Guild Wars 2

And what about casual RA and TA. While i do respect HA people in there did compete seriously altrought somewhat randomly :P

As for pve behing grossly wrong i think your point is hardly any proven. Just in pve and for a single instance you could find several different build per class all of them usefull and appropriate. It wasnt about build like it was about purpose. You ned an interuption build, then you brought in your party a rupter, if you ned a MM you brought one. a party couldve been made out of 4 warriors 1 ranger 1 monk and 2 defrent mesmers long as each character filled a defrent role (one mes rupted everything as the other placed other stuff.

This is the large principe of everyone can do something efficiently.

If like right now a character lose in effectiveness for not running something it just means the other options needs to be improved.

Esplen.3940:

@Drarnor, in the case of Andal in HotW, Mesmer is better not for removing the Might, but for stealing the Might and then giving the group 25 stacks of Permanent Might. Also with Mimic, Mesmers can now obtain 25 Might onto themselves instead of only holding 3.

Of course, then you have the idiot that shouts and gives everyone Might.

Unless they fixed it already…

Might is one boon. Even at 25 stacks, it’s still just one boon, so it’s well within the area where Mesmers do better (sustained, low quantity boon removal).

Necros do better where there are multiple boons to remove, but do so on a long cooldown.

kyubi.3620:

Speedrun in itself is an abomination and i think we all know what Anet thinks of it.

They support it.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/dungeons/Announcing-Fall-2014-Dungeon-Speed-Clear-Open

Your point is bad. You can use bad builds and complete all the instances in GW2 just like in GW1. You can’t expect bad builds to be as good as the good builds were in either game. If you were happy with your bad builds in GW1 fine, I don’t get why you can’t be happy with them in GW2.

I dont see any Anet post in this topic save for the one saying it should be in the dungeon forum. So how does this make it any official especialy since the tread maker is a player. Proving your point yet? Because it looks like unoficial stuff to me. A third party site making contest etc doesnt necesarily means Anet is in the plot.

Also small reminder,
Anet has nerfed many dungeon shortcut
Anet has nerfed various dungeon running build in the past in some case litteraly ruining them to the point of behing unusable.
Anet has nerfed critical damage recently and might do it again
Im not so sure Anet aproves of stacking in the corner and avoiding all their well planned mechanics when fighting bosses.

They may not be firmly against it but they sure aint helping speedclear dungeon runners right now. Also bad build is only true depending on the point of view over the situation. You cant consider a build bad just because it doesnt rely on a glass cannon principe far from that it is of poor choice for the circonstance but it doesnt mean its wrong by default.

Also you should try and use more words then just ’’bad’’.

kyubi.3620:

I dont see any Anet post in this topic save for the one saying it should be in the dungeon forum. So how does this make it any official especialy since the tread maker is a player. Proving your point yet? Because it looks like unoficial stuff to me. A third party site making contest etc doesnt necesarily means Anet is in the plot.

Also small reminder,
Anet has nerfed many dungeon shortcut
Anet has nerfed various dungeon running build in the past in some case litteraly ruining them to the point of behing unusable.
Anet has nerfed critical damage recently and might do it again
Im not so sure Anet aproves of stacking in the corner and avoiding all their well planned mechanics when fighting bosses.

They may not be firmly against it but they sure aint helping speedclear dungeon runners right now. Also bad build is only true depending on the point of view over the situation. You cant consider a build bad just because it doesnt rely on a glass cannon principe far from that it is of poor choice for the circonstance but it doesnt mean its wrong by default.

Also you should try and use more words then just ’’bad’’.

https://twitter.com/GuildWars2/status/515890659186978816

@GuildWars2 · Sep 27
The Fall 2014 Dungeon Speed Clear Open Tournament, hosted by DnT, is now live! – http://www.twitch.tv/nike_dnt ^JD

I don’t care what you think of my opinion of bad builds or how I arrive at them being bad. This entire thread is you crying that random stuff like Spirit Weapons and MM necros arent as good as meta builds and you wish they were. Get over it, in every game ever there has been good builds and bad builds, welcome to MMOs.

I dont think you have the correct definition of the word bad. The build work as intended altrought it is not appropriate for a player created situation wich only exist in the so called player mind.

Also did Anet actualy do any promotion of this on their main site? Not that i recall and the main page annoucement is prety much blank about it. They are way to busy announcing wvw and spvp tournament. Fact is they likely dont care if you do a third party tournament but dont disaprove it either.

