Guild Wars 2

Let Arenanet figure out whether or not it’s balanced. I don’t see the point of running builds that don’t put you and your team at an advantage, or make you inherently weak to something popular

It’s everyone’s choice what they run when they queue up and have that minute and a half to analyze the team comps.

Ya no problem. The reality though is that most people run what they feel like running and Anet is attempting to decipher what is “balanced” and “overpowered” based on their data and the silliness of the forums.

It’s better to just run what works and let the chips fall where they may

The only thing that matters with a build is whether or not it puts you and your team in an advantage.

That said, Ranger is the easiest class to play in the game running far away. They are really important to have in Conquest because of point defense, and they will be a bit more risk/reward with incentives to run greatsword that are coming in the Tuesday patch, but it’s going to be a long time before people respect Ranger mains

I think a lot of people would benefit from seeing objective information about what classes are being run in pvp.

Maybe a % chart of how often each class is run and their winning %.

I suspect its nowhere near as lopsided as some people think, but that information being available and updated over a period of time would help people see the big picture.

You don’t know what I play lol. I haven’t logged in the game in more than a month.

You’re assuming a lot, making weird comparisons to Hitler… it’s kinda funny and sad at the same time.

Sure, there’d be people running the same builds but wouldn’t hundreds of players running the exact same build warrant a more immediate response than three dozen?

Let’s say 78% of the playerbase rerolls and exclusively plays longbow hammer warrior. I really doubt Anet would let that continue. They’d see that the players don’t even try to play the other classes and force changes because I’m pretty sure they wouldn’t want that when they built 8 different classes.

That actually happened in Starcraft with zergling rush. They nerfed zerg rush and the entire game benefitted from it but only when it became clear that the players didn’t play the game any other way.

I’ll go as far as saying that Ele, Mesmer, and Thief are bad classes to bring to solo queue in quantities more than one between the three of them. All three of them have either terrible health, armor or both in the case of Ele. It’s more chaotic in solo queue so you’d rather have better base values.

I know class identification is something a lot of people do, but it still baffles me. The classes in all MMOs are just tools. Which tool works best in which environment? Nobody peels for anyone in solo queue, communication is pretty much nonexistent, so does it really make sense to bring classes with low initial defenses?

Going zerker ammy on Ele is 1.8k armor and 14k health before traits. That is worse than both Ranger and Engineer without any amulet equipped, let alone Warrior. Soldiers on Ele is only 300 armor more than Warrior and less health without any amulets equipped!

It just makes more sense to bring Engi, Ranger, Necro, Guardian, and Warrior to solo queue. I’m not saying the classes aren’t viable – if you have an organized team and everyone is communicating the classes’ weaknesses become less of an issue.

Wow… what have I unleashed?

Equating playing to win and enjoying winning as a goal to genocidal tyrants is kinda crazy man.

If you run zerker ele and try to 1v1 anybody with decent armor without getting a jump on them good luck lol.

Guild Wars is a familiar name and its the same company who made the first one…

I’ll agree that GW2 is different fundamentally than GW1, but not that it’s false advertising lol

Rangers get protection on dodge and 50% endurance regen, so there’s another option. They have Rampage as One and can hold off on their condis until Zerker stance is down.

Guardians have really high armor level and short protection cooldowns, plus really strong direct damage, and stability.

Melandru runes help vs. stuns on all classes. 1k condi damage hits pretty hard having 1.2-1.5k doesn’t mean anything if you’re dead vs. warrior in every single 1v1 that you don’t dodge his low cooldown stuns.

Do those add up to winning vs. warrior reliably? No, but at least they help

Nobody is responsible for your having fun in any game except you. Ethics don’t exist in a win/loss constructed reality, which PvP in this or any other game is.

I recommend you read the articles, especially the one about introducing the scrub.

Advertising is always going to be positive in nature regarding a product. Nobody is going to say, “You might not like our product, but please buy it we worked our butts off on it!” that wants to sell anything.

