Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Guild Wars: Developer Update - December 2010 GvG Balances

DrewDrew Toronto, ONPosts: 434Member

The folks over at ArenaNet have hit Guild Wars players with the latest GvG update and they've published the results! Check them out and let us know what you think over at the Guild Wars forums.

Today we're pushing out a follow up to our November GvG update. This update addresses some missing or weak elements from the last update. We also revisit some older updates that may have gone too far or not far enough.

While the last update was successful in getting the Ritualist into GvG play, it did not change the fact that the runner is often the single point of failure on a team. Several factors make defending against pressure on a runner seem futile.

Check out all of the updates over here.

image

Comments

  • admiralnlsonadmiralnlson Sophia-AntipolisPosts: 240Member

    Why they would choose to make the PvE and PvP versions of a skill so different is beyond me. Aegis, for instance, is ridiculous now.
    They should have just forbidden certain skills in PvP and created new skills when necessary. This PvE/PvP split is just cheap and nonsensical.

    I certainly hope they don't do this kind of shit with GW2.

    ---
    Waiting for: GW2
    *thumbs up*: GW, Eve(, WoW)
    *thumbs down*: MO, GA, FE

  • eye_meye_m Notta Chance, ABPosts: 3,133Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by admiralnlson

    Why they would choose to make the PvE and PvP versions of a skill so different is beyond me. Aegis, for instance, is ridiculous now.

    They should have just forbidden certain skills in PvP and created new skills when necessary. This PvE/PvP split is just cheap and nonsensical.

    I certainly hope they don't do this kind of shit with GW2.

     I think that the new way of selecting skills is to limit the balancing issues with such diversity.

    All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.

    I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.

    I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.

  • admiralnlsonadmiralnlson Sophia-AntipolisPosts: 240Member


    Originally posted by eyelolled


    Originally posted by admiralnlson
    Why they would choose to make the PvE and PvP versions of a skill so different is beyond me. Aegis, for instance, is ridiculous now.
    They should have just forbidden certain skills in PvP and created new skills when necessary. This PvE/PvP split is just cheap and nonsensical.
    I certainly hope they don't do this kind of shit with GW2.

     I think that the new way of selecting skills is to limit the balancing issues with such diversity.

    I understand that. What I'm saying is when the PvP version of a skill does something completely different than what it used to do, it just becomes ridiculous.
    If it does something completely new and the PvE version remains untouched, then it should be a new skill and the old skill should just be disallowed in PvP. Those extreme splits are cheap and unnatural.


    The game had a great GvG scene for years. And now, everybody can agree that the scene sucks. I wouldn't go as far as say that the "recent" introduction of splits made it worse, but still this shows they were probably never necessary.

    ---
    Waiting for: GW2
    *thumbs up*: GW, Eve(, WoW)
    *thumbs down*: MO, GA, FE

  • eye_meye_m Notta Chance, ABPosts: 3,133Member Uncommon

    I agree with you. I think they could have dealt with the problems in a better way. I just meant that I don't think they'll have as many balancing problems with GW2, so it shouldn't be a problem.

    All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.

    I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.

    I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.

  • admiralnlsonadmiralnlson Sophia-AntipolisPosts: 240Member


    Originally posted by eyelolled
    I agree with you. I think they could have dealt with the problems in a better way. I just meant that I don't think they'll have as many balancing problems with GW2, so it shouldn't be a problem.

    Ah I didn't realize you were talking about GW2. Yes, let's hope you're right.

    ---
    Waiting for: GW2
    *thumbs up*: GW, Eve(, WoW)
    *thumbs down*: MO, GA, FE

  • CoffinshockCoffinshock Bowling Green, KYPosts: 21Member

    Originally posted by eyelolled

    I agree with you. I think they could have dealt with the problems in a better way. I just meant that I don't think they'll have as many balancing problems with GW2, so it shouldn't be a problem.

    Can you post a link please?

    Each player must accept the cards life deals him or her: but once they are in hand, he or she alone must decide how to play the cards in order to win the game.

  • admiralnlsonadmiralnlson Sophia-AntipolisPosts: 240Member


    Originally posted by Coffinshock


    Originally posted by eyelolled
    I agree with you. I think they could have dealt with the problems in a better way. I just meant that I don't think they'll have as many balancing problems with GW2, so it shouldn't be a problem.

    Can you post a link please?

    What eyelolled meant I think is that since we are going to have less liberty in the skills we can choose (half of them being determined by your profession and the weapon you're wielding), there will be fewer combinations and it should make balancing the game a bit easier.
    On top of this, I personally think there won't be as many skills in GW2 overall (~1300 skills in GW1 was a lot).

    ---
    Waiting for: GW2
    *thumbs up*: GW, Eve(, WoW)
    *thumbs down*: MO, GA, FE

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Posts: 14,784Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by admiralnlson

    Why they would choose to make the PvE and PvP versions of a skill so different is beyond me. Aegis, for instance, is ridiculous now.

    They should have just forbidden certain skills in PvP and created new skills when necessary. This PvE/PvP split is just cheap and nonsensical.

    I certainly hope they don't do this kind of shit with GW2.

    The ironic thing about it is that the skills were better balanced for PVE when they were mainly trying to balance the skills for PVP, and then just applying the same skills to PVE.  If you take something that would be absurdly overpowered in PVP and insert it in PVE, it doesn't suddenly become balanced.  It's still absurdly overpowered, but only messes up the play balance for the PVE site of the game.  I'm not sure why they decided to do that, but it was a big mistake.  And I agree with you:  I hope they don't repeat that in Guild Wars 2.

  • someforumguysomeforumguy HomePosts: 3,540Member Uncommon

    The split was made to prevent that balancing PVP would hurt PVE. PVP has always been the focus and main reason for Arenanet to balance skills. But it always messed up popular excisting PVE builds.

    Ppl kept complaining (instead of finding new combinations within loads of skills) and Arenanet split certain skills into PVE and PVP ones. You can thank the nerfcryers for this split. Arenanet just listened.

  • ZeroxinZeroxin LondonPosts: 2,521Member Uncommon

    I think the split was a good idea. Many people hate it when the PvP balance affects pve, all the stuff they've balanced if it had affected pve ....well let's just say we'd have a whole different set of people pissed off .

    This is not a game.

Sign In or Register to comment.