Thw world after tommorow - bringing PvE into the balance equation.

I still don't understand why nerfing skills matters so much to PvEr's...isn't PvE easy enough as it is? plus you have ungodly PvE skills at your disposal just in case...Frankly the only reason I think there should be any separation at all is to allow the devs to create truly difficult PvE areas...and they created Ursan for that...so whats the problem?

PS - I love PvE and I love the challenge that skill balancing brings...

The only relevant difference between the two is that in PvE you fight predictable AI and in PvP you fight intelligent humans.

The problem is having to learn two different sets of skills for more or less the same game. The advantage right now is that PvErs can transfer their knowledge of skills into PvP and get a decent head start. It works the other way too, as many PvP builds have been adapted into PvE.

They don't, that's why people don't run Frenzy Shock Axes or Rit Flaggers in PvE. However, I think you're talking about the skill "sets", as opposed to the skill "bar". There are enough versatile skills in GW to allow you to build against anything PvE has to offer. Is there anything that is unbeatable with the current skill set?

No.

I think a unified skill system is more attractive than a divide one. It's a bit late for any "fix" at this point. It's been this way too long, any change to the structure would be too radical and disturbing for those that know the game as it is. Hopefully Anet will create a system that makes more of you happy in GW2.

glad you saved me the trouble of saying this.

Pretty much everyone here admits that PVP and PVE are 2 different games, yet they share the same skills. The solution is so blindingly obvious.


@ Sab : no.

@ Magicarp :

1. you use 700+ skills at the same time? I can only put 8 on my bar...

2. i guess all those people who play MTG are super geniuses, theres well over 14000 skills in that game, and yes the skillset changes every year, several times.

3. The GAME organizes the skills in the order you want, it could even organize them using a "per date modified" choice. This is not the same situation as playing with RL cards.

The solution is obvious, maybe, to players that don't play the full game of Guild Wars.

Splitting the game would wreck the playerbase and its overall cohesion.

I think PvE skill balance isn't REALLY necessary. But it's good to know that, the skills used in PvE, aren't just an arbitrary set of numbers pulled out of a dev's arse.

Maybe I did, but no Factions = No BHA OR SY.

It usually takes an hour to complete the majority of things.
Some areas take as much as 3 hours.
And then, if this player isn't advanced, that player most probably wouldn't hit the HM titles.

I'm pointing my finger at the PuGs.
Go to ToA or wherever and turn on all chat.

No, he mentioned that complaining about WY is stupid because there is already a skill which is 100x better, even at only rank 1 kurzick, so you don't need to have a high title rank, you just have to have the first rank.



No they didn't. i paid as much as up to £30 per game, which is around £90 + the £20 that I paid for the expansion.


No, it's not. Thats like saying someone buys a car but doesn't want to pay extra for something like Air Con or a Sat Nav to be installed and then complains about how they don't have the accessories that they didn't pay for.

Again, what is currently wrong with this system? Are your skills not powerful enough? Are they not versatile enough? Or is this just a veiled attempt at saying you don't want your favourite build nerfed due to PvP?

if you dont have factions, you cant get SY, simple as that. if you dont own EotN, you cant get PvE skills (past alliance rep skills/Nf stuff). simple as that. the games are DESIGNED TO BE STANDALONE GAMES. if the casual player doesnt want to shell out the $200 right off the bate for a game he/she has no clue whether or not they'll like, why the hell would they buy all four games?

learn to be reasonable. the players have FAR LESS of a skill pool diversity of good skills to choose from in this game overall, let alone if you only own a few of the games, cutting your skill pool even more, when in reality, the skills should all be equally balanced, both in power, and number, for all campaigns.

if all the games were expansions, fine, you have me sold on your "accessory" argument, but these are separate stories, campaigns, and routes to play the GWs multiverse in.

Ten times is an exaggeration, yes, but the point remains the same: a broken skillbar extends the time it takes to do something by a seriously non-trivial amount. The entire concept of the timed Master's rewards is evidence of that. You can DO Nahpui Quarter with ease with a completely broken skillbar, but it'll take you over half an hour. To do it in under 25 minutes you have to actually use a decent set of skills.

