Guild Wars 2

LOL that’s ridiculous.

You can’t tell what’s going on in 5v5 tournaments right now always if you’re not familiar with GW2. Higher numbers would just make it unwatchable. You gvg guys shouldn’t talk about ever being #esports. Zerging will never be #esports outside of RTSes.

BlackTruth.6813:

It’s called L2 abuse z-axis teleport, l2 Line of Sight. Slick Shoes, Blind Spam, Weakness, Aegis, Jumping Puzzle.

It’s really pathetic that people can’t even L2P against something that is legit L2P.

If you want to complain about something, complain about frame-eaters like Slick Shoes or D/D Ele. Don’t fix something that isn’t broken.

Oh and it’s not like Rampage and Lich Form is instant cast, interrupt them before they use it? Or make it so that they don’t wanna use it? Not to mention when they DO get into Rampage and Lich form, you can literally just tank them if you were good, which you aren’t.

LOL @ you for defending those two things and complaining about engies constantly.

Center of Foefire is better if someone is going to cast this. Beach area is a terrible area for actually watching and isn’t much better for duels.

Cya when the expansion or boredom of CS:GO sets in Blu…

Will miss your casting.

Elxdark.9702:

First OE and now Blu…

RIP Blu 2012-2015.

Despite the haters we’ll miss those unbreathing moments.

Considering your hate of Happy Kid this made me LOL

Turn the skill points into gold if you care that much.

“At this time we have no plans for it……” or something along those lines

http://www.twitch.tv/reyana_atac/c/5997437

Believe this is the stream where it occurred. Can’t watch it all at the time to find the time.

Jon.5271:

Bumping this because I want a reply from Arenanet. I personally think this suggestion is great and should be reviewed further with the community so we can come to a proper solidified plan. The word on the street is that a lot of guilds will be coming back with the Heart of Thorns expansion, this is THE opportunity to do something right for the guilds that enjoy big scale PvP. The same players that have been playing your game for 3 years creating a brand new game mode, anxiously hoping that you will hear their call and not turn a deaf ear to what they have to say.

It has been said before in this thread, your combat system is amazing for this type of thing. Don’t let it go to waste. Some of the suggestions in this thread are great. The perfect opportunity to ‘’Set a foundation’’ as you would like to call it. If this doesn’t happen then I fear for the competitive scene of WvW, because there will be new games on the horizon and the people WILL leave.

Colin already stated Anet’s position.

Morabi.4568:

1. It takes no skill to GvG.
In pvp, the communication between 5 people is less chaotic than in higher number fights. If you think it’s hard to sync up 5 players, just imagine 20. The sync between 20 people is a very hard thing to pull off. Each person has a specific job to do and they need to all play off the other 19 people in the gvg. So less individual skill…sure, maybe. But the teamwork aspect is much more developed and important. Three people wont carry a whole 20 man team to victory.

2. GvGs are no fun to watch.
That’s just personal opinion. If you don’t know all the loops and plays of a gvg it is much less interesting to watch, much like any sport. Maybe you do know and just have no interest, well that’s fine.

3. GvGs are too big for an E-Sport
Maybe they are too big for what we perceive as an “E-Sport” because the cost of Anet to fly 40 people out for a tourny is too high. That’s fine. However, that doesn’t mean that they have to actually do that. Nothing is wrong with them keeping it within the game. I, for one am fine with only in-game recognition for winning. I wouldn’t play if I didn’t think it was fun.

Please keep it constructive guys. Bashing each other can be left to the unofficial forums, where it belongs instead of cluttering a constructive post.

If you think I shouldn’t like GvGs then convince me with evidence.

1) Teamwork in spvp is more important than you give it credit for if you think gvg teamwork is somehow superior. Bad teamwork in spvp can easily cause teamwipes. I don’t think teamwork aspect is greater in one game mode or the other.

2) GvG look like visual gibberish to people. You have to understand that we aren’t saying you can’t decipher some of what is going on if you know what to look for. We are saying it would be the last thing we want to sit down a potential new player to watch and try to explain what’s going on. That’s why it really isn’t an opinion.

3) It doesn’t matter whether you are fine with gvg not being #esports. That’s the issue. If you were an Anet designer or developer under a budget from NCSoft or at least your budget is set because of NCSoft’s relation, you need to develop game modes, maps, and stuff you can show off like Stronghold at Cons. At this time, considering Anet is actually fairly small, there’s zero possibility they could even dump resources into make a few maps for you guys.

It would be nice for you guys to get your own game mode, but Anet has to go in the direction it thinks has the best potential.

Haha, you can watch gvgs and tell what it is all about. There’s no great secret what staff eles, power necros, thieves, mesmers, hammer warriors, and guardians do. Nor it is a secret that plopping down a giant kitten of AoE is what you guys do. Think the term pirate ship meta is your code word for long range spam.

KcB.6890:

SobeSoul.6910:

Sodapoppin got 15k viewers and he was a complete GW2 newbie.

Sodapoppin got 15k viewers because he’s Sodapoppin not because he was playing Guildwars 2.

Disappointed that this thread was moved to this forum. It’s already starting to turn into a mix of “YOUR GVGS NOT TRUEEEEE GVGGGG!!!!!!” and “That thing I’ve never tried and admit i don’t understand is bad”.

You missed my point. People watch things on Twitch that are popular.

Do any of you realize that the celestial nerf might not even be a nerf at all?