Again, balance is relative. LoL has a good model for giving the community the choice to self-regulate. That might be something that Anet considers, but in the meantime those aren’t the rules with which GW2 are governed by.

Suggestions are positive contributions to the developer’s discussions, which might not be entirely connected to what the players want but complaining just wastes yours and everyone else’s time.

At this point it’s hard to argue that anybody can reliably hard counter Warrior 1v1 so guess what I’m playing when I come back in solo queue? lol

I understand that and trust me I’ll be playing this game 2 to 3 hours a day on average once the patch comes out. I’ll probably stop posting in the forums altogether, but I’m in the process of getting some information together before I come back.

Ya the math isn’t there for Warrior stun defense right now on any class that doesn’t have stab uptime.

Also, Warrior has higher armor and health than any other class so they start with more defense that comes with the package.

I don’t really see the point of trying to 1v1 a Warrior right now.

Whoa lol

That was impressive. Yes I am looking for one dimension – the one that wins. In all honesty I could care less what anyone else runs unless it helps me learn more about what works and what doesn’t. I just find that not getting angry over dumb stuff feels better and when I get back in game I’ll be able to be much better at the game than I was because of it, with practice and objective analysis.

My approach to this game is pretty simple. Yours, clearly, is somewhere in the mess of arbitrary rage over something you can’t control. I have no idea what you play this game for if you’re that angry.

This thread is proving what I’ve been saying about looking for advantages with objective reasoning.

A stun Warrior build clearly wins vs. OEggs’ Engineer build a lot easier than Engineer wins vs. Warrior in a 1v1. So if I see a Warrior on the map I’m going to bring a class and build that has stability uptime without sacrificing damage.

The best classes for that are Guardian and Warrior right now.

The way I see it, bringing that Engineer build when there’s a Warrior on the map is asking to be farmed or seriously challenged all match. Same thing when an S/D thief is on the map and someone brings a Mesmer or Ele. If your teammates aren’t peeling for you, it’s a 4v5.

I plan on not getting wrapped up in class identity, favoring objectively deciding what class gives me the best chance to win overall.

Haha you’re funny Cutepics.

The chess vs. checkers excuse and all the irritation in your response shows you either need to take a break from GW2, play chess, or do something else.

All I’m doing is getting as many people as possible to potentially look at how they approach the game differently, in a way that will always improve the way they play it.

If you don’t like the game or believe that it favors “idiots” and “faceroll cheesers” or any other arbitrary name, then don’t play it! Take a break from it or something.

HGH is back next week

And I thought I’d seen all forms of QQ

You sir get a plus one just so I can stare at that screen and laff my kitten off

Then the veteran needs to adapt their play style to account for this new climate where someone can beat them if they don’t plan to counter it. If the new stuff is a hard counter, then that begs that response even further..

If there isn’t an easy or conclusive counter to something, then why aren’t these “skilled” and “intelligent” and “great” players taking advantage of it?

It’s your opinion about the “shallower sport.” If a bunch of people agree with you, then the developers will notice and make changes, but as far as I can tell, based on my own previous complaints, and the complaints you see on every single game’s forum imaginable it’s better to not get wrapped up in those things.

If anything, there would be more swift action taken if everyone just ran the best builds, because then there would be objective reasons to nerf rather than piles and piles of whiny, subjective QQ to wade through.

I used to think you had to “earn your place” and that balance should be handled to favor more complex builds, but here’s the problem with that:

The shortest route from A to B is going to be taken, and “simple” and “faceroll” become more and more relative because it’s by comparison to standards that are entirely subjective.

Take SWTOR’s pvp for example. People call Operative faceroll there because they have insta cast stuff that works really well, but the sheer # of cooldowns (as in TWO DOZEN), needing to use consumables, expertise gear, and speed of 4v4 deathmatch make that argument relative to the game’s climate.

