Guild Wars 2

PvE is where the money is. PvE people spend real money to get gems to have the latest shiny objects. They will grind for hours to get an item, keeping them busy for months on end. SPvP has real-world tournaments and money associated with it. WvW—nothing. We don’t want the latest costume (with lag many of us turn the graphics down) or coolest pet, we want random combat. Some want huge fights, others want small group fights. Either way, we spend very little in the way of money. WvW was designed to keep us busy when we ran out of PvE content. If you think I am on the wrong track; look at EoTM.

EoTM was added as a way for people to keep busy WHILE waiting in queue for WvW. They couldn’t increase the population of WvW BLs so they give us a pve like environment to keep us from logging out and going to another game.
To continue that trend they turn the BLs into EoTM like maps, leaving only EB as the traditional map with, I am told, very long queues.

To get people ‘used’ to pve, they force WvW centric players to farm mats so they can then have WvW advantages. They change the mechanics so that objects in WvW require 0 care and attention. You flip something and auto-pilot takes over.

If you watch the progression of WvW over the last 3 years, you are correct. It is the last area to get any updates/patches/improvements/balance. They don’t want it. It is a money sink.

There will be the people who do not like the changes and will leave (I haven’t played for over a month now. I’ve found another game to occupy my time and will not be coming back). You can ask Anet to change things back or make certain changes, but what makes you think they will listen this time?

The owners of the game believe this is the right direction for the game to head. We as players know what we like, but that is not always what is profitable or what the game owners want to do. If they are correct, then there will be a larger influx of players who like this new system than those that leave. If they are wrong, then this game will disappear like so many before them.

Seezungenschleuder.8319:

If you really are necromancers, show some dignity. Some minor nerf here and there, but buffs also. Could have been worse.

There is a big problem with the new DS mechanic. Since I can’t see exactly how much health I have (it’s just a bar), I can’t gauge how much damage I can take. Since heals ONLY work in ‘normal’ form, I won’t be able to heal myself (or be healed) until I have reverted back from DS, however, the damage will not wait for the transition. I think this is going to act like lag and we will wind up getting killed in that gap.

Drensky.9567:

Atleast we get360 radius marks if traited……

Are you sure? It simply said it increased the standard mark by 50%, to 180. The greater marks specifically states “increases radius from 120 to 240”. Then can easily keep that at 240 and only provide unblockable.

My biggest concern is the ‘gap’ between being in DS and reverting back to normal form. I am guessing this will act like lag and cause many deaths. Here is the scenario:

I have 2k of health and 3k of ‘DS health’. I get hit for 4.5k of dmg. 1.5k of the gets pushed right into our health, but we haven’t made the transition back from DS so we can’t hit our heal. That would leave me with just 500 left in which to heal up. Now being there is no numbers associated with the DS health bar, I can’t really tell just how much dmg I can absorb. Just seeing 1/2 a bar doesn’t tell me anything.

Kilger.5490:

boneduste.4023:

Kilger.5490:

boneduste.4023:

Can you not dodge while crippled?

Not sure what your point is, you can dodge crippled or not. Still better chance you’ll take another pulse if crippled.

I walk into the well and get crippled, I dodge. One pulse.

Dodge twice and take none. Your point? Dodge is good? No argument there…

In fact you can dodge and avoid anything in the game. This makes the skill no good? Gotta make your argument more clear bud.

I was commenting on the person who posted that with a WoC swiftness would be converted into cripple which would cause the enemy to be in the Well for one more pulse.

Kilger.5490:

boneduste.4023:

Can you not dodge while crippled?

Not sure what your point is, you can dodge crippled or not. Still better chance you’ll take another pulse if crippled.

I walk into the well and get crippled, I dodge. One pulse.

Kilger.5490:

boneduste.4023:

Thanks for the post Rennoko. I found a post that is much older (last year) that tested WoC and found nearly the same order. Tried to convince fellow necros that CorruptBoon was a better choice. Even now with only 5 boons I think it is much better than WoC.

You can argue that it’s 1 boon off up to 5 people every second for 5 seconds, but WvW has become more of a ‘push right through, don’t stop’, which means you might get 10 people in the well for 1-2 pulses before they double-dodge roll through it or just walk through it (can’t take more than 1 second to walk the radius of a well). Also, wells are blockable.