On paper the amulet losing 10% stats is a nerf. But everyone who is calling this a nerf doesn’t seem to account for the fact that the amulet will synergize better after the patch with more classes and builds than now.

The celestial amulet is designed to provide a rounded build. With the patch allowing you to dip all the way into three trees, you should be able to form builds from most classes that has a lot of synergy with the amulet. Whatever damage you drop from losing 40ish power, you may pick right back up through damage modifiers.

After the patch you also have more than three classes of doing the above.

I don’t think this is an actual nerf at all. Maybe even a little bit of a buff in some areas.

Xillllix.3485:

SobeSoul.6910:

Xillllix.3485:

Sizzle Hint.1820:

I agree OP, i think this should be made into a new sPvP game mode.

Picture something like 15vs15 or 20vs20 fighting over a single tower. One group on the defensive side one on the offensive. Ah one can dream i guess…

Considering it took them an eternity to come up with a single Stronghold map I wouldn’t expect anything revolutionary in terms of pvp content duting GW2 lifespan.

Look at all the people thinking that the GvG community is small when new GvG guilds are forming up constantly. There is a serious misunderstanding of what GvG is from people that never participated in one, both from a gameplay and community perspective.

A GvG hub would give this game new life. A single Stronghold map will get pvp players sticking around for 6 more months or so before they are bored again.

New gvg guilds form from players from dead gvg guilds. lol. It is doubtful any game mode is receiving a steady increase of new blood these days. Maybe new guilds form, but how many actual new players are joining in?

It really doesn’t matter hat you think about the GvG community size considering it doesn’t even have a proper map and isn’t a supported game mode. If it was in the game, with defined rules, ranking and a good 4-5 arenas, people would play it more than PvP.

Nothing would be better for GW2 than having short WvW-size type battles with a scoring system that isn’t as meaningless as the current PPT system.

Lol. The first part is absolutely wrong. The average player would rather spend 5 minutes in queue than fiddle around for however long it takes 20 player teams to organize fights and all the time you guys spend between rounds.

Second part is just your preference.

Xillllix.3485:

Sizzle Hint.1820:

I agree OP, i think this should be made into a new sPvP game mode.

Picture something like 15vs15 or 20vs20 fighting over a single tower. One group on the defensive side one on the offensive. Ah one can dream i guess…

Considering it took them an eternity to come up with a single Stronghold map I wouldn’t expect anything revolutionary in terms of pvp content duting GW2 lifespan.

Look at all the people thinking that the GvG community is small when new GvG guilds are forming up constantly. There is a serious misunderstanding of what GvG is from people that never participated in one, both from a gameplay and community perspective.

A GvG hub would give this game new life. A single Stronghold map will get pvp players sticking around for 6 more months or so before they are bored again.

New gvg guilds form from players from dead gvg guilds. lol. It is doubtful any game mode is receiving a steady increase of new blood these days. Maybe new guilds form, but how many actual new players are joining in?

Jinn.7948:

Frankly I think it comes down to a lot of people not being exposed to the playstyle. I get the impression that a lot of hardcore PvPers dislike wvw because their only experience with it is either roaming, or joining a zerg.

While roaming can be a satisfying experience, I’m sure zerging is sort of devoid of any real strategy or complexity. Nor does it have any real organization.

GvG/fighting imo is the bridge between PvP and WvW much like how WvW is supposed to be the bridge between PvE and PvP.

I don’t think exposure is the issue. It’s not that PvPers dislike WvW, it’s because WvW offers no skillful game play on an individual level for numerous reasons.

I have watched enough gvgs to understand that a lot of the game play is really brainless in comparison to spvp. Waiting on some guy yelling in TS to tell you when to throw down wells or deliver hammer stuns isn’t something I consider an art form like knowing when to lay down a cc combo. Not to mention, gvg meta appears to be 100x less diverse than our already non-diverse spvp meta lol. I mean you guys don’t use one or two classes when all classes are playable. Something is wrong there.

Jinn.7948:

SobeSoul.6910:

Oh, Chem’s channel got 800 viewers once. So has a pve stream. Yawn.

This has probably been the most dead the GvG scene has gotten, and it still hit 800 viewers, all the while when at the same time G4GW2 EU was running with 500 viewers.

Lest we forget Agg vs TA had 4.3k viewers when that happened last year.

If people knew that GvGs were going on more often, then yes they would probably watch.

Considering gvgs are broadcast a lot, usually see one a night of some sort while browsing GW2’s twitch directory, and get next to no viewers I don’t think this statement is accurate.

Sodapoppin got 15k viewers and he was a complete GW2 newbie.

I would also state that when you get 800 viewers on Twitch in GW2, you are on top of the list, so you are probably getting quite a few viewers who just watch GW2 in general, and not there for gvgs or spvp or pve in particular.

Gauging how popular gvg actually is among players would take guilds doing rolecalls of sorts and tallying numbers on a nightly basis to give Anet data.

Jinn.7948:

SobeSoul.6910:

Who cares what their reasoning is behind leaving? If I’m a developer, there’s no chance I’m designing a game mode for a wishy washy crowd.

GvG being unwatchable is not an opinion. It is a fact. There’s no camera that can cover the entire thing or single out intricate play. If you showed it to someone outside of the GW2 player base, they wouldn’t be able to distinguish much from it.

Why sink resources into a mode that you couldn’t promote on Twitch or where ever? It would be silly.