Yes, Watch Yourself! It was a very useful buff for H/Hs when they got themselves in a tough spot. Pop up WY! and it bought you time to get to a squishie hench in trouble and save their stupid ass (particularly that moron Vekk who thinks he's a melee character). I could replace it, yes, by tweaking the prot monk or by maybe going and getting Save Yourselves or some Paragon skills, I just don't have the motivation. I just don't care anymore. I'm tired of having to stop progress to go get new skills when something breaks. After two and a half years, it's gotten old and I'm tired of it.

I don't buy it. Most of the changes are related to the upper tier of GvG and HA matches. I find it extraordinarily improbable that anything close to a majority of people do both PvE and upper end GvG/HA. If there were really that many people doing both PvE and PvP in significant numbers, what would be the point of even selling PvP unlock packs?

I think it's much more likely that people who do the higher end PvP that spawns many of the "balances" are strictly PvP only or dabble in PvE only very slightly. I have no proof of this, mind you, it's just the impression I get from watching the matches and ladders.

The problem has been stated by myself and others numerous times in this thread already. Go back and read the thread to get an answer to your question so you're up to speed next time you comment in it.

That is pretty much what the entire thread, at least those portions that aren't whining about Ursan Blessing (which could use a minor nerfing, IMHO: dump the 2 seconds on the Ursan Rage knockdown and make it ignore the (Stonefist?) insignia. Maybe lower the damage to 75% of what it is now. It'd still be very powerful, but not insanely powerful), is about.

The parts of the thread that confuses me, though, is the complaining and conspiracy theories about them making changes to some skills for the sake of balance in an upcoming tournament and changing them back afterwards because they figure they're fine as-is for regular usage. And that they're going to attempt to not make changes that impact PvE at all for tournaments. What's so horrible about that, especially from those complaining about nerfs?

I can speak from personal experience that this is usually not the case. Of those that don't play PvE, the vast majority are those who have completed it and are no longer interested in it.

<------ Living proof otherwise...

That may be the case, but you'll agree that there aren't that many people in upper-end PvP compared to PvE or RA/AB? Where are those other people who finish up PvE going then?

Some quit, because they don't want to PvP and PvE has no more allure. Some dabble in PvP and then go back to PvE (hi Racthoh!). Some just play PvE over and over again and then wonder why the entire game doesn't revolve around them.

the reason you don't see skill balances around PvE is because AI doesn't argue back.

If there is a build that rickrolls every mob in seconds, AI isn't going to complain about the unfairness of play and how people are beating them without using any real skill. No one is upset in this instance, as the people who want to use the overpowered builds/skills are allowed to and the AI doesn't get upset about it.

If people have a problem with the broken build and decide not to use it (for example many choose not to use ursan) no one is upset here.

In PvP, both partys clash. People use overpowered skills and balanced skills in the same instance and they go head to head. Now, this results in the team running the balanced build being annoyed that a group of people who may be 100x worse in terms of ability and skill are able to completely trash them doing next to nothing for the simple reason that the other teams build is better than theirs.

This results in teams being forced to run broken builds to stay competitive, unlike PvE where you can run whatever you want and the other tea(the AI) will have the same set of skills every time.

methinks you may not be interpreting what we mean by pve balance....

pve balance is the essence of skill creativity, adaptation, and diversity. not... lets make this stronger/this weaker per say... but to make all, or at least most of the skills available at least useful.

right now, one could easily argue that out of the 800+ skills in the game, only about 100 are worth using, not including the wildly broken time>skill pve skills if you have EotN ect...

this imbalance hinders the flow of economical/community equality, and pins a very stale, mediocre experience for the average player, myself included.

examples of this are elitism towards skill bars, mass abuse of Ursan, and Holy Trinity mindsets.

long story short: with only pvp in mind when "balancing" (cough... nerfing), they slice up the remaining 100 some skills that were left even being usable in both pvp and pve. BOTH need to be balanced so that the counter-gimmick-counter pvp staleness, and the repetitive build staples of pve, are dissolved into a more open ended, free thinking, skill based economy again.

Actually, you'd end up with one game. PvP doesn't have enough players to support itself without a constant influx of PvEers to go lose in PvP or the constant influx of cash from PvE-only players buying the game. PvE has a viable customer base that would allow it to survive alone. PvP doesn't.

But that's not necessarily a bad thing, because it doesn't look like either game-type would survive if they remained tied together.

