GW1 = more build diversity?
Believe as you will Karla, but stating something doesn’t make it true.
I come from a planet where we call it ‘listing arguments to make a point’.
You must be an allie(n). (;
RIP ‘gf left me coz of ladderboard’ Total views: 71,688 Total posts: 363
Believe as you will Karla, but stating something doesn’t make it true.
I come from a planet where we call it ‘listing arguments to make a point’.
You must be an allie(n). (;
Your arguments don’t change a single point I’ve made though. The playerbase is getting better. Some of them, anyway. What’s the argument against that?
You never had one to start with (or rather, admitted you agreed with mine and other users’ point – that GW1 is more diverse). The rest is just random whiteknighting for the sake of it.
RIP ‘gf left me coz of ladderboard’ Total views: 71,688 Total posts: 363
necro has 102 skills if you consider all(downed skill, death shroud, elite forms etc…) 37 of them are weapon skills counting aquatic weapons as well. so its more like 1/3 of them are weapon skills and 102 while much less then a gw1 necro has isnt exactly a few. not just that but those 102 can do everything (except for weapon management) that the gw1 necro skills could do.
i could not let this sit by and get on with all the BS in this post section.
in GW1 you can actually choose which skills to use even while we have only 8 skills in a bar at any given time, that’s both the first half of the bar, the second half of the bar and the massive more elite skills available.
in GW2 you’re still stuck with weapons deciding the build, a healing skill slot that decides you should take a healing skill and allot less skill choices in both utility and elite skill slots.
snip…
Weapons dont decide the build, they decide to roles. And again you’re constraining yourself with the perceived optimal because whats stopping you from not complimenting those weapon skills and taking utilities for a completely different role? If you’re comparing optimal with optimal in Gw1 you had far less builds then you’re considering.
Also double standard, if you’re considering weapon skills as being a big limiting factor then it isnt fair to ignore 2 – 3 slots out of those 8 slots had to be dedicated to energy management.
Thing is skills themselves are meaningless its the action you want to accomplish that truely matters. With that in mind why does it matter that the skills in death shroud arent customizable? In a fight I am not interested in personally selecting a skills that immobilizes a target if thats something I need, I only care about having such a skill when I need it. So why should the tainted shackles not count? With same argument is tainted shackles even 1 skill? Because it does more then simply immobilize a target, It does direct damage and it inflicts torment. In Gw1 you had a truckload of skills but they all did one specific thing and in most cases under a specific condition.
Like say in Gw1 you had Barbed Signet, Rip Enchantment, Signet of Suffering, Ulcerous Lungs. How are these different? Barbed Signet inflicts bleeding immediately at a cost of some of your health. The rest they inflict bleeding but on a certain condition that the target has an enchantment, you use a skill on a target or the target shouts. they’re basically the same skill with different triggering conditions. All of them are allowing you to do the same exact thing, bleed your target its just you need to pick the right one against the right enemy. Now dont get me wrong, such things are awesome in certain ways, a system like this provides an good element of strategy in preparing for a fight element thats essentially non existent in Gw2 but what i doesnt do is provide more flexibility like people are arguing. Those 4 skills might be used to create 4 different builds but none of those builds do anything my Gw2 necro cannot do with one single skill that is inflict bleeding.
Yes I can tell you with perfect confidence that Gw2 has as much skill diversity as Gw1 for the above stated reasons. What made Gw1 great is unlike most other MMOs your character wasnt tied down to a stereo typical role. You wanted a necro that deals damage, supports allies, debuffs enemies , does crowd control etc… You could do that no problem but guess what you can do that in Gw2 not just do it but while in Gw1 doing all that required numous different builds in Gw2 you can do it all using the same build or with minor modifications you can do in between fights. how is that less flexible?
I dont understand your issue with engineer. If you want to just play with turrets then just equip turret skills, how does a lack of kit choices effect you if you already decided you want to use turrets instead of kits? In Gw2 every profession has its own unique mechanic and thats a good thing, if they all worked the same then whats the point of choosing one over the other? Engineers can swap weapons not because of some techinical limitation but as the result of a design choice which gives engineers greater flexibility through the use of kits. Kits are essentially the same thing as weapons and thus engineers get a bonus in that they can swap 4 weapons instead of 2 like most other classes its only fair they pay for that flexibility by sacrificing 1 utility slot for it.
You never had one to start with (or rather, admitted you agreed with mine and other users’ point – that GW1 is more diverse). The rest is just random whiteknighting for the sake of it.
I’m sorry are you saying that saying there’s a reason there is less build diversity is off topic? That’s whiteknighting? You must be awfully desperate to win an argument if that’s all you can come up with to defend your point.
I think that Anet was smart to simplify the build system in this game. They took it too far (as I said earlier), but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t well done.
And calling me a white knight to discredit me doesn’t make it any less true.
necro has 102 skills if you consider all(downed skill, death shroud, elite forms etc…) 37 of them are weapon skills counting aquatic weapons as well. so its more like 1/3 of them are weapon skills and 102 while much less then a gw1 necro has isnt exactly a few. not just that but those 102 can do everything (except for weapon management) that the gw1 necro skills could do.
i could not let this sit by and get on with all the BS in this post section.
in GW1 you can actually choose which skills to use even while we have only 8 skills in a bar at any given time, that’s both the first half of the bar, the second half of the bar and the massive more elite skills available.
in GW2 you’re still stuck with weapons deciding the build, a healing skill slot that decides you should take a healing skill and allot less skill choices in both utility and elite skill slots.
snip…none of those builds do anything my Gw2 necro cannot do with one single skill that is inflict bleeding.
Yes I can tell you with perfect confidence that Gw2 has as much skill diversity as Gw1 for the above stated reasons.
Just say you like GW2 better. Honestly, thats all you have to say. You cannot possibly prove that this Game has an equal number of skill combinations as GW. Simple math. Just throwing in 2nd profession variables throws the possible combinations through the roof.
Fine if you like a simpler game. Silly to try and prove the simpler game has as much build complexity and variety.
Particularly when you start equating a single skill as equivalent to full builds.
Ley lines. The perfect solution to deadlines and writers block. Now in an easy open Can.
(edited by Teofa Tsavo.9863)
Believe as you will Karla, but stating something doesn’t make it true.
I come from a planet where we call it ‘listing arguments to make a point’.
You must be an allie(n). (;Your arguments don’t change a single point I’ve made though. The playerbase is getting better. Some of them, anyway. What’s the argument against that?
I would pay real life dollars to see a boss cast GW Panic on a stack of players here, and read the forum outrage. Less player skills seems to equate to less Boss skills, and less diversity throughout.
simpler game is simpler. And still we had masses that never understood a HUGE orange arrow was a clue on marionette, and never grasped finishing clockwork rezzers. We still have masses who don’t begin to understand “protect the golums” and “watch the ledges” on Jormags Claw.
Players who have mass stampeded with Zergs to endgame and understand nothing else.
Ley lines. The perfect solution to deadlines and writers block. Now in an easy open Can.
(edited by Teofa Tsavo.9863)
Well, sorry Vayne, but ‘stating something doesn’t make it true’.
