So your criteria for the system is broken is a possible outcome of the designed system, and this will show that further investigation needs to be done?
I give up. I now understand why the devs stopped responding to RNG broken threads. They realized long ago that the players have no idea what they are doing.
Snip.
5% of what? # of drops? That is literally inherent to a RNG system. It’s expected. I’m pretty sure your problem with the system is you don’t like it, not that it’s broken.
There’s no point in making personal comments. I’m interested in experiments, sure. I don’t think the system is broken though and never said it was- I’ve always maintained that disparity as described through annecdotal evidence is due to cognitive bias and/or is well within the realms of RNG.
As for the 5% thing, I think it would mean that player X (under the same circumstances/variables as player Y) would receive a consistent average of 5%+ exotics.
The system they designed allows this. It allows 500%+
Yes I can read.
This: “Say all 10 accounts found that RNG is bugged”
You cannot make this conclusion because your sample size is too small. Period.
It’s only 10 for right now. Just to see. A month from now we can do 500 accounts all we want. There’s nothing wrong with starting small and expanding out. We can even do 10 at a time and have 50 a week.
I mean the 10 won’t let you see anything but for the sake of discussion, what results would show you the system is bugged? Not generally speaking (ie “one person got less drops”). What specifically. Like numberwise, dropwise. What data would say the system is broken?
For starters, will record rare and up drops. Then in another week will only record exotics. If 8/10 accounts get nothing but blues, while 2/10 get exotics/rates every time, there’s a questionable call.
If 8/10 accounts report at least on exotic/rare every time, then that shows that it’s fine, it’s all luck. This experiment is really about whether or not some accounts are luckier then others. If those 2/10 accounts keep getting exotics say 5/7 days of the week while the other 8 keep getting blues/greens and 0-1 exotic out of that week, there’s a valid reason to investigate.
These of coarse are not real numbers, I just used these for example purposes…
An RNG system, literally, allows this kind of result while working. Your problem is with the design. Not that it’s broken.
The system would be “bugged” if there was a significant difference between a normal and “problem” accounts. In science, I believe a “significant difference” is a difference of 5% or more.
The problem here is, if the experiment was conducted and data appeared to be perfectly normal and reasonable, I wonder how many people would discredit the data purely because they have experienced otherwise. (People currently discredit A-net’s word).
5% of what? # of drops? That is literally inherent to a RNG system. It’s expected. I’m pretty sure your problem with the system is you don’t like it, not that it’s broken.
Yes I can read.
This: “Say all 10 accounts found that RNG is bugged”
You cannot make this conclusion because your sample size is too small. Period.
It’s only 10 for right now. Just to see. A month from now we can do 500 accounts all we want. There’s nothing wrong with starting small and expanding out. We can even do 10 at a time and have 50 a week.
I mean the 10 won’t let you see anything but for the sake of discussion, what results would show you the system is bugged? Not generally speaking (ie “one person got less drops”). What specifically. Like numberwise, dropwise. What data would say the system is broken?
Yes I can read.
This: “Say all 10 accounts found that RNG is bugged”
You cannot make this conclusion because your sample size is too small. Period.
The loot disparity is, quite literally, supposed to happen between different accounts. So what are you documenting? That it works?
Yes and no. The whole point is to say " ok 10 accounts reported this, we should expand the research to xxx accounts now because of the results."
Indefinitely, the results would help open the door to expanding the research. This is not conclusive research rather a gateway. Say all 10 accounts found that RNG is bugged, now that doors open to expand it, cause yes 10 out of Xxxxxx accounts is not a valid/realiable result. BUT there is some reason to expand the experiment to see if the results are truly flawed or by coincidence.
Not yes and no. Just yes, it’s not enough. You cannot get a conclusion from 10 accounts. I mean you can think you get a conclusion, but statistically, no, you cannot get a conclusion. If the purpose of this experiment is to show anet there’s something wrong, the second they see “10 accounts only” they are going to dismiss your claim (rightfully so).