There's a strong feeling among many PvEers that being subordinated to PvP skill balances is slowly but surely strangling PvE to death. No matter how many times PvP players say that the impact on PvE isn't really that bad and that PvEers should just quit QQing and adjust, the fact remains that PvEers are enjoying the game less and less because of the balance updates. Things like the SR nerf made some PvEers quit, and it made others, like me, decide to swear off GW2.
(Before someone replies, "but, impact on PvE isn't really that bad and that PvEers should just quit QQing and adjust," I'm going to cut you off at the pass: (1) You're wrong. And, (2) it wouldn't matter if you were right. Even if PvP skill balances weren't wrecking the PvE game, we strongly feel that they are, and make our future purchasing decisions based on that feeling.)

PvP would quickly die if its balance changes were subordinated to PvE, for reasons we all understand. Without updates, there'd be another stagnant "IWAY Era" with one build to rule them all.

And so the unified game cannot survive no matter which mode is on top. A-net knew from the outset that PvP couldn't survive on the bottom, and it seems that they've finally realized that PvE, though hardier, can't indefinitely survive there either. But PvE can at least survive on its own. It's really a simple choice in the end: A-net can save one game mode, or they can let both die.

I can see how that really sucks for the hardcore PvP player. You really want to ask, "can't PvE sacrifice just a little bit more for just a little bit longer?" But it can't. A line has to be drawn somewhere. If a-net doesn't draw it now, they'll come to regret not having done so. PvE may yet be salvaged. PvP is going to die no matter what a-net does. So, go enjoy this tournament while it lasts.

Because other competitive games have this problem, right? Had ArenaNet not done such a good job of driving away PvPers, there would be enough of a PvP playerbase to sustain their own game.

They've claimed that Guild Wars is dying since the first farming nerfs. 3 years later, it's still around.

Ah. I think I've found your problem.

Agreed, but i wouldnt say it was in very good health though.

Totally agree 100% if it weren't for the pve players there wouldn't be much of a pvp community to support Anet and NCsoft would shut it down just like they did "Auto Assault" last August.

But of course the idea that these evil, evil pvp players MAY actually play also pve is too hard to understand?
Oh, right, it's you sonya.
Nvm then.

What pvp only games are you thinking of with the above comment?

PvPers are a devious bunch. There's only around 100 of them, but they bounce from game to game, balancing skills, mocking honest god-fearing PvErs, and eating babies.

PvP and PvE are a real paradox.

PvE unquestionably benefits from the coonstant skill balances produced on the PvP side of the fence. However, at a fundamental level, PvP is undermined by each class having different abilities and skills. How do you balance Class X's ability against Class Y's different ability? At some point, someone is going to find a way to leverage Class Y to gain a benefit, and then rebalancing against THAT strategy disrupts the rest of the equasion.

It would seem TRUE PvP balance can only be achieved in a format where everyone has an identical character with identical skills.

PvE, on the other hand, seeks inequality. They WANT unique skills and abilities, and don't care in the slightest if things are a bit out of kilter, so long as classes are roughly appealing and useable.

It's a paradox.

I don't know what the answer is.

First-person shooters, strategy games, fighting games. Part of the reason Guild Wars initially interested me was because Arenanet was founded by the same people who made Starcraft. It was different and it had lots of potential.

Then Arenanet threw away that potential because making another MMO clone seemingly makes more money than being different.

True, but diversity is much more interesting than absolutely perfect balance. Being able to make choices is part of the game.

I was looking for an actually game title?

Well, the "right" answer comes in two parts:

First, you do away with the idea of class altogether and use a totally different mechanism to enforce limitations on character breadth. (Really, the only point behind having a concept of "class" in a MMO is to limit character breadth to prevent you from making a healer/melee/AoE nuker/beastmaster that's good at each of those things.)

Second, you make a PvE game that plays like PvP -- party-sized groups of non-stat-pumped, intelligent foes with interlocking team builds. That way a balance change (1) has a positive monster-nerfing effect in PvE that (somewhat) balances out the negative build-wrecking effect balance changes have now, and (2) doesn't accidentally land on a staple skill that PvEers are using to abuse the AI or counteract stat-pumping or population-pumping because those wouldn't be central to this sort of PvE.

