{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
10/19/2016 7:58:39 PM
3
Nah.
House of Wolves PvP was actually decent, and a good enough reference point for Y1. Sure was a hell of a lot better than how PvP is right now.
The only real major problem was the fact that Thorn/TLW was broken and Felwinter's was ridiculous. There were also a few weapon archetypes that suffered like AR's or low-impact hand cannons.
A few minor tweaks and fixes and it would've probably been the best that Destiny's PvP could've ever been.
English
-
That's kind of part of my point though. HoW was [u]8 months[/u] after release. I find it hard to consider that as a "Y1" reference. Wouldn't people be better off using the Tuning 1.1.1 as the actual reference point rather than the year? Or is saying Y1 just easier?
-
Edited by Swiftlock: 10/19/2016 8:39:40 PMIt took place in the first year. Therefore, it is fair to consider it a point of reference for Y1. Not sure what your deal is.
-
My 'deal' is that there were so many things that happened in Y1 that it doesn't feel right to me to generalize 'Y1 PVP Balance' in to 1 phrase, statement, or time frame. The first 6 months was PVP 1.0 with essentially no balance (or at least whatever PVE centric default balance came out of release). That's half the year. Then 1.1.1, then HoW 3 months later, then 2.0 in another month. This was all in Y1. 1.1.1 and HoW only lasted like 4 months before 2.0 came out and the nerfs started. So essentially the "Y1 PVP" that people talk about was only 4 months of that year. I"m just trying to give some clarity to people who may not know the timeline as well and also point out that it may be too general of a statement.