Spirit Ranger / Healing Signet / Marks spam are relatively simple stuff sure, but even if the game were made more complicated people like you are going to find something “faceroll” “cheesy” or “ez mode” to complain about.

Yes, solo q matches are won before they start. People run dumb builds there, make dumb decisions, and they lose because of it for a variety of logical reasons and their mental approach to the game.

Are simple, effective build bad for a game? Hell no. Newer players need those builds to be effective and in solo queue nobody is talking so simple, effective, and versatile builds are more effective.

Read the section about the dragon punch. That’s your “complex” and “depth” for you. A whole bunch of work to try to pull off something you can easily counter with a more simple move. Same concept in GW2.

That’s good to hear

You’re welcome lol

Ya that’s a good TLDR version too

hackks.3687:

Just out of curiosity why is that people assume complex builds are supposed to be better than simple ones?

GW2 PvP is fast paced combat where you need to make decisions quickly and without hesitation. By using a more complex build you are giving yourself more questions to decide and execute in fractions of a second. If a complex build is not working for you then you might need to consider how much complexity you are actually capable of utilizing before you end up making things harder for yourself. If it takes “player A” 3 button presses to do the same thing that “player B” is doing in 2 or even 1 button presses, then “player A” is obviously less efficient. Is player A making a trade off though in efficiency for Power or Sustainability? Was the trade off advantageous for the fight he’s engaging in? There’s more going on in each and every fight than merely simple vs complex.

My point is, just because it has a lot of buttons doesn’t always means it’s better for each and every player or in each and every fight.

You can’t assume that complexity of a build directly correlates to tilting risk/reward in your favor.

That was one of the first things I learned playing Engi.

Yeah that’s something important strategically that I’m planning on asking myself with each build I use. Do I have to think too much about this? Does all this extra stuff work against something that doesn’t have to?

Yes Hammerheart the gif attached is exactly what I will be doing when I play this game. I’m gonna drop all objective reasoning and just try to kill people because I’m gonna be a winner by your rock-solid definition

I’m all for new game modes as long as there is a reason for there to be all over the map. I’ve done some deathmatch in SWTOR recently and being split up and having to risk being outnumbered ought to be a part of any deathmatch style format.

When you’re all clumped up together it’s not going to be all that great.

Whoa!

I think you’re mad but I’m not totally sure

Sweetbread.2679:

I can’t fault players for taking the simplistic and yet utterly imbalanced pos system Anet has put out and finding the most efficient, least skill based way to play it. However I can definitely fault those players for being simple enough to find that brain-dead gameplay entertaining. This is the community Anet has built by catering this game to morons who just want BOOM HEADSHOT satisfaction and can’t be bothered to learn an in-depth combat system that rewards skilled play over faceroll idiocy.

If a build’s in-depth creative and practical strategy lets you win over the majority of your opponents and holds up vs. strong players, great!

If not, then it’s just another suboptimal waste of time.

KrisHQ.4719:

http://cdn.meme.li/i/mbthy.jpg

Haha two can play that game

Lowest Animal.8014:

You are not wrong, OP, but you are also not exclusively correct. Different people can play the same game for different reasons. This is not GW2 related but it has applicability here:

https://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/mr11b

Its not a perfect analogy but it becomes evident that player types or “psychographic profiles” are useful to answer the question “why do people play a game?” and “what is fun?”.

I perceive you have embraced your inner Spike in GW2 and that is perfectly fine. Winning is fun and winning all the time is more so. I’m sure you can be happy playing and playing against meta builds and classes while honing your skill at the game while not worrying about the development side of the game. And its all good.

However, you cant expect everyone to be a Spike or convert to becoming one. In order to have a successful game that thrives and grows the developers must find out who GW2’s Timmy, Jhonny and Spike are and how to cater to them. There is also what others have said before me that there needs to be balance in order to maintain a skillful, fair game.

