Guild Wars 2

Xae Isareth.1364:

lolnotacat.9814:

2/2

It’s time to make MMORPGs more social

Guild Wars 2 is NOT more social. Infact, if anything, GW2 is a very anti-social game. Social interactions in games spring up from necessity, forced or accidental. In GW1, this was obviously facilitated by the need to use a party to complete 99% of the game’s PVE content. And really difficult content (Urgoz’ Warren or the Deep at Factions’ launch come to mind) absolutely required a good team (usually guild members) who could strategize and communicate. You practically needed to join a good guild to have any chance at most PVP as well. But, in GW2, there’s no reason to get to know who you’re partying up with. As long as you have zerker gear and know the path, why bother? And since any combination of classes can clear content (although some combinations are much better at it than others) there’s little reason to stand out or learn which individuals are good at their class on your server. It almost feels like queueing up for a heroics run in WoW.

.

That’s not making a game social. What you just described is actually what makes MMOs ironically such an anti-social genre.

Players just find an exclusive group which they do content with, then that’s it. You don’t meet new people, you don’t want to meet new people because it takes too long to teach them the content and their class may not fit in your group.

That’s what makes newbies feel like they’re that kid who gets picked last in football or the new guy who has no friends.

Why would you need to be only in 1 guild? There’s guild alliances in other MMOs which are basically the same as joining different guilds.

Some of the best convos I’ve had with people in this game are in PUGs. We once did a fractal run which lasted 4 HOURS. Seriously, 4 hours. The group was that bad, but it was 4 hours of my life which I’d gladly waste again because it was great, we joked about it, we laughed and we RPed all the way through.

The only reason which people don’t get to know each other is because they don’t want to.

What I just described is why other games are far more social than GW2. Yes, the average GW2 player is more polite than other MMOs, but that doesn’t make them more social. The fact of the matter is, content in this game requires very little social interaction overall. There is little/no division of labor, which forces social interaction (whether it be good, bad, polite, impolite, etc…)

Since we’re using anecdotes, I’ve had the exact opposite experience as you (on Tarnished Coast no less!) in regards to dungeons. It just turned into a quick explanation of a fight if nobody knew, then move on. No interaction, no real strategy…just an explanation that was essentially copy/pasted off a wiki article.

Now lets look at other games, ones which force social interaction via a division of labor. Sandbox games like Star Wars Galaxies (pre-NGE) were extraordinarily social because the entire game required other players to accomplish relatively simple tasks. My friend’s list in that game was 50+ players, all of whom I had tagged for specific reasons (armorsmith, weaponsmith, image designer, good pilots, etc…). More mainstream games like WoW are also far more social than GW2 because, they too, require the division of labor (limited crafting and gathering specializations, the trinity, etc…).

Creating an environment which promotes individuals to stand out is what social interaction is all about! Just because you had a pretty fun experience once doesn’t negate the fact that the game generally promotes an anti-social atmosphere which feels like a bunch of people playing a single-player game at the same time.

2/2

Finally, whenever I play Guild Wars 2, Mike O’Brien’s manifesto keeps going through my head, particularly the big, bolded titles on the manifesto page. https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/guild-wars-2-design-manifesto/

Shouldn’t great MMORPGs be great RPGs too?

Guild Wars 2 is not a great RPG. Infact, as far as RPGs go, it’s mediocre at best. The writing, voice acting, and machinima(?) is so bad half the time it’s actually laughable. Despite having great talent like Steven Blum and Claudia Christian, the ONLY part of the story that had ever stood out to me was Tybalt’s death. The living story content…hell, I don’t even need to go into that. The living story threads elaborate far more than I ever could. And the quests/leveling; if anything they make me feel more detached from the game world. Oh noes, it’s been 5 minutes, save my hay (again!) from the bandits!

It’s time to make MMORPGs more social

Guild Wars 2 is NOT more social. Infact, if anything, GW2 is a very anti-social game. Social interactions in games spring up from necessity, forced or accidental. In GW1, this was obviously facilitated by the need to use a party to complete 99% of the game’s PVE content. And really difficult content (Urgoz’ Warren or the Deep at Factions’ launch come to mind) absolutely required a good team (usually guild members) who could strategize and communicate. You practically needed to join a good guild to have any chance at most PVP as well. But, in GW2, there’s no reason to get to know who you’re partying up with. As long as you have zerker gear and know the path, why bother? And since any combination of classes can clear content (although some combinations are much better at it than others) there’s little reason to stand out or learn which individuals are good at their class on your server. It almost feels like queueing up for a heroics run in WoW.

