"Balanced" Way vs. "Gimmick" Way
3 pages • Page 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTSFirebat
Why do people add the word "way" after everything...? the title of this thread gives me a giggle. Still to keep on topic people should play whatever works best and still is enjoyable.
Because it is way of doing something.
Because -way simply became suffix denoting that word describes teambuild.
Because -way simply became suffix denoting that word describes teambuild.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTSFirebat
Why do people add the word "way" after everything...?
because IWAY was the first recognizable team build. addind -way to the end of something explains that it is a team build. It's a tradition, no one is saying that balanced groups are a gimmick.
gimmicks are any set team build.
gimmicks are any set team build.
K
Balanced is abusing MANY different overpowered aspects of the game, and then bragging to other people you can play "balanced".
Gimmick is abusing one, or few, different overpowered aspects of the game, often to a higher succes than balanced, and then usually not care about e-honor.
In PvE: face it, a gimmick build will ALWAYS be better than a balanced build.
E.G.: In a certain area (Urgoz, UW, Fow, etc), it's ALWAYS THE SAME ROUTINE. In other words: Why run a balanced build, than can adjust to MANY situations, but is only mildly good in everyone of those, when you can run a specifiek counter, aka farming, build for that area?
Ursanway was lame, but there was no denying it, it was THE BETTER BUILD in pretty much every top PvE location. Yes, Ursan was overpowered as fcuk, and required no skill, but that doesn't change the fact that it WAS the better build.
The same way now a Barrage/Pet, or a SF farm, will do faster in, let's say Urgoz, a balanced will always be "slower", concidering they have more utility, and "useless" skills for situation that will never happen in that given area.
Regardless of fun, I play Monk, so I don't care what group the "damage dealers" form. I do find it sad for the Paragons, and other "left-out" imba farming professions that they simply don't have a chance in "pugging" in these elite areas.
Nonetheless, as I Monk, I prefer to "farm" Urgoz in 1 hours, than "balance" it in 3...
Gimmick is abusing one, or few, different overpowered aspects of the game, often to a higher succes than balanced, and then usually not care about e-honor.
In PvE: face it, a gimmick build will ALWAYS be better than a balanced build.
E.G.: In a certain area (Urgoz, UW, Fow, etc), it's ALWAYS THE SAME ROUTINE. In other words: Why run a balanced build, than can adjust to MANY situations, but is only mildly good in everyone of those, when you can run a specifiek counter, aka farming, build for that area?
Ursanway was lame, but there was no denying it, it was THE BETTER BUILD in pretty much every top PvE location. Yes, Ursan was overpowered as fcuk, and required no skill, but that doesn't change the fact that it WAS the better build.
The same way now a Barrage/Pet, or a SF farm, will do faster in, let's say Urgoz, a balanced will always be "slower", concidering they have more utility, and "useless" skills for situation that will never happen in that given area.
Regardless of fun, I play Monk, so I don't care what group the "damage dealers" form. I do find it sad for the Paragons, and other "left-out" imba farming professions that they simply don't have a chance in "pugging" in these elite areas.
Nonetheless, as I Monk, I prefer to "farm" Urgoz in 1 hours, than "balance" it in 3...
F
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avarre
Because they heard of 'i-way' and are bandwagoners in naming their builds.
I'd let that to be decided by someone with Linguistics & Sociology background, but i don't think that suffixing build name with -way could be considered just kids trying to be cool anymore.
It's more like part of GW jargon & gramatics.
It's more like part of GW jargon & gramatics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killed u man
In PvE: face it, a gimmick build will ALWAYS be better than a balanced build
Everyone knows that. Gimmicks rely on minmaxing to get the optimal effect - obviously they're going to be powerful. That doesn't change that fact that believing you are in any way a good player because you run gimmicks is stupidity.
The rest of your post is almost painful to read, especially where you assume balanced builds in a certain area run skills that would not be used in that area. I'm also not sure why you are so aggressively asserting that gimmicks are both simple and powerful (why else would people use them?), perhaps you have some issues with e-honor.
