Guild Wars 2

Thanks. I hope you can work it out as well.

“One day you’ll be as awesome as I am…”
/walks out in the sunlight, slowmoooo… and…. cut.
Finally…

spoj.9672:

Hahah. If you cant answer that question then theres obviously a fault in your logic. Its a pretty reasonable question.

Accusing me of loaded questions just because you cant justify your suggestion is pretty hilarious.

PS. Last night i was almost pulling my hair out with frustration. Which is why i gave that response.

It’s not that the question can’t be answered, you just don’t justify why you dismiss the answers that were already given.

You were accused of loaded questions because you were asking loaded questions (who’d have guessed that!?) Example: “So spoj, have you stopped beating your wife?” Answers would be “Yes, I’ve stopped beating my wife” or “No, I haven’t stopped beating my wife”. Another answer being “Leo, you’re implying a falsehood assuming I’ve ever beat my wife” but then you’re not answering the question.

Another example: “Why should range have no disadvantages?” A possible answer is “I’m not trying to give range no disadvantages and here’s why…” to which is responded with “I don’t want to hear about that other stuff. Just answer my question!”

And there’s your lesson for today about discussion on an online forum. If I did manage to actually frustrate you in such a manner, that wasn’t my intention and I apologize but I can’t help but feel smug that I could accomplish that by being as civil as I possibly could.

I havent dismissed the answers you’ve already given. They have involved disadvantages to the melee players not the rangers which I have pointed out repeatedly. You just keep conveniently ignoring that. So you still havent actually given me a valid answer.

And to this quote: “I’m not trying to give range no disadvantages and here’s why…”. You actually are. I havent seen a response where the the disadvantages still remain. Because the main disadvantage is currently the buff sharing. Without that the risk vs reward is completely warped. I really dont know how you dont understand that.

spoj.9672:

I havent dismissed the answers you’ve already given. They have involved disadvantages to the melee players not the rangers which I have pointed out repeatedly. You just keep conveniently ignoring that. So you still havent actually given me a valid answer.

And to this quote: “I’m not trying to give range no disadvantages and here’s why…”. You actually are. I havent seen a response where the the disadvantages still remain. Becaus the main disadvantage is currently the buff sharing. I really dont know how you dont understand that.

Shhhhhhhh… let’s just do dungeons…

Spoj must be reeeeeaaaaaally bored now.

spoj.9672:

I havent dismissed the answers you’ve already given. They have involved disadvantages to the melee players not the rangers which I have pointed out repeatedly. You just keep conveniently ignoring that. So you still havent actually given me a valid answer.

Well some of what I mentioned is a disadvantage to the melee players but others go both ways (such as being further away and getting downed and having no allies nearby to help) while others are a disadvantage to the dynamic of the team. A disadvantage to the team is less likely to be used because of it, such as inadvertently kiting the mob, drawing it out of AoEs, lowering damage of others and opening teammates up for retaliation because of it. If this happens, people will be less likely to incorporate long range into their strategy unless that strategy is kiting. Lastly, one can currently accomplish powerful damage from range by utilizing team boons under team organization (notifying the team of boon-stack barrage, gather then spread back out after) and yet is it the stronger more optimized approach used? If it is, the suggestion wouldn’t be taking much disadvantage away just making team boon-sharing quicker. If it isn’t, then why? Because it’s impossible to get 25 stacks of might and fury for a decent amount of time at range? Because it’s too slow to organize boon rallies? Because only a scant few professions can take advantage of long range better than close?

These are all the same answers I’ve given before. Your response is it will make range broken. You don’t state how. If it makes ranged numerically stronger, why not actually provide that data. If it simply makes Ranger too strong, rebalance them.

From my perspective, you are not answering what I’m putting down because you know I’ll counter it…because it can be countered.

spoj.9672:

And to this quote: “I’m not trying to give range no disadvantages and here’s why…”. You actually are.

No, I’m actually not. I can state factually, without a shadow of a doubt, that my intention is NOT to give range or Longbow Ranger no disadvantages.

[quote=4578867;spoj.9672:I havent seen a response where the the disadvantages still remain. Because the main disadvantage is currently the buff sharing. Without that the risk vs reward is completely warped. I really dont know how you dont understand that.[/quote]

Yes, I’ve been waiting to discuss the dynamic of boons as a reward and their place in strategic gameplay, but you’ve yet gotten to that threshold of the discussion because you’ve yet to clarify your responses to my previous answers.

Well im completely lost now. Please do go on. The way i see it. If you want to dps from max range with complete safety then you should stack buffs at that range. Otherwise you are just simplifying the content and making teamwork far too easy. Especially for the people ranging. If you dont stack buffs then you do less damage but you are safe. Completely fair trade.

