Showing Posts For Rho.1923:
OP, your idea is very pay to win. I’m against it.
I would love more skins based on race/class/order/story choices.
I don’t think it’ll work in PvP/WvW unless those game modes automatically disable those options.
good post.
I feel that if Anet uses the AI they use for the dualing NPCs in the mist for all mobs (they dodge and kite in addition to DPS), we’ll see more uses for all gear types.
ANET’s trinity got lost mainly for these reasons:
1. PvE Mobs are designed badly.
Defiance makes control pretty much useless, no need to skill for control.
Very, very big HP Pools on bosses make anything hybrid a chore not worth the effort for what you get at the end.
Support builds can be build with max damage gear, making support gear meaningless.
Condition damage is capped hard.
Healing is a joke when you see that continues healing of 4 People in a 5 man dungeon is not enough when you have insta down skills on bosses.
Dodge (+vigor) makes everything avoidable if you are good enough.Leading to a meta that encourages buff Support with max DPS equip. Leaving condition outside due to the cap.
<snip for length>
Long Story short, to have fun you will want to kill stuff and get stuff from them to make yourself better, to kill more stuff and so on. This leads to the simple premise, that games are all about HP on enemies and DPS on yourself.A dead player does not do any dps, thats the reason for healers. But if it’s just healing, it’s not tactical, so somebody thought of tanks. That’s the trinity we know, build around the premise of killing something.
Taking the trinity of tank and healer away, that just leaves us with dps. But over the time other meachnics were introduced like support through buffs or debuffing the enemy, as well as control through interrupts etc. This is actually more fun for some people, than the standard Tank/Healer/DPS Setup, as it leads to a more strategical fight than just tanking, healing, kill it.
Arenanet tried to use support (low heal, buff and debuff) and control as roles. But they also wanted every class to be able to fill these roles if demanded. Due to the nature of the game (killing enemies as the major incentive) dps is always king. Everybody wants as much dps as possible and just as many support as necessary. This leads to the Status quo: taking zerker gear and support utility, while control in PvE is neglectable due to defiance.It would actually be possible to change this with a different Boss Setup. Instead of killing the Boss, one has to defend NPC’s etc, thus a greater need for Support, healing etc. Another Option in WvWvW for example would be increased points for defending keeps. This would lead to a new meta, where survival is top and support would become the actual most important Thing next to dps, while still having to kill and conquer. This kind of gameplay would just be terrible boring. Who wants to stand all day in a keep to defend it, if somebody Comes to capture it? So, here it’s the same: Killing enemies and capture keeps is more fun and therefore zerg meta was created.
PvP has actually the defensive System. Everybody needs to keep his spots to gain points. That is why in PvP there is an actual “Balance” of trinity with bunker and Support builds. Still, other problems apply like a too small group (5 man) to make it meaningfull and the sheer amount of support, control abilities every class can bring are pushing specialized Support/control builds into meaningless.
The bi-weekly theme park content is needed to keep people logging in. There’s no subscription fee “forcing” people to play, there’s no title tracks that people can advance on (ala GW1), and there’s no objective in-game measure on how well people run dungeons and frac (people completing a frac 50 in a 30 mins being an “S” rank, 1 hour “A” rank, 5 hours “F” rank, etc…)
Edit: title track that shows a cool title per tier of achievement. Not something crazy like Ultimate Liberator as the only title (they should have partial title tracks like Apprentice Liberator, Journeyman Liberator, etc…)
No. This game was designed, marketed, and sold as one where you don’t have to pay to play or to see all the content. What you suggest goes against its core philosophy. The gem store is for fluff and convenience, not for content, and changing that would likely gut their player base far more than they’d gain in content sales.
Exactly, and thanks to that business model we got all awesome content, new races, and classes, and cantha…. instead of weak bi-weekly theme park content….
(edited by Rho.1923)
Realistically, they should go back to the GW1 model.
IMO, Laurels would be the best choice.
The advantage of smaller, more frequent, DLCs is that it’ll smooth out Anet’s revenue stream. It doesn’t have to be as excessive as them making and selling a single dungeon for $5. For instance, Anet could make a sell a series of zones in the Woodland Cascades, Far Shiverpeaks, or Charr Homelands (the equivalent of a major zone like Ascalon or Kryta for GW2 ppl) with the appropriate dungeons included.
Good to see some other people finally realizing the ability to convert F2P currency to P2P currency isn’t such a great idea. There’s no fix for it unless Anet creates yet another currency, but wait. We have so many to choose from, karma? no maybe laurels? How about dungeon tokens?
bummer
15 char
sounds like there’s not alot of trust for anet. ^^;
The advantage of smaller, more frequent, DLCs is that it’ll smooth out Anet’s revenue stream. It doesn’t have to be as excessive as them making and selling a single dungeon for $5. For instance, Anet could make a sell a series of zones in the Woodland Cascades, Far Shiverpeaks, or Charr Homelands (the equivalent of a major zone like Ascalon or Kryta for GW2 ppl) with the appropriate dungeons included.
eventually the megaserver system SHOULD solve this problem.
save your champ bags!
Let’s leave the current gemstore offerings out of this, I would rather see a jump puzzle on the gemstore than another gathering booster.
I would pay an expansion’s worth of money for an expansion’s worth of content. It wouldn’t matter if it were pro-rated or not.