The main point

The first thing I would say is that the pve-pvp relationship in GW does work, it works just fine. From the crying of people on forums, you'd think this was not the case, but PvE is not and has never been broken by skill balances.

Second, I'd say that balance in a lot of other games isn't as complicated given that each character is balanced, rather than each possible team combination. Look at, for example, Diablo 2 - every character is balanced because every character is incredibly broken at the pinnacle of its power.

This is because GW isn't designed for a pure PvE community. It's not a PvE game and a PvP game, it's just Guild Wars, and just about every player that plays PvP is playing PvE at the same time. In Guild Wars, the goal of PvE is not to gather huge amounts of gold and rare skins, it's to teach you about the game and gather common, max gear so that you can move on into PvP or smash the elite areas - and hence PvP isn't going to help with the farmer-grinder-hoarder reward mentality.

GW isn't a material game so much as a platform for competitive play, so looking for material rewards is going to get you nowhere. The reward for PvPing is you get to roll faces, get better at the game, and compete.

I agree! Sadly PvE always comes as an afterthought, so it is no wonder, ANet didn´t do that, even when creating HM.

Stop trolling and read what Avarre said!

Then it should be. Are you suggesting that Anet doesn't have a direction for GW to go because there're many developers in the company with many opinions? Seriously?

This is true but it doesn't mean anything. A PvE-loving developer shouldn't be able to do something he wants to do if it's not go well with the concept and direction, or the so-called "vision", of the game. Same goes for PvP-biased developer. It's when the so-called "vision" keeps getting changed around over and over that the game fails.

It's true that after 3 years, we still don't get the clear sense as to where the game is headed. But that's because Anet keeps changing around the vision of the game. First they want the game to be cooperative, and PvP is the end-game while PvE basically "train" you to play PvP (look at the desert missions). People can play the game for a while and then leave and come back when the next chapter arrives. Then they want PvE players to keep playing PvE by introducing grind titles, and that you don't even have to bother with PvE AT ALL if you want to PvP. Then they also want people to be able to play alone by introducing Heroes, but then they still expect people to play cooperatively by making sure that Hero's AI is somewhat bad AND not allowing the use of heroes to fill up your team. THEN they want PvE players to keep playing PvE even more by giving grind rewards & advantages. THEN they make sure PvP game gives PvP-only players some decent rewards they could only get from PvE. Who knows what's next?

Why do you think a vision has to be so narrow minded as to include PvP or PvE in its greater intentions and not both? They're obviously trying to cater to the needs of both sides, so why should someone be able to say which side is getting better treatment?

Maybe because they're doing a VERY BAD job at catering both sides?

PVE Balance is a completely irrelevant topic, regardless of Ursan Blessing. There has been nothing in the history of skill changes that has made significantly harder. PVE difficulty is derived from three (retarded) concepts that Arena Net seems to love. Pushing normal skill numbers up to stupidly high levels (see bosses that can hit for 450 damage a spell), making mobs stupidly large or giving the mobs skills that are so far beyond the power curve as to be completely broken (EoTN is the worst offender in this, see for instance Soulrending Shriek, Mandragor's Charge, Trample etc.).

None of these difficulty mechanisms have anything to do with, or are noticably influenced by skill balance changes. As such, PVE should never be allowed to prevent necessary PVP rebalances from happening. The fact that Arena Net seems to be going there indicates that they have a dire misunderstanding of there own game and of the principles of good game design (although Ursan blessing and the afore mentioned difficulty mechanisms allready show this).

Tsk tsk tsk, I was merely describing the average forum poster on Riverside.

It would seem that GW has been heavily derailed from that vision. Shamefully. Judging by the builds of most Joe Wammos, they didn't do enough to teach them.

True, but if a farming build gets nerfed, they will drown the forum with crying.

Meh, i wish all trolls were like him. Atleast he's right.

Your making a massive assumption that how YOU play this game is how it is meant to be played. This game, like most all other games, is what the players make it to be.

You say that PvE isn't about gathering gold or rare skins, yet they exist and are sought after by many players.

Many people that play PvE never have any intention of moving to PvP, the game may have originally been designed for that but that is NOT what players have done for the most part.

GW is a material game if that is how the player wishes to play it.

You are correct in that skill changes do no "break" PvE, but then the lack of them will not "break" PvP either. You would just be forced to run the "broken" build that you wish to be nerfed like everyone else.