Maybe if you watched some records you would understand. Or if you knew the very basic requirements of an optimised group and what each class brings.

dlmoore.7293:

And also, I don’t really understand how sitting at range has disadvantages for the ranger as it is right now? Sure they don’t get boons, but they stay safe. After the encounter is completed, they will still get rewards similar to those who were melee. If anything, their lack of boons is a detriment to the team and not the individual.

What is detrimental to the team IS detrimental to the individual if you’re looking at completion time and working as a team.

A lot of people don’t understand the finer points of speed running, they see things but don’t fully understand them. I’m no different, I’ve been carried hard by people and afterwards I just have to ask “umm, why was that so much easier than last time I tried it?” and usually I get a cool answer like “ohh well you must not have had a good aegis rotation last time” or “did you strip defiance and land a second deep freeze?” and all that stuff.

Let me explain why 1 or 2 people ranging causes problems. And it should not be encouraged by making them recieve buffs while away from the team.

Ill use lupi as an example. If you have 5 people in melee they share buffs can help each other out when someone downs. And lupi’s aggro is shared on everyone in the same area. He doesnt move around and cause problems.

When people start to do a mix and range him. It causes huge problems for the melee players. Anyone who has pugged and tried to melee while others range will know this. Basically lupi will start shadowstep around the room. He will kite the melees and this will causes bubbles and barrages on the melees when he switches targets. Or if he stays aggroed on them (best case scenario) he will only be a threat to those in melee. If that melee person messes up and downs. Then his ranging buddies are in no position to help him.

Now if we implement your suggestion. What we end up having is an incentive for players to range and cause these sorts of problems. And generally speaking they wont recieve any of the disadvantages unless the party as a whole is overwhelmed. If it is not overwhelmed they get to achieve max damage with almost complete safety while the others have multiple times the difficulty compared to if the group stayed together. This doesnt mean stacking. This just means staying in a reasonable distance from each other.

So currently the boon sharing radius does two things. It encourages people to stick close to each other to share buffs. And it also encourages them to work and stay together to support each other. If you remove the radius, you lose that incentive for teamwork. You basically encourage players to go off and do their own selfish thing because they dont need to join the group to get their buffs. Do you understand what im saying?

One of the great things about gw2 combat is the combo field system. You devalue that system if the radius is infinite.

I don’t agree with the OP, I would just like to have more content catered to ranged players. I want to whip out my Kudzu and my Brownbear in pride, with some random hero music faiding in while everyone is praising my… heroism.

Jep, that is my dream.

And a fix to the aggro range would be nice. What’s the use of my wonderful almost-2000 range if the kitten mobs keep resetting?

Spoj, he’s trying to twist words to fit his agenda

His response will be something along the lines of “well you’ll still have incentive because then you can work as a team and pick eachother up”, which we both know is simply bullcrap.

There is a reason for the systems that are in place, they don’t need to be changes, the people who feel they need to be changed need to sit down, learn the systems, learn why they are good, learn how to use them, and enjoy the game for what it is, which is honestly a pretty beautiful game. I mean the only complaint I have about the entire game is that they aren’t giving me enough content that challenges me… systems wise, it’s pretty darn near perfect.

EDIT:

SEE!

Im well aware of that. Seeing as he understands me now Ill just leave it there (ill let the faulty logic accusation slide). Besides i only kept going with this thread because i was bored.

We all know even anet arent stupid enough to make such a drastic change. And there really isnt any other solution other than new content. Which is the same thing weve been saying to people who want passive defence to be more useful.

One thing I’m certain of is that the party coordination required to buff at short range is greater than that which would be required if buffs affected party members at any range up to max. Extending buff range would move the game in the direction of greater simplification. It’s not a huge amount of coordination, but there would be no coordination at all required if the range were simply extended. You could replace proximity with some other requirement, but I’m not sure what that could be.

If buffs were to last longer, ranged could move in, drop their buffs and get those of their teammates, then return to range. The existing short duration buffs make that tactic more trouble than it’s worth. Given the other benefits of proximity, it’s better and simpler to just stay put.

As it is, though, buff durations are an important part of profession and game balance. Also, keeping buffs like Might up require more thought and skill than kiting and shooting. Further, buffs like banners, Empower Allies and Spotter balance their persisting buffs with the proximity requirement.