Would be nice if they updated the wiki to show the corruption order. If you look at WoC it shows what gets boon gets converted into what condition, but the order alphabetical by boon.

Nice thing is though, swiftness if a very common buff and second on the lst. Once corrupted to cripple they’ll take another pulse at least.

Can you not dodge while crippled?

Thanks for the post Rennoko. I found a post that is much older (last year) that tested WoC and found nearly the same order. Tried to convince fellow necros that CorruptBoon was a better choice. Even now with only 5 boons I think it is much better than WoC.

You can argue that it’s 1 boon off up to 5 people every second for 5 seconds, but WvW has become more of a ‘push right through, don’t stop’, which means you might get 10 people in the well for 1-2 pulses before they double-dodge roll through it or just walk through it (can’t take more than 1 second to walk the radius of a well). Also, wells are blockable.

Would be nice if they updated the wiki to show the corruption order. If you look at WoC it shows what gets boon gets converted into what condition, but the order alphabetical by boon.

Sad Rabbit.9174:

I got excited when I saw the 0.11 coefficient on the wiki but it’s clearly wrong. At 1400 condition damage using the wiki formula it should be ticking for 186 damage but it’s doing less than half of that.

It ticks for 75% of what my bleed ticks for. It ticks twice as often if they’re moving (I guess it’s hard to test).

So the formula appears to be (0.0375*[Condition Damage]+31.875) per tick.

Thanks, Rabbit. I was seeing something very similar and thought I might be doing something wrong.

I have been trying to test torment out and I have hit a bit of a snag. In the wiki page it explains the formula for torment as ((0.11*[ConditionDmg] + 32) * stacks). While I ‘assumed’ it is base damage, it doesn’t say if that formula is for base or the 150% of running. Then there is the confusing part that says it is 75% of bleed while standing still, 150% if moving. Does that mean the formula is ((0.05*[ConditionDmg]+42) * 0.75)*stacks)? Finally, I am hearing that since it is based upon bleeding, the more bleeds on the opponent the greater the dmg, because it is based off your bleed dmg, meaning the more stacks of bleed on the opponent, the greater the torment dmg. I find the last one highly unlikely.

Has anyone tested torment to see how the numbers actually work?

jaimy.4108:

If this was true, which I think it is not. This would be the stupiest thing Anet could ever do:

“Torment: Added a new Condition called Torment. This does damage every second (75% of a bleed), and double damage to foes that are moving(150% of a bleed). Stacks intensity”

This will only punish the small organized groups in WvW because they relay on movement, were blobs can simply stand still.

Lets just pray this thing will never come out.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Torment

I wouldn’t worry too much about this. The push in WvW is for power/well necros, which gimps your condition damage. I’ve seen a few power/well builds that have condition damage of 200, which would make this new condition tick (0.11*[Condition Damage]+32)=22 + 32= 54/tick.

Watch out for the rare condition necro.

Wells only affect 5 people max as well and the comparison is apples/oranges. If you are going to use epidemic, best to also equip Corrupt Boon.

Just rollback the changes, go back to QA to reproduce the issue, and then come back with a proven fix.

Jeknar.6184:

Missy.7356:

Maybe this way they can say they got rid of the queues….

Free transfer to medium pop servers and broken queues on full servers…

hmmmmmmm… smells fishy…

Nice <catch>.

To give people incentive to do things to get them titles. What good is a title if you can’t show it off to the enemy? Now the stuff ANet works on has perceived meaning.

They fixed what was causing the crash. The simple ‘FIFO’ queue.

Culling has been solved. Just limit the number of people in WvW<(total # of NPCs)

Conner.4702:

Can I suggest a better error message while you are at it. Telling people to check their internet connection while you are ingame is not really a helpful error message.

It’s for the devs not the users. Why would you need to check your internet if you are logged into the game? I think it’s a message when the in-game client is looking to connect to a new set of servers (WvW).

I agree the message should be something akin to “WvW is temporarily down”.

Here’s a guess.