As said its hosted by DnT not by anet.

They promoted it on their facebook, twitter and on the official forums.

They also provided gems to both of the dungeon tournaments.

Well funny because they didnt promote it at all on their main page. Well at least they helping and rewarding their hard working player somewhat. If i didnt specificaly had seen the topic before in the dungeon forum i might have totaly ignored it.

Anet clearly intend to reinforce supportive role however and you only need to check at the trait they have created to confirm it, worse yet they recently created mobs with retaliation and other ridiculously physical build harming ability. Healing people with death shroud strike? Water ele healing to ally? Either anet is making ’’bad’’ trait on purpose or its trying to send a message.

Holy kittening kitten man why is it so difficult for some people to just accept there is probably going to be that one build per class that is probably the best for that game mode.

Also lol at the comment about other people being mad someone else’s build might be better than theirs… the only ones whose jimmies seem to be rustled is you because your decision to use a rp build vs a meta pve dps build isn’t optimal and other players can tell. GO play with other role players and you won’t have a problem.

kyubi.3620:

I dont think you have the correct definition of the word bad. The build work as intended altrought it is not appropriate for a player created situation wich only exist in the so called player mind.

Also did Anet actualy do any promotion of this on their main site? Not that i recall and the main page annoucement is prety much blank about it. They are way to busy announcing wvw and spvp tournament. Fact is they likely dont care if you do a third party tournament but dont disaprove it either.

As said its hosted by DnT not by anet.

They sponsored it with 14,000 gems in prize support, and promoted it on social media. You can try to minimize that however you like, but it won’t make you any more correct. You seem to have a habit of making a statement, get proved wrong, and then double down on that statement by finding some bit of minutiae to quibble over while still being wrong at the main point. Stop being so stubborn.

Oh, so you’re complaining because support is too important for you. You feel like you shouldn’t support your party by taking spotter. Wich is exactly the opposite of what you were saying. So, there’s a way to increase your party dps and you don’t want to take it. Don’t? Your char won’t disapear magically because you didn’t trait for spotter.

It’s pathetic. You said support should be more important, and then after we gave you proof it was the most important thing in the game, you ask for a nerf. Then you insult speedrunning, even though you have 0 experience in speedruns, dungeons, pve, or even the game in general. You rant about how spotter is necessary when taking a ranger in a speedrun, even if you will never ever attempt one. You want any selfish spec to deal the same result as a real spec. The amount of stupid here is Bjarl level. There’s hundreds of alternatives to spotter, and if you made a trait mandatory, let’s say a spotterII trait, everyone would take it and you will come on the forum ranting how you can’t use the original spotter. Please. Stop.

NeXeD.3042:

Holy kittening kitten man why is it so difficult for some people to just accept there is probably going to be that one build per class that is probably the best for that game mode.

I’ll answer that! It’s because some view having a single build that is “the best” as an affront to the intended design of GW2. Despite the fact that I feel the OP has been bouncing around and not so successfully tackling a wide range of tough subjects, there is a point to balancing out pinnacle builds. If, and that is a big if, the devs wanted to give players multiple ways to not just be successful at PVE but to be effective, then tackling the best build and working on improving lesser builds is not a crazy proposition. There is a logic to that, but it only makes sense if how I’m interpreting the design goals of GW2 is close to accurate. The intended design goals of GW2 combat is where people seem to disagree. Did Anet intend for defensive stat points to be a sort of “training wheels” that are later shed for offensive stats when players get “better”? Did Anet intend for players to stack offensive stats and have access to the best defensive skills? Will condition damage remain hamstrung in group PVE content as it is for the entire duration of GW2’s life? In other words, is the way the current meta settled intended? Will it change and should it change? I personally think Anet is tackling most of these questions right now, but as is typical, they are taking a while.

I’ve read through several threads that all have given great ideas on how to fix the perceived/imagined/real issues with combat in PVE/PVP. I’ve reached the conclusion that to achieve a comprehensive solution, there are multiple aspects of combat/builds/AI that have to be altered. Anyone looking for a fix to AI, builds, armor stats alone is probably fooling themselves or at the very least not viewing combat as a series of inter-dependencies.

nightwulf.1986:

Did Anet intend for defensive stat points to be a sort of “training wheels” that are later shed for offensive stats when players get “better”? Did Anet intend for players to stack offensive stats and have access to the best defensive skills? Will condition damage remain hamstrung in group PVE content as it is for the entire duration of GW2’s life? In other words, is the way the current meta settled intended? Will it change and should it change?

