Guild Wars 2

Targeting has always had issues in GW2,

• Targeting Still Broken Please Fix It!
• Improve Ground Targeting system
• Ctrl + click = target

but it looks like recently it’s become even more of a problem:

• New targeting a pain

It looks like after the September Feature Pack targeting is selecting literally the closest target even if it’s to the side, completely behind, behind a door/wall, or is a structure. It leads to a lot, a lot of frustrating situations where I appear to be trying (and failing) to attack something completely different instead of the enemy which is in front and trying to kill me.

It would be nice to have it at least reverted to the behaviour which limited closest target to the viewable screen, and preferably to have outstanding targeting changes to be made, such as:

Lishtenbird.2814:

1. Improved targeting system: option to display and cast AoE skills at max (“green”) distance even if cursor is out of range (particularly useful for shadowstep skills);

2. option to exclude yellow mobs from closest targets;

3. option to limit closest target to a narrow cone in front of the character (say hello to white moa at Jormag);

4. option to prioritize heaviest mobs over trash;

5. separate key to target heaviest mob (not bound by default);

6. option to always cast AoE on selected target (if it is in range);

7. option to prioritise enemies over allies when clicking to select target (Lyssa surrounded by trash and players);

8. retaining target marker on reappearing targets (Lyssa, Inquest Golem Mk II, Shatterer);

9. reworking the way in which large targets with high target point are losing focus when camera is tilted towards the ground a bit.

Lishtenbird.2814:

141. Official version of “Combat Mode” – a crosshair which targets anything under it and makes AoEs cast at where crosshair points, plus various rebinds. Thread on reddit, video demo.

I wish it was so. Usually when I get ganked by mordred wolves in Silverwastes, of course it will never pick up the one biting my ankles, but the one who is still a few yards away. My experience is the auto-attack picking the farthest target, the one that I would least want to attack. Not to talk about the fact that if the target moves, often auto-attack would attack ANOTHER mob bringing it into the fray too.

and here’s a good example of why Anet can simply never win with the community.

this is something that a lot of people complained about before.. that “nearest” shouldn’t depend on which direction you’re facing, that nearest should literally be the nearest enemy, period.

they’ve now fixed it so of course people are now complaining about wanting it reverted.

I don’t really have an opinion on which it should be.. but it’s important to remember that for every complaint you have about the game, there’s plenty of people that want the very opposite.

The current version is great for WvW for finding mesmers hiding in keeps.

Unless you’re the mesmer.

Since there won’t be anything hostile until the outside, they will always be nearest hostile target.

GrandmaFunk.3052:

and here’s a good example of why Anet can simply never win with the community.

this is something that a lot of people complained about before.. that “nearest” shouldn’t depend on which direction you’re facing, that nearest should literally be the nearest enemy, period.

they’ve now fixed it so of course people are now complaining about wanting it reverted.

I don’t really have an opinion on which it should be.. but it’s important to remember that for every complaint you have about the game, there’s plenty of people that want the very opposite.

I do not remember people ever asking for Centaur Supplies being targeted behind your back when you’re heading towards a Veteran Centaur to make a ranged interrupt opening.

What I do remember is people asking for the enemy to be targeted if you killed the guy in the front and there’s still someone really close to you to the side or back who’s attacking you, especially if you know it since your view is zoomed out.

I agree that tweaking such things for everyone’s taste is tricky, but manual options and common sense make far more sense than iterating in a radius around your character.

It doesn’t make sense to target things that can’t be hit(on the other side of a wall for example) in favor of things that can be hit. And reds should be targeted in favor of yellows. In fact there ought to be an option to disable targeting of yellows. They really messed up with the red/yellow target thing, IMO. There ought to be a way to target heart/event objectives and hostiles, without targeting neutral creatures.

There are several reasons why this change was implemented.

This is not a bug, and target nearest enemy does exactly what it says it does….

I have been waiting for this change since launch, and I am 100% content with it.

personally, i like the new targeting system. maybe they should make a new command called target nearest enemy within line of sight.

@ TheBlackLeech & Pray for Kosmos – Why would you want to target something that can’t be hit? Can you please explain why this method works so much better for you than they way it was? Maybe the rest of us are missing something.(I’m serious, not trolling)

And I would definitely like a “target nearest enemy within line of sight” option.

duel: a thief appears directly behind you (you hear him on your headphones), you press the closest target button and use greatsword rush and force him to waste dodge or other evade.

Pray For Kosmos.5849:

duel: a thief appears directly behind you (you hear him on your headphones), you press the closest target button and use greatsword rush and force him to waste dodge or other evade.

