Showing Posts For Tauhx.2504:

RNG as a concept: Discuss

in Guild Wars 2 Discussion

Posted by: Tauhx.2504


I haven’t parsed through the middle pages, and I apologize if this is redundant, but I’d like to shine some light on the area where RNG disappointed me most in recent days: The Treasure Hunter Achievement.

Plainly put, RNG strongly detracts from the spirit of a treasure hunt.

Honestly, who would get excited of a festive Easter egg hunt if participants were told that certain eggs appear only randomly, and that they will need to repeatedly check nearly half of the hiding spots several dozens of times in order to get lucky enough for the egg to spontaneously manifest. Even more frustrating is that the event staff fully supports going to the store and just buying eggs as a perfectly viable alternative to searching, even though some eggs cost well beyond what many participants earn in a month. Moreover, those participants who are chiefly concerned with the prize awarded for a complete egg collection have only a cheap goodie bag to look forward to, something befitting of an 8-year-old’s birthday party.


I understand the struggles of decoupling existing systems (namely things like precursors) from RNG, as their acquisition is largely tied to economic stability on many levels. Further, I think its totally fine that mobs drop trash loot with a touch of RNG to keep players income somewhat somewhat normalized. These systems are not fun for the player, but they exist so that everyone can work within a relatively stable and healthy trade environment, and I’m jaded by cool with all that.

However, the heavy-handed RNG added to the treasure hunt achievements is extremely out of touch with the spirit of the event. This is a brand new system that had its cheerful intent mutilated in name of making some otherwise unvisited events “more rewarding.”

Summarily, it appears that in the case of the Treasure Hunter Achievements, Anet decided that gold circulation and acquisition trump engaging content. A slot machine titled “Treasure Hunter” is still a slot machine.

(edited by Tauhx.2504)

[PvX] A Proposal for Phantasms

in Profession Balance

Posted by: Tauhx.2504


This is actually eerily similar to my planned Mesmer profession balance thread suggestion—at least in the aspect of adding skill chains to Mesmer phantasms.

Also, I like the idea of the “drag and click” Phantasmal Berserker reticle. I didn’t want to add any new mechanics to the game, but I suppose you can be as auspicious as you want. I sure don’t care enough anymore since nobody else really does.

Hah, glad to be on the same page. As you’ve probably noticed via some borrowed formatting and stylistic choices, I follow your posts, and I’ve been eagerly awaiting the Mesmer edition since your first thread on Necros. Though I may not agree with all your proposed changes, I find them typically well-thought and a good representation of the communities desire for more active, skillful gameplay.

Regarding the addition of new mechanics, if the click and drag proved cumbersome to develop, I’d imagine a possible substitute might be a ranged “line” cast like any of the wall-type skills currently in game, just with expanded width and length to match the attack.


Phantasms are something distinguishing mesmers from other professions. AoE skill with pink delivery boy animation is just another AoE skill.

And if you want to play a profession with heavy AoE roll an Elementalist.

My intention with this proposal was not to threaten the identity of the Mesmer or other classes. Thematically, I agree that phantasms are a significant component of a Mesmer, but mechanically, they’re no more defining to the profession than minions to a Necromancer, Spirit weapons to a Guardian, or Turrets to and Engineer: These things are all (generally speaking) persistent second-body damage and utility sources. The unfortunate difference between Mesmer and other professions is that Mesmers are currently inseparable from reliance on this type of AI.

That said, functionally speaking, the proposed changes weigh very little against the actual purposing of the individual phantasms; rather, the emphasis is placed on the delivery system such that Mesmers can utilize the tools already available to them in a broader scope of engagements.

I have to disagree to the idea of phantasm being a single action and then vanish spell. the fact that they phantasms stay around can be a life saver don’t know how many time they have save me in pve. and yesterday me and guardian downed each other at the same time my phantasms stayed around and stopped him from getting up and stomping me and allowed me to kill him instead.

I understand your position, which is precisely why I suggested that these proposed changes be implemented via a side-grade in the trait system. If people like their AI builds – I know they’re especially popular in PvE dungeons – they should be able to keep them (inb4 swagg disagrees with me here). I would just like to see a broader functional palate for Mesmer.

