Guild Wars 2

Handicap would be really difficult to balance, because good players have better judgement, multitasking, strategy, etc. It is not something easily measurable, and you wouldn’t want to mess with those.

I personally think adding a player (based on rating) to to weaker side would be better.
Player won’t feel like OP/UP character just because of some shady handicap adjustement.

I think lowering the channeling time would be too powerful especially in pve, but I think HB is too lackluster in pvp because of its immobility. And must be combine with other crowd control skill to be awesome.
I think it would look stupid for warrior to walk at ~50% movement speed while HB, and not that useful against anybody since everyone move at full speed anyway.
If they enable warrior to rotate the direction while HB then it would seem less like a joke.

Wow, I never thought I would see such hostility against mounts… Think of it as a cosmetic item, mounts are an integral part of any medieval fantasy world… and it sure is a great future addition to GW2.

I think people misunderstand that mount = super fast traveling/skipping method, but it doesn’t have to be…
But it can be difficult for charr, I can’t see them on a horse… so everyone race get a “racial mount”? or just charr… that is the only reason I see why mount can be a problem, consistency with all races.
And, I’m against flying mount , those are over the top…

Mirta.5029:

You might have a case if it was a first person game. You might still have a case if the tool in question is the same one that people were using as a zoom tool to see trough walls. If all it did was increase the FoV then there’s no advantage with that.

Can’t have a case here, it is already possible to change FOV (wider screen/ajust resolution).
Based on what the op is saying, since that’s where the argument came from, it is only a FOV tool.
So, no logical reason to be this fire up against someone using 3rd tool to change his FOV.

Arkenbon.7301:

I guess my 3 monitor eyefinity display which GW 2 supports and automatically increases the FoV is a bannable offense.

This should give people a hint, increasing the FOV is okay.
If ANet is against it, they would change how resolution affects the FOV.

FOV slider (limits to ~120°) for everyone, everybody is happy.

Since it is a topic to stir up some discussions weither or not LA (or all major city) waypoints should be free, it is interesting so see different opinions or else there wouldn’t a lot of things to discuss.

And for now the only reason to be against it is : money sink
But since we are only asking for free waypoints to major city, it is totally reasonable for logical reasons :

- Still plenty of waypoints to sink your money
- Unless you remove the feature of the portal to LA in the mist, LA is going to stay overpopulated and the other major city underpopulated.

I only see advantages to free travel to all the main city, and can’t see any reasons to be against it.

Money isn’t a problem for them, but it helps. Not enough artist working on new skin, throw in some money, hire more.
New skins doesn’t have to follow the theme of some future contents, they can be developed independently.
At least with the backers, those complaining about everything have to accept the fact that the skin that appear in the gemstore is actually chosen by the players.

tolunart.2095:

I know that, but if I were to take any of the things posted here seriously, I might as well superglue my palm to my face.

ANet doesn’t have to do exactely what the players suggests, that wouldn’t be logical. If the idea is ridiculous, even with a million of backers it is still ridiculous.
Ideas come from ANet and their vision of the game.
The artist at ANet put forth some concepts, players back the ones they like.
Player get to see what the developers are working on before the developer puts in months to finish modelling the skin for all race.
They work on those that are successfully funded.

I get what I want, they get the money.
I sure want that.

And since we are backing a concept with money, there is a lot more weight in it.

RNG boxes exist because it has the potential of better profit, but is it RNG, and it lack transparency from ANet, it doesn’t inspire confidence from the community (a lot of people dislike RNG boxes).

In the process of creating new models, they have to create a lot of concepts, they can update us with those, so we are not always in the dark., this won’t take a lot of their time.

tolunart.2095:

NCSoft is a publicly traded company, isn’t it? If so, it is already crowdfunded. Buy stock.

This is not a tiny independent company that runs on a shoestring budget.

This is not the point of crowd funding, how much stock do you think you need to buy before they allow you to choose what they add in the gemstore/future content?

This is just another way to bring more funding for the development of the game, but this time it is the player who decide which concept/project they will be backing.

If this turn out to be profitable (enough support from player), they can dedicated a team for bring new skin in the gemstore regularly.

This will allow player to see what the artists are working on.