Ive said this a few times but I'll say it again.

PvE is about Stability, knowing what your going to face and planing for it.

PvP is about diversity, not knowing whats coming and planing for any eventuallity.

You have just defined broken PvP. Therefore, you have no real point.

There are cases where not rebalancing PvP works. This, however, is not one of them.

There is no such thing called 'balance' in PvE.

Players have PvE skills, that are 'overpowered'.
Monsters have Monster skills, that are even more overpowered.

And Players do not compete with other Players, since in PvE they are all in the same side (yeah, even in Factions).

If they nerf a PvP skill you needed in PvE you can always make a beter build using PvE skills, unless we are talking about farming builds, that doesn't really matter since they are not part of the equation, but a side effect of some mechanics of the game.

Or people who don't have factions/NF/GWEN? Or people who do, but don't have enough rank to get the skills?

But you know, other than all those people, right?

Plus, that's a dumb argument anyway. "OH NOES, ANCESTORS IS NERFED. IS K THO: I CAN USE SUMMON SPIRITS"

Agree with you 100%

When this happens, people stop playing. GW PVP dies effectively.

FTFY.

Guild Wars was always meant to be a PvP game, and anybody who remembers the original design philosophy behind Prophecies knows that. All of the problems with PvP versus PvE started on a bunch of whiteboards and flow charts long before a single line of code was written.

The PvE portion of the game was meant to be the lead-up to the end game content, which was HA and GvG. Even the name betrays the original intent: "Guild Wars". It's not "You versus the Charr and then the White Mantle and then some dead guys in the desert and then the dwarves and then the Titans". It's "Guild Wars".

Then they realized that only a few people are willing to tolerate the absurdly childish nature inherent to competetive online PvP in ANY game, much less something that's supposedly an RPG derivative which is traditionally about COOPERATION, so they tried to FORCE players into PvP with Factions, then gave up with Nightfall, then made a completely half-assed attempt at actually creating a PVE game with GWEN.

The only reason the arguments have ramped up so heavily since Nightfall is because when it was only Prophecies the two systems could appear to be relatively separate. Only now and then did changes to PvP have a major impact on PvE, but now there are so many class combinations and skill interactions that even a minor PvP tweak can have significant repurcussions to completely unrelated PvE builds.

They screwed the pooch right from the start with this. They expected that people would just naturally glide right into PVP, but there's a huge group of folks - myself included - who just don't like the entire nature of competetive online gaming whether it's people "teabagging" you in Halo or D&D wannabes typing IN ALL CAPS THAT YOU SUCK PVX NUB in an MMO.

They tried to force people to play a certain way, and that was doomed to fail from the start. Arguments like this can pop up till the cows come home, but there's nothing ANET can reasonably be expected to do because the fundamental design of the game is entirely flawed.

The only reason PvP is dying is that it's entirely inaccessible to anybody who's not willing to devote ridiculous amounts of time to it, so there's no compelling reason for casual players to do anything but RA or AB. It has nothing to do with this latest change's commentary, or anything similar. The PVP in this game is a disaster and it was always doomed to be a disaster because they've bet the farm that they could force people to do it, and they bet wrong.

I'd post in this thread stating my personal opinion, but the post of the year on this topic has done that for me.

fix'd. sweet dreams Guild Wars Guru....

What I'm getting from your post is something like this;

1: ANet designs a game where PvE leads into PvP.

2: Lots of people buy the game.

3: Players play the game as ANet intended, PvE and PvP.

4: Other players refuse to play PvP due to whatever reason. The game has to change its fundamental design to accommodate these players while shafting the players who saw and were attracted to the original game design.

It's not a case of ANet forcing players to play a certain way as much as the players trying to force ANet to redesign the game to suit them. Support for PvP has decreased while PvE focus and support increases. The game has shifted from more casual PvE to a game where grind is rewarded. Rather than find a game that suits what they want, players who don't fit into the game are trying to force the game to change to their whims.

And ANet is obeying, because they have to make money.

The irony of it all is that the more PvE and PvP separate, with special skills for PvE, and more focus on farming and grinding, the more PvP rebalances hit PvE. If the two games were more parallel (Prophecies, for instance), then balance in one would be balance in the other, to a degree. The less the design of PvE tries to follow actual balance, the more it gets screwed up by being half-nailed to the balance changes of PvP. If PvE did not have any special conditional items, mechanics, or skills (monster skills included), then balancing would be a lot less potentially disruptive - not because the changes wouldn't make a difference (they would have an effect), but because the changes would have an easily tracked effect in both parts of the game, and the criteria for balance would be somewhat similar.