I don’t expect people to all be uniform. I knew when I posted that there were going to be plenty of people who take issue with it, vent their frustrations, and potentially look at the text seeking answers.

Ya what you’re saying makes a lot of sense. Personality tests and evaluations are how well-run organizations ascertain where people are best deployed. Maybe Anet has some kind of system like that in their development iteration process I don’t know.

But it’s one thing to vent, whine, complain, kitten, and waste time and energy trying to fix something out of your hands and it’s another to offer constructive feedback you know what I mean?

@Karla

They left for their reasons. So did I. It happens.

@ Cutepics

I’m not mad you are lol. Skill is best measured objectively or it can be imagined /shrug

@ shimmer

We aren’t devs. The way I see it the energy spent whining and complaining and kittening and moaning about every little problem under the sun can be spent getting better at the 98% of the game that does work…

Munnies

/15char

IMA FIRIN MAH LAZOR!!!!!

Staff condi ele OP that’s what you should be talking about guys

This thread is going to make me have serious aches from laughing too hard lmao. You guys are health hazards!!!

@Hammerheart

Cherry picking? Good lord the irony.

What bugs make the game unplayable to the point where you have no chance to win vs. that team? As in 100% loss rate where there is literally nothing you can do to win? Can you prove that it’s possible to hack the game and force D/Cs on people?

Has the community enacted rules that made it into tournaments? Do these teams agree before a tournament that we’re not running spirit ranger, CC warrior, etc.?

No?

The scrub section is a crystal clear definition of people who think they’re good but aren’t and build a mental prison that prevents them from becoming so. Reevz pointed out a scientific theory that explains this.

You are apparently looking for something to justify that Anet is out to get you and anyone else who wants a “perfectly balanced game,” and seem to believe that the message from the scrub section isn’t a wake up call.

The attitude behind your choice of quotes is textbook, almost word for word scrubbery. Sure, he said them, but I guarantee you in this context that guy would be /facepalming looking at how you used them.

It’s simple – unless you figure out a way to hack the game, screw up opponents’ internet connections, or some other gamebreaking situation that makes it impossible for the other team to win, then it’s fair game.

Misconceptions? Everything I’ve said about the book is an interpretation of it.

Read the scrub section again lol

“He does not play to win.
The scrub would take great issue with this statement for he usually believes that he is playing to win, but he is bound up by an intricate construct of fictitious rules that prevents him from ever truly competing. These made-up rules vary from game to game, of course, but their character remains constant.”

Is that the kind of “not nearly as divisive or inflammatory or ill-spirited” happiness and sunshine pep talk hackz was referring to? How about “This “cheapness” is truly the mantra of the scrub.” or “Here we’ve encountered our first clash: the scrub is only willing to play to win within his own made-up mental set of rules. These rules can be staggeringly arbitrary.”

That’s the section that you guys need to read over and over.

Also here’s a diff quote from whoever said it, “The truth will set you free – but at first it will kitten you off!”

Trolling is different then engaging emotions. I’m not bringing unconstructive, distracting, or irrelevant crap to the forum that doesn’t serve a purpose.

You two are mad again but trust me you won’t forget that book any time soon.

Subtlety is fun.

The classical definition of rhetoric in Ancient Greece included logos, pathos, and ethos. Logos = logical argument. Ethos = moral relevance. Pathos = emotional engagement.

I want to make people mad reading my post. If I just recommend the book and make a boring interpretation of it nobody would care and my goal, which I will let people try to figure out for themselves, will not have been accomplished.

The post is working well

You’re seeing what you want to see. I never said anything about what I’m running.

I’m just saying whining and complaining and kittening and moaning about everything you’re getting beat by is irrelevant.

The scrub part talks about how people make imaginary barriers for themselves. There’s a whole paragraph dedicated to it. Like you said, winners use all the tools available and denying yourself tools based on things like “fair” or “balanced” are creating barriers that make it difficult to get out of that self-designed mental prison.