1. Server is taken offline — all data is saved to disk.
2. Server is restarted and daemons come online and calculate current state of game — ((mins since last tick/15)*current point tick)+current total points

Since it’s automated it will update the score accordingly as soon as it comes back online. I don’t think they have any exception tables or rules and it would be too tedious to have a dba go in and change all of the scores back.

Let’s look at what we can deduce without assuming anything:

• Player for a given server for a given map is in Queue
• Players from the same server actually in that map show out-manned buff

Unless ANet uses the results of ‘culling’ in its determination of when a server has an out-manned buff, then by having any queue AND an out-manned buff would show that either the out-manned calculation AND/OR the queue is bugged.

With the above said I am in the camp that states the queue system is bugged. This OBSERVATION is based upon much the same data that the rest of the population is getting. Seemingly random persons getting into a BL shortly after entering the queue, while others wait hours. Very low observable populations while the out-manned buff and queues are active.

Corrupt Boon has the same issue. I believe if a target has an Aegis, the Corrupt Boon (and/or) Lich 5, get blocked. as the Aegis states it blocks the next incoming attack. Looks like a bug.

Churros.7196:

How do you bug a FIFO queue lol… it is so simple it is not possible to be bugged(or if it is it should be fixed in like 2 mins)

THANK YOU!!!!

fellyn.5083:

terrordrone.1875:

Definitely not FIFO. They can say it’s FIFO all they want, but I’ve had guild mates enter the bg before me even though I started queuing 15 minutes before them.

I would agree with this too. This was while we were still on DH I remember queuing up and getting through in maybe 5 minutes while people in the guild were saying they’d been in the queue for 45+ minutes at that point.

It very well may be a FIFO system, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t broke as kitten.

FIFO (First-in-First-Out) queue by its nature means people who queue first, get in first. This is not such a structure. The funny thing is a queue is a basic programming 101 structure. How did ANet mess this up?

Here’s a step towards working with the WvW community: give us a command to count total number of persons in the zone. I played many games that provided such a command so you could see if you were out-manned or of certain strategies were available to you. If ANet did that we could get true counts.

GottFaust.5297:

1 – They have already said it is first in first out.
2 – Many players have suggested this.
3 – This is NOT a technical issue. It’s an issue where all the transfer babies all transferred to a small subset of servers and now wonder why all 20,000 (exaggeration) of them can’t join the same battleground at the same time.
4 – They aren’t going to do anything to “reduce the wait” that’s up to the transfer system to take care of. Don’t like the long queues? Find a new server.

1. It is in no way a FIFO queue. They may have said it, but unless I see the code I don’t believe them.
3. It is a 100% technical issue. Last night during reset our entire guild was standing around and tried for ‘EBG’ and 1 of us got in. All servers were reporting low numbers. It took upwards of 3 hours for the rest of us to trickle in and interestingly when one of our guild members logged out someone else got in. This is most likely a coincidence, but if I remember there were issues when people in parties tried to queue as it took the party as a unit and only allowed everyone or no one. They might have done a cut/paste with the code.
4. If the purpose of the transfer system is to help balance out WvW, then it’s wrong and broken. IF you can have (166*4)=664 people total/server in WvW (166 people/4 borderlands) then they need more servers. I think the point of server transfer was to allow you to find a server that had people on during ‘your’ time of play to group up for PvE/Dungeons/Fractals AND WvW.

style.6173:

The ratings reset will actually cause imbalances for the next 10 weeks until this becomes sorted out again. I do not understand the logic.

That said, what do we really expect? Look at the culling system. The system failed a test in December and was reverted. So what happened? They rolled out the same failed system a second time expecting a different result.

It won’t cause imbalances because right now everyone is teamed with the servers they would have been teamed with this week. The only change is each server is no longer rated. I think this is good and here’s why.

Up until the change to paid transfers servers would gain/lose guilds which caused massive imbalance. If you look at NA servers over the last few weeks you would have seen SBI fall from grace. When they hit T2, SoR got massive points for beating them BECAUSE SBI was ranked so much higher than them. This caused SoR to shoot right up the ladder gaining hundreds of points/week. Once a T1 server falls to T2 legitimately (they were unable to keep enough score to fend off a top T2 server), it takes many weeks to regain your position in T1, because you are fighting servers below your rank (points not ladder). It took BG nearly 8 weeks to push back into T1 after winning in T2 for 8 consecutive weeks. Why? Because the rating system said “You need to beat your opponent by much more since you are higher ranked”.

