Showing Posts For Donnach Donnchadha.7864:
4.8 million orders for candy corn have been placed for candy corn at or below the equilibrium price. There is clearly a desire for candy corn to be used in some fashion, why do you believe that people are dumping their stock on the TP if supply has not yet fulfilled the demand?
(edited by Donnach Donnchadha.7864)
This mini game is a joke…
And the Mad King plays the rim shot
Do Signet of Renewal and Empathic Bond both remove conditions from the player on the same cycle or do they tick on staggered ten-second cycle?
No this map is not for GvG. The new area they will add in Obsidian Sanctum will be the place for player-organized GvG.
Oh, I hadn’t read about the Obsidian Sanctum, thanks for the link
Given that the announced new map will not contribute to the PPT of your team and there is no limit to the number of allowable players in that map (correct me if I’m wrong on either of these assumptions please), it sounds like this is a way to accommodate GvG within WvW while removing some of the issues many people had with GvG occurring in an otherwise active map. I understand that this is likely not Anet’s intention, but it seems to me like this is a form of tacit consent. Thoughts?
I don’t mind having old content reinstated. This time last year was thick with mid-term exams and I didn’t really get the opportunity to experience the Mad King’s ephemeral reign.
I too would like the opportunity to replay the personal story. I laughed so hard during the norn storyline wherein you get so drunk that you misplace a tank. sigh wish I could do that again.
ok but what about ts info? is that considered prohibited contact info?
I do not mean to distribute my contact info to thousands of people. Given how generalized the text in the rules of conduct are, I don’t want break any rules by coordinating out of game communication with my guild, some I know from real life, others I’ve only spoken to through the game. Given that many companys make the distinction between distributing information you’ve be previously authorized to disseminate and surreptitiously obtained information, I want to know if Anet makes that distinction as well.
Rule 2 reads as follows:
You may not post or communicate any player’s real world information (name, address, account name, telephone number, etc.) through the Guild Wars 2 Game or websites.
I would like to know whether or not this is exclusive to other player’s real world information, or are we prohibited from disclosing our own contact information through the game client as well.
Hmm, thanks for the link. The wiki indicates though that infinity ball storyline is just a possibility and not the confirmed source. I may have prematurely jumped to the conclusion that it was Scarlet, however, the information presented doesn’t yet require a retcon to implicate Scarlet.
I’ve never played Asura, that is interesting. Though, the same steam creatures are occasionally included in Scarlet’s invasions, it that to be considered independent asuran influence supposedly from Scarlet’s past?
I always thought it was a clutch of karka.
It seems that there is a new forum thread every other day demonizing the introduction of Scarlet into the lore of Guild Wars. Complaints commonly claim that she is a Mary-Sue, a Foil, an irrational actor, and shoe-horned into the world with no connection the world from before.
The dev team has repeatedly told us that the first two listed complaints (Mary-sue/Foil) are only an issue for the present as with future updates and more character development the whole Scarlet storytelling process will have been enriched through the layering and foreshadowing. Subsequently, there’s not much to say about that save for wait and see, so if you will indulge me I’d like to delve into the latter two:
Scarlet as an irrational actor
First, a rational actor is one that has a goal or preconceived win condition and actively makes decisions to further their progress towards achieving that aim. Keep in mind, characters can be both insane and rational, as goals and win conditions are set by the character internally and not subject to external definition.
Archetypes of Character Rationality
In order to better define character rationality in this post (as there seems to be multiple definitions used on the forum) I’ve included a number of comparative examples for illustration. The Joker and Harley Quinn are included because of the frequent comparisons made between them and Scarlet, and Gollum/Smeagol for the inclusion of the insane-rational character archetype.
The Joker is a hobbesian villain whose objective is to oppose the persistence of “the leviathan” in the form Batman, this over-arching goal does not change. Each encounter with this character shows them acting in a way which would aid their aim; i.e. attacking the established “moral code” of no killing as arbitrary through presentation of reasonable counter-factuals; and exposing flaws in established security in order to weaken trust in “the leviathan.” Harley Quinn also follows this example, the only change that her goal is instead to earn the affection of the Joker. While these characters appear insane and irrational they are not. Their worldviews are not inconsistent with the reality experienced by those around them, and each plan progresses them towards their goals.