The only conclusion I can draw from all this is that changing the game to allow for longer-ranged buffs would involve changing the game very substantially. Not only do I not see that happening, I’d question whether it would be a good thing. If people want to use ranged weapons, then use them in proximity. Mesmer GS and Ranger LB #1 skills would need the “more damage at range” limitation to be removed, and as a result the weapons might need to be tweaked, but that would be worlds simpler than changing the entire buff system.

DISCLAIMER: The suggestion that those who want to use ranged weapons should do so assumes they are doing so only in parties where such use is welcomed.

So the disadvantages stated are, in fact, disadvantages, yes? And it might not be a shared viewpoint but something that works against team dynamics can also be seen as a detriment to be associated to ranged.

spoj.9672:

Now if we implement your suggestion. What we end up having is an incentive for players to range and cause these sorts of problems. And generally speaking they wont recieve any of the disadvantages unless the party as a whole is overwhelmed. If it is not overwhelmed they get to achieve max damage with almost complete safety while the others have multiple times the difficulty compared to if the group stayed together. This doesnt mean stacking. This just means staying in a reasonable distance from each other.

So currently the boon sharing radius does two things. It encourages people to stick close to each other to share buffs. And it also encourages them to work and stay together to support each other. If you remove the radius, you lose that incentive for teamwork. You basically encourage players to go off and do their own selfish thing because they dont need to join the group to get their buffs. Do you understand what im saying?

That I can agree with. It certainly changes the team dynamic of boons, which is likely the goal, but also hits on a different system of incentivizing specific placement in combat encounters. That likely isn’t intentional of the OP but unavoidable.

spoj.9672:

One of the great things about gw2 combat is the combo field system. You devalue that system if the radius is infinite.

That’s a whole other system, and is actually one of the main reasons I even started rolling the idea of team-shared boons in the first place. The combo field system isn’t great, it’s limited at best and unbalanced at worst. Limited in that their intended use, to alter the effect of allies’ attacks, is more often ignored or breaks if multiple fields exist. Unbalanced at worse because the main utilized fields are fire and water and even at that, only blast finishers play a part in most combat strategies.

That somewhat reveals my agenda, there, as team-shared boons being decoupled from needing to stand inside of fields, huddled under each other and in the mob’s face would free up the card of placement to be used more tactically than it is now.

I wont deny the balancing of combos is pretty bad. But to say the system isnt great i think is unfair. Its a really cool dynamic to combat and teamwork. The problem is projectile finishers are unreliable and weak. And as you say some fields arent all that useful. Dark, ethereal and ice fields have ok effects but they just dont have a valued place anywhere. Exception being dark field against Jade Maw.

Leo G.4501:

So the disadvantages stated are, in fact, disadvantages, yes? And it might not be a shared viewpoint but something that works against team dynamics can also be seen as a detriment to be associated to ranged.

spoj.9672:

Now if we implement your suggestion. What we end up having is an incentive for players to range and cause these sorts of problems. And generally speaking they wont recieve any of the disadvantages unless the party as a whole is overwhelmed. If it is not overwhelmed they get to achieve max damage with almost complete safety while the others have multiple times the difficulty compared to if the group stayed together. This doesnt mean stacking. This just means staying in a reasonable distance from each other.

So currently the boon sharing radius does two things. It encourages people to stick close to each other to share buffs. And it also encourages them to work and stay together to support each other. If you remove the radius, you lose that incentive for teamwork. You basically encourage players to go off and do their own selfish thing because they dont need to join the group to get their buffs. Do you understand what im saying?

That I can agree with. It certainly changes the team dynamic of boons, which is likely the goal, but also hits on a different system of incentivizing specific placement in combat encounters. That likely isn’t intentional of the OP but unavoidable.

spoj.9672:

One of the great things about gw2 combat is the combo field system. You devalue that system if the radius is infinite.

That’s a whole other system, and is actually one of the main reasons I even started rolling the idea of team-shared boons in the first place. The combo field system isn’t great, it’s limited at best and unbalanced at worst. Limited in that their intended use, to alter the effect of allies’ attacks, is more often ignored or breaks if multiple fields exist. Unbalanced at worse because the main utilized fields are fire and water and even at that, only blast finishers play a part in most combat strategies.

That somewhat reveals my agenda, there, as team-shared boons being decoupled from needing to stand inside of fields, huddled under each other and in the mob’s face would free up the card of placement to be used more tactically than it is now.

By that logic an ele can just stand outside of the room to have no aggroe at all and stack 25 stacks of might and perma fury for the party. Now that seems completely broken to me…

NeoVaris.4806:

By that logic an ele can just stand outside of the room to have no aggroe at all and stack 25 stacks of might and perma fury for the party. Now that seems completely broken to me…

And if I were changing team boons like the OP, you’d also not even be able to stack might with fire fields + blast finishers.