Quote:
In PvE: face it, a gimmick build will ALWAYS be better than a balanced build
Everyone knows that. Gimmicks rely on minmaxing to get the optimal effect - obviously they're going to be powerful. That doesn't change that fact that believing you are in any way a good player because you run gimmicks is stupidity.The rest of your post is almost painful to read, especially where you assume balanced builds in a certain area run skills that would not be used in that area. I'm also not sure why you are so aggressively asserting that gimmicks are both simple and powerful (why else would people use them?), perhaps you have some issues with e-honor.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by zwei2stein
It's more like part of GW jargon & gramatics.
By this point, yes, you are correct. |
E
Hmm well it's arguable what you can classify as "gimmick" or not.
From what I've read so far the topic started out as differentiating team builds as balanced or gimmick by sorting the general frontline-midline-backline template as balanced, and spank-and-tank spike builds as gimmick. According to that classification, yes I'd say balanced allows far more professions to be included in the build, and can deal pretty well with most if not all aspects of pve. But then the so called gimmick spike builds exist for a reason, and it's that they do accomplish certain specific areas faster, because they are built for it (obviously in both cases not considering fail pugs).
Further down the thread, someone seemed to suggest a different classification, that gimmicks are builds that rely on a small number of overpowered skills to exploit game mechanics and getting ahead of others while using less skill. Although this correctly defines the term "gimmick", I think it's important that it's set apart from the original classification previously proposed.
So now what we're really discussing is the nature of the skills involved in both types of builds, or more specifically, Save Yourselves and Cry of Pain (sure you can run "balanced" without save yourselves, and there's other "gimmicks" that don't revolve around cry of pain, but this is the main point i want to raise). Now let's face it, you really can't successfully argue that either one of these is more of a gimmick skill than the other: Save yourselves alone allows your entire party to tank massive amounts of damage, allowing you to work the rest of your builds to focus on offense and making quick work of whatever you encounter; and Cry of Pain's large-area-of-effect compressed raw damage makes impressively fast kills on clustered foes, at the cost of allowing only tanks, cryers (generally mesmers and eles) and monks into the party. I play both types of builds in pve, and I don't see anything wrong in it, but I really don't see one as more "balanced" in terms of skill and power than the other.
Basically I think that most pve builds nowadays rely on inherently broken skills, but since it's available to us (which by the way I don't think they should be -> re-work the efficiency of pve skills so they don't make everything "easy-mode"). In any case, you play however you like, but it's unnecessary to undermine other people because they run builds that you think are overpowered and "lame", and as a result refuse to run it youself.
In the end if you're playing with good players you can rack up any sensible build and become efficient at it, and then proceed to thinking you're pve gods and calling everyone else bad =P
From what I've read so far the topic started out as differentiating team builds as balanced or gimmick by sorting the general frontline-midline-backline template as balanced, and spank-and-tank spike builds as gimmick. According to that classification, yes I'd say balanced allows far more professions to be included in the build, and can deal pretty well with most if not all aspects of pve. But then the so called gimmick spike builds exist for a reason, and it's that they do accomplish certain specific areas faster, because they are built for it (obviously in both cases not considering fail pugs).
Further down the thread, someone seemed to suggest a different classification, that gimmicks are builds that rely on a small number of overpowered skills to exploit game mechanics and getting ahead of others while using less skill. Although this correctly defines the term "gimmick", I think it's important that it's set apart from the original classification previously proposed.
So now what we're really discussing is the nature of the skills involved in both types of builds, or more specifically, Save Yourselves and Cry of Pain (sure you can run "balanced" without save yourselves, and there's other "gimmicks" that don't revolve around cry of pain, but this is the main point i want to raise). Now let's face it, you really can't successfully argue that either one of these is more of a gimmick skill than the other: Save yourselves alone allows your entire party to tank massive amounts of damage, allowing you to work the rest of your builds to focus on offense and making quick work of whatever you encounter; and Cry of Pain's large-area-of-effect compressed raw damage makes impressively fast kills on clustered foes, at the cost of allowing only tanks, cryers (generally mesmers and eles) and monks into the party. I play both types of builds in pve, and I don't see anything wrong in it, but I really don't see one as more "balanced" in terms of skill and power than the other.