You gvg guys can scream for the mode you all want, but you need to take a healthy and honest look at why the chances of it happening is less than 2% in the next few years.

In all honesty, conquest isn’t that pleasurable of a viewing experience either, especially since there are multiple skirmishes happening at the same time, it’s nearly impossible to capture every play unless it’s a teamfight going on at a point or something, and that’s pretty rare as people would rotate out to try to decap the obviously uncontested points. And then additionally, non GW2 players will probably have a hard time following normal PvP anyway. Hell I bet if you get a PvE main to spectate a PvP match they won’t understand either.

That not withstanding, with first person view, it’s now possible to get an overhead view in the Obsidian Sanctum of a GvG, similar to how camera works for traditional sports like hockey, football, soccer, basketball. You cover the entire play area and can see the movements of both guilds’ melee trains, backlines, and gank skirmishes.

I think a lot criticism stems from the misconception that something like this has to be easily spectated (not going to argue whether it is or not, just that people for some reason are under the assumption that it has to be) or that you need to have a matchmaking system. It’s not a mode that lends itself to being spectator friendly with a complex algorithm to matchmake and determine leaderboards (hell Anet’s still trying to figure out normal matchmaking and leaderboards for PvP), neither does it have to. It’s about being a worthwhile thing to have because people have fun doing it.

WvW is 100% impossible to spectate, because in addition to the points you brought up regarding 15v15/20v20, you still have capture points spread across 4 maps. Yet WvW exists.

And I think the reasoning behind leaving is important to consider. People want to play the game, but can’t because there’s no support for how they play. It’s a chicken and egg scenario.

I don’t think it’s as simple as saying guilds leave and that’s why Anet shouldn’t put in dev time. There’s a lot of things that go into the reason guilds leave that’s not just clearcut “because the game isn’t interesting”. The pool of guilds to fight right now is restricted to guilds not on your server, and guilds who are in your tier. Those severely limit possible opponents. EotM is currently a suboptimal battle ground as there are a ton of environmental hazards such as canons that can easily disrupt the middle of a fight.

You say conquest isn’t viewer friendly always and try to explain how gvgs can be. lol. I agree with you that conquest isn’t always viewer friendly. When 8 people get together and team fight, you miss things because the laser light show. You add 30 more to it, and it just looks like a mess to people who don’t play the game or gvg.

I’m not against a gvg game mode. But it’s like none of you gvgers ever stop and look at it from the perspective of the game designers. I have heard some of the gvg activists whine about how Anet is so evil blah blah blah. I would almost guarantee none of them understand business, nor the business structure of Anet.

Ogre.3124:

SobeSoul.6910:

tluv.5821:

SobeSoul.6910:

tluv.5821:

SobeSoul.6910:

Fallen.4317:

http://postimg.org/image/z4husdh3j/full/

This is an unedited screenshot of a fight between players from NA servers and EU servers in our “made up game mode” we call GvG here in GW2.

While we may all agree that simple team deathmatch 20v20 in a flat surface can be bland and is hardly a game mode, I think that this picture shows you the real interest in large scale PvP. Keep in mind, this is a completely and totally unofficial game-mode, with very little publicity or advertisement. The viewers on this are kitten near what ESL got, with all the publicity and whatnot you guys had on that. Imagine if you had hyped this.

I just ask that you folks at ArenaNet reconsider what your true focus is as far as what the PvP in this game entails. I love PvP, I’m rank 80, play it a lot. I loved large scale WvW fighting as well.

But the lack of a true player versus player mode with a larger scale basis that focuses on the true mechanics of the game’s combat system is a huge business blunder and something I definitely believe could benefit your company.

I think we all understand that WvW is a bit more casual of a game mode – there is no true rewards or incentives to play. This is totally fine, but ANET, you’re missing a massive business opportunity sitting right under your nose by overlooking the community of players that are interested in larger scale COMPETITIVE PvP. You’re never going to compete with League of Legends with Stronghold. But you’re overlooking an entire market because it seems to me, from the outside, that from a business standpoint you’re trying to get a slice of the MOBA pie when you could have a whole pie all to yourself.

Your game has an amazing combat system and an amazing capability to have very intense, teamwork-oriented fights at a larger scale. To be completely honest, I legitimately don’t think I’ve ever seen a game come close to the ability that you have currently to create a PvP mode to support a mid-scale (10-20 vs. 10-20) competitive PvP scene with the success I believe you would have.

I am not asking for GvG. I am asking for you to consider the possibility of having “raid size” COMPETITIVE player versus player, as I believe there is an entire untapped market out there that you would be able to benefit from without having to compete with games like SMITE, League, or DotA.

Just food for thought.

What you and the other gvgers seem to miss is the lessons your own scene teaches.

Why do you think your scene is dead? Why do you think smaller scale pvp is preferable from a business perspective?

If I were to look at the player based mode as a dev, I would think gvgs (or whatever you want to use as a codeword) as a waste of time to invest in.

If you are going to shoot down an idea, put some facts up please.

Fact: your gvg guilds quit the game regularly.

Fact: small scale pvp is more watchable than the visual clusterkitten gvg would be and already is.

Fact: 20 pvp teams could form from the same number of people it would take to make 5 20-man gvg guilds.

It’s a waste of resources for a scene that doesn’t even have guilds playing consistently.

They do not play consistently because there’s zero support. Many of them stated that they would come back permanently if it is supported.