Whatever things people suggest, don’t just find the flaw in it, look for a solution. I’m sure you could fix the problem you found out in the OP’s suggestion just now. It’s not that hard.

Thats even worse. Are you trying to destroy group buffing?

spoj.9672:

Thats even worse. Are you trying to destroy group buffing?

Don’t you mean team might stacking?

Spoj some one out there is trolling you pretty hard.

I’ll just use this as a moment to remind everyone certain people have voting rights.

Leo G.4501:

spoj.9672:

Thats even worse. Are you trying to destroy group buffing?

Don’t you mean team might stacking?

And fury. So how else do you want to stack might?

As for the OP’s suggestion it is indeed easy to fix…by leaving it as it is. There is no point giving the same benefits to someone camping at 1500 range as someone who is in melee. It just screams lazy to me, if you want to use a ranged weapon because it’s stronger at a certain range, then precast might and cast that skill before moving into melee range (ranger) or just use it in melee range (scepter guardian). You’ll only be able to use that skill once or twice for most fights anyway.

NeoVaris.4806:

Leo G.4501:

spoj.9672:

Thats even worse. Are you trying to destroy group buffing?

Don’t you mean team might stacking?

And fury. So how else do you want to stack might?

There’s a combo field that grants fury? Or are you talking about a trait? I don’t see why a trait that activates fury when you trigger a blast combo wouldn’t still do so.

To talk about how I’d change combos and combo fields is off topic.

Leo G.4501:

NeoVaris.4806:

Leo G.4501:

spoj.9672:

Thats even worse. Are you trying to destroy group buffing?

Don’t you mean team might stacking?

And fury. So how else do you want to stack might?

There’s a combo field that grants fury? Or are you talking about a trait? I don’t see why a trait that activates fury when you trigger a blast combo wouldn’t still do so.

To talk about how I’d change combos and combo fields is off topic.

You are talking about giving party wide boons regardless of range, the main source of might comes via blast finishers inside a fire field. So yes, it is kind of on topic, since as I said an ele could just stand afk in safety to blast during the entire fight to provide perma fury and 25 stacks of might -.-.

NeoVaris.4806:

Leo G.4501:

NeoVaris.4806:

Leo G.4501:

spoj.9672:

Thats even worse. Are you trying to destroy group buffing?

Don’t you mean team might stacking?

And fury. So how else do you want to stack might?

There’s a combo field that grants fury? Or are you talking about a trait? I don’t see why a trait that activates fury when you trigger a blast combo wouldn’t still do so.

To talk about how I’d change combos and combo fields is off topic.

You are talking about giving party wide boons regardless of range, the main source of might comes via blast finishers inside a fire field. So yes, it is kind of on topic, since as I said an ele could just stand afk in safety to blast during the entire fight to provide perma fury and 25 stacks of might -.-.

Alright, so you’ve identified a problem.

How would you solve it? Coming up with more than one way to solve it makes it easier to adapt to varying views of preference.

Leo G.4501:

NeoVaris.4806:

Leo G.4501:

NeoVaris.4806:

Leo G.4501:

spoj.9672:

Thats even worse. Are you trying to destroy group buffing?

Don’t you mean team might stacking?

And fury. So how else do you want to stack might?

There’s a combo field that grants fury? Or are you talking about a trait? I don’t see why a trait that activates fury when you trigger a blast combo wouldn’t still do so.

To talk about how I’d change combos and combo fields is off topic.

You are talking about giving party wide boons regardless of range, the main source of might comes via blast finishers inside a fire field. So yes, it is kind of on topic, since as I said an ele could just stand afk in safety to blast during the entire fight to provide perma fury and 25 stacks of might -.-.

Alright, so you’ve identified a problem.

How would you solve it? Coming up with more than one way to solve it makes it easier to adapt to varying views of preference.

You are dodging the question, which just suggests to me that you have no clue what you are talking about. I have already given my opinion and how to would “fix” your supposed problem.

NeoVaris.4806:

Leo G.4501:

NeoVaris.4806:

Leo G.4501:

NeoVaris.4806:

Leo G.4501:

spoj.9672:

Thats even worse. Are you trying to destroy group buffing?

Don’t you mean team might stacking?

And fury. So how else do you want to stack might?

There’s a combo field that grants fury? Or are you talking about a trait? I don’t see why a trait that activates fury when you trigger a blast combo wouldn’t still do so.

To talk about how I’d change combos and combo fields is off topic.

You are talking about giving party wide boons regardless of range, the main source of might comes via blast finishers inside a fire field. So yes, it is kind of on topic, since as I said an ele could just stand afk in safety to blast during the entire fight to provide perma fury and 25 stacks of might -.-.