[PvX] A Proposal for Phantasms

in Profession Balance

Posted by: Tauhx.2504


Hey Forum Folk,
I know a decent amount of whats below is a bit of a re-telling, but I thought I’d give the discussion a bump with a freshly CDI-formatted post.

Proposal Overview

As a form of horizontal progression, the Mesmer would benefit from an additional, alternate behavioral set for phantasms. Functionally, these changes would treat phantasms more like standard attacks and utilities, and less like AI summons.

Overall, a Mesmer utilizing this alternate behavioral set should feel stronger and more relevant in a larger engagements at the cost of feeling more resource starved in smaller engagements and duels.

Goal of Proposal

Due to their glassy, target-locked nature, phantasms, which can represent a significant portion of a Mesmer’s presence, drastically lose value in larger engagements where enemy AoE and cleaving are ubiquitous.

Further, in their current manifestation, phantasms promote a heavy reliance on AI, which is widely viewed as unengaging both to play-as and to play against.

Therefore, the primary goals of this proposal are to

  • Increase the Mesmer’s ability to contribute in larger-scaled engagements
  • Promote active, skill-driven gameplay
  • Provide an alternative play style for those who appreciate the Mesmer profession, but do not enjoy reliance on AI

Proposal Functionality

Many skill cool downs, cast times, damage values, and other factors will likely need to be adjusted to accommodate new behavioral patterns; however, such things are not quantitatively discussed in this proposal in an attempt to focus on higher-level design points. Any numbers mentioned here are purely “ball-parked.”

Seminal Changes (apply to all phantasms)

  • Phantasms act only once per summoning and are then removed.
  • Phantasms are invulnerable.
  • Phantasms that act through AoE are now ground cast, rather than target cast.
  • Phantasms do not count towards the 3-illusion maximum and cannot be shattered.

Phantasmal Berserker: Click and hold to designate origin location. Drag and release to designate attack direction.

Phantasmal Mage: [Functionality Change] This is now an AoE attack with radius 240. The iMage will be summoned in a random area near the target area to preform its attack and to indicate to the opponent that the attack is being preformed.

Phantasmal Duelist: Only adjusted by seminal changes.

Phantasmal Warden: Now summoned as an AoE ground cast.

Phantasmal Defender: [Functionality Change] This is now an AoE spell with radius 240. It now also has a short, timed-life. The iDefender will be summoned in the center of the AoE to preform its ability and to indicate to the opponent that the ability is being preformed.

The next batch of proposed changes are mostly for discussion purposes, as bundling them with the above changes may give the Mesmer an unwieldy amount of AoE and/or devalue some tools that might balance out the play style of new behavioral set.

Phantasmal Warlock: [Functionality Change] The iWarlock is now an attack that does less base damage, but its now AoE with radius 240. The iWarlock will be summoned in a random area near the target area to preform its attack and to indicate to the opponent that the attack is being preformed.

Phantasmal Disenchanter: [Functionality Change] This is now an AoE spell with radius 240. The iDisenchanter will be summoned in a random area near the target area to preform its ability and to indicate to the opponent that the ability is being preformed.

Phantasmal Duelist: [Functionality Change] Added piercing attacks and a widened cone of fire. Click and hold to designate origin location. Drag and release to designate attack direction.

All changes would be made through trait selection, most likely via a hefty Grandmaster trait with some associated master/adept traits.

The following could be used To distinguish traited/untriated Mesmers:

  • A permanent buffbar icon, both to phantasms and the sourcing Mesmer
  • A distinguishing particle effect (e.g. Ele’s have attunements represented around their wrists)
  • A different coloring/texturing of phantasms (recommended: dark purple)

Associated Risks

  • If implemented via the trait system, conveying the volume of changes made to the class mechanics could prove difficult. This additionally means that newer players would struggle even more when learning to duel Mesmers.
  • Bugs! The Mesmer is a class well known for bugs that cripple its essential mechanics (lookin’ at you, iLeap). A large undertaking like this one would no doubt unearth some new bugs.

(edited by Tauhx.2504)

Vote for the Profession Collaborative Development

in Profession Balance

Posted by: Tauhx.2504


I think it’s worth separating PvP and PvE to answer this question well.