I suggest taking a course in statistics before trying to set up experiments, because it would let you know that this has been framed extremely poorly and any conclusions from it will be gained incorrectly.
I know others will say" RNG is RNG"….sorry I’m just not buying it. There are too many coincidences for that to fly anymore. I also know others will say…“we are programed to find patterns when there aren’t any”…sorry not buying that as the patterns emerge on their own accord.
If you are unwilling to listen to the reasons why this happens, then what possible discussion were you hoping to have? “Agree with me or don’t post”?
Not in the slightest. I am more than willing to discuss the matter when valid points are made. No one making the claim that “rng is rng” has given any decent reasoning to why that is a valid counter point as of yet. If you would like to, I’d be more than happy to read though it and consider how it applies.
So to expand on this a little bit more. The conversation of it typically goes:
a)“I think our loot system is borked”
b)“Nope, rng is rng”
a)“Huh?”
b)“Rng will have some lucky and some unlucky by default”
a)“So, what does that have to do with the loot system being borked?”
b)“Any outcome can be explained as random”
a)“That might explain outcomes, but it doesn’t address whether the system is borked”
b)“It makes evidence redundant, therefor denies the possibility of a broken system”
a)“Uhmm ya, that sounds more like a cop out”
b)“Nope rng is rng”
Yes but all evidence that the system is borked is completely anecdotal and perceived imbalances. You having two accounts with two different loot experiences is completely normal. Is it bad design? Maybe. Is it broken though? No statistical evidence says it is. If I can be bothered, I’ll put some actual stats stuff to show just how wildly different outcomes can be, even over a long period, with randomness.
I know others will say" RNG is RNG"….sorry I’m just not buying it. There are too many coincidences for that to fly anymore. I also know others will say…“we are programed to find patterns when there aren’t any”…sorry not buying that as the patterns emerge on their own accord.
If you are unwilling to listen to the reasons why this happens, then what possible discussion were you hoping to have? “Agree with me or don’t post”?
I know you don’t want to open a support ticket, but seriously, that’s like the only thing that’s going to give you a definitive answer.
I want you all to know that NOTHING is truly random in computers….
Thats an illusion. There is something behind the scenes picking who gets the drop…
This has been beaten to death.
Yes, computers do not simulate a truly randon number generator.
But no, a correctly generated RNG is not distinguishable from true RNG in application. This has been proved over and over for computing purposes for years, if not decades.
And here I was ready to come back to do ranked queues now that Turret Engi has been properly humbled.
/waitsummoar
Just don’t hit b during the match? Individual score is misleading anyway. Or does the lag persist during the entire match if you hit b just once? You could unbind it temporarily. I know it would be not ideal to not see their team comp prior to match, but this seems like a big that can be avoided until they find the issue.
On the issue: if one account has an issue and the second doesn’t on the same issue, to me that suggests it has to do with something it’s displaying, like reward track. Has anyone had this happen and then not happen later?
There was a fully open PvP beta for 24 hours recently (stronghold). Far more than what PvE has gotten, time wise. Guess it’s PvE’s turn.
So instead of players taking an active role to get a closed beta key, it is better for them to RNG emails from a list of potentially dead accounts? Access that could have gone to active players instead?
So instead of players from each of the 3 core game modes having potential access to the beta keys, it is better to omit PvPers and WvWers by having a steep RNG factor in only two PvE maps?
It’s beta may be PvE only, so that seems fitting. There was a full 24 hours of stronghold recently for everyone. There may be a WvW coming up as well.
I don’t think there’s much to gain by applying realism. We can burn fire eles, chill ice foes, poison undead, bleed ghosts, etc. This change was purely mechanics, and a necessary one to nerf the cheesability of a build.
I’m a little confused as to the point of this thread? These generalized setups don’t have much play in GW2. You can go full damage while still giving more than sufficient support. No need to split damage and support.