Does it actually work that way? If it actually rotated the character and attacked, that might’ve been acceptable, but in my scenario skills just won’t cast. Hm, let me guess: you’re not holding right mouse for navigating?

Ah, it’s a PvP thing. I was afraid of that. I so wish they would split traits and skills into PvE and PvP lines. And give us multiple options for targeting.
But I still can’t see the justification for targeting something that can’t be hit, over something that can. Nor for targeting non-hostiles over hostiles.

“Next enemy” targets the nearest thing to the centre of your screen and won’t target anything behind you. Is there a reason that you can’t use that?

Elden Arnaas.4870:

@ TheBlackLeech & Pray for Kosmos – Why would you want to target something that can’t be hit? Can you please explain why this method works so much better for you than they way it was? Maybe the rest of us are missing something.(I’m serious, not trolling)

And I would definitely like a “target nearest enemy within line of sight” option.

I’ll give you one example at a time, till you realize why this is a good thing.

Attacking players in WvW used to be unable to target foes atop of keeps/towers who were able to rain fire down upon them.

This was due to a problem with the “Line of Sight” targeting that was in the game since launch.

There was a tiny lip on the tower that prevented the game from detecting any enemies if you were on the ground, even though you could clearly see them, and were being attacked by them.

Can you see why this was a problem? Do you think this is a good thing?

@Filaha – Didn’t realize “next enemy” behaved that way.(was that a recent change?) That’s very helpful, thank you.

@TheBlackLeech – I can see how that helps you, but the way I play it’s more of a hinderance. Thank you for taking the time to explain, though.

Lishtenbird.2814:

Pray For Kosmos.5849:

duel: a thief appears directly behind you (you hear him on your headphones), you press the closest target button and use greatsword rush and force him to waste dodge or other evade.

Does it actually work that way? If it actually rotated the character and attacked, that might’ve been acceptable, but in my scenario skills just won’t cast. Hm, let me guess: you’re not holding right mouse for navigating?

some skills to not need line of sight like shield bash and rush. i’m sure there are many more.

Elden Arnaas.4870:

@Filaha – Didn’t realize “next enemy” behaved that way.(was that a recent change?) That’s very helpful, thank you.

@TheBlackLeech – I can see how that helps you, but the way I play it’s more of a hinderance. Thank you for taking the time to explain, though.

Well, if you are not big on WvW, I will assume you don’t like PvP in general, and spare PvP and WvW related issues from my future explanations.

Here is something you will probably be able to relate to a bit better.

The PvE world is littered with rocks, bushes, fences, and thousands of other obstructions which we call our environment and the game world.

Often times, when an obstruction managed to find its way between yourself and the foe you wanted to fight, you would be completely unable to target it.
This could happen at any moment, even mid fight.

This is an image of one of my characters in Queensdale.

As you can see the landscape is full of Ettins (one is already dead, lol).

The nearest foe to me, would be the Ettin directly in the center of the screen.

The line of sight targeting system would not allow me to target the Ettin by any means. (Target nearest enemy, tab, clicking, etc.) even though it is clearly visible and is hiding behind the tree like something out of a bad cartoon.

Check it out.

Elden Arnaas.4870:

@Filaha – Didn’t realize “next enemy” behaved that way.(was that a recent change?) That’s very helpful, thank you.

No problem. I don’t know if it was changed at all. I don’t think so. I’ve always had both bound. One for who’s attacking me (Nearest) and one for when I need to cycle if I don’t want the nearest target (Next).

@ Filaha – It may be the difference in GW1 & GW2 targeting that is messing me up. In GW1 “closest target” seems to work much more like “next target” in GW2. Whereas in GW1 “next target” often seemed oddly random, so I’ve never made much use of it. But I’ll definitely try using it now. Thanks again for your help.

<edit: extraneous _ characters added to keep the profanity filter from triggering falsely>
@ TheBlackLeech – Thank you for taking the time to make very detailed explanations. In your example, the tree’s _ hitbox obscures the ettin’s _ hit box, so line of sight can’t target the ettin. And the environment/topography of GW2 is very complex, leading to a lot of obscuring hit boxes which would interfere with line of sight targeting. But I still think that they should refine how the game determines whether a target can/cannot be hit, and not target something which cannot be legitimately hit.
In the bandit cave in Kessex Hills, for example, GW2 will let me target the caged cave trolls, which cannot be hit and are in fact invulnerable. Why does GW2 even consider the trolls as possible targets? In the Ruins of Holy Demetra, GW2 will target angry spirits through impenetrable walls. This is isn’t like your WvW high tower target obscurement bug, these are targets which cannot be legitimately hit. Yet GW2 will target them in preference to targets which can be hit.
I see your point, but I think that the targeting methodology needs tweaking. I’m going to have to experiment with “next target”, though. That may prove to be a viable workaround. Thank you again for your answers.