Granted, there would still probably be complaints from players too short-sighted to see that PvP balance changes don't make a dent in PvE gameplay.

No, that's exactly the opposite of the point. ANET can't change the basic design of the game at this point. It's not feasible, so these arguments are just going to keep popping up until the game goes offline.

They can keep on doing things like this last update "oh we'll just revert it", but it's not going to help because they're trying to manage a game that doesn't exist.

DO you remember back when the big selling point of this game (aside from the no monthly fee) was that you could play it "your way"? ANET never meant that, and they eventually dropped that claim. The game was built as a PvP game with a very long tutorial, simple as that. The entire purpose was to funnel people through PvE unlocking things for use in PvP. That was the entire POINT of the unlock mechanic. It did nothing else AT ALL, because back then skill trainers only sold a certain set of skills - not those skills plus whatever you had already unlocked - up until Dakk, who had all the non-elites. The game was so PvP-centric back then that there was even a thriving market for salvaged, unidentified runes solely because of the unlock mechanic.

They wanted people to play PvP at the end. It was specifically designed that way. But people don't want that. People want PvE and casual PvP, and a handful of people want UT-style laddered ultra-competetive PvP.

Point being: that's how they designed the game, and the players that bought the game didn't want to play that way from EITHER side. Most hardcore PvPers didn't want to play PvE at all, and most PvErs didn't want to play competetive PvP. The game was built to accomodate people who wanted to play PvE and then spend the rest of the time after that doing GvG and HA, but there aren't many players like that. As a result, ANET is just never going ot make the other two groups of players happy because each group is always going to feel like their toes are being stepped on when the other group's demands are met.

They designed the game for a group of people that barely exists. They can't fix this problem now, it's 4 years too late.

Actually, I remember being attracted to the game because it offered competitive play with skill valued over time. At no point did I expect a game with carebear PvE, or a game that gave benefits from grinding.
Most hardcore PvPers ended up there after starting as hardcore PvEers. This was especially necessary when PvE characters were a requirement in PvP due to equipment and weapon sets.

Your argument would be stronger if GW didn't have other unique distinguishing features that were totally unrelated to PvP. Namely, no monthly fee and elegant, uncartoonish graphics. I bought GW because it was one of the only games I could play on an older laptop - that was my criteria #1.

So even if GW intended for players to move from PvE to PvP, they designed a game that drew in players for lots of unrelated reasons. It shouldn't surprise anyone that GW couldn't shoehorn all these players into the same mould.

It's really a matter of GW reaping what it has sown. And those seeds were there from the beginning.

And it used to not be that way. They had to tack that garbage on because it was the only thing they could do when a large portion of the playerbase refused to switch over to PvP and wanted to stay in PvE.
But as I pointed out in the other thread, how many hardcore PvPers are there, really? The top tiers usually only have a handful of Guilds dominating HA/GvG for awhile. Compared to the lower-end PvP and PvE, HA/GvG top end gaming is not that populated. I think ANET envisioned this huge, revolving tourney where PvE veterans would be constantly engaging in regularly changing battles, but it just doesn't work like that because the end game PvP hasn't drawn in the numbers they planned.

The issue isn't so much the top end - that will always be small, by definition. The problem, which has been brought up before in PvP discussion, is the lack of new players filling up the low/mid level guilds. With the lack of support for PvP as a whole, there's really not that much incentive for a bunch of new players to start GvGing and get rolled repeatedly. The biggest intermediary, HA, has a score of it's own problems, and no longer helps get new players into the upper tiers.

PvE has also become more seperated from PvP, and with so much more endgame content and grind rewards available, players that finish PvE tend to stay there rather than look for new stuff.

That combined with a large number of PvP players leaving due to the lack of support and general pessimism of the community as a whole, leads to low numbers.

/threadwin

this couldn't have been better explained. On the bright side, I think anet realizes this, but to fix GW1 would be a monumental task. Its probably one of the reasons not spoken about as much as to why they needed to make GW2.