With the reset of points, servers will get proper points based upon beating teams of ‘equal’ rating. So now when you gain points against the other 2 servers they are true points, not scaled in any way. Now you can say “they aren’t equal”, but they are as close as we can get. It would have been a true disaster if they decided to completely randomize the match-ups.

What I cannot attest to is the actual Glicko values they use or if the system should be used at all. Glicko was designed as a way to rank an individual not a collective. While it was ingenious to look at a server as a collective ‘individual’, they didn’t take into consideration the impact guilds would have in the movement. In the grand scheme of things, individuals will come and go and the total population would be even, but when whole guilds move that can be devastating. How they missed this in a game called “Guild Wars”, I don’t know.

Rislo.6293:

hey guys, this will be my first forum post. But what i would like to know specifically is what exactly our problems are? Granted, I’ve only got my Necro to level 39, and I dont have damage meters or the like to judge my performance, but I haven’t found much to be wrong with the profession….yet, at least. So, from more experienced players with the prof, could you inform me or possibly link me to a proper forum to find such info. It’s just really disheartening to hear that we’re bad as a prof, but yet i don’t know any specifics. Im hoping to have this guy at 80 and rockin on with him. But i fear that will not be so, nor worth the effort.
And i apologize if this is the wrong thread for such a question.

If you do a little surfing through this forum you will see the myriad of bugs/issues with various abilities in this profession.

Rennoko.5731:

I doubt very seriously it would impact their development cycle, and it really shouldn’t. I am sure an up to date bug list would help them focus their very narrow time window for individual class balancing.

The biggest issue with the undertaking is determining what really is a bug, vs. what is a feature or correct application of game mechanics. For example shround stomping, which SEEMED like a bug, even though there are numerous other examples of other immunity/stability stomping going on, has now been classified as a fixed bug.

Healing power not applying to siphoning traits? Could be a bug, an oversight, or an intended oversight. The dodge roll and DS activated skills being weaker than their castable counter-parts? Bug or intended?

What you end up with at the end, is a big list of “issues” that may be exactly what Anet wants. Unfortunately they have not taken the time to dispell what is intended vs. what is un-intended, so we are left to wonder.

Which is why I posted the question in hopes that an ANet representative will answer and put the subject to rest.

Simple Question — ANet, does it benefit you in any way for us to compile a bug list? Does it in any way impact your development cycle?

SoNovel.2715:

The NPC guards you get with the upgrade just protect the yak from whatever hostile wildlife it may encounter along its route, and aren’t meant to be a deterrent against invaders. You and your server mates are meant to protect the yak from invaders.

If this were the case, then don’t require me to buy a guard upgrade for the yak, prior to upgrading the camp.

Many have stated that WvW has become Zerg-on-Zerg. The zerg is part of WvW, but I believe the use of the zerg can be mitigated. If part of the points awarded is some ratio of the servers K/D (in WvW and vs players only) this could very well adjust the dynamic of the game. How? Here are a few ways that come to mind:

1. Defending a keep could provide the defending sever with a bump in points by killing more attackers than defenders.
2. Knowing deaths affect the server, commanders would have to take this into account for strategy. Having dozens of users cycle in to attack could backfire (more points awarded to the other side for the number of kills vs the points of taking the objective)

We need to find ways that increase the complexity of WvW, but aren’t exploitable (walking dolys) to help mitigate the fact that population is the biggest impact on this game.

Having guards on yaks provides little protection. If you spend the money to upgrade them, which is required to get more guards around the camp, you should HAVE to kill the guards before you can damage the yak.

Lopez.7369:

It’s toward the bottom of the vendor. Screenshot is attached.

The only other factor that could be causing the discrepancy that I can think of is consumables. Are you using tuning crystals and food?

I was not looking at food when calculating the 1598, just base armor, traits, runes. I have the HoTW version of that armor. The armor I have has identical stats, but in the wiki it shows higher. Are you using food to get to that number?

