Guild Wars 2

Shirlias.8104:

totally agree too ( though was what yoy TS meant. You didn’t talk about other passives, which modify skills, cause changing the gameplay by choice is ok, am i right? ).

Also, random sigils should be gone too ( 50% chance on crit, which is another %, so RNG over RNG, to proc X extra damage ). Something like Every X seconds, your next attack deal X extra damage. Flat passive, no RNG, seems fine.

Everything using rng or independant from player’s own active playstyle shouldn’t be tolerated. I didn’t talk about other passives because I didn’t had other in mind and couldn’t find the bother to look them up. but in short:
- Every passive where its effectiveness scales according to one’s own skill is acceptable and should be encouraged.
- Every passive that help raising someone’s skills is toxic and shouldn’t be allowed in any case.

Blue Hare.8612:

@Pepsi.8907

Agree. That is the exact point I was trying to make but didn’t articulate it this well. Ppl mix up a lot of things in this thread, some say that 99% of passives are cancer, others say that passives that require active playstyle are not passives but active passives, then there are static passives that just are there, and then there are passive proc passives that you have no control over. Ppl shouldn’t mix all those thing up and say that they all should be removed.

Anyway, your post has pretty much everything that needs to be said about passives, well written.

Thank you. I felt it was going a bit out of hands when people started mentionning vit/toughness as passive that should be removed. That they tried to go to extremes and ridicule others, or they really thought what they wrote is beyond me, but I felt the need to clarify that passives aren’t a single, homogeneous category of behind-the-scene mechanics contributing to the toxicity.
Passive can actually help build diversity by offering exit door to some classes that would be stuck in a single mindset, otherwise.
Hell, Boons and DoT can be considered passive… but they offer interesting play style and truly reward players based on their skills.

Pepsi.8907:

snip

I dont know anymore. You make some good points. I think the invuln/offensive autoprocs should get a cd increase at the very least. I would much prefer if they were reworked to interact with their active counterpart (chill of death teleports you to the enemy, self regulating defenses gives nearby allies invuln or allows you to use skills while invuln). Something like that. I think there is a point where removing all autoprocs (however cheap they are) doesnt do the game any good. If they did completely remove them, then they should add more active defense to compensate.

Pepsi indeed did make a good post. I am just not 100% strict that way. It must be looked in depth for each passive. I am a fan of passives that make playing feel better for low skilled players but don´t push good ones. This helps to keep players and give them time to get better with less frustration. I personaly am more hardcoe. I won´t give up even after getign anihilated for days. I stand up and get better but nowerdays people tend to quit fast without success.
Also the key of a game for me is build diversity and build tactics/strategy which should have more impact then pure skill. The game would be dead for me if each class has one e-sports build all are about the same with slightly diffrent roles and it comes down to 80%+ player skill. I want strategy, team tactics and counterbuilds not pure reaction training. I have the most fun with games that include uncontroalable human interaction and where you have to adapt to the situation, crying in the microfone the changing strategy and a team that reacts fast to changign environement makes my day. A fight where you can only optimize your chances but not see evrything is a good one. Even the best can die from a stray bullet. But thats maybe just me. I am a strategist and tend to be a comander. Had been a good chess player in the past. I am not the best in pure klick reaction and have to focus on a class to hold the level needed.

90% of traits are passive already
like -20% cooldown on X skill type, or +33% duration on Y condition, or +10% damage on Z

Pepsi.8907:

Passive can be either lazy or add depths to a play, it truly depends on how often and strong they are.
It should be a given that passive being as it is, it should never be able to help in any form of significant way, but should help the survival or damage output.
Some passive that requires active play to activate (Slow on interrupt, dodging removing x condis) and/or passive with ICD that others can keep track of without affecting the other player in a major way (I.E: rev’s taunt) can add depth and difficulty to a game, because it’s nothing that makes the player feel like no matter what he does he’s being countered by the I.A, while requiring mental awareness of the other classes to be able to properly interpret and circumvent.
It goes without saying that, in gw2, passive are part of the game: Sigils, runes, amulets and traits gives passive and I think it is acceptable since it doesn,t make the player feel like he’s competing against the computer or the build itself and not the other player.