I personally think Anet is tackling most of these questions right now, but as is typical, they are taking a while.

It doesn’t look to me like they are tackling these big questions at all. Have they done anything at all since release, to improve conditions? Or to improve the role of the armor stats? Or to change the DPS-focus of the game? Or to fix Defiant?

The only hint I currently see, is that they want to fix the ai, since they are hiring an ai specialist. And about time too. But yeah, they sure ARE taking their time. If they take their usual time to fix glaring fundamental issues with the game, it could take another 4 years before we see big fixes to these problems.

Another issue that I can’t fathom, is how the recent september patch basically added extra training wheels and tutorials to the start of the game (which was fine, and didn’t need fixing), while neglecting to include a tutorial for the real stumpers in the game:

• Combo fields, never explained
• The Mystic Forge, our constant journey to the wiki page
• Crafting, also a constant wiki-fest or Dulfy visit
• Agony gear, again with the crafting, but never explained

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

nightwulf.1986:

Did Anet intend for defensive stat points to be a sort of “training wheels” that are later shed for offensive stats when players get “better”? Did Anet intend for players to stack offensive stats and have access to the best defensive skills? Will condition damage remain hamstrung in group PVE content as it is for the entire duration of GW2’s life? In other words, is the way the current meta settled intended? Will it change and should it change?

I personally think Anet is tackling most of these questions right now, but as is typical, they are taking a while.

It doesn’t look to me like they are tackling these big questions at all. Have they done anything at all since release, to improve conditions? Or to improve the role of the armor stats? Or to change the DPS-focus of the game? Or to fix Defiant?

The only hint I currently see, is that they want to fix the ai, since they are hiring an ai specialist. And about time too. But yeah, they sure ARE taking their time. If they take their usual time to fix glaring fundamental issues with the game, it could take another 4 years before we see big fixes to these problems.

Another issue that I can’t fathom, is how the recent september patch basically added extra training wheels and tutorials to the start of the game (which was fine, and didn’t need fixing), while neglecting to include a tutorial for the real stumpers in the game:

• Combo fields, never explained
• The Mystic Forge, our constant journey to the wiki page
• Crafting, also a constant wiki-fest or Dulfy visit
• Agony gear, again with the crafting, but never explained

I guess the only indication I was using was that they had acknowledged most of these issues at some point. They gave a statement in the forums on why conditions are calculated the way they are and why it’s in its current state. On the subject of the dps-meta, Ferocity was stated by devs to be just the first step in a series of changes moving toward something that is more than just allowing “killing things faster”. Obviously, with their stance on how quickly balance is done they said they wanted to see how the changes would shake out before making any other changes. Given how long it’s taken devs in other mmos with far more money and manpower to address similar issues (many years in some cases), I can only assume that these things will change in some shape or form but it won’t be in the near future.

As for the NPE changes, I agree that things like combo fields and agony gear should have a better in-game explanation. However, Anet has said they didn’t pull this stuff out of thin air and was the result of testing with players on what they were most frustrated with in their experience as new players. Again, the confidence in their methods boils down to whether or not someone believes that Anet would out and out lie or simply distrusts their methods at face value. Can’t say much on that subject.

oxtred.7658:

Oh, so you’re complaining because support is too important for you. You feel like you shouldn’t support your party by taking spotter. Wich is exactly the opposite of what you were saying. So, there’s a way to increase your party dps and you don’t want to take it. Don’t? Your char won’t disapear magically because you didn’t trait for spotter.

It’s pathetic. You said support should be more important, and then after we gave you proof it was the most important thing in the game, you ask for a nerf. Then you insult speedrunning, even though you have 0 experience in speedruns, dungeons, pve, or even the game in general. You rant about how spotter is necessary when taking a ranger in a speedrun, even if you will never ever attempt one. You want any selfish spec to deal the same result as a real spec. The amount of stupid here is Bjarl level. There’s hundreds of alternatives to spotter, and if you made a trait mandatory, let’s say a spotterII trait, everyone would take it and you will come on the forum ranting how you can’t use the original spotter. Please. Stop.