Gollum/Smeagol is an insane-rational character. His perception of reality has become warped to the point that he believes possession of the ring is central to his fulfillment, despite being a tool for his demise. Despite this, given that character’s goals and views are internally defined and so long as the character’s actions are not contradictory to this goal, his insanity is not a barrier to his rationality
Scarlet as a Rational Character
Scarlet is in danger of becoming an irrational character, though not doomed. Currently, her short-term objectives have focused on the disruption of the established order through any means available. This may serve a number of long-term goals, the institution of a new regime of her design being prime among them. Meaning that Scarlet’s actions are not inconsistent with a rational character. However, this has not been disclosed as her intention as of yet. Categorical or indiscriminate violence has limited goals it can potentially serve, subsequently, if these actions continue for much longer, the writers will have written themselves into a corner wherein they may need to default to insane-rational in order to avoid a Scarlet regime if that is not their intention.
Longevity of Scarlet within the World
Another common issue raised with the introduction of Scarlet is that seems to have materialized out of no-where. This issue does not need an examination of ideas to dispel, but a look at in-game evidence to the contrary. I apologize if gameplay bias has seeped into this post, the majority of characters I play are norn, so the evidence may not be as prevalent in other regions as it is in the Shiverpeaks.
Scarlet has been an opponent in the Shiverpeaks since release. For those familiar, we have battled her steam creatures in the eastern part of Lornar’s Pass since release. Moreover for the patrons of Hoelbrak we’ve played witness to the seemingly inane ramblings of a woman driven half-mad by Scarlet’s attacks since the beginning:
“Take heed, I haven’t taken leave of my senses. I’ve seen creatures of metal and steam.”
At this time I’d like to open this up to criticism. This appears to me to be a clear element of foreshadowing, however, if this is not associated with Scarlet, I would be happy to see evidence to the contrary.
TL;DR Scarlet is not an irrational character, nor is she ungrounded to the lore of the game before her formal introduction.
Yeah, I don’t really care for the loot. I ran the Molten weapons facility cause it was hella fun, I’ve completed the personal quest for the story. I tried and failed teq because it was challenging, and I’ve played through TA because its intriguing.
Loot is not an effective motivator to play content. Yes, the keys don’t give you much of a reward, but it also takes next to no effort to get them.
Also D3 failed because of poorly implemented UI, poor multi-player systems, and the RMT. Loot is ancillary to the game but is not the mainstay of it.
My main concern about the pet mechanic is the AoE avoidance problem. More fights are including unique AoE effects that cannot be micromanaged to mitigate damage to pet (i.e. “waves” and other effects that require precise positioning). While pet micro issues are mitigated by using sword or greatsword, this limits build diversity by tying pet efficacy to a subset of available weapons. In summation, we are not given the opportunity to manage pet mitigation of AoE damage and on-target status with the same sovereignty that is given to other classes and their mechanics. That’s just frustrating.
Oh I thought you were alledging that pine was a hardwood despite its softness
So a Hardwood is a non-conifer broad-leafed tree, and a Softwood is anything else (confier or needle-leafed).
Fyi, Pine is a Softwood tree (needle-leafed evergreen.)
Alright, I guess that’s a good an answer as any. I had wondered if tyria just had a different flora genealogy, but it seems its just unofficial.
Oh the pine tree! How glorious is she! An evergreen having needles with sheen. Is there any greater sight than her boughs bending in the wind. Her branches, so versatile, flexible and soft. No better an example of a softwood tree than she.
So why the hell does chopping down a sapling yield Hard Wood Logs?
Well I’d recommend focusing on mobility/control and just make sure they don’t catch up to you. PBS is obvious in its application. Hunter’s Shot is good if you capitalize on it by maneuvering behind them during the short stealth. However, to maximize that potential I would recommend dumping GS for just a sword. Hornet Sting/Monarch’s Leap just gives you so much mobility if you manipulate it correctly.
How will this be amazing for Rangers? I play mostly on the weekends so I haven’t been able to WvW since the patch, but I seldom even have the opportunity to stomp. Engaging from 1500 range, they usually are stomped by someone else by the time I close the distance.
edited for grammar/spelling
I also think it is important to recognize the pet swiftness on that ability. With the stealth+pet swiftness it now makes it easier to shift PvE aggro from the ranger to the pet, making it an effective aggro reset
yeah it’s frustrating me too, I posit that there is a “opening strike range” since I more consistently apply the condition when I am close to the target