But, to make matters worse, social interaction is curtailed further because the game’s economy actually disincentivizes interaction. Every character can learn every trade. Everyone can collect every node, and trading with others without using the TP is impossible. So, instead of relying on other players to gather and craft, players can either do everything themselves, or just head to the TP, which has absolutely zero interaction, for their needs. It may not have been a great solution, but at least the trade channel in GW1 promoted people to message one another to trade. And while the upside to your system definitely helps with competition for resources, it (along with the loss of the trinity) gives players no reason to interact at the most fundamental reason why people are social and interact; to engage in the division of labor.

Rethinking combat

This is something I have very mixed feelings about. I really want to like the more twitch based combat. I like dodging and the need for positioning. I like having skills which I can use as gap closers or allow me to jump back and evade. But, to me, combat feels unfinished, particularly because of the lack of skills/trinity. Since the classes are no longer complete specialists, they have become jack of all trades; good at everything, but great at nothing. To me at least, that’s boring. I miss hopping on my ranger because I was great at using traps for CC, or timing my distracting shot, broad head arrow, and savage shot. I was known in my guild specifically for those skills. It made me stand out. It was also a large part of what promoted my social interaction in the game.

I’m sorry I wound up vomiting this essay when I was originally going for a short, to the point response, but I really do think the game has a lot of potential, which is why I keep coming back every few months to check it out. Unfortunately, It just seems like this game is turning into a modern Star Wars Galaxies. I hope that isn’t the case, but I don’t think I’ll be holding my breath.

In all honesty, I just don’t find the game to be all that entertaining.

Like DarkSpirit said, the game was heavily marketed to GW1 players, but failed to deliver on what made GW1 fun for me. I enjoyed having a plethora of builds I could use depending on the situation. It was also fun experimenting with guildies when trying to find new ways to complete content (Splinter B/P in Urgoz’ Warren was a fun disaster). In GW1, the simple act of vanquishing an area or doing a hardmode mission was actually fun! Granted, I hated doing grinding for reputation or other “achievements”, but grinding sucks in every game.

Also, GW1 forced players to be social. Guilds had their uses. Not only were there guild halls and guild battles, but being only in 1 guild required us to interact and get to know one another, even for seemingly trivial things. Sure, that’s been severely negated with heroes and improved henchie AI (oh god, how bad were Lina and Little Thom when the game first came out?) but I would still rather clear a mission, dungeon, or quest with an experienced group than use heroes/henchmen.

One of the reasons I played GW1 regularly for nearly 7 years was also because of the ease of getting to max level and fully geared. I could make a new character, try it out, play with some builds, and work with my team. If I didn’t like it, I didn’t feel like I was really losing anything because of the minimal investment in the character. In GW2, the gameplay can change drastically over the leveling process. A level 10 Ranger does not play like a level 80 Ranger, and if I happen to dislike the playstyle of the 80 ranger, all that time spent leveling and acquiring rare or exotic gear seems like a waste.

1/2

I’ll bite. There’s not much to say that hasn’t already been said, but I’m gonna throw in my $.02 anyways.

Content Permanence
I’m a sporadic GW2 player (for a multitude of reasons, one of them being the living story) and every time I come back, there’s new events going on that have very little or absolutely nothing to tie them in with what has happened. There’s no real way for me to experience what has happened in my month break, instead I have to hear it from other players or go look around online to read a web page about it.

Content needs to be put into place and stay there (or at least have a way for me to experience it). In GW1, this was handled extremely well by quests and missions. If I forgot how Rurik was killed and/or why it’s important, I could always go back to replay the Frost Gate mission. On my Ranger in Guild Wars 1, I can still go back and finish the quest for Keiran and Gwen’s wedding, or the Shining Blade’s campaign against the White Mantle.

Instead, all I see are a bunch of disjointed quests which have no real impact to me or the world overall, and they’re something I want no part of, especially considering the limited time I have to participate due to the release schedule.