What tells you i got 0 experiance? Just because i dont want to run the meta ranger doesnt mean i dont run other meta class for pve endgame (note that i did play end level fractals i just dont like running them on warrior only and constantly with the same boring build). Ive been here since release and the reason i dont run spotter is because i dont run marksmanship to begin with and thats because i run beast mastery. You cant basicaly run 4 marks and have 5 skirm 3 nature and 6 Bm at the same time. The fact that spotter is in the one traitline i dont trait in is kind of a serious issue to my build because i indeed cant take it. In theory this means i cant actualy run both BM and spotter at the same time wich is kind of hilarously ironic because just to run spoter id likely have to downscale my pet damage by about 150 power and precision so to gain a barely better auto attack damage and grant ally a what +5 chance to crit? Spotter is only viable in a build that actively use the ranger itself as the damage source wich automaticaly removes axe build from the chart despite their easy access to might.

They should indeed give more explanation on combo fields at the start of the game for all those people that just started playing. They also should largely improve condition damage in pve as well as stuff that currently dont scale up as easily as brute strenght build does. I can only hope a new AI will actualy help make variety amonst the many availlable meta.

Also thanks to the fact meta proc might to the whole party, multiple class stuff such as might to pet on crit and from axe AA becomes nearly automaticaly obsolete. At this point why bother running a pet specialist ranger? Running that build however works very well in pugs where a 25 teamwide migh stack isnt garenteed. Considering i rarely with anything else then pugs as ive not myself joined a dungeon running guild or ever been interested into one my build remains adequate but i must admit that in any combination of organised team it would have several crippling lacunes.

kyubi.3620:

At this point why bother running a pet specialist ranger?

There is a really simple answer to that question, but only you will be able to answer it for yourself.

hybrid.5027:

kyubi.3620:

At this point why bother running a pet specialist ranger?

There is a really simple answer to that question, but only you will be able to answer it for yourself.

The question is why having 4 marksmanship should be more important then having put it anywhere else, they should actualy give incentive to run multiple defrent stuff not niche classes into one trick ponies. There should be other buff in other trait line wich may or may not be compatible with current meta so to give options to bring something defrent (sure you wont be able to have them all and by far you shouldnt but it would assure everyone can actualy bring something usefull. I dont mind bringing in a party wide buff long as its in my chosen traitline cept the only traitline that has a buff in the whole ranger list is the one line ill never use on this character (how ironic).

The second question is why do you people are actualy anoyed that someone would request uneficient pve build to be buffed to actualy become efficient. What do you have to lose? This would not weaken your own build in the first place, only promote the use of more options.

Meta dps will always exist thats sure but it would be less of a pain for dungeon runners not running the meta on purpose if the defrence in effectiveness wasnt this large between builds. Sure its all right that your build does more damage, but if the defrence was only of about 5% between two build and both brought in a defrent interesting features im prety much sure you wouldnt see the defrence between those 2 build and two defrent classes.

Because everything is already usable, so buffing a spec means making it optimal, and thus forcing everyone to play the way you want to play. You know, play how I, me, and myself want.

oxtred.7658:

Because everything is already usable, so buffing a spec means making it optimal, and thus forcing everyone to play the way you want to play. You know, play how I, me, and myself want.

Not if they all equal it indeed mean you can play what you want and that i can play what i want and all that witheout anyone judging or hating. If you wanted to play sword ranger its all fine but axe ranger should be equaly viable as a choice for an effective character in a party as an option for people that DONT want to play sword ranger. Everyone should be able to play how they want witheout penality or the impending menace of behing rejected. I aint forcing you to play my playstyle neither should you force me to play yours with the menace that if i dont i wont get a party. Your litteraly forcing people to play your way just so they can do end game content how is this not a form of blackmail and intimidation.

You hate that wich isnt efficient but what if everything was actualy efficient?

Look its obvious that a guy running a condition damage weapon should clearly wear condition damage gear but theres absolutely no reason NONE why two berserker geared characters both relying on heavy damaging mechanics shouldnt be close or next to equal in effectiveness. Also no reason why one build should have more advantage then another still well made build.

Do you have something against the other spec of a same profession behing as optimal as the one you use right now? Because i think it should work that way. This isnt world of warcraft where your stuck playing a single role and even then within the same class theres 3 defrent spec the same character may do.

There is multiple way to deal dps you know not just one.

