Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Help
- - - - -

What in your opinion constitutes an "Effective Character"?


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 gw2guruaccount

gw2guruaccount

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 892 posts

Posted 06 February 2014 - 05:37 AM

Be as specific or broad as you want on the topic whether it be talking about Fire Elementalists or just setting basic criteria for any class and build. I'm just curious what you think a character's value rests upon and what you find important in gameplay. Obviously I would like it if you stuck to GW2 but if you wish to talk broadly about your general outlook across all games go ahead.

#2 Epixors

Epixors

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 401 posts
  • Location:The Netherlands
  • Profession:Guardian
  • Guild Tag:[LSL]
  • Server:Seafarer’s Rest

Posted 06 February 2014 - 11:51 AM

Effective at... what?

#3 gw2guruaccount

gw2guruaccount

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 892 posts

Posted 06 February 2014 - 01:41 PM

View PostEpixors, on 06 February 2014 - 11:51 AM, said:

Effective at... what?
That would be the question posed to you.

Let me give you a simple format:

"I think _______ is effective for _________ because _________________."

I.E.

"I think Warriors in Berzerker are effective for Speedrunning Dungeons because Hundred Blades is awesome."

._. I'm disappointed.

#4 Baron von Scrufflebutt

Baron von Scrufflebutt

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 3267 posts

Posted 06 February 2014 - 02:10 PM

BiS gear.
And it doesn't matter if we are dealing with a poorly designed VP game such as GW2, where you don't even need said BiS gear. It's sole existence is important here.

#5 Epixors

Epixors

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 401 posts
  • Location:The Netherlands
  • Profession:Guardian
  • Guild Tag:[LSL]
  • Server:Seafarer’s Rest

Posted 06 February 2014 - 02:28 PM

Well, as I'm most experienced with PvE Guardians I'd say a PvE Guardian is effective when he:
  • Utilizes an efficient build (meta builds), this includes gear, traits, food, etc.
  • Knows the encounter
  • Has good observational skills
A Guardian who doesn't utilize an efficient build is a liability in the first place (shouting horrors). It's required that one knows the encounter (if reflects are needed, stability is needed, etc.) and that he has good observational skills to use these things at the correct time. Aegis spam is useless, well-timed Aegis can prevent a wipe. To time it well one has to know the encounter and observe what's happening.

and the general requirement in PvE for all classes:
  • Able to manage dodges well (no dodge spamming)
  • Able to manage cooldowns/skills/rotations


#6 MazingerZ

MazingerZ

    Golem Rider

  • Curse Premium
  • Curse Premium
  • 2274 posts
  • Profession:Guardian
  • Guild Tag:[CYRL]
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 06 February 2014 - 02:30 PM

View PostBaron von Scrufflebutt, on 06 February 2014 - 02:10 PM, said:

BiS gear.
And it doesn't matter if we are dealing with a poorly designed VP game such as GW2, where you don't even need said BiS gear. It's sole existence is important here.

Pretty much this.  Once the community is in a majority consensus that the game has achieved some semblance of balance (even WoW's rock/paper/scissors balance) and characters are configured to their maximum efficiency (BiS gear), then the effectiveness can be based entirely on skill.  A game is an experiment to determine the better player and if the control variables are not the same, then it does nothing but frustrate people in determining the outcome, which is why fairness is such a big thing in every major sport.  Even in PvE content.  It used to frustrate Horde guilds to no end that Alliance had a huge advantage in Paladins during the days of BWL.

Balance is probably the most important thing to character effectiveness.  Balance is what makes every character feel viable in an encounter.   Every aspect of the class feeling viable is  important.  Look on the forums at every basic design issue people have with professions from pet AI to turret survivability to healing power scaling.  Every issue is because people think that bothering with those aspects of the professions makes them less effective.
It's okay to enjoy crap if you're willing to admit it's crap.
Every patch is like ArenaNet walking out onto the stage of the International Don't Kitten Up Championship, and then proceeding to shiv itself in the stomach 30 times while screaming "IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD! IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD!"

#7 El Duderino

El Duderino

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 2249 posts
  • Location:Drowning in a White Russian listening to Creedence
  • Profession:Mesmer
  • Guild Tag:[DuDE]
  • Server:Blackgate

Posted 06 February 2014 - 05:03 PM

Considering the game was built more towards solo play than teamwork and the homogeneity of the classes, it seems to me that everything is equally effective at the same thing. Not to mention that BiS gear is made specifically to give plausible deniability to the argument of a gear treadmill, it is rendered as equally effective as everything else.