Content Quality
Another problem with the living story is that the quality is not up to par. Players expect an engrossing (or at least entertaining) story. Having Scarlet stand around in Divinity’s Reach, acting like a lifeless doll while threatening the queen should not be acceptable by your own standards…it certainly isn’t by ours. Guild Wars’ story was definitely engrossing, even the parts I disliked. I felt for Jora when she killed her brother. I cursed the Charr when they let loose The Searing on Ascalon. I laughed when I went around punching punching Stone Summit Dwarves with Kilroy. I smiled when Gwen and Keiran finally got married.

Nothing in the living story has moved me. I couldn’t care less about Braham (is that even the right spelling of his name?) and his issues with the Charr/Dredge alliance (notice how I keep forgetting the name of lore?). Hell, the only thing in the personal story I felt any emotion towards was Tybalt's death. Considering this is supposed to be my story, that’s pretty bad.

Content Distribution
One thing that really bugs me about the living story is how it’s used for you to generate revenue. It makes it seem like you guys are pushing out half-finished content so we feel pressured to hop onto the gem store and open our wallets. And while I understand you obviously need revenue to keep the game afloat, I feel the way this is tackled is distasteful. With the limited schedule in regards to the living story, it feels like the game is screaming “Limited offer!”, “Buy Now!”, “These deals won’t last forever!”… so instead of playing a AAA title which engrosses me and makes me want to spend money, it feels like I’m playing with a sleazy used car salesman who’s gonna make me immediately experience buyer’s remorse.

Content Schedule
I’ve already touched on this in the other topics, but I think it needs to be reiterated. A 2 week schedule, even while being handled by multiple teams on a rotation, puts out lower quality content that feels rushed and has little use aside from directing us (sometimes not very subtly I might add) to the gem store. Instead, I’d love to see new content rolled out every other month. This gives your teams time to develop in-depth stories of higher quality and iron out any bugs. I think that by doing this, I’ll feel respected as a player and customer and would probably be willing to spend some cash on gems from time to time (something I’ve absolutely refused to do since launch).

But, I’m not trying to just bash you guys into submission. I really think that there’s lots of potential with the living story. The approach and implementation need some heavy tweaking, but if done right, it can be the success you guys envisioned.

This problem could be resolved with a wardrobe system similar to the one in Star Trek Online.

Kilaelya.1420:

I think we should wait and see what happens on the 6th.

I’m guessing more “content” which doesn’t really have an effect on the overall story and focuses on lockboxes.

They may be able to wait, but I can’t.

Since I have little interest in achievement points and couldn’t really care about the dungeon content (a new dungeon is a new dungeon), I’ll be treating this election like the real thing by not participating.

I’d consider it if the skins didn’t look like kitten and if I didn’t vow to not give anet any more of my money.

Hey John, I’m a bit late to the party, but I think this is an interesting subject and wanna throw in my 2 cents by addressing the question, and also the conversation which sparked the creation of this thread. And while I obviously don’t expect a response, I hope you’ll at least read this post and give it some consideration.

I think that most virtual economies serve as poor analogues for the real world. Sure, certain phenomena can be modeled and tracked, and certain aspects can even be used as explanations for harder concepts (someone gave me an interesting explanation of the Labour Theory of Value using Guild Wars 2 as an example!), but there seem to be inherent flaws that are adopted by the large majority of developers. Why these flaws are adopted may be by design (probably by the accounting departments no less), but I also think there’s a certain lack of understanding, or at least forethought into the creation of a virtual economy.

My biggest beef with virtual economies is the method of creating currency. While the standard input -> output method can serve as an analogue to some phenomena in fiat currency, it tends to create some real problems for the virtual economy.

The convention for most games is to go to a quest-giver and earn some gold, or to sell junk back to the NPCs. The biggest problem with this is that it fails to take the subjectivity of the value of the labor, items, etc… (supply/demand) into account. You can have 1 person selling 1 piece of rawhide to a vendor, or a million people selling a million pieces of rawhide, and you’re going to get the same amount of gold for each piece. This may not seem like much of a problem at first (output just has to equal input, right!?), but gamers are a crafty bunch and can quickly/easily take advantage of static systems which diminishing returns on the loot table can’t completely compensate for (yes, that was a cheap shot).