I really loved the ideology.
“Elementalists are multi-faceted spellcasters that channel elemental forces, making fire, air, earth, and water do their bidding. What they lack in physical toughness, they make up in versatility and the ability to inflict massive damage in a single attack.”
The ele is not worth it anymore for skill to reward ratio. They have the lowest defense and health pool in the game, if the damage is getting nerfed what use is there to play ele?
The elite specialization tempest should be something good, or ele will just be the forgotten profession. Its still decent in terms of damage, but not when compared with other professions. I don’t like the direction the balance team take the elementalist, especially for PvE.
Some suggestions:
- Make the adept air trait ‘’Ferious winds’’ depending on precision instead of healing power.
- Elemental attunement as minor trait in Arcana.
- More or higher damage multipliers in Fire and Air specializations. To compensate for the loss of dps.
I agree with what you say. Thief and mesmer both have a generally similar DPS output, similar Health and defense, yet they have stealth which is 10X better than the healing elementalists can provide. Fire and Air should be made more viable, since now everyone is gonna get forced into Arcane, Water and Earth, espec d/d.
Did you mean thief and ele? Otherwise I think we may be playing two different games…
When we log back in; we are still in the party and just in time to see the three others kick us.
It wasn’t a big deal since we only started, but it’s still insulting that you get a party going and get booted of your own party and then you have to rebuild another party.
It’s not true that we don’t need party leaders. There is always someone leading and most groups expect to have someone leading them. That’s the reason you join a party instead of creating your own: so that you can follow, sit back and not think to much.
If anything, either you agree or not with having party leaders, we have to agree that Anet needs to look at options regarding parties. The situation is not good at the moment and no one can disagree to this because all the negative posts speak for themselves.
My 2 coppers.
One of your mistakes is assuming that was your party. That’s not how this game works. That may be what you want, but no one owns a party. And not everyone is expecting that. You claim all parties need a leader, but I’ve done so many PUG runs where there’s not even communication in terms of what to do. Maybe idle chat, but nothing about the dungeon. Everyone knows what they are doing. No one is leading. Maybe you need a leader to get through a dungeon, but a lot of us do not.
I can disagree with you about the situation on parties. Until you prove to me that a few 100 complainers on the forum reflects the 100000s (if not millions) of active players in the game, I’m going to assume the only people that are upset are the ones posting – a very small community. I have literally never been kicked from a PUG party, and I typically PUG dozens of runs a week. Your situation, or the situation of a few dozen, or even a few 100, does not speak for me, or anyone I know.
I don’t think it’s a total disaster or gamebreaking, but it’s certainly stifling variation and flexibility. It’s a step in the wrong direction, in my opinion. We’re supposed to be getting more options in builds, not limiting them.
There are some traitlines with traits I consider vital in the adept and master tiers. Traitlines that I have no use or desire to go further into. Being able to spend those points going partially into another traitline is a huge part of the flexibility we have now. They won’t even be useful by giving additional stats under this new system.
There are also several characters where I forgo a master trait for a second minor, or even a grandmaster for a second master. From the screenshots in today’s posts, that looks to no longer be possible.
I feel like some of you just completely fail at reading comprehension. The existing traits will be changed and moved around. So that trait that you consider vital on the adept/master tier of a traitline you don’t actually want? May actually get moved into a traitline you want to max out.
Some of them will even disappear and their functionality become part of the skill’s normal functionality. Using the example from the article, necromancer wells. At the moment I need to take Focused Rituals for ground targeting, because otherwise I have to jump into the middle of the enemy hammer train to drop my wells and with a large enough enemy zerg, that’s a really bad thing to do. If that trait gets removed since it’s now become a normal part of the well line of skills, I can now use that slot for something else that I might find more useful.