Moreover, I’ve read enough posts of yours to realize you’re actually in love with either the game or the company. Or both.P.S. Try re-reading my quotes, they offer plenty of reasons against dumbing things down.
But the player base is getting better, which surely contradicts at least some of your points, and you have no answer for it. Presumably you’re not even playing these days, so how would you know?
What correlation you see between a palyerbase ‘improving’ and lack of build diversity is beyond me. If anything, it speaks in favour of giving them more GW-like building freedom, doesn’kitten
Okay I’ll take it step by step. Guild Wars 1 remained a niche game because a lot of people left the game because it was too hard to make builds and not everyone runs to a wiki to play games. That’s pretty much a given. I know people personally who tried the game and couldn’t cope.
Guild Wars 2 attempts to create an easier entry for people and keep them playing. It’s okay with a game that has a lower budget and 50 devs to lose people rather quickly but Guild Wars 2 is going to need to keep some players longer term. And yes I know the doom and gloom crowd think no one is playing but that’s what’s said about every MMO.
So Anet makes a world with easier content for longer to get people who maybe don’t pick up things quite as quickly to hang around for a while. See there are people that are good, people that are bad, and people that are bad but can improve. But they can’t improve if they don’t stick around.
A lot of people aren’t going to die repeatedly and stick around, even if some resilient people can do that. They’ll go play another game where the open world is more friendly.
So Anet created a friendly open world with friendly builds, which means less options. As I said earlier, I believe they overcompensated. They have a history of doing so.
But if you add more skills to start, you can’t take them away later. They added less skills and over the course of time might very well add more.
In the mean time, more people can just pick up the game and play. Having less options is part of what makes that possible. Having too many build options isn’t welcoming to newcomers.
That’s why so many people have trouble getting into SPvP. Too many options all at once.
necro has 102 skills if you consider all(downed skill, death shroud, elite forms etc…) 37 of them are weapon skills counting aquatic weapons as well. so its more like 1/3 of them are weapon skills and 102 while much less then a gw1 necro has isnt exactly a few. not just that but those 102 can do everything (except for weapon management) that the gw1 necro skills could do.
i could not let this sit by and get on with all the BS in this post section.
in GW1 you can actually choose which skills to use even while we have only 8 skills in a bar at any given time, that’s both the first half of the bar, the second half of the bar and the massive more elite skills available.
in GW2 you’re still stuck with weapons deciding the build, a healing skill slot that decides you should take a healing skill and allot less skill choices in both utility and elite skill slots.
snip…none of those builds do anything my Gw2 necro cannot do with one single skill that is inflict bleeding.
Yes I can tell you with perfect confidence that Gw2 has as much skill diversity as Gw1 for the above stated reasons.
Just say you like GW2 better. Honestly, thats all you have to say. You cannot possibly prove that this Game has an equal number of skill combinations as GW. Simple math. Just throwing in 2nd profession variables throws the possible combinations through the roof.
Fine if you like a simpler game. Silly to try and prove the simpler game has as much build complexity and variety.
Particularly when you start equating a single skill as equivalent to full builds.
Yeah I do like Gw2 approach better and I didnt say there is equal number of skill combinations I said there is the same flexibility which is different.
I do disagree with your statement that all of this makes Gw2 a simpler game (it is a simpler game but not because of its skill system, its simpler because its PvE is balanced to be way too easy) Like I said in Gw1 the complexity is in creating the build. There are tons of skills to choose from and thus tons of combinations. pairing the wrong skills or even choosing skills that are wrong for the situation will cause trouble. In Gw2 the complexity is in the execution. Execution in Gw1 is pretty easy, all you need to worry about is your 8 skills and when you need to use them which for most builds is pretty straight forward. Execute this before this, use this skill once enemy has a hex on them etc..
In Gw2 you got more skills to worry about and they do multiple things each may be ideal in some situations but not others. Sure combat is easy and you can ignore all of that and just autoattack if you want, does remove the complexity that is there though.
I never equated a single skill to a build as far as I know. I just said a single skill in Gw2 can perform the same function as multiple skills in Gw1 and thats true.
" Galen Grey.4709:
none of those builds do anything my Gw2 necro cannot do with one single skill that is inflict bleeding.
Yes I can tell you with perfect confidence that Gw2 has as much skill diversity as Gw1 for the above stated reasons."
Repeated for clarity.
Ley lines. The perfect solution to deadlines and writers block. Now in an easy open Can.
" Galen Grey.4709:
none of those builds do anything my Gw2 necro cannot do with one single skill that is inflict bleeding.
Yes I can tell you with perfect confidence that Gw2 has as much skill diversity as Gw1 for the above stated reasons."
Repeated for clarity.
whats the point of twisting what I said by quoting only part of what I said to destroy the entire context which said something entirely different? if you quoted the whole thing it is clear I was talking about build that included bleeding skills and mentioned 4 specifically.
Full Quote:
“Like say in Gw1 you had Barbed Signet, Rip Enchantment, Signet of Suffering, Ulcerous Lungs. How are these different? Barbed Signet inflicts bleeding immediately at a cost of some of your health. The rest they inflict bleeding but on a certain condition that the target has an enchantment, you use a skill on a target or the target shouts. they’re basically the same skill with different triggering conditions. All of them are allowing you to do the same exact thing, bleed your target its just you need to pick the right one against the right enemy. Now dont get me wrong, such things are awesome in certain ways, a system like this provides an good element of strategy in preparing for a fight element thats essentially non existent in Gw2 but what i doesnt do is provide more flexibility like people are arguing. Those 4 skills might be used to create 4 different builds but none of those builds do anything my Gw2 necro cannot do with one single skill that is inflict bleeding..”
Just to make sure we’re entirely clear. Gw1 Necro had 4 skills that caused bleed directly Barbed Signet, Rip Enchantment, Signet of Suffering, Ulcerous Lungs.
Now I am sure we’ll all agree no person would ever create a build that has all 4 of these skills in 1 build. Dont think there is anywhere in the game where you could use all 4 of these anyway. Thus it is fair to assume you’d find each and every one of those skills in a different build. So we got 4 builds using 4 different skills that all do exactly the same thing, inflict bleeding same as say mark of blood in Gw2.
Do you disagree? if so please let me know what say signet of suffering allows you to perform that cannot be replicated in Gw2 or Ulcerous lungs or Rip Enchantment.
Rip enchantment, surprisingly, removed an enchantment + bleeding. Ripping an enchantment, in GW, was the main use.
Ulcerous lungs didn’t even cause bleeding. It depended on the target already bleeding, caused degen, spread to nearbys, and punished shouts and chants. You used it in synergy with bleed skills. Particularly with Barbed Signet.
Just stop.
Ley lines. The perfect solution to deadlines and writers block. Now in an easy open Can.
(edited by Teofa Tsavo.9863)
Rip enchantment, surprisingly, removed an enchantment + bleeding. Ripping an enchantment, in GW, was the main use.
Ulcerous lungs didn’t even cause bleeding. It depended on the target already bleeding, caused degen, spread to nearbys, and punished shouts and chants. You used it in synergy with bleed skills. Particularly with Barbed Signet.
Just stop.
And what Necros in Gw2 dont have the ability to remove boons? cause pretty sure Unholy feast, Spinal Shivers, Corrupt boon, Well of corruption and Grim Spector do just that!