1) Ranger: It’s only viable build (Spirits) is AI driven, auto-attack heavy (boring), and not particularly potent in many situations.
2) Elementalist: Fresh Air can be brutal in the hands of a skilled player, but the profession suffers from a lack of viable build options and is too easy a target for competent thieves.
3) Mesmer: Mesmer is in a rough place because it competes with thief for a roster spot. It desperately tries to outmaneuver its shortcomings in damage and mobility with team utility like portal and occasionally null field, but often it simply can’t add enough value to compensate.
3)Thief: This profession needs to be carefully evaluated in the context of other professions that occupy an offensive roaming role.

Honorable Mention) Engineer: This profession definitely has competitive potential, but outside of cheesy builds (a.k.a. Decap) one is compelled to take grenade kit and the related traits. This greatly diminishes the potential for build and role diversity and identity.


DISCLAIMER: These statements are made in accordance with the Zerker meta.

1) Necromancer: Though this profession can provide competitive DPS, it doesn’t add enough DPS to overcome its lack of cleaving options and feasible team utility.
2) Ranger: The profession is on the lower end of the personal DPS scale, which is disappointing considering how difficult it is to control (1hs sword autos) and how often/easily it’s primary team buffs (pet/frost spirit) get blown out by stray AoE.
3) Engineer: Engineer is more often than not just an inferior form of Elementalist. Excluding from comparison the ridiculously high DPS Elementalist can provide with FGS rush, the Elementalist provides much better sustained AoE DPS, better crowd control via warding, and comparable heals/cleanse. Engine stacks vuln, but Ele stacks might. The list goes on.

Honorable Mention) Mesmer: This class has a comfortable niche, only sometimes competing with guardian for utility type. What weighs heavy on Mesmer is that a significant portion of its DPS is single target, short lived (phantasms), and takes time to ‘wind up’. Most significantly though — this profession has many significant bugs that need to be addressed.

[PvE] Revising the "Tank/Healing Meta"

in Profession Balance

Posted by: Tauhx.2504


Fantastic post! It completely and succinctly identifies the major problems with the current tanking/healing meta, and the video attachment is great evidence to support your points.

Well done.

That fractal video..

in Fractured

Posted by: Tauhx.2504


I love the video, BUT, seriously, no swamp roll?


General ToN Feedback Thread

in Tower of Nightmares

Posted by: Tauhx.2504


But after playing since the release, I’m sorry if my expectations exceed the same routine:
1. Kill x of these
2. Do x events
3. Press F x times on y maps
4. Eat/collect x items
5. Play a mini-game

This isn’t content and achievements should never be QUESTS. Honestly, I feel like I log in, “pick up my quests” by watching the achievements and go do what the “quest giver” (description from achievement) tells me for extra experience, the achievement point and possibly a loot item that is useless or just something I’ll never see again (hello home instance…sorry for being rude, but I don’t really spend time there…no bank, no TP).


And here’s a thought for everyone:
I am able to watch a tv series or focus on something else while in Guild Wars 2. This is not something I consider “playing”, when I’m not even required to pay attention in most content released. Do you? Is pressing 1 (also known as auto-attack for most) really how you wish to play your game? Because this patch for example requires nothing more. Sure, I can press all my skills, but whatever for? In most cases, you’re lucky to hit the mobs with 1 skill in a zerg.

Great post. It really highlights some of the major problems that LS content is facing: Each release, the living story has shipped content that’s shallow, grindy/zergy, and unthoughtful of the full impact on players (taco overflow/instancing nightmare) and setting (NPCs peripheral to events have been largely oblivious to LS content).

I sympathize for Anet because I do believe that they’re passionate about their work, but they are obviously struggling/rushing with tight deadlines and disorganized management. That said, sympathy is no more a replacement for content than the ubiquitous “Do X of Y” achievement padding we’ve been toiling away at, and I imagine it will not be enough to retain players against alternative hobbies (that’s right, it’s not just other MMOs that threaten GW2 — people are free to spend their time learning an instrument, a (computer) language, a skill, etc).

Like many others, I’m still somewhat stricken with optimism about this game because of the potential it has: The combat mechanics of the new nightmare court are headed in the right direction, and, even if only on the surface, the ambience of the nightmare tower is dark and threatening in a way that other recent threats seem to have lacked. Nonetheless, the overall continued lack of substance, both from storytelling and gameplay, has been a major letdown.