This generally (if not universally) has caused rampant inflation (expansion of the monetary base). The people who can take advantage of this (much like in the real world) are the ones who use the system to their advantage. The botters, scammers, gold buyers (cash shop or 3rd party), etc… have a leg-up and have access to this ‘first money’, allowing them not only the excess accumulation of currency, but also the ability to use it at pre-inflation prices — as the expansion will only affect the economy once it’s introduced and starts to flow into areas which are subject to supply/demand. This causes ‘normal’ players (casuals to farmers to hardcore) to be left behind and on the short end of the stick.

And, while it seems like modern games try to mitigate these problems by introducing a cash shop which is partially determined by demand, it seems to only delay the consequences, while creating other issues (gem price nearly doubling since launch).

Finally, I understand I’m not really offering any solutions, although I could try to tackle that in another thread. I would like to at least try pointing out these major problems (there are other, minor ones) in what I see as the epistemology of virtual economy design. From my (an average player’s) viewpoint, participating in these games soon gets to the point where the only option to stay competitive is to spend money (which is obviously by design) in the cash shop. But, feeling forced to do this also makes me feel somewhat alienated by the game’s developers and pushes me towards other products.

I’m also with the OP; for the most part. Silly/cute is fine, but it needs to at least fit in with the world that’s being created. The Adventure Box feels so ham-fisted that it’s just annoying because it intrudes on the world so much.

Remember back to GW1. Kilroy Stoneskin and his events in GWEN were pretty silly, but still fit in with the game’s atmosphere. The costume brawl and snowball fight in GW1 were also silly, but also played off the atmosphere cultivated for the game. They also were kept separate from the rest of the game for the most part.

I’ve tried to complete Evacuation now a couple times (solo to avoid the group bug). Each time, progress on the mission stops after the first wave of enemies. No further waves spawn and the mission is at a standstill.

I gave anet a chance. Despite not playing the game for over a month now, I waited patiently and popped in time to time to see how this patch would work out. I got somewhat excited even when Jon Peters made his post in the ranger forums. The “fixes” today are not even a shallow reflection of the problems outlined.

My patience is out, my bookmarks are deleted, and the game is uninstalled. I hope that everything gets ironed out eventually, I just don’t expect it to happen anytime in the near future.

Instead, you should gather an army of skilled riders and invade China. It’s been 800 years, they’ll never expect it.

@whiran

“at the time of your posting there were 12 NA servers that are listed as full and 12 listed as High for population.”

But what does “full” and “high” population even mean? Other games (Star Wars Galaxies) have listed servers as such and were ghost towns. Combine that with the irritatingly high number of bots which are being counted; “full” and “high” both carry very little weight.

I love this, so you’re either gonna have marginal efficacy because you’re gonna wait around for weeks before reporting someone (and whose account has most likely been stolen and reported already), or you’re gonna go all out and report people who appear to be bots and have a negative effect by bogging down the reporting system.

Depends on what you intend to ‘solo’. If you’re going to Orr to farm, rangers can do it without any real problem. But if you plan on doing DEs, getting vistas, or POIs, then things get a bit more difficult because of the increased spawn rates. Combine that with the AI Lobo mentioned and Orr quickly becomes a pain.

Great non-response gwawer, you must work for a PR firm. Observing players doesn’t help if you’re observing someone who just likes to grind materials (you know, typical bot behavior). Or do know the algorithms and pathing used by bots to differentiate them between legitimate grinders?

kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten kitten

Mainly, what you’re experiencing is a glut in gold and most crafting materials. Because of MF gear and bots, a huge influx of both have been introduced to the economy. This has caused prices of most crafting materials to drop, despite the rampant inflation (which disproportionately affects truly rare items).

Also, because of the increase of gold introduced, this has allowed players to have more disposable gold to purchase gems, which are artificially scarce, and drive up their price.

gwawer.9805:

And that is why a anti-bot guild is needed

we search the crevices and crannies in search of the less obvious bots, whisper them, then report them

And you’re also gonna report to people who just don’t wanna respond to you or speak a different language.

Gonna agree with OP here with an extra emphasis on combat.

Substance E.4852:

Exactly what are you and all your pals up to that has caused you all to be “hacked” and lose characters?

It doesn’t even have to be the result of hacking. My little brother lost his level 80 Guardian due to some sort of error and it can’t be restored either.