Pretty sure it worked even if they’re were not bleeding, they wouldnt get the health degeneration but they would start bleeding if they used a shout during the duration.
Again context, was talking about bleeding.
In anycase I am not sure how your argument of skill doesnt work unless target is already bleeding helps you make your argument gw1 offers more flexibility then gw2 because actually it proves the opposite if anything.
Thanks. I needed a laugh this morning, the heat is sweltering here.
Carry on.
Ley lines. The perfect solution to deadlines and writers block. Now in an easy open Can.
Thanks. I needed a laugh this morning, the heat is sweltering here.
Carry on.
Miss quoting, changing context to suite your argument, Give an example thats restrictive as proof of flexibility and when called upon it retort by saying you needed a laugh.
Guess that explains what you’re seeking to gain from this forum.
Okay I’ll take it step by step. Guild Wars 1 remained a niche game because a lot of people left the game because it was too hard to make builds and not everyone runs to a wiki to play games. That’s pretty much a given. I know people personally who tried the game and couldn’t cope.
Guild Wars 2 attempts to create an easier entry for people and keep them playing. It’s okay with a game that has a lower budget and 50 devs to lose people rather quickly but Guild Wars 2 is going to need to keep some players longer term. And yes I know the doom and gloom crowd think no one is playing but that’s what’s said about every MMO.
So Anet makes a world with easier content for longer to get people who maybe don’t pick up things quite as quickly to hang around for a while. See there are people that are good, people that are bad, and people that are bad but can improve. But they can’t improve if they don’t stick around.
A lot of people aren’t going to die repeatedly and stick around, even if some resilient people can do that. They’ll go play another game where the open world is more friendly.
So Anet created a friendly open world with friendly builds, which means less options. As I said earlier, I believe they overcompensated. They have a history of doing so.
But if you add more skills to start, you can’t take them away later. They added less skills and over the course of time might very well add more.
In the mean time, more people can just pick up the game and play. Having less options is part of what makes that possible. Having too many build options isn’t welcoming to newcomers.
That’s why so many people have trouble getting into SPvP. Too many options all at once.
Really?
So not only are you saying having fewer options is better than more options, but that easier is better than hard?
And people wonder why kids these days are soft.
Obsidian Sky – SoR
I troll because I care
I troll because I care
(edited by Obsidian.1328)
Okay I’ll take it step by step. Guild Wars 1 remained a niche game because a lot of people left the game because it was too hard to make builds and not everyone runs to a wiki to play games. That’s pretty much a given. I know people personally who tried the game and couldn’t cope.
Guild Wars 2 attempts to create an easier entry for people and keep them playing. It’s okay with a game that has a lower budget and 50 devs to lose people rather quickly but Guild Wars 2 is going to need to keep some players longer term. And yes I know the doom and gloom crowd think no one is playing but that’s what’s said about every MMO.
So Anet makes a world with easier content for longer to get people who maybe don’t pick up things quite as quickly to hang around for a while. See there are people that are good, people that are bad, and people that are bad but can improve. But they can’t improve if they don’t stick around.
A lot of people aren’t going to die repeatedly and stick around, even if some resilient people can do that. They’ll go play another game where the open world is more friendly.
So Anet created a friendly open world with friendly builds, which means less options. As I said earlier, I believe they overcompensated. They have a history of doing so.
But if you add more skills to start, you can’t take them away later. They added less skills and over the course of time might very well add more.
In the mean time, more people can just pick up the game and play. Having less options is part of what makes that possible. Having too many build options isn’t welcoming to newcomers.
That’s why so many people have trouble getting into SPvP. Too many options all at once.
Really?
So not only are you saying having fewer options is better than more options, but that easier is better than hard?
And people wander why kids these days are soft.
It really needs to be a balance too many options can be as bad as too few options. Thing is there is an entire spectrum of players. All here (in this thread) probably agree Gw2 is way too easy and could use a bump in difficult yet its important to point out that one of the major criticism that probably led to the mega server was people and quite a number of them complaining they’re unable to complete events in mid level maps because they’re not finding people to do them with. Now dynamic events are undoubtedly the easiest content in this game yet some find them too hard to solo. We’re not even talking 1 or 2 people but quite a large number of posts.
It really needs to be a balance too many options can be as bad as too few options.
I would disagree with that. Some here have said in this post that that the GW1 meta changed so fast that infrequent players found it hard to keep up. My question is, why do you need to use the meta? If you weren’t getting included in dungeon runs(for example) because you weren’t using the latest flavor or the month build, then don’t run with that group. It was a combination of titles, lazy players, and new uber skills that led to GW1 speed runs, not because of having too many skill to choose from. The areas were meant to take hours to finish, not minutes. Heroes were an attempt to fix that, but they brought their own issues to the game: i.e. the core game mechanics were never meant for highly customizable npc’s.
Thing is there is an entire spectrum of players. All here (in this thread) probably agree Gw2 is way too easy and could use a bump in difficult yet its important to point out that one of the major criticism that probably led to the mega server was people and quite a number of them complaining they’re unable to complete events in mid level maps because they’re not finding people to do them with. Now dynamic events are undoubtedly the easiest content in this game yet some find them too hard to solo. We’re not even talking 1 or 2 people but quite a large number of posts.
That sounds more like a problem with scaling.
Obsidian Sky – SoR
I troll because I care
I troll because I care
The design philosophy around the GW2 system vs the GW1 system was to lower the number of possible builds while simultaneously raising the number of viable builds. If you look back to GW1 and the popular builds used, there weren’t really all that many per class. Some had more than others.
Sure there were mathematically far more permutations, but an Echo Mending warrior is pretty terribad.
So to start the conversation, How did we go from creating almost endless combos of builds in GW1 to being pigeon hold into certain builds to fit the meta in GW2? Is there any chance that things will improve or only get worse?
There were optimal “meta” builds in GW1 but there was still more diversity because of secondary classes, larger skill pools and the fact that weapon skills weren’t fixed to a particular weapon type for a given class.
As I understand it, the reason GW2’s skill system is somewhat more fixed is that Arenanet wanted to reduce problems with sub-par builds and the resulting exclusion of a player for it.
If Arenanet decides to unfix weapon skills that will obviously go a long way but there’s also the option of introducing new weapons to classes. I think we’re more likely to see the latter, which means slightly more diversity but nothing will replicate the feel of GW1 without recreating it as it was.
The design philosophy around the GW2 system vs the GW1 system was to lower the number of possible builds while simultaneously raising the number of viable builds. If you look back to GW1 and the popular builds used, there weren’t really all that many per class. Some had more than others.
Sure there were mathematically far more permutations, but an Echo Mending warrior is pretty terribad.
You must be talking about the GW pvp meta. PvE had tons of “viable” builds, if you could grasp playing outside the pvxwiki box.
Longbow Ranger is perfectly viable here. Bring one to a meta function.. and you will be shown the door based solely on weapon equipped.
Meta perception and actual viability in the big game are night and day. In any game.
Ley lines. The perfect solution to deadlines and writers block. Now in an easy open Can.
(edited by Teofa Tsavo.9863)
If you look back to GW1 and the popular builds used, there weren’t really all that many per class. Some had more than others.
