We're confused. Could we have some developer explanations on the 4.25 PvP changes?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Divinemights

I have played Tera after FF14 1.0 flopped. While I like the active combat system (especially the combat system for the tank), it is nevertheless a pay to win.
I wouldnt find Blade and Soul much different, as all Korean mmorpg especially are PTW.

---

Arena is actually pretty not p2w (outside of HM skills, which they're addressing IIRC in an upcoming patch). If you want to play BNS just for 1v1 PVP, it's not bad (miles above this game, for instance).

The PVE is enjoyable but definitely p2w if you don't no-life or get into a good guild willing to carry you to better gear from where you start out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by loreleidiangelo

Arena is actually pretty not p2w (outside of HM skills, which they're addressing IIRC in an upcoming patch). If you want to play BNS just for 1v1 PVP, it's not bad (miles above this game, for instance).

---

HM skills are not hard to get either. You can farm hm skill in pvp with zen beans or pay few bucks from duelist bundle and get everything at once. Battleground 6v6 mode other hand is insanely stupid in that game, because even if you have 200k+ hp and 3k crit def, whales one shot you. Balance is not good either and ncsoft did not do any balance patches like half year after world tournament. Warlock is still insanely stupid. If you play blademaster, you have to play like 5x better than opponent if you wanna win warlock.

You know, I find that explaining why buffs and nerfs were made is possibly one of the most valuable things we could have in the pvp world. If we take into consideration of other competitive games, we can get a clear understanding why nerfs and buffs were made and understand exactly what the Meta is to the devs, and how they plan to shift it.

If we don’t get any explanations then it makes it seem like the Devs don’t understand their own game’s meta. That’s dangerous for a competitive game in general.

Yes I don't understand why we don't at least get an explanation for changes that were made, it seems like it's just random otherwise. Other companies like Blizzard are a lot more open about their design process and why they make certain decisions. For example, if they buff healers maybe it's because they feel they want matches to slow down a little - perhaps I won't agree, but at least I know what they're thinking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AchaNoYumi

You know, I find that explaining why buffs and nerfs were made is possibly one of the most valuable things we could have in the pvp world. If we take into consideration of other competitive games, we can get a clear understanding why nerfs and buffs were made and understand exactly what the Meta is to the devs, and how they plan to shift it.

If we don’t get any explanations then it makes it seem like the Devs don’t understand their own game’s meta. That’s dangerous for a competitive game in general.

---

Exactly this. Something similiar to what Jeff does for Overwatch would be a great step in the right direction.
It would really show that the devs at least understand the game and genuinely have an interest in the pvp community.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lovelikewinter

Exactly this. Something similiar to what Jeff does for Overwatch would be a great step in the right direction.
It would really show that the devs at least understand the game and genuinely have an interest in the pvp community.

---

I was always under the impression that Live Letters were meant to fulfill that purpose. It seems like over time they've been far less open with what they're willing to talk about...and a considerable amount of time is now devoted to promoting optional merchandise instead of addressing reasonable issues with the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AchaNoYumi

You know, I find that explaining why buffs and nerfs were made is possibly one of the most valuable things we could have in the pvp world.

---

Do you 'really' want to know, though?

They've made healers as powerful as they currently are not because of balance concerns, but because "if they weren't that strong, nobody would want to play them." Literally. That's the kind of statements you get when the devs do tell you why they made certain adjustments. Do you really want to see more of that iceberg? Like that old interview in which they stated that they don't expect tanks and healers to DPS beyond the aggro combo in Savage and how they do the tuning? Or the pre-SB live letter where they finally realized Raid Synergies are a thing that should be balanced? Their recent argumentation around tank accessories?

Believe me when I say this: You would get the impression the devs don't understand their own game far, FAR more often if they did give you explanations. Read some old interviews to get a taste.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

I was always under the impression that Live Letters were meant to fulfill that purpose. It seems like over time they've been far less open with what they're willing to talk about...and a considerable amount of time is now devoted to promoting optional merchandise instead of addressing reasonable issues with the game.

---

Hm...yeah I guess you're right.
It's what the Liveletter is supposed to be.

But it's very much so fallen by the wayside in that sense.
It'd be nice for them to reevaulate their transparency with their playerbase, regardless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zojha

Reeee

---

Even if they are wrong with their buffs and nerfs the community will have a better understanding why they did what they did and will be able to appropriately construct and helpfully criticize their decisions with more accuracy.

So yes, I would still want it even with what you said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zojha

x

---

Understanding where the devs stand will give us more room to helpfully criticize them if they make errors in the explanations to see quicker improvement.

Jeez, some people would argue with a brick wall given the chance...