Wrong. Most people who played during the beta (myself included) AND THEN bought the game had no knowledge of such thing. The game ended with just Sanctum Cay during beta, with something promising in Temple of Ages that, despite being somewhat pvp-dependent, looked a lot like "more end-game PvE content coming soon" in the form of 3 other inactive statues.

They never promise the content would come (and ironically it never comes). But they didn't say how much more content would come in the retail version of the game either. To say the we bought the game based solely on what we saw in the beta weekends would be somewhat wrong; we bought the game because it looked PROMISING during the beta (I, for one, wouldn't have bothered if they had told me "by the way, what you see during the beta might be all you get in the retail game").

With that said, I don't think people knew the game would end with PvP as an end-game content; let's face it, who would think such thing could exist? The GW box itself doesn't even mention this. The game during beta was full of PvE content, and some optional level-based arenas. The only thing that linked PvE to PvP was the Tomb of The Primeval King AND Favor of the Gods for Temple of Ages content (and let me tell you that nobody knew you'd have to go through all PvE content before you could reach Tomb either back then). Most other MMO before GW (WoW included) makes PvP an optional part of the game, while also make sure that PvE players would have some incentive to get into PvP. If they don't want to that's fine. But if they do, they'd be rewarded, or at least they'd feel that they haven't wasted their time.

Who? Just you and some other people perhaps? I'm quite sure I'm not one of them. I remember thinking that it's weird for the 3 desert missions to have a very similar mechanic & setting to certain PvP maps (I did try PvP during beta, sue me); what's the point of doing that? Why Anet thinks I need to be prepared for PvP? Is this just a creative way of designing missions?

Little did I know, huh?

People have every right to play GW however they want. It's the fact that Anet didn't stick with the game's original design that led to the failure of the game as we're seeing now.

Let's face it, nobody can force Anet to do what they did. If GW's sale figure would be lower because people don't like PvP as an end-game content and don't buy the game. Who'd be at fault? Anet, isn't it? Some people who liked the game the way it was would've stayed with the game. The low sale-figure would tell Anet that people don't like GW as it was, that's all.

But instead they tried to change the game around to attract more people (trust me, it's not about "customers asked for it" but more about "the research says people prefer something else over what we have in GW. Let's make sure our game has those too"). But too bad they didn't do a good job at it. They also didn't go "all the way" with this new direction; look how long it takes for them to separate PvE content from PvP, and they still don't think it's a good idea to also separate skill balance, for some reasons.

So now we got mediocre PvP game where the original PvP community has long died a bleeding death (see the-guild-hall), and a mediocre PvE game that isn't rewarding and also all about "this skill is the most powerful skill in the game, are you using it? Why not? Is it more rewarding not to? Oh, more fun you say? LOLOLOL". I don't even want to mention the repetitiveness and the little amount content that the game has, really.

Such a shame huh? This kind of thing (changing around the main concept of the game to accommodate the needs of the market) doesn't seem to happen with other games, at least not as drastic. I wonder why.

My point is the oppisite of your post stating that PvE players are not forced to change thier builds after a nerf.

If having to run the same build in PvP as other people is concidered broken then having to change your builds in PvE due to a nerf is also broken.

The simplest thing anet could do to separate pve and pvp while still making pvp attractive as new content, would be to completely separate pve and pvp skills altogether. That's right, i said skills, not pve and pvp entirely. That is what i feel is the biggest failure in GW1.

What they should have done is make a whole set of skills for pve only and a whole set for pvp only with no skill from either set being a repeat of each other, that is, a pvp only skill would not have an equivalent in pve and vice versa. What this achieves is make pve immune to pvp balances but at the same time, there is incentive to check out pvp, cause the skills being used there are entirely different from pve skills and designed with pvp balance in mind.

This also serves to improve pvp player quality, cause you don't get mr pve "wammo mending god", entering pvp for the first time with all his pve misconceptions and thinking since mending works in pve, it should too in pvp and proceeds to get stripped and raped. All pve misconceptions of skills would be removed cause there isn't any pvp skills that does the same as what the pve user is accustomed to playing and so by learning to play with the pvp only skills, he would be freed from sucking at it due to said misconceptions from pve.

Likewise, pve skills would then be free to include fun and interesting effects that while unbalanced in a pvp format, would not be so in pve. All this however would only be possible in GW2, GW1 pvp is dead and nothing this late in the game's life cycle can prevent its death, its only possible to prolong its death but not make it live again.

why do you feel obligated to pve if the pve and pvp skills are seperate.