You’re mistaken. Almost every class had at least 5 or more optimal builds and those builds could be tweaked further due to secondary class choices and non-fixed weapon skills. The most limited classes were probably the Ritualist in a PvP setting and the Paragon in a PvE setting, but they still had as much variety, depending on the task, as any class in GW2.
If you look back to GW1 and the popular builds used, there weren’t really all that many per class. Some had more than others.
You’re mistaken. Almost every class had at least 5 or more optimal builds and those builds could be tweaked further due to secondary class choices and non-fixed weapon skills. The most limited classes were probably the Ritualist in a PvP setting and the Paragon in a PvE setting, but they still had as much variety, depending on the task, as any class in GW2.
Many of the viable builds you speak of are really just variations on a theme. I’m not saying there were less than 5 optimal builds. I’m saying that beyond 5 was mostly just slight variations of the original 5. Just because you switch two skills out doesn’t really make it a completely new and distinct build.
If you look at the pvxwiki builds, there’s only 3 or 4 builds per class listed under “good” and 3 or 4 more under “great.” True, you can find your own viable builds without pvx, but they are likely to be similar in some way because the possibility space for viable builds is smaller than you think. The vast majority of viable builds are designed around an elite skill. The elite skill almost always defines the rest of the build. Is it a Panic mesmer? Or is it a SoS rit? See once you pick that elite skill, the rest starts to fall in to place. There would be no reason to make an SoS rit build if I didn’t intend to be a spirit spammer. It would be inefficient. So I pick skills and abilities that lend to a good spirit army. I wouldn’t bring SoS and a bunch of fire magic spells for example. A spirit spammer might not even take SoS however. Maybe he takes SoGM or Soul Twisting. These are different elite skills, but they still fall under the spirit spammer catagory. Just like most ele builds tend to fall under the “nuker” catagory. Prot monks are prot monks, etc.
tl;dr – Whatever build you are using falls under a general catagory or serves a certain purpose. You had hundreds of skills to chose from but it was all just variations on a theme.
Furthermore when I speak of non-viable builds, I’m talking about ludicrous stuff like Echo + Mending. The vast majority of skill permutations fall under this catagory.
Many of the viable builds you speak of are really just variations on a theme. I’m not saying there were less than 5 optimal builds. I’m saying that beyond 5 was mostly just slight variations of the original 5. Just because you switch two skills out doesn’t really make it a completely new and distinct build.
I don’t refer to a single skill swap i.e. dev hammer for magehunter’s smash or deathpact signet for res signet. That was just the icing on the cake and the fact that you could draw these single skill swaps from secondary classes made it even sweeter. Yes, some builds are variations on a theme and they revolved around a particular elite skill. I’m talking about different builds that looked vastly different as well as playing very differently. For the record, SoGM and SoS were similar spirit spam builds but ST was a different beast.
Furthermore when I speak of non-viable builds, I’m talking about ludicrous stuff like Echo + Mending. The vast majority of skill permutations fall under this catagory.
The echo + mending combo was just a punchline. Yes, people used mending from time to time(55 monks and warriors leaving pre-searing comes to mind), but like hamstorm, no one really used builds like this past a certain point in leveling. Think about it, why would you echo mending? Some people do nonsensical things but that would really take the cake without it being satirical in some way.
Okay I’ll take it step by step. Guild Wars 1 remained a niche game because a lot of people left the game because it was too hard to make builds and not everyone runs to a wiki to play games. That’s pretty much a given. I know people personally who tried the game and couldn’t cope.
Guild Wars 2 attempts to create an easier entry for people and keep them playing. It’s okay with a game that has a lower budget and 50 devs to lose people rather quickly but Guild Wars 2 is going to need to keep some players longer term. And yes I know the doom and gloom crowd think no one is playing but that’s what’s said about every MMO.
So Anet makes a world with easier content for longer to get people who maybe don’t pick up things quite as quickly to hang around for a while. See there are people that are good, people that are bad, and people that are bad but can improve. But they can’t improve if they don’t stick around.
A lot of people aren’t going to die repeatedly and stick around, even if some resilient people can do that. They’ll go play another game where the open world is more friendly.
So Anet created a friendly open world with friendly builds, which means less options. As I said earlier, I believe they overcompensated. They have a history of doing so.
But if you add more skills to start, you can’t take them away later. They added less skills and over the course of time might very well add more.
In the mean time, more people can just pick up the game and play. Having less options is part of what makes that possible. Having too many build options isn’t welcoming to newcomers.
That’s why so many people have trouble getting into SPvP. Too many options all at once.
Really?
So not only are you saying having fewer options is better than more options, but that easier is better than hard?
And people wonder why kids these days are soft.
Well, there’s a whole lot of reasons why the younger generation is different from the older generation. We put up with a huge amount of stupidity in games many years ago because there weren’t as many games. The actual amount of entertainment available to us these days is many times greater. Games come out faster. Entire TV series can be watched all at once. It’s a different world. So when a game is not as easy to get into in the front end, there’s no guarantee someone is going to stay with it long enough to get better at it.
My argument is that a game needs to be approachable. Guild Wars 2 is, in some ways not all, far more approachable than Guild Wars 1. But there are always was I feel Anet has dropped the ball and that Guild Wars 1 was more approachable than Guild Wars 2. I don’t feel they’ve done a great job of explaining the game.
The design philosophy around the GW2 system vs the GW1 system was to lower the number of possible builds while simultaneously raising the number of viable builds. If you look back to GW1 and the popular builds used, there weren’t really all that many per class. Some had more than others.
Sure there were mathematically far more permutations, but an Echo Mending warrior is pretty terribad.
You must be talking about the GW pvp meta. PvE had tons of “viable” builds, if you could grasp playing outside the pvxwiki box.
Longbow Ranger is perfectly viable here. Bring one to a meta function.. and you will be shown the door based solely on weapon equipped.
Meta perception and actual viability in the big game are night and day. In any game.
Yes, I never got asked to leave a party because I wasn’t using the build of the month in PvE in Guild Wars 1…oh wait.
There were tons of players that required absolutely specific builds to participate in runs of almost all end game content, from voltaic spear farms, to the Underworld to DOA. Looking for an imbagon paragron. Looking for IWAY. These things existed. I ran into them all the time, because I enjoyed making my own builds.
The design philosophy around the GW2 system vs the GW1 system was to lower the number of possible builds while simultaneously raising the number of viable builds. If you look back to GW1 and the popular builds used, there weren’t really all that many per class. Some had more than others.
Sure there were mathematically far more permutations, but an Echo Mending warrior is pretty terribad.
You must be talking about the GW pvp meta. PvE had tons of “viable” builds, if you could grasp playing outside the pvxwiki box.
Longbow Ranger is perfectly viable here. Bring one to a meta function.. and you will be shown the door based solely on weapon equipped.
Meta perception and actual viability in the big game are night and day. In any game.
Yes, I never got asked to leave a party because I wasn’t using the build of the month in PvE in Guild Wars 1…oh wait.
There were tons of players that required absolutely specific builds to participate in runs of almost all end game content, from voltaic spear farms, to the Underworld to DOA. Looking for an imbagon paragron. Looking for IWAY. These things existed. I ran into them all the time, because I enjoyed making my own builds.