Your fact about watchable? That’s an opinion not a fact. I do not find it pleasurable to watch 1v1 or 2v1 for a point. Not interesting to me. I love the teamwork it takes to do a Gvg battle and is much more interesting for me to watch.

I’m not sure what statement you were making wiTh your last fact.

Who cares what their reasoning is behind leaving? If I’m a developer, there’s no chance I’m designing a game mode for a wishy washy crowd.

GvG being unwatchable is not an opinion. It is a fact. There’s no camera that can cover the entire thing or single out intricate play. If you showed it to someone outside of the GW2 player base, they wouldn’t be able to distinguish much from it.

Why sink resources into a mode that you couldn’t promote on Twitch or where ever? It would be silly.

You gvg guys can scream for the mode you all want, but you need to take a healthy and honest look at why the chances of it happening is less than 2% in the next few years.

The fact is that the OP linked a screenshot to a gvg having 800+ viewers. What are you even saying?

Oh, Chem’s channel got 800 viewers once. So has a pve stream. Yawn.

tluv.5821:

SobeSoul.6910:

tluv.5821:

SobeSoul.6910:

Fallen.4317:

http://postimg.org/image/z4husdh3j/full/

This is an unedited screenshot of a fight between players from NA servers and EU servers in our “made up game mode” we call GvG here in GW2.

While we may all agree that simple team deathmatch 20v20 in a flat surface can be bland and is hardly a game mode, I think that this picture shows you the real interest in large scale PvP. Keep in mind, this is a completely and totally unofficial game-mode, with very little publicity or advertisement. The viewers on this are kitten near what ESL got, with all the publicity and whatnot you guys had on that. Imagine if you had hyped this.

I just ask that you folks at ArenaNet reconsider what your true focus is as far as what the PvP in this game entails. I love PvP, I’m rank 80, play it a lot. I loved large scale WvW fighting as well.

But the lack of a true player versus player mode with a larger scale basis that focuses on the true mechanics of the game’s combat system is a huge business blunder and something I definitely believe could benefit your company.

I think we all understand that WvW is a bit more casual of a game mode – there is no true rewards or incentives to play. This is totally fine, but ANET, you’re missing a massive business opportunity sitting right under your nose by overlooking the community of players that are interested in larger scale COMPETITIVE PvP. You’re never going to compete with League of Legends with Stronghold. But you’re overlooking an entire market because it seems to me, from the outside, that from a business standpoint you’re trying to get a slice of the MOBA pie when you could have a whole pie all to yourself.

Your game has an amazing combat system and an amazing capability to have very intense, teamwork-oriented fights at a larger scale. To be completely honest, I legitimately don’t think I’ve ever seen a game come close to the ability that you have currently to create a PvP mode to support a mid-scale (10-20 vs. 10-20) competitive PvP scene with the success I believe you would have.

I am not asking for GvG. I am asking for you to consider the possibility of having “raid size” COMPETITIVE player versus player, as I believe there is an entire untapped market out there that you would be able to benefit from without having to compete with games like SMITE, League, or DotA.

Just food for thought.

What you and the other gvgers seem to miss is the lessons your own scene teaches.

Why do you think your scene is dead? Why do you think smaller scale pvp is preferable from a business perspective?

If I were to look at the player based mode as a dev, I would think gvgs (or whatever you want to use as a codeword) as a waste of time to invest in.

If you are going to shoot down an idea, put some facts up please.

Fact: your gvg guilds quit the game regularly.

Fact: small scale pvp is more watchable than the visual clusterkitten gvg would be and already is.

Fact: 20 pvp teams could form from the same number of people it would take to make 5 20-man gvg guilds.

It’s a waste of resources for a scene that doesn’t even have guilds playing consistently.

They do not play consistently because there’s zero support. Many of them stated that they would come back permanently if it is supported.

Your fact about watchable? That’s an opinion not a fact. I do not find it pleasurable to watch 1v1 or 2v1 for a point. Not interesting to me. I love the teamwork it takes to do a Gvg battle and is much more interesting for me to watch.

I’m not sure what statement you were making wiTh your last fact.

Who cares what their reasoning is behind leaving? If I’m a developer, there’s no chance I’m designing a game mode for a wishy washy crowd.

GvG being unwatchable is not an opinion. It is a fact. There’s no camera that can cover the entire thing or single out intricate play. If you showed it to someone outside of the GW2 player base, they wouldn’t be able to distinguish much from it.

Why sink resources into a mode that you couldn’t promote on Twitch or where ever? It would be silly.

You gvg guys can scream for the mode you all want, but you need to take a healthy and honest look at why the chances of it happening is less than 2% in the next few years.

tluv.5821:

SobeSoul.6910:

Fallen.4317:

http://postimg.org/image/z4husdh3j/full/

This is an unedited screenshot of a fight between players from NA servers and EU servers in our “made up game mode” we call GvG here in GW2.

While we may all agree that simple team deathmatch 20v20 in a flat surface can be bland and is hardly a game mode, I think that this picture shows you the real interest in large scale PvP. Keep in mind, this is a completely and totally unofficial game-mode, with very little publicity or advertisement. The viewers on this are kitten near what ESL got, with all the publicity and whatnot you guys had on that. Imagine if you had hyped this.

I just ask that you folks at ArenaNet reconsider what your true focus is as far as what the PvP in this game entails. I love PvP, I’m rank 80, play it a lot. I loved large scale WvW fighting as well.