So basically, everything is good at everything because no had the chutzpah to develop the game in a way that didn't appeal to the lowest common denominator.

#8 MazingerZ

MazingerZ

    Golem Rider

  • Curse Premium
  • Curse Premium
  • 2274 posts
  • Profession:Guardian
  • Guild Tag:[CYRL]
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 06 February 2014 - 05:10 PM

View PostEl Duderino, on 06 February 2014 - 05:03 PM, said:

So basically, everything is good at everything because no had the chutzpah to develop the game in a way that didn't appeal to the lowest common denominator.

And yet still failed due in part to their inability or unwillingness to address the short-comings of each class within their own realms.  For instance, turrets are considered bottom the of the barrel.  The only one worth a damn was Net Turret and it got nerfed.  Every other thing is either bugged or useless in comparison to other aspects like Elixirs or Kits and a singular kit is almost mandatory because Engineers cannot weapon-swap, but it'll take up a utility (with the tool belt providing little compensation).

So players ultimately feel pigeon-holed to a certain extent to at least avoid the aspects of their professions that are the least effective.  And I mean wholly ineffective, not ineffective when paired with other skills or traits, but really, bottom of the barrel ineffective.

WoW did a rather fantastic job of eventually providing viability to each spec the game had to offer.  It did take some serious limitations to customization (removal of talent trees), but ultimately they did a very good job of making it such that even rogues had a unique play-style for each DPS spec.

Edited by MazingerZ, 06 February 2014 - 05:22 PM.

It's okay to enjoy crap if you're willing to admit it's crap.
Every patch is like ArenaNet walking out onto the stage of the International Don't Kitten Up Championship, and then proceeding to shiv itself in the stomach 30 times while screaming "IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD! IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD!"

#9 Featherman

Featherman

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1028 posts
  • Location:Frolicking in Kalos

Posted 06 February 2014 - 05:26 PM

View PostMazingerZ, on 06 February 2014 - 05:10 PM, said:

And yet still failed due in part to their inability or unwillingness to address the short-comings of each class within their own realms.  For instance, turrets are considered bottom the of the barrel.  The only one worth a damn was Net Turret and it got nerfed.  Every other thing is either bugged or useless in comparison to other aspects like Elixirs or Kits and a singular kit is almost mandatory because Engineers cannot weapon-swap, but it'll take up a utility (with the tool belt providing little compensation).

So players ultimately feel pigeon-holed to a certain extent to at least avoid the aspects of their professions that are the least effective.  And I mean wholly ineffective, not ineffective when paired with other skills or traits, but really, bottom of the barrel ineffective.
It's actually the because of the shallowness of the game that there are glaring class imbalances. If the game had a system of checks and counters created from the interplay of game mechanics, then the each class would at least have a niche, When such a system exists the game's balance becomes self-correcting; e.g. if hexes become more powerful/more plentiful then players would start using their counters, and then counters to those counters and so forth.

Since there's really only a few optimal strategies in GW2 the distinction between effectiveness of each professions becomes obvious, moreso when you have professions that can do everything others can but to different degrees (i.e. guardian support vs engineer support).

#10 Konzacelt

Konzacelt

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 562 posts
  • Location:a prairie under a clear, blue sky
  • Guild Tag:[PD]
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted 06 February 2014 - 05:41 PM

View Postgw2guruaccount, on 06 February 2014 - 01:41 PM, said:

Let me give you a simple format:

"I think _______ is effective for _________ because _________________."

Oh I see, let me fill in the blanks:

"I think Logan is effective for laughs because he's such a whiny bitch."

Like that?

#11 Veji

Veji

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 493 posts

Posted 06 February 2014 - 05:43 PM

I disagree.  I think by removing the niche classes, they've forced homogenization and therefore rely on player skill, more than class balance or abilities.  Take Arah path 1 - it can be done without Guardians.  It can be done without a Mesmer.  It can be done without a Warrior.  Its just that it takes alot more skill to do without, then to do with.

So, in a PuG situation, you are already inviting the standard that there is no player skill, because not everyone know everyone's level and they don't have voice chat to coordinate.  In that scenario, you have to have a Mesmer and a Guardian (probably 2) and a warrior.  Theres just no way around it, because the margin of error is very small.