You probably have a dynamic IP set up through your ISP. You can call them up to confirm this, and if it bugs you that much, ask them to switch you over to static.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Hide_in_Plain_Sight

Anatarin.7018:

Sadly No – I had hoped for much more – The questing and levelling are poorly matched, character development is weak and the weapon driven abilities become boring,, voice acting is awful, the graphics are sugar spun, and most group events are zerg fests that prove that the trinity actually works best. If this is the new answer for MMO’s I wonder what the question was.

I’ll just defer to this post.

BAEK.8561:

Yea permanent stow would be nice.

Actually, I wish there was a trait or skill or something that gave me a damage boost for not “having a pet” or “stowing it away.” I like the ranger class, but I dont like being reliant on pets to do the damage for me.

I was a fan of how pets were handled in GW1. They could be managed in a way which best suited the situation. Sometimes I was best off without a pet, others I needed it just for a meat shield, and sometimes a beastmaster build was the best option. Unfortunately, with GW2, we’re forced to stick with a buggy and obtrusive mechanic which detracts from my character’s utility just as much (if not more) than it adds.

^ “I think the issue here is simply that the game is still extremely new, and they’ve been spending all their time lately getting the Halloween event ready.”

It’s not just the Halloween event. Their biggest motivator as to where to direct resources is the paid tournaments. Monetization is paramount, so things like class balance and fun take a backseat.

“They may have been unspeakably God-awful at actually achieving balance….”

Really? I know balance wasn’t perfect in GW1, but compared to other games, I think they did a kitten good job, which is what made PVP enjoyable for me.

@Widomaker Z

And that arrow was shot by a warrior or thief.

I didn’t mind WoW’s pet system, as at least the pets were useful in every type of gameplay, but I really preferred the pet system in GW1. Sometimes using a pet was optimal (Barrage/Pet), others it made more sense to skip them all together (full trap build). That kind of versatility is what made the ranger – at least for me – interesting to play.

I think you completely misunderstood my post, as it was only a response to the rhetorical question I quoted.

Nurvus.2891:

Lowering health is just a compensation for giving enemies defensive skills and healing.
The “effective health” should remain similar – I’m not suggesting the fights should be quicker.

I never advocated for any changes in health pools, up or down, as the game designers need to decide how to tune PVE in the way they feel is best.

Nurvus.2891:

I’m only suggesting the nature of the fight itself to be more similar to PvP, where health doesn’t simply get grinded down, it goes up and down.

An interesting concept, I dunno how successfully it could be tuned, or if that’s something they’d even want to do.

Nurvus.2891:

It is arguable whether players that are said to enjoy tank and spank / don’t stand in fire battles aren’t simply just used to it.
Because more challenge is only not more fun when there’s some problem in the middle.

Of course there’s something to be said for familiarity, but challenge and fun are subjective concepts which you seem to be trying to pin down based on your preferences.

Nurvus.2891:

Group synergy isn’t something I suggest breaking – on the contrary, the mentality of group synergy you get in PvP would cross over to PvE by making PvE fights more similar to PvP.

I never said you wanted to break group synergy — which makes me think you didn’t read my post. I was stating that there was little real synergy to begin with, at the individual and group levels. Because of this, combat seems shallow and mundane.

Nurvus.2891:

No thoughts on this?
Do you really think PvE is fine and just needs to have bigger numbers to be challenging?

Depends on who you ask. Some players like tank and spank / don’t stand in fire battles with huge health pools on enemies, others like bosses with more dynamic movements with a certain amount of unpredictability, and there are those who like partying up and having real synergy like in GW1. Unfortunately, GW2 isn’t really any of these right now and cultivates a zerg mentality while trying to pick up pieces from all 3 (different but not mutually exclusive) playstyles.

I think GW2 actually has the potential to be something more, but right now it’s being held back by a relatively shallow combat system. Because the developers haven’t taken advantage of synergy, skill chains, combo fields and finishers, etc… the game has forced many classes to rely playstyles which are relatively simple to completely mundane (SB ranger, I’m looking at you) just to remain competitive.

What it really comes down to is overhauling the combat system to give it more depth, balancing it out as much as possible for PVP since it’s the game type which is hardest to control, then tweaking PVE to match the difficulty they feel fits best for their intended goals (which haven’t really even been stated).