You missed the part where I stated “In any Game?” At no time did I state that GW was immune to the meta/min max mindset. Pulling up templates deemed the only “viable” build by that same subset is not representative of actual viability. From any game, whether it be meta builds, meta gear, meta AA builds or supposed meta classes.
Ley lines. The perfect solution to deadlines and writers block. Now in an easy open Can.
(edited by Teofa Tsavo.9863)
The design philosophy around the GW2 system vs the GW1 system was to lower the number of possible builds while simultaneously raising the number of viable builds. If you look back to GW1 and the popular builds used, there weren’t really all that many per class. Some had more than others.
Sure there were mathematically far more permutations, but an Echo Mending warrior is pretty terribad.
You must be talking about the GW pvp meta. PvE had tons of “viable” builds, if you could grasp playing outside the pvxwiki box.
Longbow Ranger is perfectly viable here. Bring one to a meta function.. and you will be shown the door based solely on weapon equipped.
Meta perception and actual viability in the big game are night and day. In any game.
Yes, I never got asked to leave a party because I wasn’t using the build of the month in PvE in Guild Wars 1…oh wait.
There were tons of players that required absolutely specific builds to participate in runs of almost all end game content, from voltaic spear farms, to the Underworld to DOA. Looking for an imbagon paragron. Looking for IWAY. These things existed. I ran into them all the time, because I enjoyed making my own builds.
You missed the part where I stated “In any Game?” At no time did I state that GW was immune to the meta/min max mindset. Pulling up templates deemed the only “viable” build by that subset is not representative. From any game, whether it be meta builds, meta gear, meta AA builds or supposed meta classes.
Well that’s the thing, when you remove the meta mindset from Guild Wars 2 there are more viable builds and things you can play around with. I know because I have with my guild. It’s definitely not nearly as much as Guild Wars 2, but then Guild Wars 1 had some crazy stuff, including Imbagon, spirit spammers, 600 monks, sabway, nornbear builds that were so OP it was silly. Just the fact that rits could solofarm the underworld for ectos was ridiculous. Even 55 monks were silly in the areas where they could function.
So that’s the other side of having too much variety. Guild Wars 2 doesn’t have enough skills and builds to play with, but Guild Wars 1 had far too many.
Something needs to be clarified about “meta” here. The term doesn’t refer strictly to viable builds, it refers to popular builds in current usage. Most of which would be quite viable by default since they’re in widespread use.
I don’t see many of the so-called meta builds in use in PvE that some folks tout on the forums here. I think they’re actually just calling things meta in the hopes that people will adopt them. So I don’t think this attitude is stunting GW2’s build diversity at all.. it’s just that some builds work and well, others don’t. In PvP, competition and observation mode drives people to adopt the most optimal builds or hope they can play it as well as someone else. They usually give the build more credit than the player in the process but the end result is that a PvP meta is tangible and exists.
If you discount the meta/ min max in any game it opens up a lot more variations and creativity in gameplay. A rigid meta is only applicable to rigid segments of the game. ie sPvP.
I hope that ANET never lets a parse application into their games.
What I really hate about Meta and min/max is that it trickles down from the content that “may” require it and infects the whole game. People start demanding meta to accomplish content that in no way requires it and they don’t know why. Only that it’s meta, and therefore mandatory.
Sigh, I remember Wailing Cave noob groups doing the LF Tank SK only thing in EQ2, because the fair haired darling MT at the time for Raids was SK. WC could be tanked in chain, with a roundshield and a clue, but because of the “meta” nonsense they didn’t even try.
Ley lines. The perfect solution to deadlines and writers block. Now in an easy open Can.
(edited by Teofa Tsavo.9863)
The design philosophy around the GW2 system vs the GW1 system was to lower the number of possible builds while simultaneously raising the number of viable builds. If you look back to GW1 and the popular builds used, there weren’t really all that many per class. Some had more than others.
Sure there were mathematically far more permutations, but an Echo Mending warrior is pretty terribad.
You must be talking about the GW pvp meta. PvE had tons of “viable” builds, if you could grasp playing outside the pvxwiki box.
Longbow Ranger is perfectly viable here. Bring one to a meta function.. and you will be shown the door based solely on weapon equipped.
Meta perception and actual viability in the big game are night and day. In any game.
Yes, I never got asked to leave a party because I wasn’t using the build of the month in PvE in Guild Wars 1…oh wait.
There were tons of players that required absolutely specific builds to participate in runs of almost all end game content, from voltaic spear farms, to the Underworld to DOA. Looking for an imbagon paragron. Looking for IWAY. These things existed. I ran into them all the time, because I enjoyed making my own builds.
Interestingly that is something that doesn’t really exist in GW2. Yes you have the zerker-only groups, but they don’t nit pick each specific trait and skill you bring. They just want the zerker stats.
@Xenon.
Oh HI! Yea, I’m a Bearbow Zerker. What do you mean I can’t come?
Can I bring my Zerk mace n shield war? No room? awww.
Tis a bit more than just Zerk.
Ley lines. The perfect solution to deadlines and writers block. Now in an easy open Can.
(edited by Teofa Tsavo.9863)
The design philosophy around the GW2 system vs the GW1 system was to lower the number of possible builds while simultaneously raising the number of viable builds. If you look back to GW1 and the popular builds used, there weren’t really all that many per class. Some had more than others.
Sure there were mathematically far more permutations, but an Echo Mending warrior is pretty terribad.
You must be talking about the GW pvp meta. PvE had tons of “viable” builds, if you could grasp playing outside the pvxwiki box.
Longbow Ranger is perfectly viable here. Bring one to a meta function.. and you will be shown the door based solely on weapon equipped.
Meta perception and actual viability in the big game are night and day. In any game.
Yes, I never got asked to leave a party because I wasn’t using the build of the month in PvE in Guild Wars 1…oh wait.
There were tons of players that required absolutely specific builds to participate in runs of almost all end game content, from voltaic spear farms, to the Underworld to DOA. Looking for an imbagon paragron. Looking for IWAY. These things existed. I ran into them all the time, because I enjoyed making my own builds.
Just a question here…
If you didn’t like the meta crowd in GW1, why did you bother trying to party with them?
Obsidian Sky – SoR
I troll because I care
I troll because I care
@Xenon.
Oh HI! Yea, I’m a Bearbow Zerker. What do you mean I can’t come?
Can I bring my Zerk mace n shield war? No room? awww.
Tis a bit more than just Zerk.
Ok well you’re pointing out the existence of “echo mending” style builds. What I meant was that I can switch my traits around significantly in GW2 compared to GW1. In GW1 for a specific speed clear you would need X, Y, and Z skills no ifs ands or buts end of story. In GW2 you might need to bring X, and Y, but you can swap Z out for B or pancakes or w/e. Like, there isn’t ONE single end all be all mesmer dungeon build. There’s like 6 or 7 variations depending on whether you’re doing reflects or mantras of w/e.
The design philosophy around the GW2 system vs the GW1 system was to lower the number of possible builds while simultaneously raising the number of viable builds. If you look back to GW1 and the popular builds used, there weren’t really all that many per class. Some had more than others.