I think you make kittenumptions off of announcements. This is not the first time anet has announced trait redesign to change the “more useless ones” and we still have a bunch of useless traits. This is not the first time they’ve gotten rid of “useless traits” to still have useless traits.
I read the post. I saw they are moving traits around. I’m not confident that they are going to make every line have a useful trait in every adept, master, and grandmaster spot. Because 2.5 years of changes have shown that they haven’t accomplished that.
I thought anything that gave ascended crafting mats can also give ascended equipment.
That was what was announced. OP and thread necro are asking for verification.
It will effectively make gear even more important as now you won’t be able to trait extra defensive stats to keep yourself from dying as often. Berserker will be even more potent however because now you can acquire any trait abilities you want without having to sacrifice any power.
Zerker builds were already not doing this. Perhaps individuals were, but the META certainly didn’t include this.
The stat changes are minor compared to the trait redesign. Depending on how much gets moved around and changed, builds may be quite different. Zerker (or assassin in some cases) should still be optimal.
I think the only thing that might remedy this is how much more likely are premades to win against a full solo queue, or a smaller premade? Actual statistical data. I solo queue a decent amount and I gotta be honest, I literally don’t even notice if a team is a premade unless it’s the same guild tag. I’ve done some 500-40, on both sides, as a team queue and solo queue, but they certainly aren’t a norm. It’s hard to not just take the complaining as a hyperbole after a few bad games.
Yeah! At least we can see different types of zerker, this 6/6/x/x/x crap was long overdue. +1 Anet
Did you read the same blog post as I?
We get 3 lines, and 9 major traits. It means all builds are going to be 6/6/6.
Edit: Or are you just referring to the fact that not everything will be pumped into the first two trait lines? Because that was more done for traits than stats. So it’s somewhat reasonable to assume those 2 trait lines are still going to be chosen, unless the traits are going to be changed that much.
I am a bit apprehensive. There are a lot of builds out there that go into more than 3 trait lines. But perhaps the movement of traits and redesign will make new builds that were better than those. We’ll see.
How does a trait that removes a condition every time you evade an attack sound?
OP as all kitten, thats how.
It probably has an ICD, otherwise a mesmer under pressure basically has a full condition cleanse every 12 seconds, on top of whatever other evades they use.
(edited by Sorin.4310)
Pumping 6 points into a trait line for stats, even if you didn’t like the traits, was a hinderance to your character, whether you realized it or not. The combination of minor and major traits from a line were more beneficial to a playstyle than the stats. This is a good change.
Ok, so most of us playing the game know that if you want significant DPS you use equips with berserker stats. On top of that people can trait build to get some ridiculous damage as opposed to say somebody who uses carrion or knight equips.
Disclaimer: I read your entire post and will get to it, but I see this comment so much on “anti-zerk” posts and it just blows my mind.
The only thing you mention here is DPS. You take a 3 offensive stat (zerker), and compare it to a 2 offensive, 1 defensive stat (knights), and this is where I get completely lost. What is the point in the comparison, if all you are talking about is DPS? Zerker by design should be better at DPS than knights. It literally makes no sense to have a full offensive set be matched by a slightly defensive set. I just will never understand why people keep claiming defensive sets need to be as effective as zerker sets. Why would anyone take zerker then? And yes I know that your focus for the rest of your post is not on this, but it’s just extremely frustrating. Until people accept that it’s fair to have defensive sets subpar to offensive sets, in terms of DPS, this “zerker issue” is going to go no where. I mention this because it leads into your next point, to just randomly add defensive stats so that all the mixed defensive stats seem better. I don’t want defensive stats on my gear. I don’t need it. Please don’t bring my effectiveness down because someone’s not willing to bring their effectiveness up.
And as others have pointed out, your suggested change will only lead to a shifted meta, not a “bring whatever you want” meta. It might bring things a lot closer, but guilds like DnT actually get into the math of how effective a build is, and even if it’s a small % better, they role with that. I highly doubt anet can make several armor sets that are completely equal. Even assassins and zerkers has some noticeable difference. And then that info trickles down into the people who want to play meta, without really understanding why it’s meta. And you are where we are now: a large portion of the community saying “this is optimal” regardless of how much better it really is.
