Quote:
Originally Posted by Skyy High
The thing is, SF is the best way to do 90% of the high end content in the game, and little else comes close. By "the best" I obviously am not talking about what organized guilds can use to blaze through dungeons quickly, I'm talking about its ability to just get through a theoretically difficult dungeon with little to no danger of failure once you've mastered the build, which should take you all of an hour if you're slow. Its power is far out of line with the skill necessary to play it, and in order to meet or match it with pretty much any other build you need to be at the top of your game, and it'll probably still be more difficult than just using SF.
|
And how is this situation different from any point in time in the lifetime of Guild Wars? There has ALWAYS been a meta, where some builds are always more effective than others. Juts because SF is the "big deal" right now doesn't mean that something else won't replace it if and when it is nerfed. Why is there so much hate @SF when you've got things like rediculously OP PvE skills, triple monk bonder heros, consets etc. The idea of GW as "rock paper scissors" in PvE was thrown out the window woth Heros and customizable skill bars. No longer could ANet balance an area around one player's wild card skillbar and the known quality of hench skills.
Quote:
|
That is the problem; in a game so based around skill choice and builds, to have one build, usable by one class, be so much better than everything else is completely against what GW is supposed to be about. Yes, the existence of SF doesn't nuke every other class directly, but the fact remains that if you're trying to get through something without SF, you're probably gimping yourself. It's like saying that you have a choice whether or not to equip armor or a max damage weapon; yeah, you technically do, but it's not really a choice if one option is clearly better than the other.
|
55 Monk, 600/Smite, OB tank (War/Ele/Derv), 330 Rit, Spirit Spammers, etc., etc. The list goes on and on. Sf is part of this thing called a meta, you may have heard of it. According to your logic, every single person in GW right now should be playing Sins, as it is the best option, yet this is far from reality. I wonder why?
Quote:
|
Furthermore, the fact that permas have existed for so long kills any notion of PvE balance that the game had previously been held to. Why was Ursanway killed, just to be replaced by something even easier to play and harder to fail with? As long as SF exists in its present state, every other nerf that was aimed at some build in PvE just looks silly.
|
Perma existed before Ursan was nerfed, yet many people chose Ursan over it. Why? Because any class could use and abuse it. When that was nerfed, people went for the next best thing, rolling Sins where they previously had not. If SF gets nerfed, everyone will roll something else and the cycle will continue. Getting bent out of shape over one skill is kind of retarded.
Quote:
|
Why, after all this time, people still think that all the hate directed at SF is the result of jealousy or spite or something along those lines, I can't fathom. Sorry, it's just not true; people hate permas because they make a mockery of all of the lauded gameplay mechanics and intricate balancing systems that make GW such a great game.
|
I lol'd. "Intricate balancing systems?" If what you claim is true, then the ONLY meta build would be Sins, and everything else would be in perfect harmonious balance. People hate permas because they either don't have one or are too lazy to start one. There's multiple character slots, and for people that play mostly PvE, that means multiple primary professions, enabling players to work with the FotM builds and within the meta. The fact that there are multiple options makes the case for SF nerfing even more dubious, and I have to question a person' arguments against SF entirely. It doesn't "ruin the economy," speedclears existed well before perma-SF, etc., etc. The only logical rationale to hate perma is out of jealousy or envy, not out of some chivalric notion of balance for all! LOL.
Quote:
Btw, this:
has got to be one of the dumbest comments I've ever heard anyone say in relation to the SF issue, plain and simple.
Without even touching the mountain of idiocy it takes to think that ANet would overpower a class specifically because the majority of sins were outright f****ing morons who played like they were wammos when Factions came out, how in the hell is buffing SF a reward to "long-time sins" who "put up with" all that crap? It's not like they prevented everyone from rolling a sin after GW:EN came out!
|
Perhaps you immune to subtle sarcasm, but I am somewhat serious. I don't see Glyph of Swiftness used in hardly any PvE or PvP builds, except Perma. Its been around long enough now that if it was an issue to ANet, they could have fixed it rather easily.
While I don't think that ANet was literally throwing a shower of presents on Sin players with SF, it does stand to reason that they wanted to give Sins at least ONE build that could get them into high end PvE groups. The truth of the matter is that many early Sin players WERE wammos and narutards and gave the class a bad rep, which in turn made the class about as attractive as the plague in high end PvE.
Whether you all like it or not, SF happened. While I make no claims of a mass exodus if SF is nerfed, there will be some poor feedback. Is it fair in a game with 10 base professions to allow one of them to basically be unused? Why even make content for it? And to be honest, you have to admit in situations such as when DoA first was released (prior to EOTN and Ursan) that pretty much only wars eles and monks got into parties, with experienced guild players sometimes subbing in a Dervish Obsidian tank.
Is it truly the skill that is unbalanced, or is it areas that are so unbalanced that only 1/3 of the game's professions can play in it? I would hope for GW2's sake that ANet gets a better grasp on balancing of gameplay, and especially ignore Guru idiots who think that one skill is somehow breaking a game that I can log into at any moment and play just fine. With or without SF...
In an effort to mend the bridges and introduce some positive feedback, there might be an easy way to balance SF. Instead of nerfing it to hell, make it necessary to party with people for support, hero or otherwise. Easiest way to do that is to make SF cause -1 or -2 energy degen, so over time (say 3 maybe 4 cycles) the Perma would be unable to maintain without some form of energy regen, like BiP, which would require either a Necro player or microing a Necro hero, just like the 600/Smite teams in concept. Whereas 600/Smite requires a second guy for damage, the Perma would require a second guy for energy regen. Similar concept, different execution. And its much more elegant a solution than all the whiny Wammo QQers saying to nerf SF to hell and good riddance Sin players hahalolz.
Keep perma in, make it party dependent, and you allow Sins to play in groups that aren't just hero/hench.