The problem of course is that making GW a no-class game would require a complete rewrite; and so would adding team builds to monsters; and so would enhancing the AI to the point that abusing the AI wouldn't be the outright best tactic for PvE; and stat-pumping couldn't be removed without making the game ridiculously easy unless the monsters got the AI and build improvements. And the odds of a-net putting in that much work on GW1 at this point is pretty much zero.
Out of the options that are realistically left on the table, completely scrapping GW1 PvP may be the least-bad choice.

this isnt Fury.. and for a good reason.

atm, i think PvP balance is really being based on poor alternatives to shift meta-counter-shift-counter tactics. its basically mega rock-paper-scissors, and because of that, the slightest gimmick, or manipulation of skills+abilities causes that slight teeter in what people think is balance, when in reality its critical control of various skills, and exploiting those skills.

while i feel like there could be a solution so close at hand.. tbh.. kids are just too smart these days, and will always find that loophole for the extra upper hand... then someone will copy it, paste it in wiki, and everyone will be doing it... getting the upper hand on any and everyone not getting on the band wagon... then the nerfing begins...

paradox is right my friend...

Counterstrike

The answer's quite easy.

- PvE skills need to die.

- Better end-level PvE content needs to be generated.

- Every single PvP skill in the game needs to be rebalanced.

- Every single primary attribute in the game needs to be rebalanced.



Putting this into practise, however, is close to impossible.

I'm not doubting ArenaNet's ability, only their will to do so.

There's no time and there are no resources available, so we get patchwork.



I do feel sorry for ArenaNet.

They've cut up their diamond in the rough so badly that it can't even pass for a cheap zircon imitation anymore.

And after all this is said and done, they've only got a seriously pissed playerbase with impossibly high expectations for Guild Wars 2 to look forward to.

No wonder Gaile passed up on that position...

Arena Net didn't stop me from playing pvp, the pvp community did that all on their own. When factions came out I tried an alliance battle and I was subjected to a large amount of foul language for interrupting an elementalist and necro and all other further attempts into pvp has resulted in similar experience with very, very, few times I have actually encountered nice people in pvp. Has nothing to do with thin skin or taking it to heart, has to do with the fact I play games to relax, not to be cursed at.

Guild Wars is not known for the great community but pvp seems to have a higher ratio of jerks.

With this statement I think Arena Net has finally taken a stand to say they will no longer upset the majority of their customers, about dang time I am no longer considered a second rate citizen. When I try a different build I want it to be because I want to try, not because I was forced to try it. You can ask people that play with me on-line, I do try new builds and work out my own build.

Counter Strike started as a mod for Half-Life which has pve. The retail version of counter strike "Stand Alone Game" included a pve part that was added before release. I don't know about the x-box version.

AB is truly the best expierence to judge a useful pvp expierence...

People are like this in competitive games. It doesn't suit some people, but those are a minority (and I don't know why they're playing competitive games in the first place). It has nothing to do with the downfall of PvP.

The point is not that it has a PvE portion, it's that it was able to do well financially as a PvP-centric game.

Well i keep on suggesting how to convert PvE and Pvp skills into seperate files, am i not being recognised?

Yea i got upset until i saw that they were only TEMP.

but on the subject of ursan balancing or some say breaking teams... as long as you have a monk with HB you'll be okay.

hmm now that you mention it...

It explains why PvP has a lot less people playing it, which is the reason why GW PvP would not survive on its own. I think the number is around 150.000 players paying monthly to make a online game viable.


It is a shooter! It is much simpler than a "RPG" game, drawing in much more players.

Irrelevant. One of the best-selling games is Starcraft, which has very complex competitive play and an immense online community.

The point you should be making is that GW PvP is almost entirely based on organized teams with defined roles, which makes it harder for people to simply grab the game and join in. You can't PuG GvG/HA in the same way you can make random teams in Counterstrike or Starcraft, and with classes balanced for team play rather than on individual strengths you certainly can't play alone at a balanced level (RA).

Community has everything to do with pvp downfall. When someone tries pvp and they are immediately subjected to that kind of language for doing nothing wrong then I am pretty sure they don't want to come back for more. I have played pvp in other games and never had to deal with this type of language or subjected others to this type of language. PvP elitest did it to themselves and now they can deal with diminishing player base.


You said other games have survived as pvp only or considering pvp balance only, I just want to know what game you are referring too.