But the lack of a true player versus player mode with a larger scale basis that focuses on the true mechanics of the game’s combat system is a huge business blunder and something I definitely believe could benefit your company.

I think we all understand that WvW is a bit more casual of a game mode – there is no true rewards or incentives to play. This is totally fine, but ANET, you’re missing a massive business opportunity sitting right under your nose by overlooking the community of players that are interested in larger scale COMPETITIVE PvP. You’re never going to compete with League of Legends with Stronghold. But you’re overlooking an entire market because it seems to me, from the outside, that from a business standpoint you’re trying to get a slice of the MOBA pie when you could have a whole pie all to yourself.

Your game has an amazing combat system and an amazing capability to have very intense, teamwork-oriented fights at a larger scale. To be completely honest, I legitimately don’t think I’ve ever seen a game come close to the ability that you have currently to create a PvP mode to support a mid-scale (10-20 vs. 10-20) competitive PvP scene with the success I believe you would have.

I am not asking for GvG. I am asking for you to consider the possibility of having “raid size” COMPETITIVE player versus player, as I believe there is an entire untapped market out there that you would be able to benefit from without having to compete with games like SMITE, League, or DotA.

Just food for thought.

What you and the other gvgers seem to miss is the lessons your own scene teaches.

Why do you think your scene is dead? Why do you think smaller scale pvp is preferable from a business perspective?

If I were to look at the player based mode as a dev, I would think gvgs (or whatever you want to use as a codeword) as a waste of time to invest in.

If you are going to shoot down an idea, put some facts up please.

Fact: your gvg guilds quit the game regularly.

Fact: small scale pvp is more watchable than the visual clusterkitten gvg would be and already is.

Fact: 20 pvp teams could form from the same number of people it would take to make 5 20-man gvg guilds.

It’s a waste of resources for a scene that doesn’t even have guilds playing consistently.

Fallen.4317:

http://postimg.org/image/z4husdh3j/full/

This is an unedited screenshot of a fight between players from NA servers and EU servers in our “made up game mode” we call GvG here in GW2.

While we may all agree that simple team deathmatch 20v20 in a flat surface can be bland and is hardly a game mode, I think that this picture shows you the real interest in large scale PvP. Keep in mind, this is a completely and totally unofficial game-mode, with very little publicity or advertisement. The viewers on this are kitten near what ESL got, with all the publicity and whatnot you guys had on that. Imagine if you had hyped this.

I just ask that you folks at ArenaNet reconsider what your true focus is as far as what the PvP in this game entails. I love PvP, I’m rank 80, play it a lot. I loved large scale WvW fighting as well.

But the lack of a true player versus player mode with a larger scale basis that focuses on the true mechanics of the game’s combat system is a huge business blunder and something I definitely believe could benefit your company.

I think we all understand that WvW is a bit more casual of a game mode – there is no true rewards or incentives to play. This is totally fine, but ANET, you’re missing a massive business opportunity sitting right under your nose by overlooking the community of players that are interested in larger scale COMPETITIVE PvP. You’re never going to compete with League of Legends with Stronghold. But you’re overlooking an entire market because it seems to me, from the outside, that from a business standpoint you’re trying to get a slice of the MOBA pie when you could have a whole pie all to yourself.

Your game has an amazing combat system and an amazing capability to have very intense, teamwork-oriented fights at a larger scale. To be completely honest, I legitimately don’t think I’ve ever seen a game come close to the ability that you have currently to create a PvP mode to support a mid-scale (10-20 vs. 10-20) competitive PvP scene with the success I believe you would have.

I am not asking for GvG. I am asking for you to consider the possibility of having “raid size” COMPETITIVE player versus player, as I believe there is an entire untapped market out there that you would be able to benefit from without having to compete with games like SMITE, League, or DotA.

Just food for thought.

What you and the other gvgers seem to miss is the lessons your own scene teaches.

Why do you think your scene is dead? Why do you think smaller scale pvp is preferable from a business perspective?

If I were to look at the player based mode as a dev, I would think gvgs (or whatever you want to use as a codeword) as a waste of time to invest in.

Ele sounds like your play style. Mesmer might be the 2nd closest thing.

Has Anet once stated boon duration is gone?

Go look at various class changes, it doesn’t take much to figure out that there will be strong condi and direct damage builds. Amplified Wrath on top of Medi lines with a celestial amulet = profit.

I don’t think any of the above ideas or responses to Celestial amulet really takes into account the fact with 3 traitlines maxed, Celestial will synergize even more with builds.

Doesn’t matter if they share it or not, the builds will get shown on ESL and tournament streams.

I actually doubt that anyone besides build copypasta-ers will just grab builds from streamers. A lot of people enjoy theorycrafting. And since you can look at warrior and already tell that there’s more than one killshot build to try, let alone one ultimate warrior build.

BlackTruth.6813:

lordhelmos.7623:

Warrior was specifically designed to be easy to play so no. If people want a high complexity high difficulty character to play they can roll mesmer.

As per the official blog post “mesmer was meant to be a high skill ceiling class in Gw1, we are trying to return to that.”

Easy to play? Okay try to land 1/2 second casting time through evades then, then call it easy. Don’t know why have an opinion when its just unintelligent and ignorant much like the guy stating his low IQ.

Just because “Mesmer” isn’t effective atm, that doesn’t mean Warrior is braindead easy as a whole.

