Also, there is a really annoying tendency for some (many?) of those wannabe leetpros to consider every single group that isn’t explicitly tagged as new player friendly to be off-limits for “worthless scrubs” and “filthy casuals”.
It’s absolutely stupid IMO but they are within their rights. From experience however most of the players who do that are trying to compensate their own flaws.
…as it is, you’re kitten ed if you do (play a “meta” character that you’re not “perfect” with) and kitten ed if you don’t (play a non-“meta” character that you’re better at staying alive on).
A stranger can’t tell how good you are so he will probably assume you’re average and the way things are right now most average full-meta will contribute more than most average non-meta.
…if a game’s balance is so messed up that many classes/builds are considered “useless”, and if the playerbase is so messed up that they not only accept that…
Players don’t accept anything balance related, we complain about it all the time, but until balance shifts we adapt to it best we can.
…but gleefully use it as a source of frequent abuse, that is definitely a much bigger problem still, and IMO people can absolutely complain both about the bad balance and the ugly attitudes.
A player that abuses another over something like this will also abuse over pretty much anything, it’s nothing to do with content, meta or balance. Toxic people will toxic, hopefully be reported, hopefully be banned.
There’s no profession in the game that isn’t able to clear any and all content, as long as its build is optimized for the task. There are specific people who are bad, but said people can play any class and any build whatsoever and cost you your run.
The meta is a tool you can use to get better control over certain things, but some players demonize it while others worship it as a cult; some take it as a personal attack to their class/build/playstyle while others confuse the meaning of “viable” and “optimal”. IMO both sides are stupid and destructive. Nonetheless the meta is useful and if a group leader wants to follow it it’s none of anyone’s concern.
Also, when I first started my Necro I knew that would be an issue later on, but I chose to play it anyway so I accepted the consequences of that decision. I don’t blame some random dude for it, if anything I blame myself and ANet’s balance team.
Bottom line is if you want to play in a group (and you don’t want to form a new one) you adapt to it, not the other way around.
I don’t feel bad for those newbies being called out.
There is a colossal difference between “calling out” genuinely bad behavior and being verbally abusive... there is absolutely no excuse ever for hatespeech, threats, stalking, etc.
I wholeheartedly agree, but the experiences I was referring to never got to that point.
And if someone’s definition of “bad behavior” includes things like “has less than 10k AP” or “has no mastery points” or “plays class X” or “asks any questions” or “tries to play a dungeon at the level the game tells them they can instead of level 80 with full ascended” or “dares to deviate in any way, shape or form from the One True Way as handed down by the Infallible Spreadsheet Meta Gods”, then they are the problem. Not the other person.
If you create a group it’s absolutely your right to put whatever requirements you want, even if they are ridiculous (you likely won’t see your party filled, but that’s on you).
Reasonable leaders will add reasonable requirements for the purpose of enhancing the success rate of whatever the group is being formed to do. If you’re looking for a DPS and you find yourself having to choose between a Tempest and a Reaper, which do you think gives you the best odds? An average Tempest equals the DPS of a perfectly played Reaper and assuming they’re both strangers to you the chance of the Tempest being average is greater than that of the Reaper being godlike, being reasonable to pick the Tempest. So if you add “no necros” does it make you a meta-slave or just aware of the odds?
The necro has just as much right to create his own group with whatever rules he wants and play with like-minded folk, so that would not be “bad behavior” on anyone’s part, no one would be the problem. Going on and on about being declined for being a Reaper, now that I would consider not only bad but an entitled and selfish attitude.
The very few times I’ve seen anything of the sort happen was during fractals and stuff, and it was because the “new guy” wasn’t pulling his own weight while simultaneously refusing to take advice.
If you’re in a group you’re using everyone’s time, not just your own, so you’re expected to put as much effort into it as everyone else. I don’t feel bad for those newbies being called out.
Other than that all I see is people helping each other: advice, JP portals, thank-you-mails and so on. I don’t pvp tho so can’t really talk about toxicity there.
Don’t you think the name is a bit redundant? Revenants are mistwalkers by default, a bunch of their skills already involve dashing through the mists for a while… to me it feels sort of like a thief elite spec named “burglar” or something.
I like the skills, the legend (always wanted to know more about Razah), the ranged dagger style, but the elite spec name bugs me.
I agree, I’m bad at names
In all fairness I’d pick Mistwalker over Revenant for the name of the class anyday.
Don’t you think the name is a bit redundant? Revenants are mistwalkers by default, a bunch of their skills already involve dashing through the mists for a while… to me it feels sort of like a thief elite spec named “burglar” or something.
I like the skills, the legend (always wanted to know more about Razah), the ranged dagger style, but the elite spec name bugs me.
The Mirage Elite NPC says that over time the sands of the desert accumulated a lot of magic and that the Mirage was sort of born out of that, so perhaps the Scourge is similar (with the anti-Palawa Joko philosophy, instead of sand mirror making) .