Alright, so you’ve identified a problem.

How would you solve it? Coming up with more than one way to solve it makes it easier to adapt to varying views of preference.

You are dodging the question, which just suggests to me that you have no clue what you are talking about. I have already given my opinion and how to would “fix” your supposed problem.

For one, it’s not my problem because it’s not my idea. I’ve just thought about the idea.

Second, why should I put forth effort to describe a solution to you just for you to dismiss it? You don’t even care about the suggestion and your animosity tells me you’re only interested in tearing down ideas.

So I’m just gonna not waste your time.

Leo G.4501:

NeoVaris.4806:

Leo G.4501:

NeoVaris.4806:

Leo G.4501:

NeoVaris.4806:

Leo G.4501:

spoj.9672:

Thats even worse. Are you trying to destroy group buffing?

Don’t you mean team might stacking?

And fury. So how else do you want to stack might?

There’s a combo field that grants fury? Or are you talking about a trait? I don’t see why a trait that activates fury when you trigger a blast combo wouldn’t still do so.

To talk about how I’d change combos and combo fields is off topic.

You are talking about giving party wide boons regardless of range, the main source of might comes via blast finishers inside a fire field. So yes, it is kind of on topic, since as I said an ele could just stand afk in safety to blast during the entire fight to provide perma fury and 25 stacks of might -.-.

Alright, so you’ve identified a problem.

How would you solve it? Coming up with more than one way to solve it makes it easier to adapt to varying views of preference.

You are dodging the question, which just suggests to me that you have no clue what you are talking about. I have already given my opinion and how to would “fix” your supposed problem.

For one, it’s not my problem because it’s not my idea. I’ve just thought about the idea.

Second, why should I put forth effort to describe a solution to you just for you to dismiss it? You don’t even care about the suggestion and your animosity tells me you’re only interested in tearing down ideas.

So I’m just gonna not waste your time.

Says the person who completely ignored what spoj was saying throughout this entire thread. The OP wants to reward lazy play, by bringing ranged weapon on par with melee weapons. There is a reason why ranged weapons are supposed to be weaker -.-

I can assure you, I didn’t ignore anyone.

So are we done?

Leo G.4501:

I can assure you, I didn’t ignore anyone.

So are we done?

Well…unless you have a reasonable suggestion that actually makes sense, pretty much.

xD

I do but not for you.

Well I do try to be nice and I try to be constructive and I try to garner discussion in as civil a way possible.

It’s not my fault people’s maturity resists civil discussion. And since it’s only a mere suggestion, it’s not like it’s going to harm you or your gameplay in any way. You could have just ignored it and never posted in the thread to begin with.

Or did you want me to take troll bait and blow up at someone for accusing me of not knowing stuff like some hormonal teenager?

What this thread needs to become the ultimate entertainment is our GMB showing up.

Leo G.4501:

Well I do try to be nice and I try to be constructive and I try to garner discussion in as civil a way possible.

It’s not my fault people’s maturity resists civil discussion. And since it’s only a mere suggestion, it’s not like it’s going to harm you or your gameplay in any way. You could have just ignored it and never posted in the thread to begin with.

Or did you want me to take troll bait and blow up at someone for accusing me of not knowing stuff like some hormonal teenager?

I just find it funny how someone can try to make constructive posts yet not actually provide anything of substance. And when called out to counter the arguements given they suddenly make the claim; “Its not my suggestion so I dont need to”. You are defending the suggestion and supporting it (Or atleast aspects of it). So you must have some counters? No?

Ironically you are doing the exact same thing in the thread in the prof balance forum. Making huge posts with absolutely no real substance. You honestly deserve a medal for that skill. Then again theres quite a few people in that thread who were doing the same.

that is a lot of patience you have there spoj. Next level zen Buddhist monk type patience.

Leo G.4501:

NeoVaris.4806:

Leo G.4501:

spoj.9672:

Thats even worse. Are you trying to destroy group buffing?

Don’t you mean team might stacking?

And fury. So how else do you want to stack might?

There’s a combo field that grants fury? Or are you talking about a trait? I don’t see why a trait that activates fury when you trigger a blast combo wouldn’t still do so.

To talk about how I’d change combos and combo fields is off topic.

See, they don’t even know what they’re talking about. Completely lost.

Tom Yzf.5872:

that is a lot of patience you have there spoj. Next level zen Buddhist monk type patience.