@OP

Once again, try landing 1/2 casting time stuns through evades or stun lock DPS people by baiting cool downs by yourself on zerker Warrior. The build is Axe/Hammer or Axe/Mace Mace/Shield with Frenzy. You’ll come crying back to your instant cast fear > immob > well combo 1 spam Necro, I guarantee it.

Warrior is easy to play in comparison to a few classes. Hitting people with skullcrack isn’t hard. And if someone is spamming evades hitting them with instacast CC is in the same boat as instacast one.

Swim.6830:

Acandis.3250:

Air

Grandmaster

• These are fine.

Stopped reading here. Not sure what kind of kitten Ele you want to see…

What do you think is wrong with the Grandmasters. The Air line is nice now.

You are 100% correct that Anet shouldn’t be socially engineering us engineers into something by taking away the utility of something else that took skill to use at its fullest range.

????

Staff eles not being good?

UMMMM L Rod + Lightning proc that isnt tied to the Fresh air trait and Tempest Defense. That would even be good on a non-full #yolo build.

darres.8203:

style.6173:

You all really need to pay attention to the stream vs just posting and complaining. EVERYONE needs to pick 3 specializations and go all the way in. Gone are the days of the 1-1-2-4-6 build or whatever random thing you created.

i absolutely despise that idea
it really takes away A LOT of build variety
there is nothing wrong with not spec fulling into a certain tree
there are just some traits that are more appealing than the others

Wat?

Build diversity will be more prominent post-patch than it is currently. I seriously doubt metabattle will just have one end all be all build per class considering there are more choices with traits with this coming patch.

Haven’t really read in detail about mesmer. But I know warrior could have a few quality killshot builds itself.

The air line looks sweet.

I think OP isn’t looking at the true potential of possible diverse builds or something.

900 range doesn’t mean you have to fight on point. The problem I see with it though is there’s nothing wrong with 1500 nades as is. Landing 1500 nades on moving targets who can see them coming from that range require aim = skillful play. It’s one of the long ranged attacks that actually requires skill. So why take it away?

I wouldn’t be as bothered by a reduction to 1200 range on them.

People also already face tank nades.

The whole change rustled my jimmies.

BlackBeard.2873:

The revamped engie is like ele 2.0. This is going to be hilariously OP with healing turret if it doesn’t change. I think having such an easy-access water field with blasts out the wazoo is going to be quickly exploited.

Yeah, but when we look at all the classes and changes I think that is called for considering what kind of burst potential we might be looking at lol

Grenades if nerfed should not be reduced by that amount of range.

Bad trade. Should trade for Lich or Rampage.

Good engies don’t really use the supply crate for the turrets to stick around for their duration.

BlackBeard.2873:

SobeSoul.6910:

I am an econ major. In econometrics we do not like micronumerosity at all. When we need to correlate data from the real world we simply cannot be satisfied with small data sets. For instance trying to correlate wage gaps between sexes and races is better if you have a huge data set.

Back to the air sigil thing. If the chances of proc’ing air on crit is 50% and you have 40% crit chances. You should only see an air proc 20% of the times when it comes off CD. Given the fact that you fail to crit sixty out of one hundred it wouldn’t be rare to miss that proc a lot over a small sample size.

But we are testing with specs that have 80% crit chance and 50% proc on crit. When you have the large number of variables in a human population, you need large sample sizes. By minimizing the number of variables, we can use smaller samples sizes. If you are an econ major, really think about the difference between wage gaps in human populations (and all the variables that come into play) and a hard-coded machine system with only 1 variable. Does it make sense why small sample sizes can reveal a difference here, while larger sample sizes are required to compare populations that share a few similarities and many differences for each member?

More learning if you look up student-t test, which is a perfect application here. Good luck with your econ studies, gaining a deeper understanding of the limitations your professors have suggested will make you certainly more valuable in the workplace.

There’s more underlining variables than the few you listed btw.

BlackBeard.2873:

SobeSoul.6910:

BlackBeard.2873:

Turk.5460:

You would need a huge sample size even if it was a 99% chance. That’s the point of probability and statistics.

This is completely false, and the point of probability and statistics are to draw conclusions without HUGE sample sizes. In fact, as few as 3 trials for air/fire each would be enough (although 4 or 5 would be better) to give a relatively high confidence (p-value) that air/fire share timing mechanics. How? You could take 3 tests (1-2 mins) each to get a mean and standard deviation on number of procs. Your hypothesis is that they are from different populations, making your null hypothesis that they actually have the same timing mechanics. From here it is a simple t-test (justified b/c the proc-chances are completely random, so they will follow a normal distribution) to find your confidence value that they are in-fact the same or not.

:)

When you are testing data that is like the data in air sigils, the bigger sample size the better. I dare you to go to a statistics professor and say that statistics is to draw info from limited data.

I’m a professor in engineering…and yea that is what we teach. So, in the engineering sense (such as hypothesis testing), yea… Bigger sample sizes can give greater degrees of confidence (p-values), but the purpose of statistics is to draw conclusions with the minimum sample size. Just looking at the data, you should be able to reach a p-value of 0.05 with only a few samples.

I am an econ major. In econometrics we do not like micronumerosity at all. When we need to correlate data from the real world we simply cannot be satisfied with small data sets. For instance trying to correlate wage gaps between sexes and races is better if you have a huge data set.

Back to the air sigil thing. If the chances of proc’ing air on crit is 50% and you have 40% crit chances. You should only see an air proc 20% of the times when it comes off CD. Given the fact that you fail to crit sixty out of one hundred it wouldn’t be rare to miss that proc a lot over a small sample size.