Basically I think that most pve builds nowadays rely on inherently broken skills, but since it's available to us (which by the way I don't think they should be -> re-work the efficiency of pve skills so they don't make everything "easy-mode"). In any case, you play however you like, but it's unnecessary to undermine other people because they run builds that you think are overpowered and "lame", and as a result refuse to run it youself.
In the end if you're playing with good players you can rack up any sensible build and become efficient at it, and then proceed to thinking you're pve gods and calling everyone else bad =P
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elentari
Hmm well it's arguable what you can classify as "gimmick" or not.
From what I've read so far the topic started out as differentiating team builds as balanced or gimmick by sorting the general frontline-midline-backline template as balanced, and spank-and-tank spike builds as gimmick. According to that classification, yes I'd say balanced allows far more professions to be included in the build, and can deal pretty well with most if not all aspects of pve. But then the so called gimmick spike builds exist for a reason, and it's that they do accomplish certain specific areas faster, because they are built for it (obviously in both cases not considering fail pugs).
Further down the thread, someone seemed to suggest a different classification, that gimmicks are builds that rely on a small number of overpowered skills to exploit game mechanics and getting ahead of others while using less skill. Although this correctly defines the term "gimmick", I think it's important that it's set apart from the original classification previously proposed.
So now what we're really discussing is the nature of the skills involved in both types of builds, or more specifically, Save Yourselves and Cry of Pain (sure you can run "balanced" without save yourselves, and there's other "gimmicks" that don't revolve around cry of pain, but this is the main point i want to raise). Now let's face it, you really can't successfully argue that either one of these is more of a gimmick skill than the other: Save yourselves alone allows your entire party to tank massive amounts of damage, allowing you to work the rest of your builds to focus on offense and making quick work of whatever you encounter; and Cry of Pain's large-area-of-effect compressed raw damage makes impressively fast kills on clustered foes, at the cost of allowing only tanks, cryers (generally mesmers and eles) and monks into the party. I play both types of builds in pve, and I don't see anything wrong in it, but I really don't see one as more "balanced" in terms of skill and power than the other.
Basically I think that most pve builds nowadays rely on inherently broken skills, but since it's available to us (which by the way I don't think they should be -> re-work the efficiency of pve skills so they don't make everything "easy-mode"). In any case, you play however you like, but it's unnecessary to undermine other people because they run builds that you think are overpowered and "lame", and as a result refuse to run it youself. SY teams are 'balanced' in the sense they tend to rely on a mix of mechanics and abilities, but that's not the same meaning as 'balanced' in terms of what's overpowered or not. I don't think anyone can argue that SY (or most of the PvE skills, really) are balanced in terms of power.
To give an example, eurospike was a balanced build in terms of not being a gimmick, but it was not balanced because the skills used were excessively good. And similarly to this discussion, nobody doubts guilds running that build were successful, but that definitely didn't mean they were good players.
Hmm well it's arguable what you can classify as "gimmick" or not.From what I've read so far the topic started out as differentiating team builds as balanced or gimmick by sorting the general frontline-midline-backline template as balanced, and spank-and-tank spike builds as gimmick. According to that classification, yes I'd say balanced allows far more professions to be included in the build, and can deal pretty well with most if not all aspects of pve. But then the so called gimmick spike builds exist for a reason, and it's that they do accomplish certain specific areas faster, because they are built for it (obviously in both cases not considering fail pugs).
Further down the thread, someone seemed to suggest a different classification, that gimmicks are builds that rely on a small number of overpowered skills to exploit game mechanics and getting ahead of others while using less skill. Although this correctly defines the term "gimmick", I think it's important that it's set apart from the original classification previously proposed.