Where it becomes boring and unhealthy is when passive is used in a way to support the player using them like a clutch, elevating his skill play to a level he wouldn’t be able to be without said passives, that’s when it’s becoming too much.
Skill level and difference in plays are being nibbled at by computer’s procs and behind-the-scene mechanics that are just so numerous that no one can keep track off them while helping tremendously in dealing with adversary without requiring any amount of active playstyle. It gives a feeling of superiority to players who doesn,t necessarily deserves it, while making players who can actively work at their skill level feel like no matter the effort, they just can’t compare or receive an even reward simply because their build doesn’t provide an equal clutch.

The difference between a passive offered in the form of toughness/vitality is that it needs active playstyle to be sustained and requires the player to actively reacts in order to benefit properly from what the builds provide, whereas passive such as the taunt doesn’t requires anything beside input from the enemy to activate itself and works in a way completely opposite of what is healthy. Instead of helping the player, yet requiring him to actively support what he was provided with (a given/taken sort of “relationship”) it works completely on its own, regardless of the player’s own skill level and input, offering 100% of what is possible and triggering against the enemy regardless of how well the player with the passive actively plays, and that is just toxic when you want to give people the impression they can actively progress through the game.

+1

reikken.4961:

90% of traits are passive already
like -20% cooldown on X skill type, or +33% duration on Y condition, or +10% damage on Z

The problem isn’t the static Passover, as stated by the OP it is the Passives that Proc, notably the ones that Proc on certain health percentage or on cc those are the ones that cause issues, they take away from skilled play, now if they toned them down it would help but removing them all together wouldn’t make me lose any sleep.

I think this post is warranted but it’s good to recognize the value of passive procs. They allow more depth in combat without adding more active skills. There aren’t that many other ways to do this. It’s just important not to make them ridiculous or have too many of them at once. Warrior’s passive stances for example are OK right now. They maybe raise the skill floor a bit, but they don’t go too far. Any build in existence can easily play around them, especially if the warrior isn’t making use of how his/her passives work.

Diamond Skin ele on the other hand..

Very powerful and much more demoralizing if it you can’t deal with it. We’ll see how the new version works out. My initial thoughts are maybe better design wise but too powerful. Time will tell though.

You shouldn’t mix up passive traits in general and passive procs. Yes, many traits are more or less passive and this is totally fine, because they still need active input to be useful. The OP is talking only about passive procs though. Those things that punish you for successfully hitting the opponent without him doing anything. They don’t need any skill to be usefull. They promote lazy play, because you get rewarded (or at least not punished in case of those 25% health procs) for taking some hits instead of actively avoiding the enemy’s attacks.
This includes warrior’s defy pain and last stand, which are actually quite strong procs and only a non-issue because of the weak state of warrior in the current meta. Which might change soon.
Diamond skin is passive but not such a passive proc. Imo it is still a bad designed trait, but for different reasons.

Example of a good proc:

Clarion bond – the indicator is there on the UI when it is available and you control it by swapping pets

Example of a bad proc:

Self-regulating defenses – oh look! you got me to 25% hp… ill just run away carried by my random invulnerability proc…. weee

UmbraNoctis.1907:

You shouldn’t mix up passive traits in general and passive procs. Yes, many traits are more or less passive and this is totally fine, because they still need active input to be useful. The OP is talking only about passive procs though. Those things that punish you for successfully hitting the opponent without him doing anything. They don’t need any skill to be usefull. They promote lazy play, because you get rewarded (or at least not punished in case of those 25% health procs) for taking some hits instead of actively avoiding the enemy’s attacks.
This includes warrior’s defy pain and last stand, which are actually quite strong procs and only a non-issue because of the weak state of warrior in the current meta. Which might change soon.
Diamond skin is passive but not such a passive proc. Imo it is still a bad designed trait, but for different reasons.

It seems like several people did not understand my point in the OP. Thank you for clarifying.

Chokolata.1870:

Example of a bad proc:

Self-regulating defenses – oh look! you got me to 25% hp… ill just run away carried by my random invulnerability proc…. weee

Not wanted to be rude but, the heck all this people talking about dept play, haven’t you people learn that those passive proc you guys talking about has their own corresponding internal cooldown? I bet some of you doesn’t even aware on those cooldown (playing against or not) and just charge blindly forward while smashing all possible keybinds.

Again, if you think this game has high risk high reward concept (which doesn’t) perhaps this game is not meant for you. Teamplayer such very rare to find nowadays.

The op is one of the most talented pvpers when it comes to 1v1 that I know, and pretty darn good at conquest too. I’d like to speak for the majorty of the hard core community and say most of us just want a game that feels more skill oriented.