Sure there were mathematically far more permutations, but an Echo Mending warrior is pretty terribad.
You must be talking about the GW pvp meta. PvE had tons of “viable” builds, if you could grasp playing outside the pvxwiki box.
Longbow Ranger is perfectly viable here. Bring one to a meta function.. and you will be shown the door based solely on weapon equipped.
Meta perception and actual viability in the big game are night and day. In any game.
Yes, I never got asked to leave a party because I wasn’t using the build of the month in PvE in Guild Wars 1…oh wait.
There were tons of players that required absolutely specific builds to participate in runs of almost all end game content, from voltaic spear farms, to the Underworld to DOA. Looking for an imbagon paragron. Looking for IWAY. These things existed. I ran into them all the time, because I enjoyed making my own builds.
Just a question here…
If you didn’t like the meta crowd in GW1, why did you bother trying to party with them?
Did any other types of party ever exist? IIRC it was either Meta or henchmen.
Then they added heroes and the game became single player…
The design philosophy around the GW2 system vs the GW1 system was to lower the number of possible builds while simultaneously raising the number of viable builds. If you look back to GW1 and the popular builds used, there weren’t really all that many per class. Some had more than others.
Sure there were mathematically far more permutations, but an Echo Mending warrior is pretty terribad.
You must be talking about the GW pvp meta. PvE had tons of “viable” builds, if you could grasp playing outside the pvxwiki box.
Longbow Ranger is perfectly viable here. Bring one to a meta function.. and you will be shown the door based solely on weapon equipped.
Meta perception and actual viability in the big game are night and day. In any game.
Yes, I never got asked to leave a party because I wasn’t using the build of the month in PvE in Guild Wars 1…oh wait.
There were tons of players that required absolutely specific builds to participate in runs of almost all end game content, from voltaic spear farms, to the Underworld to DOA. Looking for an imbagon paragron. Looking for IWAY. These things existed. I ran into them all the time, because I enjoyed making my own builds.
Just a question here…
If you didn’t like the meta crowd in GW1, why did you bother trying to party with them?
Did any other types of party ever exist? IIRC it was either Meta or henchmen.
Then they added heroes and the game became single player…
How did I find non-meta parties all the time then? o.O
Granted it took some patience, and having a good guild helped. But it sure beat the rampant /ragequitting that came along with speed clears that took 2.9 secs longer than optimal. Those guys were kittens and I smiled inside every time they flipped out over a failed dungeon.
Obsidian Sky – SoR
I troll because I care
I troll because I care
If GW2 had fewer skills for better balance though, why isn’t it balanced? There is still a meta with professions that are thrown to the wayside in certain aspects of the game.
The design philosophy around the GW2 system vs the GW1 system was to lower the number of possible builds while simultaneously raising the number of viable builds. If you look back to GW1 and the popular builds used, there weren’t really all that many per class. Some had more than others.
Sure there were mathematically far more permutations, but an Echo Mending warrior is pretty terribad.
You must be talking about the GW pvp meta. PvE had tons of “viable” builds, if you could grasp playing outside the pvxwiki box.
Longbow Ranger is perfectly viable here. Bring one to a meta function.. and you will be shown the door based solely on weapon equipped.
Meta perception and actual viability in the big game are night and day. In any game.
Yes, I never got asked to leave a party because I wasn’t using the build of the month in PvE in Guild Wars 1…oh wait.
There were tons of players that required absolutely specific builds to participate in runs of almost all end game content, from voltaic spear farms, to the Underworld to DOA. Looking for an imbagon paragron. Looking for IWAY. These things existed. I ran into them all the time, because I enjoyed making my own builds.
Just a question here…
If you didn’t like the meta crowd in GW1, why did you bother trying to party with them?
I didn’t myself. I finished Proph with hench, solo. Finished Factions, NF and EoTN and Legendary Vanq with Hero/Hench. Finished DoA and other stuff with 7 Mercs. That did not mean I was unaware of LFG chat, speed clear LFG chat, and idiot statements like “show stones”. And I’ve had 12 years of mmo and min/maxer meta experience and observation.
ah.. oops. wasn’t addressed to me. oh bother.
Ley lines. The perfect solution to deadlines and writers block. Now in an easy open Can.
I think GW1 had a larger set of “optimal” and “near-optimal” builds than GW2 does.
There were also many more exotic/gimmick builds that were somewhat viable, which I thoroughly enjoyed making/using. I can’t think of any wacky builds in GW2 like touch rangers, for example…
I suppose that’s expected, since GW1 had more skills, a more flexible skill bar, and dual professions.
Touch Rangers are a GREAT example of WHY the Devs decided on a simplified GW2 skill set. I’m sure some balance Devs would love to discuss just how many potential viable Necro and Ranger builds were devastated because of that particular combo….Even after the PvE/PvP skill split, I recall that combo (Expertise & Necro Life Steal) causing havoc across all game modes….
We go out in the world and take our chances
Fate is just the weight of circumstances
That’s the way that lady luck dances
Fate is just the weight of circumstances
That’s the way that lady luck dances
The design philosophy around the GW2 system vs the GW1 system was to lower the number of possible builds while simultaneously raising the number of viable builds. If you look back to GW1 and the popular builds used, there weren’t really all that many per class. Some had more than others.
Sure there were mathematically far more permutations, but an Echo Mending warrior is pretty terribad.
You must be talking about the GW pvp meta. PvE had tons of “viable” builds, if you could grasp playing outside the pvxwiki box.
Longbow Ranger is perfectly viable here. Bring one to a meta function.. and you will be shown the door based solely on weapon equipped.
Meta perception and actual viability in the big game are night and day. In any game.
Yes, I never got asked to leave a party because I wasn’t using the build of the month in PvE in Guild Wars 1…oh wait.
There were tons of players that required absolutely specific builds to participate in runs of almost all end game content, from voltaic spear farms, to the Underworld to DOA. Looking for an imbagon paragron. Looking for IWAY. These things existed. I ran into them all the time, because I enjoyed making my own builds.
Just a question here…
If you didn’t like the meta crowd in GW1, why did you bother trying to party with them?
Did any other types of party ever exist? IIRC it was either Meta or henchmen.
Then they added heroes and the game became single player…
How did I find non-meta parties all the time then? o.O
Granted it took some patience, and having a good guild helped. But it sure beat the rampant /ragequitting that came along with speed clears that took 2.9 secs longer than optimal. Those guys were kittens and I smiled inside every time they flipped out over a failed dungeon.
LOL.. I remember so many Z Elite missions that people rage quit over one trap laid out of order or the ele not doing exactly what was expected.
Ley lines. The perfect solution to deadlines and writers block. Now in an easy open Can.
(edited by Teofa Tsavo.9863)
If GW2 had fewer skills for better balance though, why isn’t it balanced? There is still a meta with professions that are thrown to the wayside in certain aspects of the game.
It has fewer skills to eliminate the problems associated with having sub optimal builds and the resulting exclusion. I don’t know how much this design choice really helps but I will say it’s certainly not the only thing helping. Designing each class to be self sustaining and (somewhat) perform each role goes a long way toward eliminating the need for a particular team composition. There’s also quite a bit of gameplay depth lost in the process but that’s the system we have.