I think the most annoying part for me with the targetting in general is just that it will target walls in WvW. Things that you don’t need to target even with the things that can damage them, and that you can’t damage with anything that does require a target (especially your weapons).

I’d personally sign for “Nearest target” not targetting yellows, at least. Hate targetting a wall just because I’m a couple steps closer to it than the player shooting at me.

I think it would be useful to refine “neutral”(yellow) targets into categories(and possibly different colors) like heart objective(active only if you’re working the heart, or in a party with someone who is) event objective, neutral creature, etc… To make the targeting work better, I think that the neutral/yellow category itself needs to be adjusted. I can’t speak to Filaha’s WvW example, because I don’t play WvW. But I think that the “neutral” target category is part of the problem and needs to be chneged.
I do like most of Listenbird’s ideas, but I think that as a whole they would introduce too much targeting complexity to be practical.(Which is a shame, lot of good ideas, there.)

Re: Lishtenbird’s 4. and 5.

Next Enemy actually does that already from my experience. If there’s a champ in the middle of veterans, it’ll target the champ first. For example.

It’s invaluable when attacking towers/keeps in WvW because (I find) it’s better to focus on the Champ/Legendary lords and kill the veterans with cleaves/AOEs.

One of the features I love about FFXIV is that they actually let you refine the targetting to a significant degree (which they have to because controllers cannot click target). You can set it to target or not target different categories, like players, pets, npcs, enemies, and objects, except to further categories like unclaimed (not in combat) enemies, claimed (in combat) enemies, enemies which you are personally in combat with, enemies which are relevant to your quest or event, etc. And they have a separate set for both weapon drawn and weapon sheathed, so I’ve got it set where I only target things I’m in combat with and things relevant to me when my weapon’s drawn (so I don’t pull extra mobs by mistake) and other mobs when it’s sheathed.

I’d imagine that’d take a pretty significant rework of this game to add in here, though, so I think it’d be more realistic to just kind of not include yellows from your targetting (since 9 times out of 10, they’re not and will not attack you, so you have plenty of time to click target them).

I think that a “set yellow/neutral to click target only” option would solve a lot of issues, and not be overly complicated.(big pluses from a coding viewpoint) Very clever.

You’re a bit slow cottoning on to this nearest target problem. A few people posted immediately on the forum after the problems started (a few months ago) and I raised a bug report on the forum. Maybe the OP should write a bug report too instead of a community complaint since nearest target function is broken compared to its previous state. It is not fit for purpose, especially when used as the default tab target selection.

Stooperdale.3560:

You’re a bit slow cottoning on to this nearest target problem. A few people posted immediately on the forum after the problems started (a few months ago) and I raised a bug report on the forum. Maybe the OP should write a bug report too instead of a community complaint since nearest target function is broken compared to its previous state.

Except that its not a bug…. and it is a fix for hundreds of issues.

Simply because some players are having trouble adapting to using tab instead of target nearest does not mean it is a bug.

To be fair, I’d call it a fix that introduces a new bug. No one has yet explained to me why “nearest target” should select a target that cannot be legitimately hit over one that can.

Stooperdale, what became of your bug report?

re: Simply because some players are having trouble adapting to using tab instead of target nearest… – Well, patch notes about changes in functionality would certainly help us know that we need to adapt and how we need to adapt.

TheBlackLeech.9360:

Stooperdale.3560:

You’re a bit slow cottoning on to this nearest target problem. A few people posted immediately on the forum after the problems started (a few months ago) and I raised a bug report on the forum. Maybe the OP should write a bug report too instead of a community complaint since nearest target function is broken compared to its previous state.

Except that its not a bug…. and it is a fix for hundreds of issues.

You’re fixing a specific Z-axis issue in the 180 frontal cone by turning it into a 360 sphere. Is that really a “fix”? At best, an undocumented change of functionality. Can’t it be “fixed” by turning the frontal 180 cone into a frontal 180 semisphere, and using “next enemy” for targeting thieves behind you?

Lishtenbird.2814:

TheBlackLeech.9360:

Stooperdale.3560:

You’re a bit slow cottoning on to this nearest target problem. A few people posted immediately on the forum after the problems started (a few months ago) and I raised a bug report on the forum. Maybe the OP should write a bug report too instead of a community complaint since nearest target function is broken compared to its previous state.

Except that its not a bug…. and it is a fix for hundreds of issues.