I thought it is on the developers part to put forth idea/concept, then players choose which one (or all of them) they want to appear on gemstore by backing the concept.

I’m sure there are artists at ANet who have great ideas about armor/weapon skin, but we never get to see it because they didn’t make the cut.

How many time, we want that armor that never made it into the game, well now at least the majority can decide if it is in game or not.

If it really work they can for a team just for that, let say the target is 2000$ for a weapon skin, backer can buy more then 1 and gift it (since we can do it now in the gemstore)
100 gems costs 1.25$, a skin cost around 500 gem, so about 6$
They only need 350 backer.

With a little organization, this is a win/win scenario.

Those “design a weapon” contest are rare, because it take time and it doesn’t have tangible profit.
With crowd funding, the developers will be more motivate and confident that the skin/new content they are working on, is what players want.

Yup, it was moved to suggestion, since I think it is more suitable, but I think it can open the door for more discussion, I hope to get more opinion about it in the general discussion section.

How about crowd funding for additional content for GW2, like new armor/weapon skin (I would like new emote too) in the gem store.

They can show us the concept before begin working on it, instead of scrapping the concepts they deem lacking, let us see it and choose the one we would like to buy.
Even the community can contribute to those concept.

We get to see the awesome concept of ANet and we get to choose which one will be on the gemstore next.
This will assure them that their works aren’t going to waste (they will get the money through crowd funding) and we get what we want.

Skin can be just the beginning, if I can only have a mount … even if it is 33% faster than on foot.

Since there is so much topic of people complaining the gem store not offering what they want, why not try this?

This can be the ground work for future suggestions too, even if it doesn’t concern the gemstore ; more big events/bosses in the world, more pets, more pets options, player housing…
That way we can show ANet what the players want the most and that we are willing to pay for it.

Note this for additional contents, this won’t affect what they have already planned.

What do you think? feasible?

BlueprintLFE.2358:

So I just tested out cleansing ire and burst mastery in some WvW to see how well it works hammer still has the blind problem of missing the burst not removing condies, but besides that these 2 traits work against each other.

Cleansing Ire removes an amount of condies on adrenaline spent, burst mastery makes you spend less adrenaline on burst.

Anyone have any thoughts or input on this.

Do you mean Adrenal reserves? because Burst Mastery as of now, increase burst skill damage by 10%.

Kahrgan.7401:

Gab Superstar.4059:

Kahrgan.7401:

Taurethion.7302:

I play PVE only, and tried greatsword for awhile. 100 Blade is the only ability I found to have any use for me… and half the time it was interrupted by knockdowns or such. 100 Blade is probably the only thing making greatsword worthwhile, take it away and watch everyone switch. Myself, I switched back to double swords and condition gear. Probably not ideal, but working best for my playstle so far.

This is a common misconception. Auto attack swings do more dmg than HB. It just doesnt seem that way because you dont see the numbers crammed together. With the right spec you CAN ignore HB all together.

Mechanics people, learn them!

This is wrong for so many reasons >.<.

I’m just gonna redirect you to the “right spec” that you seem to be so fond of. Read what some of the traits do, then evaluate the skills again (mostly in terms of attacks per second).

Sorry, I don’t have the time or energy to explain it to you. If you can’t figure it out, I apologize, but you are beyond my help.

Good luck.

Hundred Blades is and will always be (for the sake of balance) superior to auto-attack.
I can’t even phantom the reasoning behind those who think otherwise.
You attack faster with HB, so more proc from various source, including Forceful Greatsword and Sigil of Strength.

Hi, I have heard bleeding build is inefficient in massive encounter because of the 25 stack limits shared by everyone.
So I was thinking, since burning stack in duration, does that mean if when I apply burning, will it add to the duration to the burning condition another player but on the foe?
For example, I see a foe has 10 sec of burning, and I use an attack that apply 2 sec of burning, does it add up to 12 sec of burning?

Or, each player have their own condition duration stack contrary to condition damage stack (which is shared by everyone).

If the condition duration is shared and not individual, does that mean if many people with burning build attack the same foe, it is possible for the foe to die in 1 minute with 2 minutes of burning duration stacked on it? so 1 minute of burning is wasted?