I can’t find that gear. I went to the vendor in LA (south section) and there is no condition/prec/toughness armor that I can find. Could you screen shot it? I have both toughness/condition rings (same as yours) and the endless quiver backpack.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

He said “Condition damage/Precision/Toughness” because Condition damage is the primary stat.

I understand that, but I cannot find that specific type of armor anywhere. I wanted to know where they found it, since the armor seems to be Arah, but if you go to the vendor the only combination of the above attributes is Prec/Tough/Cond.

Lopez,
I have a question. In the picture of your build in your guild I see you have a Condition dmg of 1679 and I can’t for the life of me figure out how you did that as mine is only 1598.

I have HotW armor (Prec/Tough/Cond), I have a complete set of superior rune of the undead, my weapons have the same stats as you (prec/tough/cond 64/64/90). and my spec is 30/30/0/10/0. You have 20 points in Death, which would give you an extra 200 toughness which would add (200*.05)=10 more condition points (via rune of the undead).

You mentioned Cond/Prec/Tough armor, which no longer exists. It looks like you have Arah armor and If you look on the wiki it shows arah with this type, but when you go to the vendor it is all the same (Prec/Tough/Cond). Same for Khilbron. Add to this I have exquisite Chrysocola jewels in my 3 non-fractal pieces (I have endless quiver and both pieces you have). This gives me an additional 25 condition over your 20 for rabid and although you gain 45 toughness, this won’t even make up the difference I get from the Chrysocola (15 over 3 pieces).

Am I missing something?

I run the same build for PvE as I do for WvW (which I do mostly). I run HoTW gear (Prec/Tough/Condition), slotted with superior runes of the undead. I run Scepter/Dagger both with (Prec/tough/cond) attributes. I would go with tortured root for your earrings, carrion rings, and colossal fang all with exquisite chrysocola jewels (they don’t have prec/tough/cond jewels yet..one can only hope).

I noticed that Corrupt Boon no longer works on the Ascelonian Captain in the FoTM dungeon. Is this intentional?

Chilling Darkness does not work with Plague Form:Blindness. This one is easy enough to test and I didn’t see it working. I see the blindness, but no chill. Can anyone else verify this?

szczhur.6954:

I went thru the topic but didnt seen anyone having same problem as i have not sure if its only me or maybe i simply didnt search hard enough.
Anyways my problem is about dodge and scepter.
It looks like scepter auto attack cancels my dodge half the time i try to dodge.
It does use the endurance i do see dodge animation but im not moving an inch. It all happens in place.
Any other conditionmancer running with scepter/dagger that have this problem?

I’ve seen this quite often and is one of most often reason I die. I do a dodge, but it seems to bounce me back to the originating spot. I use Scepter/Dagger 99% of the time, but never attributed it to that combo. I always thought it was key press issues.

zastari.1730:

How about doubling the limit to 10 in WvW maps only?

It just pushes the issue farther out, meaning I just need to have 20 people to make it ineffective. If you make it unlimited then people have to take AoE into consideration. Right now, I bust down a wall and if I have enough people you just rush through, because even if the area is covered with AoE, you take your chances that you won’t get hit. This makes AoE less of a deterrent and more of an annoyance.

Ralathar.7236:

Because new school players are too big of kittens to accept proper resource management as part of play style. We don’t wanna wait, or conserve. We want is all now.

So instead of a power or mana limit to curb your AOE form being a permenently unstoppable force you have cooldowns and target caps. Note I’m not talking a Wowesque theoretical mana limit I’m talking a DAOCesque hardcore power limit.

What style of resource management are you talking about? I am talking about having 40 people banging at a door and the best I can do is hit 5 of them. Oh and by the way if there are 5 pets at the door, then I hit NO ONE. That’s just ludicrous. I have yet to see an AoE drop a person who was paying attention. As soon as you see the red circle you make a decision; “Do I stay in the circle and finish whatever I was doing or do I hop out”. Right now most people don’t even pay attention to the circle because they think “I won’t be the one who gets hit, I’ve got 10 people right next to me”.