I’m not saying that I’m going to run FOTM builds or that they are required for winning, because I don’t know if they are yet. I haven’t been in the game for a while. I just know that when people complain about something on the forum, I’m going to load it up and see for myself how strong it is. If people complain about something, I’m pretty sure they’re losing to it

I take it a bit extreme on how I interpret it for the winning part, I’ll give you that. I just see the goal as being much, much more appealing than my previous experience in this game where I was angry almost every time I logged on for pretty stupid “reasons.”

If I’m winning, then I get to compete with higher quality opponents and can objectively see that I am, in fact, good or great. If I’m not, then I simply don’t have what it takes and need to change

Control isn’t the right word – influenced is more like it. Anet feels that some of the suggestions are worthwhile and have responded in the way they saw fit.

I’ll see how I feel about whether or not strong, simple builds do the trick once I climb out of the craphole I put myself into rank wise.

Of course, winning and working toward objective goals don’t apply to all people. There have to be people for the winners to beat right?

are we really arguing about that fantasy game mode Goofballs v Goofballs?

Haha that wasn’t your team that beat SYNC? I was kidding

See, you’re already opening up. You want the game to be different, but can’t control that. Nobody who isn’t in Seattle, Washington in that studio can change that. I let it go and it feels good.

This isn’t an open-source game. I realize there are problems, but they are Arenanet’s problems to fix. The only problems we have is whether or not we want to play the game and whether we want to win. It’s a lot more simple than what many people on this forum make it out to be, and I made it out to be in the past.

I’d rather work toward that tangible and objective goal than be miserable between patches hoping that the “balance” and “fairness” comes back, if it was ever there to begin with.

trololol

I never said anything about the maturity or out of game identity of the scrub. I’m just saying that anyone who makes up reasons why they can’t win in this game is defined as such, in game. Personal = out of game. Scrub has nothing to do with your real life, although it’s possible it could.

Cool story is applied to your all star team that won the last two tournaments. Good job on those wins vs. all those teams by the way.

All I’m saying is you might want to look in the mirror to find the source of your stress in this game and stop pointing the finger at the devs for not making you feel good about how you play vs. stronger builds and better players.

Again, it’s not your responsibility to care about what’s “balanced” or “fair” or “just” in a game where all you can control is whether you win or lose.

“It’s not aesthetics. It’s the rules. If the rules are bad (eg. bad balance, too simple, relies too much on luck, boring point cap!, etc.), then the game is not interesting.”

That’s what I was responding to, your most recent post Timespace

@Cutepics

Cool story, have fun losing against better builds and players. Personal shots being fired looks like projection and makes you look like, dare I say in response, a little girl.

Skill is subjective. Winning is not.

@ Merlin

Winners get “in the zone”, which can be defined as detaching yourself from that which creates losing. Does that make you a sociopath? Not at all, nobody says you have to be that way outside of the game lol

Edit:

I’ll add that these kinds of responses are what I mean. What defines skill objectively, in a way you can measure? Winning. Anybody can say they’re skilled. I thought I was skilled. I wasn’t winning so there was a clear objective proof in my face that I was not.

Also, I don’t need to win to enjoy the game but I see the appeal in doing so and find it more worthwhile than trying to prove to myself or others that I am “skilled.” What’s the point?

Ya I made a post about QQ addressing how pointless it is and that winning cures their self-pity.

I commend you for thinking of a team comp those kinds of efforts are always valuable if they help

Haha cool

I hear you on people not wanting to play anymore I was one of them, but at the end of the day I love dodge rolls, and how unique the game is vs. other types of games.

I don’t think Anet is gonna stop working on PvP regardless of who quits. Those teams may or may not come back, but it’s w/e

I think the appropriate words are wishful thinking

Well then it’s more likely that you will lose than you win timespace

And that book would make good TP for me

/shrug

Also luck is entirely nonexistent. Nobody who wins in a constructed reality does so by divine intervention or random chance….