Thats why when you state, "the game was built more towards solo play than teamwork", thats absolutely wrong, because the dungeons require a solid team to complete them.  Like any MMO, there are strong solo elements and there are strong team elements.  The game can be solo'd and everyone can run the easy paths in a PuG, but in order to truly achieve and be proud of those achievements, you have to have a team to depend on.

WoW killed this by making LFR and therefore i experienced multiple, multiple guilds where no one ever talks in guild chat.  Its just a random group of solo players, doing their own thing, because they don't need anyone else.  I think this way of developing is counterproductive to what online gaming (in general) is.  I think MMOs that force a balance between "whats solo gameplay" and "whats team gameplay" are the ones that spark the most interest.

I firmly believe that GW2 has that balance, but it takes a while to find and then to finally recognize it.

#12 Beyond Freedom

Beyond Freedom

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 247 posts
  • Location:In your dreams.
  • Profession:Thief

Posted 06 February 2014 - 06:13 PM

View PostMazingerZ, on 06 February 2014 - 05:10 PM, said:

WoW did a rather fantastic job of eventually providing viability to each spec the game had to offer.  It did take some serious limitations to customization (removal of talent trees), but ultimately they did a very good job of making it such that even rogues had a unique play-style for each DPS spec.

Rift managed to do that without limiting customization, and also permitting every class to perform every role (almost) - i.e. tank, dps or heal. And it didn't take them 8 years to do.

#13 RandolfRa

RandolfRa

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 413 posts

Posted 06 February 2014 - 06:20 PM

Warrior is effective whenever he has healing signet.

#14 Veji

Veji

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 493 posts

Posted 06 February 2014 - 06:58 PM

View PostBeyond Freedom, on 06 February 2014 - 06:13 PM, said:

Rift managed to do that without limiting customization, and also permitting every class to perform every role (almost) - i.e. tank, dps or heal. And it didn't take them 8 years to do.

Rift also came out a number years after WoW.  Thats why the MMO genre always will have a 'next best thing' because all over companies did what Blizzard did and that was to review what was working, what was popular, and then refine it into its own product.  Oh don't worry, its all borrowed and rehashed with a unique spin on it.

View PostRandolfRa, on 06 February 2014 - 06:20 PM, said:

Warrior is effective whenever he has healing signet.

Yer goddamnright!  Warrior healers 4tw!

#15 MazingerZ

MazingerZ

    Golem Rider

  • Curse Premium
  • Curse Premium
  • 2274 posts
  • Profession:Guardian
  • Guild Tag:[CYRL]
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 06 February 2014 - 07:21 PM

View PostBeyond Freedom, on 06 February 2014 - 06:13 PM, said:

Rift managed to do that without limiting customization, and also permitting every class to perform every role (almost) - i.e. tank, dps or heal. And it didn't take them 8 years to do.

Rift came out way later and was pretty much a testament to 'iterative' development, in that it iterated off of all the things WoW was doing right.  WoW started from a place that was driven by the MMOs before it and considered today to be backwards.  Hell, Rogue epic gear had spirit.  They resisted a lot of things mid-expansion because it would mess up itemization.  There wasn't gear to support a druid tank, there was the weird concept that hybrids had to somehow be 'sufficient' at everything, but not provide the room for error that a pure Warrior tank or Rogue melee DPS did.

Edited by MazingerZ, 06 February 2014 - 08:44 PM.

It's okay to enjoy crap if you're willing to admit it's crap.
Every patch is like ArenaNet walking out onto the stage of the International Don't Kitten Up Championship, and then proceeding to shiv itself in the stomach 30 times while screaming "IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD! IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD!"

#16 Beyond Freedom

Beyond Freedom

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 247 posts
  • Location:In your dreams.
  • Profession:Thief

Posted 06 February 2014 - 07:51 PM

View PostVeji, on 06 February 2014 - 06:58 PM, said:

Rift also came out a number years after WoW.

View PostMazingerZ, on 06 February 2014 - 07:21 PM, said:

Rift came out way later

You are both right but this comes over a bit apologist. Rift came out 2 WoW expansions ago; if Blizzard had really wanted to provide viability to each spec without limiting customization, or provide full party roles to each class, they should easily have been able to do it by now.

#17 MazingerZ

MazingerZ

    Golem Rider

  • Curse Premium
  • Curse Premium
  • 2274 posts
  • Profession:Guardian
  • Guild Tag:[CYRL]
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 06 February 2014 - 08:24 PM

View PostBeyond Freedom, on 06 February 2014 - 07:51 PM, said:

You are both right but this comes over a bit apologist. Rift came out 2 WoW expansions ago; if Blizzard had really wanted to provide viability to each spec without limiting customization, or provide full party roles to each class, they should easily have been able to do it by now.