So now what we're really discussing is the nature of the skills involved in both types of builds, or more specifically, Save Yourselves and Cry of Pain (sure you can run "balanced" without save yourselves, and there's other "gimmicks" that don't revolve around cry of pain, but this is the main point i want to raise). Now let's face it, you really can't successfully argue that either one of these is more of a gimmick skill than the other: Save yourselves alone allows your entire party to tank massive amounts of damage, allowing you to work the rest of your builds to focus on offense and making quick work of whatever you encounter; and Cry of Pain's large-area-of-effect compressed raw damage makes impressively fast kills on clustered foes, at the cost of allowing only tanks, cryers (generally mesmers and eles) and monks into the party. I play both types of builds in pve, and I don't see anything wrong in it, but I really don't see one as more "balanced" in terms of skill and power than the other.
Basically I think that most pve builds nowadays rely on inherently broken skills, but since it's available to us (which by the way I don't think they should be -> re-work the efficiency of pve skills so they don't make everything "easy-mode"). In any case, you play however you like, but it's unnecessary to undermine other people because they run builds that you think are overpowered and "lame", and as a result refuse to run it youself. SY teams are 'balanced' in the sense they tend to rely on a mix of mechanics and abilities, but that's not the same meaning as 'balanced' in terms of what's overpowered or not. I don't think anyone can argue that SY (or most of the PvE skills, really) are balanced in terms of power.
To give an example, eurospike was a balanced build in terms of not being a gimmick, but it was not balanced because the skills used were excessively good. And similarly to this discussion, nobody doubts guilds running that build were successful, but that definitely didn't mean they were good players.
Quote:
| In the end if you're playing with good players you can rack up any sensible build and become efficient at it, and then proceed to thinking you're pve gods and calling everyone else bad =P u mad? |
U
I enjoy playing either.
I don't care whats considered lame or abuse, i enjoy playing the game my own way. Telling people that what they find fun in the game is lame or boring is just pointless. We all prefer a different playing style, some may love to button mash 1 2 3, some may love being on vent strategically planning out every pull and hell, some people like to not play the game at all and sit on these forums playing god.
So agree to disagree.
$0.02
I don't care whats considered lame or abuse, i enjoy playing the game my own way. Telling people that what they find fun in the game is lame or boring is just pointless. We all prefer a different playing style, some may love to button mash 1 2 3, some may love being on vent strategically planning out every pull and hell, some people like to not play the game at all and sit on these forums playing god.
So agree to disagree.
$0.02
f
f
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arkantos
Funny, because around the same time, the skill of the PvE community started going down. Coincidence?
WtS Arkantos pre-nerf Shadow Form 
g
First, I find it amusing to say builds are gimmicks as every build better be synergistic in some fashion or you will be unsuccessful. Is there a difference between a Hoj-Poj group of folks and a team, I say there is. When you play football is everyone the running back or the center? No you have roles and responsibilities.
Second, I, like many others simply want to play the game not stand around for an hour balancing skills before even starting. Because of this I am a proponent of team builds, not individual builds (unless they are designed for soloing).
Knowledge about a build and area are critical to success, but what I find annoying is the "punkness" which goes beyond arrogance many seem to have, which is often why PUGs are unsuccessful. I find it very hard to respect anyone calling someone a noob in a derogatory manner. Some may be less experience with an area or skill bar than others, but one should help them not berate them. I take solace in the fact that most of the folks who continue with the attitude of I am better than you and you are a "noob" mentality, do not have their drivers license and cannot vote.
Sorry I got on my soapbox.
Second, I, like many others simply want to play the game not stand around for an hour balancing skills before even starting. Because of this I am a proponent of team builds, not individual builds (unless they are designed for soloing).
Knowledge about a build and area are critical to success, but what I find annoying is the "punkness" which goes beyond arrogance many seem to have, which is often why PUGs are unsuccessful. I find it very hard to respect anyone calling someone a noob in a derogatory manner. Some may be less experience with an area or skill bar than others, but one should help them not berate them. I take solace in the fact that most of the folks who continue with the attitude of I am better than you and you are a "noob" mentality, do not have their drivers license and cannot vote.
Sorry I got on my soapbox.
h
T