I’ve been a daily player since launch with about 3.5k hours logged, and GW2 is going on the back-burner for me. If the new content continues as it has been, I’ll likely be dropping it altogether.

(edited by Tauhx.2504)

More Colorblind Consideration, Please!

in Queen's Jubilee

Posted by: Tauhx.2504



I believe the disagreement we’re having (like many disagreements) is semantic. When I define colorblindness as a handicap, I am supposing that for some portion of colorblind peoples, the AoE rings are significantly more difficult to see than they would be for non-colorblind peoples. This creates a disadvantage unique to that set of people and thus a handicap. While I have based my position from the standpoint that of that definition, you are hung up on the implications of perceived weakness sometimes associated with handicaps.

Unfortunately, overemphasizing societal stigmas of handicaps to the extent of denying the existence of clearly observable, mechanical disadvantages is not helpful to the colorblind community. Being disadvantaged is not inherently bad, it just means there’s an extra obstacle on the route to obtaining a goal, and carrying on as if that obstacle doesn’t exist perpetuates the disadvantage and validates the stigma by ignoring simple solutions to potentially significant struggles.

E.g. colorblind people taking significantly longer to complete Liadri because they cannot see the AoE indicators is evidence that there is an issue unique to colorblind persons, and that they are less capable of that task. It’s not necessarily an issue of willpower, determination, or skill — they simply can’t see the critical indicators, so they fail. Alternatively, simple UI tools that could make those rings more visible, thus bringing colorblind persons of otherwise equal skill to a completion rate on par with non-colorblind persons and thereby demonstrate (to society) that colorblind peoples are not disadvantaged for that task.

Anyway, at least we can agree that changing indicator colors would (minimally) be a neat feature for colorblind and non-colorblind alike.

More Colorblind Consideration, Please!

in Queen's Jubilee

Posted by: Tauhx.2504


When I suggested that it’s similar playing without AoEs, I wasn’t literally saying they were invisible; I meant, much like you stated, that they blend in very well with the floor making them quite difficult to see by lack of contrast. Even if (in your particular case) the hue of that gray ring stands out, it isn’t necessarily going to behave that way for all forms of colorblindness. I made the secondary recommendation on the basis that it might give insight to developers what people with more extreme forms of the disadvantage (like using endpoints to guess a midpoint).

Further, colorblindness is a handicap and being prideful about it won’t change that. Toughing-it-out may be a working solution, but I rarely see it as the “best” solution. If you feel you need to prove that you can operate as well as someone without colorblindness, that’s fine, you don’t have to use any aid: many colorblind modes in games are toggle-able, and my primary suggest would support that feature, but I do imagine a fair number of colorblind players (myself included) would appreciate some simple tools to subvert the handicap.

In an incidentally fitting way, it’s almost like a gambit for the gauntlet — but not one we have the option to deselect.

EDIT: Whoops, somehow my quote was disconnected from my post. I’m responding to Fancia. :P

More Colorblind Consideration, Please!

in Queen's Jubilee

Posted by: Tauhx.2504


Hi Forums, I’m Colorblind,

And, in addition to other troubles in GW2, it makes it very difficult to see AoEs — especially in the Queens Gauntlet; my experience is very near playing without AoE indication at all, making Liadri’s death-storm AoEs insanely challenging.

I understand that colorblindness is something Anet has addressed in the past, and giving movement to the AoE indicators was tremendously helpful in many situations (Cliffside first fight is a big one for me). Nonetheless, it is still a large obstacle for colorblind peoples.

Without expecting a speedy solution, I would recommend 2 things:
1) Allow for players to choose what color AoE indicators are. While I personally have intensity deficits in red (80% loss) and green (65% loss), I have heightened intensities for blues and yellows — both at almost 200% intensity. Being able to select those colors as an alternative might be very helpful.

2) If in designing new content, there are to be AoEs atop green/gray surfaces or surfaces that otherwise might not provide best visibility, have your play testers complete the content with AoE indicators disabled. This will give the developers better feedback as to what the challenge might be like for colorblind players.

Anyway, that’s just my 2 cents. I’m gonna keep trying at Liadri, but speaking honestly, I can only get to phase 2 because I’ve memorized the first bit of the drop pattern, and I know darkness doesn’t befall the same region twice in a row. It’s poopy and slow, but it’s the best I’ve got right now (and I’m totally open for suggestion).