@Xenon.
Oh HI! Yea, I’m a Bearbow Zerker. What do you mean I can’t come?
Can I bring my Zerk mace n shield war? No room? awww.
Tis a bit more than just Zerk.Ok well you’re pointing out the existence of “echo mending” style builds. What I meant was that I can switch my traits around significantly in GW2 compared to GW1. In GW1 for a specific speed clear you would need X, Y, and Z skills no ifs ands or buts end of story. In GW2 you might need to bring X, and Y, but you can swap Z out for B or pancakes or w/e. Like, there isn’t ONE single end all be all mesmer dungeon build. There’s like 6 or 7 variations depending on whether you’re doing reflects or mantras of w/e.
Speed Clear. I still "clear"HM Mt Qinkai nearly every day for lux pts. With all sorts of ludicrous builds and group builds because I’m bored. I don’t die, and the only loss is time. Optimal, no. Viable, yes. The zone gets cleared for the same amt of points.
Ley lines. The perfect solution to deadlines and writers block. Now in an easy open Can.
Weapons dont decide the build, they decide to roles. -snip- If you’re comparing optimal with optimal in Gw1 you had far less builds then you’re considering.
weapons do decide builds, it changes your skill bar thus changing your build.
if it changes your role it would change the traits along with it, that’s the difference.
also, GW has (the game isn’t dead so stop revering it as a past game) plenty of optimal builds, they might not be on PvX but keep in mind that PvX is only a baseline for cookie cutter builds, not for all optimal builds.
it’s also a place that is only used by players that care to share the builds, there is quite a group of players who know builds sometimes better then what PvX contains.
Also double standard, if you’re considering weapon skills as being a big limiting factor then it isnt fair to ignore 2 – 3 slots out of those 8 slots had to be dedicated to energy management.
lol, you’re talking as if a necro needs 2-3 skills for energy management, i only have signet of lost souls with me just in case but the rest is done by ether minions or enemy deaths.
really, if you need energy management skills on a necro then you’re doing something wrong, take that from a 9+ year veteran.
Thing is skills themselves are meaningless its the action you want to accomplish that truely matters. With that in mind why does it matter that the skills in death shroud arent customizable?
and here you already start to show signs you didn’t read my post correctly, i already said dead shroud is fine this way.
In a fight I am not interested in personally selecting a skills that immobilizes a target if thats something I need, I only care about having such a skill when I need it. So why should the tainted shackles not count? With same argument is tainted shackles even 1 skill? Because it does more then simply immobilize a target, It does direct damage and it inflicts torment. In Gw1 you had a truckload of skills but they all did one specific thing and in most cases under a specific condition.
some is the key word, there are plenty, plenty of skills with double functions.
just to show a few:
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Chilblains
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Defile_Enchantments
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Enfeebling_Touch
Yes I can tell you with perfect confidence that Gw2 has as much skill diversity as Gw1 for the above stated reasons. What made Gw1 great is unlike most other MMOs your character wasnt tied down to a stereo typical role. You wanted a necro that deals damage, supports allies, debuffs enemies , does crowd control etc… You could do that no problem but guess what you can do that in Gw2 not just do it but while in Gw1 doing all that required numous different builds in Gw2 you can do it all using the same build or with minor modifications you can do in between fights. how is that less flexible?
for one it depends on traits and two you’re talking BS, you can do the exact same thing in GW with the same build.
advice: learn your profession
I dont understand your issue with engineer. If you want to just play with turrets then just equip turret skills, how does a lack of kit choices effect you if you already decided you want to use turrets instead of kits? In Gw2 every profession has its own unique mechanic and thats a good thing, if they all worked the same then whats the point of choosing one over the other? Engineers can swap weapons not because of some techinical limitation but as the result of a design choice which gives engineers greater flexibility through the use of kits. Kits are essentially the same thing as weapons and thus engineers get a bonus in that they can swap 4 weapons instead of 2 like most other classes its only fair they pay for that flexibility by sacrificing 1 utility slot for it.
aaaaaand another sign you didn’t read my post, hard to take someone serious if (s)he doesn’t even think to read a post first.
i never said anything about forced kit use, i said it’s a design flaw to depend on kits as weapon swap.
one thing GW did right is making sure that the only thing you depend on is using the right weapons for certain skills (like GW2 does with weapon skills), it never removed a feature just so you have to depend on certain skills.
so like i said, if they made it so that when you don’t use a kit it allows weapon swap.
and before you’re gonna compare the engi with the ele, the ele actually has allot more freedom because it doesn’t need to depend on skills to get a weapon swap.
1 weapon on an ele is equal to 4 weapons, they don’t need weapon swap and no other skill to compensate.
an engineer however does, i would’ve not mind if the kit could be slotted on the F keys but since it’s not it only takes space and hinders freedom.
The design philosophy around the GW2 system vs the GW1 system was to lower the number of possible builds while simultaneously raising the number of viable builds. If you look back to GW1 and the popular builds used, there weren’t really all that many per class. Some had more than others.
Sure there were mathematically far more permutations, but an Echo Mending warrior is pretty terribad.
You must be talking about the GW pvp meta. PvE had tons of “viable” builds, if you could grasp playing outside the pvxwiki box.
Longbow Ranger is perfectly viable here. Bring one to a meta function.. and you will be shown the door based solely on weapon equipped.
Meta perception and actual viability in the big game are night and day. In any game.
Yes, I never got asked to leave a party because I wasn’t using the build of the month in PvE in Guild Wars 1…oh wait.
There were tons of players that required absolutely specific builds to participate in runs of almost all end game content, from voltaic spear farms, to the Underworld to DOA. Looking for an imbagon paragron. Looking for IWAY. These things existed. I ran into them all the time, because I enjoyed making my own builds.
Just a question here…
If you didn’t like the meta crowd in GW1, why did you bother trying to party with them?
Because I live in Australia and the amount of people doing content when I was awake was limited. I had little choice but to accept the meta or never do end game instanced stuff. Not like you can take your heroes and do the Deep or Urgoz’s warren, or even the Underworld. You need a party. Finding one was really hard during off hours.5
If GW2 had fewer skills for better balance though, why isn’t it balanced? There is still a meta with professions that are thrown to the wayside in certain aspects of the game.
No game is ever balanced. But it’s balanced a lot better than Guild Wars 1 was for most of it’s life.
The design philosophy around the GW2 system vs the GW1 system was to lower the number of possible builds while simultaneously raising the number of viable builds. If you look back to GW1 and the popular builds used, there weren’t really all that many per class. Some had more than others.
Sure there were mathematically far more permutations, but an Echo Mending warrior is pretty terribad.
You must be talking about the GW pvp meta. PvE had tons of “viable” builds, if you could grasp playing outside the pvxwiki box.
Longbow Ranger is perfectly viable here. Bring one to a meta function.. and you will be shown the door based solely on weapon equipped.
Meta perception and actual viability in the big game are night and day. In any game.
Yes, I never got asked to leave a party because I wasn’t using the build of the month in PvE in Guild Wars 1…oh wait.
There were tons of players that required absolutely specific builds to participate in runs of almost all end game content, from voltaic spear farms, to the Underworld to DOA. Looking for an imbagon paragron. Looking for IWAY. These things existed. I ran into them all the time, because I enjoyed making my own builds.