There’s a lot of support, indeed, but it’s variations or nuances within homogenized DPS builds. GW2 lacks clearly defined roles and categorizations, with clearly defined niches for each of them (some exceptions excluded), and the playerbase hasn’t been reacting very well to that.

Even then there should be variation within the dps builds in questions that would be a +

kyubi.3620:

Even then there should be variation within the dps builds in questions that would be a +

There are variations of DPS builds, you’re just purposely choosing to ignore them.

nightwulf.1986:

I guess the only indication I was using was that they had acknowledged most of these issues at some point.

Acknowledging a problem, and fixing a problem are two very different things in my book. Anet has acknowledged a lot of problems, including conditions and defiant. But until they actually change the way these things work, how much they acknowledge does not make much of a difference to the problem at hand.

nightwulf.1986:

They gave a statement in the forums on why conditions are calculated the way they are and why it’s in its current state.

It wasn’t a very convincing explanation though. I think they just didn’t do their game design very well. The game currently leans much too far towards DPS, and away from conditions on multiple levels. Not just the condition cap is holding it back, but also the countless immunities to conditions in PVE, and the fact that large world bosses are considered objects, and can thus not be affected by conditions. That’s just bad design, and it’s also inconsistent design.

nightwulf.1986:

On the subject of the dps-meta, Ferocity was stated by devs to be just the first step in a series of changes moving toward something that is more than just allowing “killing things faster”.

I’ll give you that one. Although on the whole I think Ferocity has not really shaken up the meta that much.

nightwulf.1986:

As for the NPE changes, I agree that things like combo fields and agony gear should have a better in-game explanation. However, Anet has said they didn’t pull this stuff out of thin air and was the result of testing with players on what they were most frustrated with in their experience as new players. Again, the confidence in their methods boils down to whether or not someone believes that Anet would out and out lie or simply distrusts their methods at face value. Can’t say much on that subject.

My confidence in their testing methods has been as low as possible since release. Ever since all those bugged achievements that they’ve implemented several times (why implement something that is clearly broken?), or changes to the game that completely broke crucial game mechanics (like all the bandits in the game spamming their special attacks infinitely), or the recent bug they introduced to the necro-trait Flesh of the Master, that kills all minions.

I don’t know how any of this passes testing, and makes it into the game. But back to the tutorials, there was nothing wrong with the low level stuff in the game. It was perfectly explained. They didn’t need to remove certain heart quests, or remove harvesting nodes. What a load of nonsense, it was fine. So why change it?

And then I go back to crafting my Mawdrey II backpiece, and MERCIFUL Grenth, what a crafting labyrinth! Look at this stuff!

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Mawdrey

And this isn’t even a complete overview. You need to click all the individual parts of the recipes, to figure out how to craft those as well. And you’re bound to make some mistakes along the line. Why isn’t this properly explained in-game? And why has the wiki such an inconvenient, convoluted way of showing these really long recipes?

And lets not forget, they even added all new materials to the recipe, as if the game didn’t have enough crafting materials yet. Foxfire Clusters? What are those, where do they drop, and why isn’t there a material slot for them in my bank? And of course I have to look that up as well. ARGH! What a mess!

And why do all of these recipes need to use the Mystic Toilet? I hate the Mystic Toilet! It’s a terrible crafting mechanic! I want to see recipes, so I can see what I need. The Mystic Toilet is like a primitive inferior crafting mechanism, when the game already has a much better crafting mechanism in the form of crafting professions.

kyubi, I’m going to respond to you as a whole and not in regards to this thread by itself, since you’re posting your frustrations in multiple threads with different discussions.

You are taking the words play how I want out of line. Whether or not you actually know or are even thinking about the words, your argument always boils down to that.

Right now, you’re complaining about being forced to put in 4 points to improve party DPS instead of using the points for other things. You are, in no way, forced to put your 4 points down that way. There is nobody holding you down until you play like that. However, if you want to improve the damage of the party, and not just yourself, then you should just quietly deal with it. Every profession has traits that are important for improving party DPS (sorry Necromancers, not you).

Yes, you want to play a different spec, you don’t want to use trait Spotter and Frost Spirit. That’s fine. Then don’t. I and nobody else is forcing you to. If your guild says you have to run a specific build and you don’t want to, then leave it. If a group you are running with tells you to run a specific build, then leave it. You can play how you want as long as you are willing to accept with whom it is acceptable.