You’re fixing a specific Z-axis issue in the 180 frontal cone by turning it into a 360 sphere. Is that really a “fix”? At best, an undocumented change of functionality. Can’t it be “fixed” by turning the frontal 180 cone into a frontal 180 semisphere, and using “next enemy” for targeting thieves behind you?

You are ignoring the fact that the targeting no longer works on line of sight, which was the main issue causing hundreds of lesser issues.

Now that enemies can’t get obstructed by invisible geometry, we are able to target them without any issues.

It is simply an added bonus that I’m able to target the literal “nearest enemy” without having to rotate my camera directly to face them.

90% of the time you won’t even have any issues, and the 10% of the time you target a barracuda in the water below you or a wall in WvW, you can simply tab target.

I’ve done a little testing, and it seems like “target next” works well in place of “target closest”. So far it looks like a good workaround against target closest’s “target impossible targets” bug.

The targeting wonkiness is driving me to rage in Silverwastes, I can’t afford to be on the wrong target in the battles, way too easy to have things go sideways.

GrandmaFunk.3052:

and here’s a good example of why Anet can simply never win with the community.

this is something that a lot of people complained about before.. that “nearest” shouldn’t depend on which direction you’re facing, that nearest should literally be the nearest enemy, period.

they’ve now fixed it so of course people are now complaining about wanting it reverted.

I don’t really have an opinion on which it should be.. but it’s important to remember that for every complaint you have about the game, there’s plenty of people that want the very opposite.

It’s a terrible example, actually. This is an interface issue, not a content issue (which is frequently subjective), so it’s entirely possible to satisfy differing opinions by having options. A proper fix would be to implement a dropdown box in gameplay settings for targeting preferences with the following (but not limited to) options:

• Target nearest from center of screen.
• Target nearest from character (on-screen only).
• Target nearest from character (all).
• Target nearest from cursor.

It’s not a revolutionary idea, I’ve seen other (older) games that have done similar, and it’s one that would step on the fewest number of toes.

Another thing that bothers me, is how TAB targeting does not match the visual range of enemies. If I see a champion, and can read its name, TAB targeting should be able to target it. I hate having to walk all the way up to a champion, before TAB targeting picks it as a target. And click targeting tends to select everything but the giant enemy that I’m directly clicking on.

I prefer it being the absolute closest enemy too, since 99/100 that’s exactly what I wanted. If I need a specific target to be selected, then that’s what a mouse is for (clicking a specific target is much faster than any form of tab system usually in my instance, but I’m also pretty ossum at FPS games haha)!

I’m still targeting all the way out to BFE instead of right next to me. Even more so if I’m zoomed out.

I have to angle the camera so I’m looking down at my character to target anything close to me.

Lishtenbird.2814:

I do not remember people ever asking for Centaur Supplies being targeted behind your back when you’re heading towards a Veteran Centaur to make a ranged interrupt opening.

Since Centaur Supplies are yellow, being able to stop auto-targeting yellow “mobs” would also fix that problem.

I like all of your suggestions.

I would also like an option to not de-select my target when using a ground-target skill. Very annoying.

Targeting did get buggered in September. I wish we could roll back the patch until it was validated against NA/EU code. I commented somewhere that it was as if the localization team took too many liberties or used the wrong source code as a basis.

Seeing as the meaning of “nearest enemy” is quite straight-forward I have expected from the start that selecting the “nearest enemy” meant exactly and literally the nearest enemy. As such I’m glad that’s exactly what it does.

For enemies in front of you you have your mouse to click with and also the option that promotes enemies to targets when you hit them.

But perhaps to allow both possibilities they could add an extra “Nearest Foreward Enemy” hotkey function to allow the selection of near enemies for projectile and melee targeting.

Djinn.9245:

I would also like an option to not de-select my target when using a ground-target skill. Very annoying.

I think it’s a bug if that’s what is happening to you. My client does not deselect a target if I ground target another enemy. I even unchecked the “Promote Skill Target” option in the settings to see if this was your problem but with ALL the targeting support options all turned off I don’t have the problem you describe.

Been trying to use “next enemy” instead of “nearest enemy” in PvE and PvP.

It’s still not always working as I want it to. Like selecting Tequatl instead of the finger in front of me because it’s definitely larger and more important, or selecting a random yellow moa to the side of the screen when there’s a red enemy approaching who’s closer to me.

Not once have I seen someone mention your weapons range as also being a factor in target selection…which it is, though it may not be mentioned anywhere.

Mo Mo.1947:

Seeing as the meaning of “nearest enemy” is quite straight-forward I have expected from the start that selecting the “nearest enemy” meant exactly and literally the nearest enemy. As such I’m glad that’s exactly what it does.