Just a question here…
If you didn’t like the meta crowd in GW1, why did you bother trying to party with them?
I didn’t myself. I finished Proph with hench, solo. Finished Factions, NF and EoTN and Legendary Vanq with Hero/Hench. Finished DoA and other stuff with 7 Mercs. That did not mean I was unaware of LFG chat, speed clear LFG chat, and idiot statements like “show stones”. And I’ve had 12 years of mmo and min/maxer meta experience and observation.
ah.. oops. wasn’t addressed to me. oh bother.
But when I played Guild Wars 1, you could only bring 3 heroes, period. No way you can convince me you soloed end game content with 3 heroes.
The design philosophy around the GW2 system vs the GW1 system was to lower the number of possible builds while simultaneously raising the number of viable builds. If you look back to GW1 and the popular builds used, there weren’t really all that many per class. Some had more than others.
Sure there were mathematically far more permutations, but an Echo Mending warrior is pretty terribad.
You must be talking about the GW pvp meta. PvE had tons of “viable” builds, if you could grasp playing outside the pvxwiki box.
Longbow Ranger is perfectly viable here. Bring one to a meta function.. and you will be shown the door based solely on weapon equipped.
Meta perception and actual viability in the big game are night and day. In any game.
Yes, I never got asked to leave a party because I wasn’t using the build of the month in PvE in Guild Wars 1…oh wait.
There were tons of players that required absolutely specific builds to participate in runs of almost all end game content, from voltaic spear farms, to the Underworld to DOA. Looking for an imbagon paragron. Looking for IWAY. These things existed. I ran into them all the time, because I enjoyed making my own builds.
Just a question here…
If you didn’t like the meta crowd in GW1, why did you bother trying to party with them?
I didn’t myself. I finished Proph with hench, solo. Finished Factions, NF and EoTN and Legendary Vanq with Hero/Hench. Finished DoA and other stuff with 7 Mercs. That did not mean I was unaware of LFG chat, speed clear LFG chat, and idiot statements like “show stones”. And I’ve had 12 years of mmo and min/maxer meta experience and observation.
ah.. oops. wasn’t addressed to me. oh bother.
But when I played Guild Wars 1, you could only bring 3 heroes, period. No way you can convince me you soloed end game content with 3 heroes.
Ha ha. See 8 pack of mercenaries. And so, I did, with 7 heroes. Old news as well. Foundry was iffy, several tries to do. Could solo Glints challenge half AFK. 3-4 mes heroes were nasty. Slavers was easy.
Ley lines. The perfect solution to deadlines and writers block. Now in an easy open Can.
(edited by Teofa Tsavo.9863)
The design philosophy around the GW2 system vs the GW1 system was to lower the number of possible builds while simultaneously raising the number of viable builds. If you look back to GW1 and the popular builds used, there weren’t really all that many per class. Some had more than others.
Sure there were mathematically far more permutations, but an Echo Mending warrior is pretty terribad.
You must be talking about the GW pvp meta. PvE had tons of “viable” builds, if you could grasp playing outside the pvxwiki box.
Longbow Ranger is perfectly viable here. Bring one to a meta function.. and you will be shown the door based solely on weapon equipped.
Meta perception and actual viability in the big game are night and day. In any game.
Yes, I never got asked to leave a party because I wasn’t using the build of the month in PvE in Guild Wars 1…oh wait.
There were tons of players that required absolutely specific builds to participate in runs of almost all end game content, from voltaic spear farms, to the Underworld to DOA. Looking for an imbagon paragron. Looking for IWAY. These things existed. I ran into them all the time, because I enjoyed making my own builds.
Just a question here…
If you didn’t like the meta crowd in GW1, why did you bother trying to party with them?
I didn’t myself. I finished Proph with hench, solo. Finished Factions, NF and EoTN and Legendary Vanq with Hero/Hench. Finished DoA and other stuff with 7 Mercs. That did not mean I was unaware of LFG chat, speed clear LFG chat, and idiot statements like “show stones”. And I’ve had 12 years of mmo and min/maxer meta experience and observation.
ah.. oops. wasn’t addressed to me. oh bother.
But when I played Guild Wars 1, you could only bring 3 heroes, period. No way you can convince me you soloed end game content with 3 heroes.
Ha ha. See 8 pack of mercenaries. And so, I did, with 7 heroes. Old news as well.
Mercenaries weren’t introduced until rather late in the game’s life, long after I’d stopped playing seriously. By the time they came out I already had 50/50 and GWAMM. And even when they first came out, you could still only take three of them.
Now the game as changed, persumably because of lower population, that you can take 7 heroes. In the old days you could take only three heroes, and henchmen couldn’t enter elite areas.
The design philosophy around the GW2 system vs the GW1 system was to lower the number of possible builds while simultaneously raising the number of viable builds. If you look back to GW1 and the popular builds used, there weren’t really all that many per class. Some had more than others.
Sure there were mathematically far more permutations, but an Echo Mending warrior is pretty terribad.
You must be talking about the GW pvp meta. PvE had tons of “viable” builds, if you could grasp playing outside the pvxwiki box.
Longbow Ranger is perfectly viable here. Bring one to a meta function.. and you will be shown the door based solely on weapon equipped.
Meta perception and actual viability in the big game are night and day. In any game.
Yes, I never got asked to leave a party because I wasn’t using the build of the month in PvE in Guild Wars 1…oh wait.
There were tons of players that required absolutely specific builds to participate in runs of almost all end game content, from voltaic spear farms, to the Underworld to DOA. Looking for an imbagon paragron. Looking for IWAY. These things existed. I ran into them all the time, because I enjoyed making my own builds.
Just a question here…
If you didn’t like the meta crowd in GW1, why did you bother trying to party with them?
I didn’t myself. I finished Proph with hench, solo. Finished Factions, NF and EoTN and Legendary Vanq with Hero/Hench. Finished DoA and other stuff with 7 Mercs. That did not mean I was unaware of LFG chat, speed clear LFG chat, and idiot statements like “show stones”. And I’ve had 12 years of mmo and min/maxer meta experience and observation.
ah.. oops. wasn’t addressed to me. oh bother.
But when I played Guild Wars 1, you could only bring 3 heroes, period. No way you can convince me you soloed end game content with 3 heroes.
Ha ha. See 8 pack of mercenaries. And so, I did, with 7 heroes. Old news as well.
Mercenaries weren’t introduced until rather late in the game’s life, long after I’d stopped playing seriously. By the time they came out I already had 50/50 and GWAMM. And even when they first came out, you could still only take three of them.
Now the game as changed, persumably because of lower population, that you can take 7 heroes. In the old days you could take only three heroes, and henchmen couldn’t enter elite areas.
Uh, they came in like 3 years ago at least. Long before the launch of this game. You could buy 8 from day one of the introduction of mercs, they were never limited to 3.
7 hero update was Oct 2010. Apparently you didn’t do WiK, WoC, Hearts of the North either.
Study harder next time before inferring that I’m a liar.
Ley lines. The perfect solution to deadlines and writers block. Now in an easy open Can.
(edited by Teofa Tsavo.9863)