You wake up 1 day "oh im gonna try pvp"
you map travel to the battle isle and look....most of your skills don't do the exact same thing they did in pve....now you have to learn everything you'd normally have to learn in pvp if the skills were together but now the new skill types. and in the learn fast and be dedicated or go home world of GW that makes it even harder to get into pvp.

And the current exodus of pvp players due to imbalanced pvp is so much better how? The constant balance issues in pvp and the exodus it causes is far more harmful than anything separating pve and pvp skills would bring about. Having a separate pvp skill set that is balanced would actually help the situation, as you need to retain the experienced pvp playerbase. There simply isn't enough new players getting into pvp in the current system now, replacing those who have left for good, disgusted at gimmicks. I have had so many full friendlists go dead on me and having had to replace them only to have the same happen in a few months, its not even funny. I barely even try anymore. It does no good to pvp if you have more people leaving than there are coming in.

I'm a bit sad that my previous post has gotten zero counter arguments yet. I type that entire thing out, and instead people are still debating useless points in the other 2 threads about this topic.

That is correct. That doesn't mean however that PvE was not supposed to exist. It just meant PvP was supposed to be more of a focus.

Ok now you lost me. Nobody was forced to do anything. Even back when PvP was more of a focus, there were still more PvE players. There was less animosity between the two sides back then though because the games BLENDED well. I agree with your assessment of the expansions killing the game over time though. Anet destroyed the blend through all of their releases (among other things).

As I stated before. Give me at least 5 PvP related things that MAJORLY affected PvE, and I'll give you a list twice as long of PvE stuff that affected PvP.

As I said before, the idea that people were somehow forced to play a certain way is ridiculous. Yes the game was supposed to be more PvP focused, but that has nothing to do with forcing people to play it. The majority of people enjoyed PvE and didn't feel forced to do anything. Even people who ventured into PvP often played PvE for enjoyment.

I don't agree that it takes ridiculous amounts of time, but even if it did, whos mismanagement of the product is that? The only good thing to come out of this argument (which has been made many times), is that Anet learned their lesson on it and is taking the grind completely out of PvP for GW2 (supposedly).

I jush wish they would learn their lesson on all the other problems of their game, and these recent announcements show us they haven't.

All I have to say is, if you think the PvP was a disaster, there is probably nothing I can say to make you change your mind. Personally, I think it was an amazing success that got brought down through severe mismanagement.

Except it's not. THere have been no nerfs that have made PVE materially harder. How is it broken - we've explained why PVP would be break, now your turn to explain why occassionally having to change your build makes PVE so unplayable for you (why are you still here after three years then?).

I haven't found one thing I haven't been able to do after any skill nerf/balance in PvE. Think about this (those of you) when you gripe about skill balances, and consider that most crucial thing in maintaining PvP is skill balancing.

In the end, it all comes down to money. I think with GW2 Anet is betting the farm on PVE-based sales, and why not? I'm sure the sweeping majority of Guild Wars sales up to this point have been by PVE purists. Casual PVP (RA and AB) draws more players than higher level stuff, because those formats are more accessible and require less time invested for tangible rewards. Last few times I've done TA, I've sat and watched / listened for nearly 30 minutes while people argued over builds and strategies before anyone even clicked "Enter Mission." In RA, I could've gotten 10 wins in those 30 minutes with the option of leaving my team after a match if I didn't like what / how they were playing.

For the first year, I was hardcore PVE. Factions killed that. Wandering through the ghetto, seeing the star on the map but NEVER being able to get to it in anything remotely resembling a straight line, typically going 10 minutes out of your way to reach something that's just around a corner, that irked me in ways I still haven't recovered from. Even now I'd sooner buy an elite tome than cap a skill in Cantha. But, my guild kept telling me I needed to try this "Alliance Battle" thing that was going on. Finally I bit. And it was FUN. It was accessible, it was new, it was PVP but big maps and not a lot of pressure. The wait for matches got old though. It was the waiting (sometimes in excess of 45 minutes) that finally turned me away. PVE was still out of the question (everyone was doing the new campaign, and I would have nothing of it), so I started dabbling in RA, which led to TA. I got hooked on TA, as did several of my guildies. We had a lot of fun and success with that. (Arrowz, Iso, Absum, you've all probably forgotten who I even am, but I still love you all )