BlackBeard.2873:

Turk.5460:

You would need a huge sample size even if it was a 99% chance. That’s the point of probability and statistics.

This is completely false, and the point of probability and statistics are to draw conclusions without HUGE sample sizes. In fact, as few as 3 trials for air/fire each would be enough (although 4 or 5 would be better) to give a relatively high confidence (p-value) that air/fire share timing mechanics. How? You could take 3 tests (1-2 mins) each to get a mean and standard deviation on number of procs. Your hypothesis is that they are from different populations, making your null hypothesis that they actually have the same timing mechanics. From here it is a simple t-test (justified b/c the proc-chances are completely random, so they will follow a normal distribution) to find your confidence value that they are in-fact the same or not.

:)

When you are testing data that is like the data in air sigils, the bigger sample size the better. I dare you to go to a statistics professor and say that statistics is to draw info from limited data.

BlackBeard.2873:

I did test it, and it didn’t seem to be triggering any faster than every 5s. Even more, when equipped with both fire/air (removing accuracy so only 86% crit rate), air procced at the exact same frequency as fire.

The damage, however, was higher for air due to a greater damage coefficient.

manysongsgw.2931:

Everyone here is wrong and obviously has never heard of Schrodinger’s Cat.

Because the sigil has a 50/50 chance of proc, it is both alive and dead at the same time.
#schooled

/thread – You’re welcome.

“How can we possible determine 50/50….yea, let’s just flip a coin, that’s heads or tails…We would need 50 coins, then 50 more: 50-50….then my computer can analyze it…with science”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTLp14MKDDU

It does go back to probability and statistics.

The expected value of a sigil proc’ing with 86% crit chance will be different from 100%. People with lower crit chances should see a longer time between procs.

Also, I would like to see a stop watch and video of peoples’ experiments. I don’t disbelieve the realm of possibility the sigil could have a longer ICD than stated tooltip. Just there’s no hard evidence produced so far to prove it . There’s the issue with the base eV of 100% crit chance and 100% proc rate in theory only yielding a proc every 4th second after the 1st proc.

I don’t think Ranked needs to be gated to not include newbies.

What I think matchmaking lacks is an account for games played. Like if someone has 100 matches don’t match them with players with thousands of games under their belt. Because when that happens the person with thousands of games played obviously will have picked up some strategy in that time and newer players can tank their MMR by having FPS (fancy play syndrome) like, “I’m distracting them by attacking their base!”.

Honestly want solo queue back. Because I don’t think you can develop a proper matchmaking syndrome under current conditions.

Agree with the RQ part.

I don’t think it is that important to figure out builds. In solo queue if a good player is on fresh air vs. DD they should be able to figure out their roles and perform them well. Sadly, a lot of burst players don’t really get their roles. Like thieves who get farmed in mid by staying in team fights for far too long.

I think the important part is volume of burst builds vs. more balanced builds on teams. It’s frustrating getting stuck with 4 burst builds on my cele engie since cele engie itself isn’t the best point holder.

Yeah, I’m also wondering if people are confused of the ICD itself and actually have a stopwatch on it.

The proc won’t go off every 3rd second even if the sigil was 100% chance on crit. If you proc it on the 1st second the CD would only be available on the 5th second as 2nd 3rd and 4th seconds are the CD.

Nyx.7342:

Why did part of this thread become discussing burden of proof and people qqing over sigils, which most of the time dont really matter….

Turk.5460:

“We took 5 minutes to survey people outside the Wal-Marts in Redtown and Necksville, Alabama – asking if they like Obama. 11 out of 11 from each store said they hated that foreign-born muslim socialist. 11 out of 11 is 100% Therefore 100% of people everywhere ever dislike Obama!”

There’s a difference between this stupid example you gave and phantarams test. Sure phanty coulda given a larger sample size but his proof does show that there may be something wrong with air sigil. Air sigil itself is buggy, just ask tarcis about arcing slice :P

i would like to know what the chances are that for 2 tests 1 minute each of channeling air 1 on scepter air sigil with a three second icd procced just as much as fire sigil with a five second icd. Also what are the chances that in 4 tests the sigil procced the same amount each time.

The game unlike real life is not random and its method of critting is probably pretty consistent. I don’t think you need a huge sample size for a sigil that proccs 50% of the time in order to see whether something may be wrong.

It wouldn’t be uncommon for four things to have the same outputs over a small sample size.

Chaith.8256:

SobeSoul.6910:

Phantaram.1265:

I tested in about 5 minutes of my free time. Less than than most of you probably took typing the things you typed.

86.5% crit chance channeling Air #1 on scepter (elementalist)

1st 1 minute trial with fire sigil (5 second cooldown)
procced 11 times

2nd 1 minute trial with fire sigil
Procced 11 times

1st 1 minute trial with air sigil (listed 3 second cooldown)
procced 11 times

2nd 1 minute trial with air sigil
procced 11 times

Oh no. I’ve provided proof when the burden was not mine. Did I commit some kind of treasonous act?

No. But that isn’t scientific. Do you understand probability and statistics?

Air procs aren’t 100% every 3s. It’s 50/50 if it procs or not. Therefore 3s is the optimal time it actually procs, but that’s not realistic.

“Do you understand probability and statistics?”