I could try to drag him away from this thread, kicking and screaming, because I don’t want our buddhist monk to afk at random times in arah. But apparently he’s got a kink for hopeless cases?

spoj.9672:

I just find it funny how someone can try to make constructive posts yet not actually provide anything of substance. And when called out to counter the arguements given they suddenly make the claim; “Its not my suggestion so I dont need to”. You are defending the suggestion and supporting it (Or atleast aspects of it). So you must have some counters? No?

Ironically you are doing the exact same thing in the thread in the prof balance forum. Making huge posts with absolutely no real substance. You honestly deserve a medal for that skill. Then again theres quite a few people in that thread who were doing the same.

Nah nah nah. Don’t pin your destructive posting habits on me. You spent a whole page trying to bully out an answer to a loaded question then complain people are talking you in circles. Not my problem it took you so long to eventually level with the OP and make a reasonable post.

As for not providing anything of substance, talking circles around people like you to get them to say what they mean is something, if not simple.

And as for me supporting the idea, I mentioned way back on page 1 that there were other problems with the suggestion not mentioned at that point that also need to be addressed. It’s much easier to contemplate them myself than throwing them against the brick wall that is the forums here. Perhaps in another thread.

And you should probably stop taking debating lessons for your buddy, J, there in the background. You’re drawing lines in the sand like him and it’s making you lose perspective (giving you the benefit of the doubt that you had perspective at some point). Defending? Supporting? It’s a suggestion. You critique it and provide feedback.

Have you ever taken an art or a writing class? You often are assigned to critique the work of your peers and provide them feedback on what they can improve. Try it sometime.

I wouldnt have needed to “bully” you if you had just provided counter arguements instead of avoiding the topic.

Ok, I will try my best to describe you that there is no problem with the current “meta”:
The encounters in GW2 are fairly easy, they don’t require you to run any defensive stats other than some supportive skills (if you know what to do and if you’re decent player). This is no problem with the combat system in GW2 but the encounters you will face. To ensure that all party members can dish out the maximum damage, it is recommended to stick together, so that all party members can profit from the buffs and so that the boss wont run around.
This wont change. The most optimal way to face enemies as an offensive group is to stick together.

Your suggestions of altering the combat of GW2 wont fix the problem because there is no problem with the combat system, as I’ve said before.
If you want a less melee-dependent “meta”, you should ask ANet for bosses who require different roles, so that some players can attack the bosses from range without screwing the players in melee range.

I don’t see why not, lets have infinite range, and at the same give every mobs range attacks and infinite condition applying range. seems reasonable trade-off. no? so melee stackers won’t fuss about range players getting it easy.

Actually, why not also have infinite range on player’s condition applying range? doesn’t make sense if only the self benefiting boons are getting inf. range but not the offensive ones.

rainynoble.6531:

I don’t see why not, lets have infinite range, and at the same give every mobs range attacks and infinite condition applying range. seems reasonable trade-off. no? so melee stackers won’t fuss about range players getting it easy.

Actually, why not also have infinite range on player’s condition applying range? doesn’t make sense if only the self benefiting boons are getting inf. range but not the offensive ones.

I don’t know you, can’t tell if you’re serious or not… And no, this is not obvioulsy sarcastic, I’ve seen things worse than this and they weren’t sarcastic.

HHR LostProphet.4801:

rainynoble.6531:

I don’t see why not, lets have infinite range, and at the same give every mobs range attacks and infinite condition applying range. seems reasonable trade-off. no? so melee stackers won’t fuss about range players getting it easy.

Actually, why not also have infinite range on player’s condition applying range? doesn’t make sense if only the self benefiting boons are getting inf. range but not the offensive ones.

I don’t know you, can’t tell if you’re serious or not… And no, this is not obvioulsy sarcastic, I’ve seen things worse than this and they weren’t sarcastic.

I’m serious, serious topic deserves serious response.

but then again , this suggestion probably won’t make pugging easier, since that is the main concern from op, right?

Been eyeing this thread for a while, here’s what I have to say about this.

I feel alot of you are missing the point entirely (Not necessarily OP’s point but another lesson that should be learned from this).
This thread and the thread about passive defense needing a buff in importance/viability can all be boiled down to one main thing. I think many (lets be abitrary and say 90+%) Guild Wars 2 players who didn’t play Beta before release and heared about the ‘no trinity’ thing didn’t quite expect it to turn into a Melee DPS only game. They expected DPS, Control, Support rather than Tanks with aggro mechanics and healers. Alot of GW2 players have played other MMO’s previously. GW1, WoW, etc. They chose GW2 most likely for the level of innovation that made it into the game. They could not however anticipate how extreme that innovation was. If you are an MMO player by heart (or any type of RPG player for that matter). You will know that the basics of RPG’s set in stone ,years before half the GW2 development team was evne born, is based on 3 main classes. The Warrior, The Archer and the Mage. All MMO’s and RPG’s will more or less adhere to this system. All other classes are variations of one (or sometimes all) of these three base classes. The problem with GW2 is that it tries to innovate on these basic concepts. While innovation is good, especially in the gaming world, there are always some fundamentals that should never be innovated on. Base classes are such a thing. It is the main draw to any MMO or RPG game that when you play, you can be whatever type of hero you’ve always dreamed you were. For some that means wielding a big sword, for the other that means using magic and for yet another it means using a bow and arrows.