Then came Nightfall. The Nightfall Preview weekend should have told me, you, everybody, just where PVP was headed. We haven't forgotten the Contemplation of Purity Dervishes, have we? After the first day, we didn't do any TA for the rest of that weekend. It was not fun, even when we played the broken shit ourselves (join em if you can't beat em) we were not having fun. But it was foreshadowing. Since Nightfall's release, it has been one gimmick after another in organized PVP. Kill one stupid instagib build and another one gets discovered days later (hint: most involve the assassin class, but Anet refuses to admit teleporting was the single dumbest thing they ever added to Guild Wars). It's worse than trying to clean Bluebeard's keys. Our PVP desire melted away, and now we just farm or do missions / quests. Sometimes our guild gets involved in AB, and even TA every blue moon, but it'll never be like it was before Nightfall's release. I still don't love PVE like I used to, but I guess I can say the same for PVP now as well.

The irony is that Guild Wars' PVP system wound up being the best in the universe, and I don't think anyone, Anet included, had any idea that it would be so damn good. The hard-core PVP players who post their concerns aren't being crybabies; they remember how good the PVP game used to be, and hate seeing it continually slip away from them. It's like being forced off an addiction. They so desperately want the game to feel like it did when they fell in love, when they got hooked. They are angry because something that was once so good just isn't that good anymore. Those who have been around a long time, remember how it felt that first time you beat Thunderhead Keep (when Prophecies was the only game)? Playing against a good team in organized PVP and winning gives you that feeling every time. You didn't just win, you accomplished.

If you haven't played much PVP you won't fully understand the fundamental difference. In PVE you win by outbuilding the AI. In PVP (when balanced properly) you win by out-thinking another human being.

I have a feeling that GW2 won't have the PVP strength we have now. Anet had something unique and world-beating, and really couldn't handle it. It got more and more broken, and is now beyond fixing. People want it back the way it was, but it can't ever be. Some have let go of the past, but don't want to let go completely. Some have moved on, but I know that in their hearts they'll always long for old school Guild Wars. There just isn't anything better in this type of format. Many hardcore PVP players will vote with their wallets and not buy Guild Wars 2. Anet knows this and as such I believe the PVP in GW2 will always be an afterthought, since PVE=sales. Even if the PVP in GW2 is really good from the start, many will be hesitant for fear of nerfs and unnecessary buffs or new skills throwing it out of balance again.

Good post kvndoom. I feel you brother.

QFT. I thought maybe I was on crack cocaine, but apparently, that 'silent' nerf to THK wasn't so silent after all.

No, absolutely not. The point of the update, as stated by ArenaNet, was to make neccessary skill changes and then revert them later so they didn't interfere with PvE. That is not testing.

As someone who has played PvP competitively for the last three years, yes - I do. You obviously aren't aware of the many gimmicks that have plagued PvP in the past, recent examples (sinsplit/dervspike) have been fairly tame in comparison.

Ignoring the gimmicks that were based around broken skills as opposed to imbalanced skills takes some of the edge off, but I'd say 'four extra queens' was a fair representation of power.

I agree with all of this.

Look at it more as a "very strong suggestion" to play PvP. These boards lit up like the fourth of July when details about how much more influence the PvP aspect of the game had on Faction development than it did in Prophecies.

I can win this argument with one phrase: Favor of the Gods. Two entire pieces of PvE endgame content (which was 2/3 of all endgame PvE content for a long time) were completely at the mercy of PvP performance for a very long time.

And most of the PvE changes that had major impacts on PvP were because PvPers were crying about things: runes, weapon mod unlocks. Only a handful of skills were ever changed because of their abuse in PvE. Most of the time, overfarming resulted in nerfs to the area, not to the skills involved.

Might as well make two different games if anets going to separate PvP and PvE, it will just make the transition from one to the other really hard. The gap between PvE and PvP will make the gap there is in GW1 look like a crack.

Balancing PvP without hurting PvE is possible (the balances now dont hurt PvE all that much) The problems that made balance between PvP and PvE harder was Factions and Nightfall. Anet should have taken more time with the new professions and skills.

That was a stupid thing to be honest.

the favor of the gods. But really any other pvp skill balance never really effected pve that much.

Joe

This is truth, and one of the biggest reasons I really do not like ANet's statement.