Showing Posts For jweltsch.1832:
where does one get monk runes in pve? I cannot find them in the tp lol.
This is actually very interesting. The +80% might duration is impressive. On the trinkets I would maybe go for emerald jewels in the valk trinkets. That will net you 6% more crit chance and the losses wont be devastating. Another thing you may want to try is running 2water runes in place of 2 of the ones for might duration. You would only lose 5% duration and gain 15% on your other boons. This would net you more survivability for only about.25-.5 secs of might lost. Also, I said more precision since with all this might it would be nice to crit almost half the time.
Is this intended for solo or groups? Because a build for each one would have a good bit of variation.
Yeah I was thinking of putting emeralds in the trinks. 2 water runes isnt a bad Idea either. As for purposes this would be for both solo and zerg play, in a zerg I would probably run ah instead of monks focus though. Thinking about runing sw/fc instead of staff, but both are great choices imo.
Was wondering what the community would think about a build I was working on. The goal of the build is to be fairly tanky, but still be able to put out damage through massive might stacking, and maintain a decent crit rating and damage.
My goal was to maximize might up-time and get stacks as high as I could get them. Therefor I chose the might duration runes. With the runes I get 18s 12 stacks of might from empower, 9s of might from every crit (1s cd), 3 stacks of might for 9s from virtue of justice, 3 stacks of might for 36! seconds every weaponswap, and 27! seconds of might for every block. On the tanky side, I have just shy of 3k armor, extra passive healing from resolve, monks focus and dodge heals. Condition control is done through activating VoR and contemplation of purity.
A few things that I am debating on changing are: using 2 hand mastery instead of empower. This would give perma uptime on the might from empower and of course the heals would occur more often.
Another change change I am looking at is swaping the gems on the trinkets to knights, this would lower my crit damage to 50 but I would get over the 3k armor mark and have 40% crit. Also I am considering the might on dodge food (permavigor gives lots of dodges) instead of life steal food.
PS. build also works well with sw/fc instead of the staff, opening with blocks port in with sword then swap to gs. might on crit sigil for the focus.
Critisism and suggestions are welcome please help me refine the build XD
One problem i see with this. You are calling it stealth. Its invisibilty. If i see someone running towards me and ‘stealths’ and suddenly he disappears from view, he didnt sudden jump into shadows or moved quietly, he went invisible.
Thieves can have stealth. They cant have invisibilty.
This times 1000. If a thief required shadows/cover/brush to hide in, and HAD to move much more slowly to not blow their cover (watch a vid on youtube on some of the training US snipers go through and see what stealth is REALLY like) I would be very much in favor of it. In fact if they had to actually take the time to do such things then their burst would be warrented (in fact I think it would need to be unnerfed) as it would provide skillful play for the thief (stick to cover, Stick to the shadows, dont move too fast) and even some viable counter play for a non-thief.
Another problem the class has, in my opinion, is the fact that if you have the best ability to PICK your fights, you should never, ever, have the best ability to leave a fight, especially not with the burst thieves have. Currently thieves have these paired abilities that should never be paired which is why the other 7 professions dislike the class, and why the class is rarely fun to play against.
ps. if you say a thief is squishy you are wrong. While they may not be able to take a large amount of hits, they have the best tools to never take those hits in the first place. Mobility is honestly the best defense in this game from my experienced with stealth being just behind. Both of which thieves have in spades………
You seem to be viewing tommorrow’s daily achievements.
Check your timezone setting and make sure your computers clock is set to the right time.
Once updated the achievements should update within 20 seconds.
The date and time is set correctly on my system, but I am unable to update those achievements, but all others work. If your theory was correct NONE of my dailies should update, but they all do except those two.
I thought this stuff was thoroughly tested… I got the kill 5 veterans daily and it will not update no matter what I kill…. I wonder how many more are bugged grrr…
Same issue, the achievement wont update for Veteran kills, both event and non-event kills do nothing. Also have tried champs to no avail.
Hey Karina I really like the thread.
Since your experiment has changed to finding the optimal mf, to wanting to see if magic find works at all or not, would it not be much simpler and much faster with greater accuracy to pick 2 stat points and see if there is any correlation at all (ie 0% and 220%) (sorry if I am wrong, I only have a moderate understanding of stats from my engineering courses).
In fact, we could even simultaneously test whether food does work and gear doesn’t, or vise verse, by picking a stat point that is easily obtained by either method, say 30% mf (which is 5 accessories or the omniberry bar). You could easily have the community help with collection by posting images of excel files with their findings in them (or even make a public google doc that people can add their findings to, though you run the risk of sabotage by randoms on the internet… but at least google docs let you see individual changes by user and undo them. You could also make a group and put up files as read only, still dose not help against false data but meh).