There are 26 rings that can come from bonus chest. The chance of getting the same 2 5 times (I’m going to ignore infused):
(2/26)^5 = 0.000002693, or 0.0002693%.
This might make you think something must be bugged, but considering literally millions of daily bonus chests have been opened, statistically, there should be other people in the same boat as you. Are you a statistical outlier? Yeah definitely. Are you bugged? No probably not.
Tons of people receive tons of doubles. I made another thread about this and did the math and I’m pretty positive it’s NOT RNG.
Here’s my thread:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Fractals-End-Chest-RNG/first#post4694039
Edit:
For reference, you’d need over 10 trillion players before you’d see the RNG that I’ve experienced in fractals.
“Tons of players have tons of doubles”. I’m seeing a few anecdotal cases.
I went over your thread. It just reinforces the fact that there are statistical outliers. You take a calculator and see that it the chance of you having these series of events is extremely small, and make something out of that. You don’t need over a trillion players before you’d see the RNG. It’s not like if something has a 1 and 10^50th, chance of occuring, then 10^50th cases have to occur. It can happen on the very first instance. That is literally what random is.
Other people tried to explain this in the other thread. Your eyes see patterns so you make it out to something. In your screenshot from the other thread there are at least 5 (I didn’t search hard) instances of you getting the same ring connected diagonally. But no one makes an “RNG” claim about rings being connected every 9th or 11th run because 1, that seems silly, and 2, diagonal patterns aren’t as easy to see. Only difference between this and the connected ones are the visual difference.
Your sample size is also way too small. You may keep doing fractals and never see a repeat again for 70 years. Because the events are independent. We simply won’t know.
There are 26 rings that can come from bonus chest. The chance of getting the same 2 5 times (I’m going to ignore infused):
(2/26)^5 = 0.000002693, or 0.0002693%.
This might make you think something must be bugged, but considering literally millions of daily bonus chests have been opened, statistically, there should be other people in the same boat as you. Are you a statistical outlier? Yeah definitely. Are you bugged? No probably not.
It does not. Wiki has a list of commonly missed places. I’m on my phone which won’t let me link it, but just go to “maguuma explorer” on the gw2 wiki. Otherwise, the best way to find the missing one is to look up each zone, and see which area you are missing from the list online. It’s a bit tedious but effective.
People didn’t do this in “old school games” not because they were letting people learn their character. They ignored mobs already engaged simply because they would get 0 loot or experience. It made MMOs single player games for the most part in open world outside of elite mobs. There was no reason to coordinate in open world. This new system is worlds better. Don’t hold on to nostalgia for the sake of nostalgia.
Only thing that can affect fall damage is the trait for each class and that rune that I can’t remember the name of. 25% less fall damage, which is additive to the 50% trait.
Legendaries can eat up over a million per legendary. Some people use the Orr exotic karma gear, which is ~300k per armor set. Others use It to buy heart armor to be forged and then salvaged, typically for linen.
I get 1500 rank points per win and wiki says it too.
The 1000 comes from assuming 50% wins.
If you die as an ele in a group, it means the guardian is bad. If you die as anything else than guardian, actually, it means that the guardian is bad. If you die as a guardian, it means that you, the guardian, is bad.
tl;dr: find a competent guardian and you will never go down. Having good teammates plays a role in your survivability until you’re able to solo all the encounters.
Um, what? No. Not everyone plays their guardian as a full cleric heal support. The guardian can supplement survival a lot, but there’s plenty of instances where the nonguardian has to do something.
What kind of playstyle do you like – in terms of like does following the meta interest you? Because then ele outstrips guardian in terms of DPS and might stacking by quite a large margin. Guardian has a lot of useful things to them though. They can blind effectively, reflect, block attacks for the entire party. They are good support. They have really good burst too. Their sustained DPS is lacking though.