The point of my post was that WoW wanted to make each aspect of each class viable... not make them cover all roles.  There were, for a long time, parts of a class that weren't considered wholly viable.  Assassination Rogues were never used, because Combat Rogues were always higher damage dealers.  Subtley was regulated to PvP because its damage was bad, except for its CD reset button making it a good ganker.  Retribution & Protection Paladins, Boomkin, Enhancement Shaman, Unholy Death Knights and Shadow Priests were considered substandard class specializations.

It was never about giving each class the ability to play any role, but that each specialization, to choose a class's toolset, was moved towards viability in all areas.  No one felt especially pigeon-holed to go Combat if they wanted to raid as a Rogue.  The idea that you know what you're going to do going in is part of the class selection process in WoW... but having being capable of playing one way because no other way is as viable doesn't create depth.

Edited by MazingerZ, 06 February 2014 - 08:25 PM.

It's okay to enjoy crap if you're willing to admit it's crap.
Every patch is like ArenaNet walking out onto the stage of the International Don't Kitten Up Championship, and then proceeding to shiv itself in the stomach 30 times while screaming "IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD! IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD!"

#18 Miragee

Miragee

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 858 posts

Posted 06 February 2014 - 09:06 PM

View PostMazingerZ, on 06 February 2014 - 05:10 PM, said:

WoW did a rather fantastic job of eventually providing viability to each spec the game had to offer.  It did take some serious limitations to customization (removal of talent trees), but ultimately they did a very good job of making it such that even rogues had a unique play-style for each DPS spec.

I don't think it is "doing a good job making specs viable" if there are only like 12 specs left in the game.

#19 Desild

Desild

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 985 posts
  • Location:New Eden
  • Profession:Guardian
  • Guild Tag:[DKAL]
  • Server:Piken Square

Posted 06 February 2014 - 09:26 PM

View PostMiragee, on 06 February 2014 - 09:06 PM, said:

I don't think it is "doing a good job making specs viable" if there are only like 12 specs left in the game.

We're talking about WoW right? Because what you're saying is really far off from reality.

That's 31 specs accross 10 classes. Druids have 4 specs ever since they split Feral into Cat and Bear. Ever since Mists, all specs are drasticaly different, and some key skills are transformed and learned the moment you pick your spec at level 10. That's 30 levels less than in BC, which you needed all those talent points to even touch your final skills.

WoW has made a fine job in making all classes diferent and unique. Sure the game is an imbalance piece of trash, but it has improved much since early Wrath that it's not even funny.

Guild Wars 2 on the other hand... Let's just say the trait system is a mess, and more often than not, the stat combos are counter-productive.

#20 Miragee

Miragee

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 858 posts

Posted 06 February 2014 - 09:31 PM

View PostDesild, on 06 February 2014 - 09:26 PM, said:

We're talking about WoW right? Because what you're saying is really far off from reality.

That's 31 specs accross 10 classes. Druids have 4 specs ever since they split Feral into Cat and Bear. Ever since Mists, all specs are drasticaly different, and some key skills are transformed and learned the moment you pick your spec at level 10. That's 30 levels less than in BC, which you needed all those talent points to even touch your final skills.

WoW has made a fine job in making all classes diferent and unique. Sure the game is an imbalance piece of trash, but it has improved much since early Wrath that it's not even funny.

Guild Wars 2 on the other hand... Let's just say the trait system is a mess, and more often than not, the stat combos are counter-productive.

I used hyperbole, I know that there aren't only 12 specs in the game. But 3 specs per class is still a low number in my eyes so my argument still applies.

//edit: btw. I just commented on WoW and didn't regard GW2 in this aspect. >ou are right with your point on GW2.

Edited by Miragee, 06 February 2014 - 10:34 PM.


#21 Cube

Cube

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 564 posts
  • Location:A Web of Lies
  • Profession:Mesmer
  • Server:Ring of Fire

Posted 06 February 2014 - 09:47 PM

View PostVeji, on 06 February 2014 - 05:43 PM, said:

I disagree.  I think by removing the niche classes, they've forced homogenization and therefore rely on player skill, more than class balance or abilities.  Take Arah path 1 - it can be done without Guardians.  It can be done without a Mesmer.  It can be done without a Warrior.  Its just that it takes alot more skill to do without, then to do with.

No, it is just slower.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users