Klawlyt.6507:

What about some sort of damage scaling for 5+X targets? That way your AoE’s effectiveness isn’t directly correlated to the number of people (and charr) you’re hitting. I know a couple other MMO’s have used this system (unfortunately, WoW comes to mind). I’m sure we could talk all night about how diluted a skill should be for however many people, but maybe it’s worth a shot. It could always be tweaked. Plus, DD might go down, but conditions would probably have to go off on everyone in the AoE… thus giving condi builds more viability in WvW.

Siege on the other hand, shouldn’t have any such cap.

There is no need for dmg scaling as it is already pre-determined in the skill. I can hit a potentially unlimited number of people in a specific radius. The dmg of the skill and the radial limit are what prevents a single person from taking out an entire zerg. What it will do is make the zerg dynamic change from a flock of birds following a commander tag, to a bunch of organized groups working to a common goal.

JemL.3501:

this is something i never was sure at the start.

if 1 elementalist use meteor shower, at same time or may be not same time another one do the same, in the same place, this means there will be two meteor showers, would this mean 1 rain will hit 5 people max and the other one will hit another 5 max?

or

the rain will be like if it was one single rain? like if one meteor shower wasnt casted at all.

oh btw iam with the people who say: aoe is aoe, if you dont move from the rain, you deserve to lay down, however does anybody know the answer from my question? because sometimes i feel my meteor shower isnt doing damage when theres another one

Again, this is an educated guess. Each of the meteor showers has a center and a radius. When it is cast, the system determines the 5 closest players to the center of EACH cast. If both happen to cast the center on top of one another, then the system has a good chance of picking the same 5 targets to hit.

MysticoN.5068:

Siege should NOT (!) have the 5 target limit, but players should. Also Siege should be cheaper and easyer to build. Make em more fearsome.

Whould also fix the zerg “problem”.

Why should players have the limit, but not siege?

Mif.3471:

Only Mesmers should be able to use their portal imo.

That would have a completely different affect on the class and I would have to disagree. Let’s stay on topic.

jkctmc.8754:

Sure, when AoEs stop doing more damage than single target abilities, I’m game for that.

That is a weak argument. Unless you are in a zerg there is a guarantee you will be affected by AoE, so why limit the damage? You are looking to exploit the chance that you won’t be one of the ones chosen when dozens of people sit on the same spot.

Let’s not forget the ability for nearly all, if not all, classes to cleanse some, if not all, conditions on you at some point.

Tulisin.6945:

I’d love to see how fast people who want unlimited-cap AE would make a 180 change in opinion once 5-man perma-stealth cluster bomb thief squads start roaming around.

I think people would prefer being able to defend against portal bombs than to worry about getting 5 thieves with that specific build roaming around.

Rhyis.7058:

If you ever played Warhammer Online you’d know why an AoE limit is needed. 5 bright wizards could insta-gib any unfortunate soul that happened to be standing in a certain location. In 50+ vs 50+ battles, if half your army were bright wizards or sorceresses you’d continually be melted into the face of the earth if you were anywhere near the front lines… And WAR had healing classes to help mitigate the damage, and they couldn’t keep you alive. How the hell do you expect to survive with no healers at all?

People will say “Yeah but DAoC didn’t either”. Well here’s the thing with that. DAoC didn’t have many players. Even in it’s absolute peak, you’d never see more then 30 players roaming together. In the new age of gaming, everybody is playing MMOs now. Games have a minimum of half a million players. This ain’t 2002.

I played WarHammer Online for many years. In that game there were issues of balance, because you had one set of characters (order) fighting a totally separate set of characters (chaos). GW2 doesn’t have that as you have the exact same character classes/races available to both sides. Also damage mitigation was complicated. You had mitigation against magic, physical, elemental. You had totally separate block/dodge/disrupt mechanics and investing in one was at the expense of others. In this game EVERYONE can dodge with a keystroke, WH Online if I was a choppa, I had 0 evade capability, which means ranged ALWAYS hit.

Apples-to-Oranges.

Telegraph.7509:

If AOE limit was removed or increased for damage, the ally-buff and heal limit should also increase accordingly for parity. Then everyone will start running bunker retaliation builds.

It’s a complicated problem.

It’s not complicated. I said nothing about increased dmg, I said remove the AoE limit.