If I need a story run, I’ll typically take whatever I can get. Story mode can be hard to find any type of group.
According to wiki, it was the 26th.
I highly doubt they will do that. They may not even have that functionality. Have you unlocked the skins in the wardrobe? Reskinning items to HoM skins does not cost any transmutation charges, I believe.
Get a sample size of at least 1000 before you try to make any claims like this, otherwise it can just be blown off as RNG.
/thread
This. Also, what level if your elementalist?
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Please-No-Profession-Loot/page/6#post4343796
I believe he’s talking about chat codes, which yeah I just checked and it seems some are working and some aren’t. Sunrise from the wiki was blank when I linked, but https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Ruby_Orichalcum_Ring_of_the_Berserker worked correctly.
Edit: Switched to a character that had sunrise and it linked properly from the wiki. The ring also linked, but that character did not have it. Switched back to the original character to make sure I linked Surnise correctly. Still was blank. So I have no idea.
(edited by Sorin.4310)
What is the world coming to!! So many people in glass houses that will complain about anything >.<
God forbid someone getting upset about racial, homophobic, gender, etc. slurs. Where did society go wrong when we started treating people like actual people, instead of just belittling them at every turn?
As for what to do, I think the screenshot and then reporting is the best option. I’ve never seen anyone complain about being told to change a pet name/having a pet name reset for being offense. Anet may not check it when you report for having an inappropriate name.
I have 2 problems with turret engineer. One, they take next to no skill to still be somewhat useful in a match. A no skill thief is probably gonna be worthless. But turret engineer? Still effective against a lot of people. My second problem is the turret health. It just seems way too high (maybe just with the trait?). Even in zerker gear, cleaning turrets can take up quite a lot of time, relative to the pace of a PvP match.
It would be interesting if they made it like GW1 spirits. Where you could only have 1 of each spirit up within range even if you had 8 ritualists. Because having 11 (seriously – 3 turret engies) dropped on me at the very beginning of the match was the biggest eye roll of all time. Though I don’t know how appropriate it is with the random teammate matching.
Taking the easy exploit out of abilities one at a time more like. Clearly you shouldn’t be able to just jump off a cliff no one can follow whenever you put yourself in a spot you can’t win.
Legendaries are definitely still going to be a grind. A few extra mats for doing some stuff in a map won’t revolutionize T6 mat farm. And I know Anet showed easy things like “dance with QJ” for the collections, but you can be assured there’s going to be ones that are much more time consuming.
I think you’re right about me not fully understanding as I just got back into the game, haha. But, in dungeons, who WANTS a Mesmer? lol I’m not saying it’s not viable, what I’m saying is that it’s not wanted, OR as effective as Warriors, Elems, Guards, or Thiefs. As for the weapon builds, I again agree with you on the support of using the blind fields with your pistol as a Thief for example, but again that’s just necessary filler between DPS. There is no other SPECIALIZATION as effective as damage. Not “specialization” as in traits, I mean as a character as a whole.
There isn’t a specialization as effective as damage, but I’m not sure there can be. Without the original trinity, most of the focus has to be DPS. How could a control build compete with DPS? And I don’t mean within the possible control in the game. I mean how could you change control to be as effective as DPS? You’d have to both redesign classes to be able to fully be dedicated to control, and also have encounters require that control. But that moves in the direction of required builds. And despite what some people will say on these forums, zerker is not required to play this game. Required to join some groups? Sure. Optimal? Sure. But not actually required. And that’s one of the huge selling points Anet tried to get across. You don’t need healers. You don’t need tanks. You can bring the build you want. It may be extremely suboptimal. But you can get through content with it.
