Having said that I do somewhat agree with the OP in regards to the number balancing, it shouldn’t be to much work to change the Warrior trait that gives 7% of power to vitality back to 5% now that the warrior has gotten more ways to deal with conditions f/e… or even start with 6% and see how that works out. In order to balance warrior zerk builds with a proper challenge/reward setting, actually this sort of shows that the list provided isn’t been used at all, as this trait should have been modified the moment Warriors got more access to condition clear… ‘how do changes effect the balance over all’.
I do not agree with the viewpoint of balance and meta that some propose though, balance means that profession/skills selection doesn’t really matter anymore, balance (in the true sense) has been achieved, and it now comes down to player skill and execution, to determine a winner. OR, but that only works for games (like f/e GW1) with a lot of choices and skills, where there are numerous right answers to the same questions and selections come with the consequence of not picking another solution. In which case there isn’t necessarily ‘balance’ as in ‘equilibrium’ but balance to a point where you can always find a way to adept and find another answer.
Seeing GW2 is NOT a game with an extensive list of answers, it can not be a game with a ‘rolling meta’, seeing playing an advanced version of Rock, Paper, Scissors has nothing to do with player skill & execution. It thus should be a game with a ‘Balance = Equilibrium’ mind set. Which also happens to be a mind set where pretty much all the builds (that make any bit of sense) are viable builds… Now b4 I get to buy gw2 gold and anti-communists on my back, let me state that ‘Equilibrium =/= Equality’ for as far as the professions are concerned, on the other hand, to have a game where it is player skill and not ‘rock, paper, scissors’ that determines a winner, and the amount of skills are fairly limited, there has to be a large amount of similarity between the professions; still though, there should be more then enough room to create distinctly different solutions to the same ‘problems’.
Amount of Armour: scaling
Amount of Health point: scaling
do direct damage: range at which, amount of which, speed of which, source, etc…
do conditions: kind of condition, how condition works (intensity, duration).
mitigate damage: by healing, by blocking, by repelling, by evasion, duration, recharge…
deal with conditions: which conditions, how often, etc.
Pro/Anti-Boons: which boons, how to applicate/remove, which (intensity, duration)
Mobility: ease of Access, range, recharge
Well you get the point, more then enough ways to differ/be distinct and still be ‘balanced’ where balance is some sort of Equilibrium. And reaching this is easiest by making frequent small (medium when difference is considered large) changes, seeing ‘you’ can always go back by a smaller bit the next time, if you over shot a little bit.