If you want to keep up this arguing, I would like to kindly remind you that there’s a difference between being a child while stamping your feet because things aren’t exactly how you want it to be and being an adult who faces the reality of your choices.

I may not be responsible or mature, but the reason why I play the “lolopmetabuild” instead of the silly builds I like is that when I play with a party, I play for the party and not for myself.

kyubi.3620:

Even then there should be variation within the dps builds in questions that would be a +

Phalanx warriors, hammer guards, reflect mesmers, PF/weak spot eles, and offhand training ranger all say hi. There are a number of builds that fall under the category of “meta” for all classes and they range from heavy support (both buffing AND defensive utility like projectile reflects/blinds/cc) to best personal dps. This includes not only trait choices but weapon and utility skill choices.

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

“on acknowledging problems”
Acknowledging a problem, and fixing a problem are two very different things in my book. Anet has acknowledged a lot of problems, including conditions and defiant. But until they actually change the way these things work, how much they acknowledge does not make much of a difference to the problem at hand.

“on conditions”
It wasn’t a very convincing explanation though. I think they just didn’t do their game design very well. The game currently leans much too far towards DPS, and away from conditions on multiple levels. Not just the condition cap is holding it back, but also the countless immunities to conditions in PVE, and the fact that large world bosses are considered objects, and can thus not be affected by conditions. That’s just bad design, and it’s also inconsistent design.

…snip…

“on NPE changes”

My confidence in their testing methods has been as low as possible since release. Ever since all those bugged achievements that they’ve implemented several times (why implement something that is clearly broken?), or changes to the game that completely broke crucial game mechanics (like all the bandits in the game spamming their special attacks infinitely), or the recent bug they introduced to the necro-trait Flesh of the Master, that kills all minions.

I don’t know how any of this passes testing, and makes it into the game. But back to the tutorials, there was nothing wrong with the low level stuff in the game. It was perfectly explained. They didn’t need to remove certain heart quests, or remove harvesting nodes. What a load of nonsense, it was fine. So why change it?
…snip…

On that first point I made about acknowledging problems, I agree that identifying an issue and fixing them are different. Remember though, the first step to addressing a problem is recognizing that you have a problem. I guess what I wanted to get at is that because they have identified these as potential or actual problems, it is not unlikely that they are thinking about how to address them. I don’t know for sure what they are doing but it’s always been my understanding that there are good and bad reasons for keeping silent on internal developments. They’ve made it clear that they have their own priorities and don’t talk about anything until there’s something to say. You can either read their silence as though nothing is happening or they aren’t in a position to discuss any progress yet. Given that the devs have been attempting to improve the game based on feedback, real or not, it is likely that they are working on these things but nothing is ready yet. There are many possibilities as to what they are actually doing, but I remain confident that they just don’t have an answer to these issues yet and will comment further on them when they have something of substance to offer.

On condition damage design issues, I believe you are right in that there was more to designing how conditions interact with the world than just the financial limitations on how condition damage was calculated. Although, I don’t think they were being questioned about those other limitations when they commented on the cap in particular. Other games have attempted to limit the way certain attacks effect bosses. Generally, in mmos and RPGs it’s to help make players feel more powerful in normal encounters and give the boss an edge over you(which can be viewed as a challenge or not). I mean there’s more to these design choices I can imagine but I can’t really comment further on their reasons. I remember WOW had similar problems for a number of years with DOT skills overwriting each other. The devs took a while to come up with a compromise for that one too.

I should mention that your statement on conditions not affecting world bosses because they are objects sounds like you are mixing different actual issues. I believe it goes like this: Conditions don’t affects objects. Objects cannot be crit. World Bosses are objects and are affected by damaging conditions but cannot be crit. I don’t know why it’s like this but there could be a number of reasons. I think part of it just comes down to controlling how quickly those fights go.

What I hope you take away from my comments is that, history has shown us that development on MMOs is often a long process and we won’t always see a fix to some big problems right away or even soon. Some mmos survive for many years with glaring issues and others don’t. I don’t know for sure that things like the condition cap will be fixed but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect a positive change in the future. Not everyone has to be as positive as I am, but I’m still having fun and I’ll stick around to see where things are going.

I’m worried about their priorities though. Especially since they decided to ‘fix’ something that wasn’t broken to begin with (the start of the game), in favor of something that did need fixing (explaining combo fields, crafting, agony gear, and the mystic forge via a tutorial).