I’m honestly just unsure if you can both set up a game that offers a “play how you want” and also require classes other than DPS to be extremely effective. They seem contradictory. I think what the game needs is a sort of hard mode. Where groups who are willing to fit into more specific roles can have that higher level, required build content. And normal mode can still just be done with whatever. But I honestly don’t see that happening. The attention dungeons have gotten in over a year have been extremely minimal.
The way to make control build and support builds as effective as DPS is actually pretty simple in my opinion.
For control:
Skale Venom for example, have the duration last longer the more X stat you have. Same with blind, or any conditions. Conditions are a joke (so I hear) so why not have those scaling abilities? (Besides “condition DAMAGE”)Support:
More/longer stacks of might with X stat, longer stability with X stat, etc.This way there’s a much greater reason for a Guardian to put points into “Healing power” which would increase the intensity and duration of his boons for example.
I’m not being rude, but it is a pretty simple idea lol :P
It’s simple but it’s not (more) balanced. Coordinated groups can already CC bosses a good chunk of the time. To allow them to do it even further would make already fairly easy dungeons an even bigger joke. Boon duration being tied into healing power is an interesting concept. I’m not sure how I feel about it. Though I think with metas being focused around 2 eles + 1 warrior, you’d have to nerf boon duration into the absolute ground to have them not be able to reliably stack might. And at the moment both ideas are unclear to me what all the reaching implications would be out of dungeons, which Anet has a far bigger focus on.
I think you’re right about me not fully understanding as I just got back into the game, haha. But, in dungeons, who WANTS a Mesmer? lol I’m not saying it’s not viable, what I’m saying is that it’s not wanted, OR as effective as Warriors, Elems, Guards, or Thiefs. As for the weapon builds, I again agree with you on the support of using the blind fields with your pistol as a Thief for example, but again that’s just necessary filler between DPS. There is no other SPECIALIZATION as effective as damage. Not “specialization” as in traits, I mean as a character as a whole.
There isn’t a specialization as effective as damage, but I’m not sure there can be. Without the original trinity, most of the focus has to be DPS. How could a control build compete with DPS? And I don’t mean within the possible control in the game. I mean how could you change control to be as effective as DPS? You’d have to both redesign classes to be able to fully be dedicated to control, and also have encounters require that control. But that moves in the direction of required builds. And despite what some people will say on these forums, zerker is not required to play this game. Required to join some groups? Sure. Optimal? Sure. But not actually required. And that’s one of the huge selling points Anet tried to get across. You don’t need healers. You don’t need tanks. You can bring the build you want. It may be extremely suboptimal. But you can get through content with it.
I’m honestly just unsure if you can both set up a game that offers a “play how you want” and also require classes other than DPS to be extremely effective. They seem contradictory. I think what the game needs is a sort of hard mode. Where groups who are willing to fit into more specific roles can have that higher level, required build content. And normal mode can still just be done with whatever. But I honestly don’t see that happening. The attention dungeons have gotten in over a year have been extremely minimal.
I don’t think you understand what you are asking for. At least not fully. You complain that there is lack of diversity (zerker – an armor stat), and yet want control builds. What armor stat in this game boosts control builds? There isn’t one. Control builds come from your traits and weapons, not your armor stat. The meta for mesmer is assassins/zerker gear, but a lot of the times the traits aren’t set up for full DPS. The reflect line is often used to boost their support/control (I’m unsure whether to consider more reflects support or control – though I’d more consider it control by stopping the enemy). The same thing goes for meta guardian in fotm. A lot of times hammer is ran for it’s autoattack protection symbol. Phalanx build on warrior is ran to boost team at the sacrifice of itself. Thief will run offhand pistol for blind fields instead of dagger, which has higher DPS and shortbow for blast fields. You can very much be a control oriented class, while still using zerker gear. That’s something this community has yet to grasp. As for support, in terms of direct healing, yes, there isn’t much use of either traiting or gear speccing for it.
I don’t understand why you are mashing 1 skills. Why not just use autoattack?