Lol, this comes across as pretty unnecessary a comment when you consder how fast the rate of fire on the Scepter Air 1 ability with crit rate mentioned, a difference in the rate of procs would be immediately apparent if the cooldown on Air Sigil was indeed 3 seconds.

Your teammate obviously shows a lack of understanding of it. If he did, you and him, would understand 1 minute of testing doesn’t provide data that would even be acknowledged on an academic level. Learn what sample sizes are, and what is too small to take seriously.

You and your teammate might be top tier players. But neither of you are top tier mathematicians if you defend that as “testing”.

You could actually set up an equation. Figure out what he average time for different crit chances for the sigil to proc. And then you would need 1,200+ bits of data (more would be better) to see if the sigil ICD is in line with the tooltip for it. I’ve been in an upper level Economics class that involved Statistics. There’s no grey area between good statistics and bad field “testing”.

And have phanta show screens shots of his testing.

Phantaram.1265:

I tested in about 5 minutes of my free time. Less than than most of you probably took typing the things you typed.

86.5% crit chance channeling Air #1 on scepter (elementalist)

1st 1 minute trial with fire sigil (5 second cooldown)
procced 11 times

2nd 1 minute trial with fire sigil
Procced 11 times

1st 1 minute trial with air sigil (listed 3 second cooldown)
procced 11 times

2nd 1 minute trial with air sigil
procced 11 times

Oh no. I’ve provided proof when the burden was not mine. Did I commit some kind of treasonous act?

No. But that isn’t scientific. Do you understand probability and statistics?

Air procs aren’t 100% every 3s. It’s 50/50 if it procs or not. Therefore 3s is the optimal time it actually procs, but that’s not realistic.

Mid air turrets need to be looked into and fixed.

As a celestial rifle engineer, the amount of CC turrets do on top of the rifle is a bit extreme. People claim simple rifle CC is over the top. If I was in the balancing team, I would look into maybe getting rid of rocket knock downs.

But if turrets are going to be easily cleavable then maybe not do that.

The joke is he doesn’t understand the math behind the sigil.

The sigil has an ICD of 3s. It has a 50% of proc’ing. With a weapon set doing 1 attack/sec with a 100% crit chance, the likelihood of you successfully proc’ing every time the proc available is still only 50%. So every third time the proc is available you will fail it 50% of the time as well. If you fail it, it takes longer to proc.

There’s nothing really to see in this thread other than a gross misunderstanding of the ICD of a sigil.

Azure The Heartless.3261:

Sunfish.5970:

Azure The Heartless.3261:

Sunfish.5970:

internal cd is 5s instead of the stated 3s. pls fisk!

Proof?

go test it

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Superior_Sigil_of_Air

You get a 50% chance to proc this on a critical hit. Even if your crit chance was 100% (which is likely is not) getting a proc every 5 seconds is lucky.

So youll need specific proof that the Internal Cooldown is 5 seconds.

This

Wrap it up.

Turk.5460:

SobeSoul.6910:

style.6173:

SobeSoul.6910:

Play an engie and find out. Because if you think the waterfield is broken on turret and you want to remove it you have little to no understanding of it.

I do play engi. You are also proving my point. EVERY engi runs healing turret. That means one of two things: it is either OP, or the other healing skills are weak. The actual answer is both.

It is the water field plus all the blasts that keep turret engis alive so long. It is also why cele rifle nade spam is so strong. Name one other change that would bring both turret engis and nade spam engis more in line….

Try again with waterfields. Considering good engies don’t blow it up and just pick them up in certain circumstances.

Also, cele and turrets have nothing to do with one another. And go compare healing turret with medi heals, troll ungent and some other heals.

He didn’t say anything about blowing up the turret. He mentioned only using blast finishers such as grenades on the water field that comes out of the turret.
Try again.

Like I’ve said, people with no clue about engies….

Shockwave.1230:

DeWolfe.2174:

SobeSoul.6910:

Lol. style doesn’t want to simply balance a class he wants to kill it.

Of course, it’s not their profession so they want it killed off. Most of the complaints on here are from players with little to no experience as an Engi. They get rolled by a better player on an Engi and instantly blame the profession and build. Since the alternative is a realization that bruises their ego.

btw, for the healing turret complaint, please learn math! Healing per second on an Engi is far lower that other professions.

Clearing up some misinformation really quickly

5500(pickup no finishers)-8500(leap and blast finishers) on either a 15 or 20 second cooldown.

The healing turret healing per second ranges from 367 – 425 healing per second, not including the tool belt.

Healing signet on warrior is 362-385ish per second

Withdraw on thief is 290 per second

Ether Feast on Mesmer is 275-375 per second

Troll Unguent on ranger is 340 healing per second

Shelter is 151 healing per second

Signet of restoration is 240ish per skill activation, it’s probably at least that per second too, likely higher.

Consume conditions removing 3 conditions is 300 health per second.

Direct comparisions between some of these healing skills is a b|t challenging to quantify due to various effects, but I think the math shows that engineers quite possibly have the best meta healing skill in terms of raw healing.

Troll Ungent heals for 371.2 with Settler’s. Which does get taken by some condi rangers. That doesn’t include things like Oakheart Salve, and Rejuvenation. And if you want to truly compare the two…. Cele Rifle has 2.4k armor rounded up versus 3.1k armor on Rabid ranger rounded up.

If you want to truly quantify healing you do need to take into account survivability on top of it as well for two good reasons.

1) How much damage do you take in x-amount of time, and will you get full usage out of the heal?
2) How often do you need to heal?