Not quite… RED text targets are defined as enemies. YELLOW text targets are NEUTRALS. As often as not, the first thing I get when I select “Nearest Enemy” is a neutral target. If the keybind were for “Nearest Target”, then it would be working properly.

“NEXT ENEMY” and “PREVIOUS ENEMY” are also misnamed, since they also target Yellow Neutrals. Plus, they are wildly erratic in their selection process. I can’t see any pattern to how they choose “next”. It seems totally random, and your “Next Enemy” can often wind up being something not only offscreen, but out of range as well. VERY broken.

Apparently WvWers are okay with the September changes, but it is making life miserable for PvEers. Stop CHANGING things, and give us OPTIONS instead!

ANet alienates soooooo many players by completely changing things instead of giving us options. They could have added the Outfit system for people who wanted to wear Town Clothes in combat, and kept the old Town Clothes system alongside it for RPers. They could give experienced players the option to NOT use the NPE, and get on with play as normal. They could have 3 sizes of Megaservers (low population, medium population, and high population) to let people play in zones with the crowd sizes that they picked at the start of the game. They could have kept “Server Pride” and a sense of community if they had left the major cities OFF the Megaserver.

Give us OPTIONS! Especially with something as central to the game as targeting!

Elden Arnaas.4870:

In the bandit cave in Kessex Hills, for example, GW2 will let me target the caged cave trolls, which cannot be hit and are in fact invulnerable. Why does GW2 even consider the trolls as possible targets?

I just went there to test this.

It is impossible to target the trolls with tab targeting.

But possible with target nearest.

I find the current target nearest functionality quite useful actually, but I wouldn’t mind an extra keybind for target nearest in view.

I’m sorry this is a bug. The previous functionality of target nearest was fit for purpose! (well it wasn’t perfect but it worked). The current functionality is not. Players do not want to target mobs that are behind them and have their attacks and skills inevitably fail. Because the mob is out of vision the players cannot see what they are targeting and why skills are failing. This makes this targeting function a liability in combat, and combat is when the targeting functions should work at their best.

Targeting mobs that are out of vision in this way is not fit for purpose and this is why tab next and the old tab nearest did not do this. Other games do not do this either. There is no point in people who do not use ‘tab nearest’ posting on the message boards that this is working as intended when everyone who tries to use it knows full well that it is not!

Nearest isn’t always nearest in my situation. Frequently, I find it targeting things far away, even when there is an enemy directly in front of me. I’ve found it very wonky.

Targeting should never target yellow or white mobs.
If there are 2 floors and you use melee weapon targeting should know that you dont want to attack target above you because you are not on the second floor.

Those are the biggest problems of targeting.

For two years “Nearest Enemy” has been selecting someone in front of us (for the most part. Targeting has always been a little problematic in this game). Now it is working MUCH differently. That alone is cause enough for outcry.

(Though despite numerous threads decrying the targeting problems here, in the Bugs forum, and elsewhere, I have yet to see ANet acknowledge us in any manner.)

Hamfast.8719:

For two years “Nearest Enemy” has been selecting someone in front of us (for the most part. Targeting has always been a little problematic in this game). Now it is working MUCH differently. That alone is cause enough for outcry.

(Though despite numerous threads decrying the targeting problems here, in the Bugs forum, and elsewhere, I have yet to see ANet acknowledge us in any manner.)

…because using target next works exactly the same way target closest did before the patch.

You have an option to use one or the other.

There is no problem… except that people either

A) Don’t realize that tab targeting works the way they want it to

B) Can’t adapt

Again, as I stated to you in a different thread, there were hundreds and hundreds of complaints about the system.

Anet implemented changes to resolve the issues.

The issues were completely resolved.

I don’t know what you want Anet to do….. put the bugs back in the game because you can’t learn to use a different key?

After further testing I can say that “next enemy” does not provide the necessary targeting functionality for me. Attached are two images of “next enemies” being somewhere far away and definitely not what I want to target and attack. In PvP “next enemy” is even more wonky and unreliable than in PvE.

I need the previous behaviour of “nearest enemy on the screen/in front of character” – preferably as an option to make everyone happy.

I remapped Tab (next enemy) to C a few months back for precisely this reason. I’d latch onto the wrong enemy and I’d keep hitting C in the hopes that it would correct itself if I faced the right one. Usually ended up with me half-dead before I started fighting and full-dead before I could get clear.

Using Next Enemy has its own special issues, as it uses map-spawning order for all nearby enemies in view (or something similar) and it’s terrible when facing a lot of enemies that are spread out, like Lishtenbird says.