Now lets fit this into this discussion right here. Let’s first state that GW2 is a very casual game on the PvE level. It has nowhere near the level of difficulity and depth that for instance WoW Hardcore World 1st/Server 1st raiding has. Ofcourse people will disagree with this but ask anyone who is actually involved with E-Sports and he will agree with this. The majority of people who play this game are therefore of the casual variety. Alot of these players also get turned off about the game because their favourite type of class the bow wielding Archer-type is vastly outclassed by any for of melee combat of every other class. Sure you can use a bow, but the point of MMO’s and RPG’s is to feel like a powerful hero. That’s what it’s designed to do for it’s players. Enter a world where they can be superpowered heroes that save the world. If your bow hits like a wet noodle and the Archer type is the heart and soul of any memorable RPG experience, you’ve just kittened over by the game pretty hard. So regardless of things like balance, rewarding ranged players for bad play or whatever type of arguments are flying around here, let’s first look at the core of the problem here, which is:

- People who enjoy playing as a purely supportive character will never be able to be useful to a party (and could actualle by a hindrance) and most likely not enjoy this game because of it.
- People who feel Mages are meant to be ranged machine guns wielding the power of the elements are forced to either run Staff-Ele or gtfo. Also resulting in a negative play experience.
- People who enjoy the Archer type will be in the same boat as the supportive player.
- Finally, people who enjoy DoT mechanics will always be extremely sub-optimal in a PvE situation
Continued

These are currently the main problems IMO and are far greater than any type of balance issue or far more important than talking about how it’s bad to reward players who are lazy for sniping safely from range. You could ofcourse bring the argument: ‘well don’t play gw2 then it’s obviously not the game for you!!’ Well, yeah, no. An MMO by design should obligated IMO to adhere to certain base principles if that MMO’s developer’s goal is to attract a large playerbase. I realise GW2 is more of a niche game but regardless of that any developer likes to see their game played by as many people as possible. Instead of being like ‘go play something else’ I feel it is GW2 that should change and adhere to the wishes of the general MMO player crowd. Especially considering this is a casual game filled with casual players. Meaning the type of players that care about stuff like what class they play and how it’s designed. If you are a competitive PvE player you care more about balance, proper encounter design, pretty much anything a WoW raider finds important when it comes to class balance. But in a game where such levels of PvE are absent, the primary thing that should be focussed on is how to make the game enjoyable for many different types of players and playstyles.
Just because a casual player isn’t all about a perfect DPS rotation doesn’t mean he won’t be bummed out when he sees that his bow shot hit a monster for 1/3 HP and the melee player proceeded to remove the rest of the monster’s HP in one strike. The ranged player will feel weak and will not enjoy his playthrough because of it.

So I propose we move away from discussions about balance and about how the current meta is fine for competitive PvE (which I will say again DOES NOT EXIST in GW2 and I can already here all the DnT members and such rage in anger but is simply the truth) and move towards discussion about how we can improve this game to be more appealing to the casual MMO or RPG player aka the main target group of this game (No it’s not SPvP either, a very small minority actually engages in ranked PvP).
Cuz think about it, LS is the game’s main focus at the moment. You can’t even complete those missions by playing a supportive character and let the NPC’s kill for you (for thos that prefer to solely play supportive characters) and you will also have a harder time completing missions if you play a ranged spec as opposed to melee.
So these’s problems even exist outside of Dungeon/Fractal PvE gameplay.