Im sure you probably could get enough community help to put together a decent survey and do follow up experiments depending on the results.
EDIT: with enough data points you would also be able to see correlation with absurdly low drop rates as sometimes even a couple thousand data points is not good enough to measure these (and rares seem to be in this area, not to mention exotics not even sure if they drop)
More qq about guardians….
You realize what they do is in their name right?
Someone didnt read op…. hes saying all the forum whiners are full of it. You do NOT need a guardian to win, there are several other classes that can fill their role just as well.
@guildwarsfan
The system would use the de system to account for players. Therefore ANY player that takes offensive action against either the keep or players defending it get counted. This means that the afkers will not count, but the randoms killing moas aoeing will as they will hit the castle (dont think ive EVER seen some people fighting the mobs and not attacking the castle when they have a zerg attacking, but w/e).
As for the formula, the +5 defender advantage is there on purpose. It is there for 3 reasons, 1 is to back scale the point gain to account for the inheret advantage having a fortification. Another is to give a base point score should a team leave a tower undefended (as not to cause a logic error in calculations, could just use a logic process to say if players = 0 then so do points, but this brings about point 3). And the other is that it is there to discourage an attacking from sitting there not capping the undefended fort to allow it to build points as the defender is still scoring points in the process (might even outscore the attacker if they are not quick enough).
And yes it would be awesome if we had the option to leave upgrades in tact or sack the keep. It would also be awesome if raiders could have more effect on the game play by allowing the “razing” of supply camps as I suggested. Will make taking and defending supply camps a much bigger deal if you could effectively take em out of commission for a long period should the zergs choose not to defend them, and also giving small teams a larger impact on the overall game.
(edited by jweltsch.1832)
Im going to make a suggestion to the wvw scoring system, as the current one does not reward actual pvp activities. My thought is that rather than scoring over time, one should score based on actual battle and points taken. Therefore here is what I propose:
- reward points for player kills (actual values can vary based on how you want your point set up to be (ie 1 kill offers 1/10 a point)
- reward points for destroying siege weaponry, more points for more valuable pieces
- reward points for actively defending a besieged point. This will use the existing de timer, awarding some points every time it updates. The points rewarded will be scaled based on how many defending players are present in the area at any point during the timer (to prevent abuse) vs how many attackers are present in the same time frame. These points, however, will have no limit. So should you be able to hold a keep indefinitely against the hordes you will score quite a lot of points.
- reward POTENTIAL points for besieging a point. Works the same as defending, but the points build up on the point and are not awarded until the point is captured. To prevent abuse, this system will have a maximum point value based on the target (ie 100 for supply, 250 for tower, 500 for keep and so on). The same process as with defense will occur where your points will be scaled based on active defenders present during the time updates. Further, to award a point advantage to taking objectives, points will scale 2-5 times faster for assaulters (depending on objective type)
- When an objective is captured, allow the attacking team to make one of two choices:
1. Destroy all upgrades on a point for addtional points for capture
2. Keep the point with all its upgrades, but all damage still standing (needs to be repaired)
- When capturing a supply point offer the team the option of “razing” the supply point. This instantly destroys the supply present in the point granting points equal to supply present and requires a player to spend some resources to restore the point before it will begin to generate supplies. This will make small teams of “raiders” more effective and allow for some new strategies to emerge.
Here is my example of how a sample siege would work out: Server A attacks a tower that server B owns. 10 players from B defend the point and 40 from A attack. During the first update, B holds the tower, but looses 2 players in the process. They thenfore will score towerbasepoints * 40/(10+5(defender advantage adjustment)). Say during the next update the defenders loose no additional players so their scoring metric will change to towerbasepoints*40/(8+5). During the 3rd update the tower is taken and no further points are awarded.
Now for the attackers their formula would look like this in the first update: towerbasepoints * 3 (the modifier for a tower) * (10+5)/40. These points would not be awarded right away, but would “pool up” on the tower until it is taken. During the second update the points would look very similar: towerbasepoints*3*(8+5)/40, and during the third update the point is taken so the attacker is awarded the points for the first two updates. Should the attacker fail he gains no points (except for points based on kills).
Going with the example, the attacker now owns the tower and has one of two options: to sack the tower for additional points destroying upgrades on it, or leaving the upgrades and any current damage intact. Lets say this tower currently has 2 upgrades costing a total of 200 supply. Should the attacker decide to sack he will gain 200 additional points. Should he decide to remain he can repair the keep to its former defensive level.
A system similar to this seems the most fair all round to me, but I would like to hear others opinions on a system like this or similar.
(edited by jweltsch.1832)