absurd.
If your camps are so important to hold, you should leave someone there. In the modern game it is easy to get the cap bar filled by the time swords even appear on the objective.

Jana.6831:

But alas, I’m a veteran with highschool logic.

No, you’re missing the high school logic. When you have an equation with an identical element on both sides, you remove it. All WvW maps are more difficult when you have competition- so it’s not a fair complaint to level against DBL.

Jana.6831:

Using uncommon words doesn’t make you smarter or more mature

I never said it did?

Jana.6831:

I never said that map should be deleted, I just think it’s unfair to have only 1 DBL as the server who’s it assigned to either has an advantage or disadvantage.

Sure it’s a PPT benefit, and that’s reasonable as a critique. But it’s a very short list of people who care about PPT- short enough that people voted over 75% in the poll on whether mixed BLs was a better option than rotating BLs. The reasons that PPT is a joke remain the same whether DBL is around or not.

Jana.6831:

I also said it’s an unsuitable wvw map for the wvw we have.

Which is wrong.

Jana.6831:

No one ever said the DBLs should be deleted – try to get that into your head, ok? =)

An objectively false statement.

Jana.6831:

If you have been able to solo flip a whole BL then there wasn’t a single enemy around. You can solo everything on the vanilla maps as well – In fact I soloed everything there and duo-loed all keeps including SM.

Not the point.

Jana.6831:

If you have enemies then solo roaming is a pain on the DBL.

If you have enemies, solo roaming is a pain on any WvW map. This is high school level logic.

Jana.6831:

No – You have a weird logic, really – just to be right? See I made plum jam the other day and the season is nearly over, so there won’t be any more plums for this year but they’re not deleted, they will come again next year.

Disputing the exact verbiage is a waste of time.

Jana.6831:

You didn’t and I didn’t know that I should explain to you: You can do more solo on EB than you can do on the DBL. You can flip: 6 camps, kill the ogres, dredge and hyleks or get them as allies – they have more use than anything on the DBL. Is that objective enough? (I really thought you realized this yourself and I didn’t need to explain it once more).

How many objectives there are to flip on EBG is completely irrelevant to my personal preference.
If you are making the case that DBL should be deleted because there are less objectives for comfortable soloing than EBG, then you should be deleting ABL first.

Jana.6831:

I told you that repeating nothing else than “you’re joking, you’re not allowed to have an opinion” while not explaining how you came to that conclusion is childish, yes.

>"you’re joking, you’re not allowed to have an opinion"
>boils down someone’s opinions on the DBL to “you just want a big 5v5 map”

okay friendo

Jana.6831:

You are asking to keep the DBLs because of your personal preference.

No, I’m asking that they not be deleted for someone else’s personal preference.
If there is a strong reason that isn’t fundamentally rooted in personal preference why they should be deleted, then I’ll agree with it. But there isn’t, so I don’t.

Jana.6831:

ETA: You can solo roam, small scale, zerg, blob on the vanilla maps – it’s pretty hard to do anything but 3-15 on the DBL.

I’ve solo flipped everything on DBL except Garri. Sorry, no, it isn’t hard to do anything solo there if you’re competent. That you think you need 3 people to be able to do anything on DBL just makes it seem like you’ve no idea what you’re doing.

Jana.6831:

Where did I demand the DBLs to be gone forever? Hint: I didn’t.

Removing them from active play or sending them to EotM is practically the same thing as deleting them.

Jana.6831:

Adults usually explain things and don’t just insult – so in case you discover how to discuss things – otherwise all we’re doing is filling the internet with more junk.

I’ve explained repeatedly the difference between personal preference and objective criteria. It didn’t work.

I do appreciate the irony in you saying that adults don’t insult people, and immediately turning around and insulting people, though.

Jana.6831:

ETA: And btw: You listed all the stuff solo roamers can do on the DBL and said yourself that it’s not much different to what solo roamers can do on EB, the map you hate – so I assumed that you realized yourself that you had no point.

No, there’s a point. You’re just missing it.
I don’t like EBG. I’m allowed to dislike EBG. You’re allowed to dislike DBL. Everyone’s allowed to like or dislike whatever they please. That’s personal preference. There are no points to be made here.
The point is personal preference is not grounds for asking for a map to be removed.

Jana.6831:

And you don’t? And no one on the forums does? And that isn’t the purpose of forums?

I’ve already said that I don’t like EBG yet I wouldn’t demand its deletion.

Jana.6831:

*facepalm

Have fun

Sulk as much as you like, I’m not the one who turned “DBL has more to do for small groups” into “you just want a 5v5 map”.

TheDevice.2751:

Oh i forgot the metaslave tactic to run cb and splash conditions everywhere by taking a nap on my keyboard.

Necromancers are the epitome of passive play so long as MM and condi are their only place in the meta (since forever).

Dude if you toss out your best tools because “they are meta” you only have yourself to blame.

Jana.6831:

Then tell me why I would be joking – otherwise you can just continue this endlessly and tell me that I’m wrong but not why. So?

Why are you joking? I don’t know. I’m asking because you’ve made a simply outlandish statement which I can’t see any other explanation for.

Why are you wrong? Because you’re conflating personal preference for what you like to do in WvW with objective criteria for what makes a WvW map.

I don’t understand why a necromancer would complain about constant blocks, we have the best Unblockable tools in the game.

If you’re playing against a guardian you just slot Corrupt Boon and then when they throw up the DH shield you just use CB and if it hits you’ve instantly won the fight.

dzeRnumbrd.6129:

How it got 75% of the vote is beyond me.

Must have just been some first class trolling from our PvE players filling out the survey.

Mixed borderlands imbalances WvW match up too much and needs to be either full DBL or full Alpine. Never a mix.

It’s because nobody cares about PPT. The only thing that matters for your overall points for the week is how good your server’s coverage is, how many BLs you can fill, and for how long. Red DBL doesn’t change that one iota.

Having a variety in places you can go adds far more than trying and failing to keep PPT balanced.