There is however the problem that currently, WvW and PvE are the same. So doing something stupid like making boons having unlimited range will destroy WvW balance and if such a thing were ever implemented it would require WvW and PvE to be seperated.
continued

Anyway, a few idea I have always had to solve these problems are:

- Remove stats on armor, make PvE and WvW have the same system as PvP currently has. You only get your runes, sigils, weapon type and amulet slot. Armor should be about showing of your skins and in case of Ascended gear be about Agony Resists. For those that care about the small stat difference, you can always give people with full ascended gear some kind of permanent always on buff to compensate. The importance of stats must be minimized. Instead, the runes and sigils along with traits should be redesigned so that they are able to be chosen based on what someone’s preferred style of play is.
- Melee and Range damage must be brought more in line. For those who are afraid range will have it too easy, let future boss fights include aggro mechanics that also target players further away, removing the guaranteed safety ranged players have. Also allow ranged combat at any range. If you want to shoot arrows at point blank range because you often weapon switch to a dagger, then let it be possible and viable. If you prefer to snipe from range, let that also be possible.
- Find a way to make supportive roles more important. Introduce boss fight mechanics that require these roles however don’t make these specific to just one class to prevent ‘lf healer guardian’. Those afraid of too much homogenization, let Anet look at WoW. Most classes and specs (not all) have vastly different playstyles. Even two healers will perform this role vastly different. An example: Let elementalists heal by focussing on blast finishers in water fields and let engineers heal by focussing on healing over time effects, let guardians have much weaker heals but focus more on damage absorption and mitigation etc.
- Introduce unavoidable ‘white damage’ aka very weak monster attacks like claws/fists strikes etc. Players will still be required to dodge as the suggestions made above should be tuned in such a way that support and avoidance co-exist rather than one being vastly superior than the other. However this unavoidable damage must be healed through/mitigated and would thus require players specialised in these things. Thus allowing the ‘supportive RPG’r to also have his fun’
- Improve enemy AI. Let them Dodge, use skills we have too, use rotations like we do. Improve general pathing and thinking patterns.
continued

- Redesign combo fields. PvE should not be solely based on blast finishers in fire fields. 90% of combo fields and combo finishers have not and will not ever be used. This needs to change. Make the other effects more potent and tone down might and other stuff.
- Use a different philosophy for future fractal/dungeon designs. Skipping isn’t fun. Instead make more interesting encounters that are less lengthy to begin with so that players aren’t being forced to get bored out of their skulls fighting millions of trash packs. Place fewer trash packs in dungeons but make them unskippable and be interesting fights. The whole dungeon should be interesting, not just the boss fight.
- Stacking and staying close together for buffs/boons are two different things. I feel it’s good to encourage players to spend most of the time close together. In my system, the buffed up Ranger would still be required to occassionaly move in close for buffs etc.
Stacking in a corner however or pinning a monster to a rock or anything like that is not interesting gameplay. It’s the result of lazy encounter design.
- Conditions need to be reworked. There is no need to change the cap. Instead simply buff damage and let the highest condition damage player have priority on their condition stacks. Make encounters last longer than ten seconds so burst direct damage isn’t the be all end all and allows condition damage to catch up after they reach 25 stacks.
- Make bossfights longer. Right now, the reason Berserker is better than any defensive gear is if you are in a preferred team composition your dodges + party blind/aegis etc if properly timed and cycled will essentially make you more or less immune to damage for a large part of the fight. If damage is high enough no one will down before the boss dies. To me this is kittened. Blinds, dodges, aegis should be used for major hard hitting effects and should be treated as defensive cooldowns. They should not be part of rotation that allows a party with high enough DPS to mow down the boss before the party runs out of party-wide total damage avoidance cooldowns. Give bosses more health/toughness. A bossfight, in most MMO’s, lasts anywhere from 5 to 10 minutes. It should be the same here. The cooldowns should be timed for the big stuff and will require players learning the exact encounters. This means making public in some kind of dungeon guide all abilites a boss has and how much damage it does + exact effects. This will allow for more theorycrafting for the competitive player too. Knowing exactly how much damage you take allows you to min/max even more than now. In between the big hits there should be the ‘white damage’ I mentioned earlier and tasks to perform (e.g. Old Tom fight). The dungeons/fractals themselves should become shorter. Take Arah, it would take a good 30 minutes to actually walk through the entire place from beginning to end. Make the roads from boss to boss shorter and have less trash but make the trash more powerful (include more champs for instance).
What’s epic about downing one of the most powerful mages in existence in 10 seconds. How’s that inviting the avid casual MMO-player to come play this grand and epic game.
(I will say Anet is doing a good job with the new boss fights in LS. I like the introduction of actual fight mechanics in solo situations)

Annnd I’m finally done. Lots of TL;DR in here but I implore you to read it anyway. It’s worth it…

spoj.9672:

We all know even anet arent stupid enough to make such a drastic change.

You can rest assured that even if this the original post was a good suggestion (it isn’t), ANet won’t change anything because of PvP! It’s extremely rare that they implement a significant class change solely for PvE, and it’s even rarer that they would change anything for dungeons specifically.