First, I think you’re conflating terms here and it’s making your post a bit difficult to follow.

Inflation = An increase in the money supply and/or an increase in prices. They are usually synonymous, but are not lock-step because of other economic concepts such as stickyness.

Deflation = A decrease in the money supply and/or a decrease in prices. Once again, this is affected by the same principles as inflation.

What you’re talking about with gold is specifically inflation. An increase in the supply, resulting in an increase in prices. Gold in this game has been subject to rampant inflation because there are more ways to obtain it (introduce to the economy) than there are ways to dispose of it (leave the economy through gold sinks).

I think the only real way to “solve” this problem is to have prices which are currently fixed become subject to the amount of currency present in the economy. Unfortunately, games which introduce currency through a central source tend to be subject to inflation. Players will either compensate by raising the prices of their goods and/or using in game items which are scarce enough to hold value (ectos from GW1 for example) as a means of currency.

Forcing a hard cap on in-game currency further causes players to search for other means of retaining value, and could actually spur the use of items as a value holder and cause further inflation.

Rise.9702:

Or Quaggan.
/15 char.

Skritt would be best…it’s already used as a quasi-filter in game.

Enchansea.4627:

Caithe is a thief.

just sayin . . . .

And while it may not be optimal, Take Root does have its uses…

voidvector.2780:

A game designer said this was conscious decision made on their part to control the economy (inflation). I doubt they will change this unless they get to charge you 15% on in person trade

I think that this decision would really only have a marginal effect on inflation; compared to the trading post face to face or COD transactions would only be minimal. Even just adding COD allows for anet to take a cut from price of the item. Maybe if they’re that concerned about inflation, they should read some Carl Menger and worry about where the money comes from as much as to where it’s going before people start stocking up on ectoplasms or whatever item is relatively scarce.

Esdra.7084:

Interesting thing about ad hominems is the premise has to be a fact/truth. Is his argument a fact? lol. Stealth is too strong? Spaming any one thief ability is a detriment to the game/players? These are facts?

Actually, it’s just bypassing the argument someone makes and attacking them directly. Much like if I were to say; “You don’t even know what an ad hominem is, obviously you’re an idiot who hasn’t graduated high school.”

Now, I certainly don’t mean that, but I hope such an example hits closer to home. You’ve completely bypassed his statements, and decided to go after him, instead of telling him specifically why he’s wrong, much like I’ve done with your ‘fact’ about the necessity of ad hominems requiring facts.

Esdra.7084:

Right…I’m not here to help for something I believe is not an issue. Whatever can possibly be an issue I gave my opinion (haste/signet which i’m not even convinced on at this point given all the nerfs already) on as a possible place for anet to look to appease the masses (bads).

That’s fine, I can understand why people think it’s a non issue, particularly if they enjoy the playstyle. So, tell him why he’s wrong, I’d say most people (myself included) would even agree with you.

Esdra.7084:

I don’t mean to be mean I just don’t see an issue for the most part (MAYBE the signet to help out the casuals.

Although it’s not your intention to be mean, I wonder if your intention is just to shut someone up who you disagree with.

Unfortunately, I think the SB nerf is indicative of a much larger problem with the combat mechanics of this game. Spamming #1 on shortbow ’isn’t fun’ in the same way spamming #1 on longbow or short sword ’isn’t fun’ while other skills are on cooldown or don’t fit the situation.

I think the problem lies in lack of skill synergy and an overall lack of skills. While weapon swapping does negate the problem a bit, it doesn’t completely alleviate it. I think a huge opportunity (for fun) is missed because the devs haven’t taken full advantage of skill chains, combo fields, weapon swapping, and trait synergy. With only 5 available weapon skills at a time, not utilizing each slot by adding chains, or increasing synergy seems like a waste. Instead of playing your character to its maximum potential, it feels like you’re constantly wrestling with it to coax your optimal playstyle (fun) out of it…which isn’t fun at all.

Ah, I love internet forums. “I disagree with your argument, therefore ad hominem.”

Honestly, I think most of spacemayu’s suggestions…well…suck. But calling him a bad player, or saying he’s never played an MMO without arguing his points specifically, then going off on a tangent doesn’t particularly help.

Because I’m feeling helpful today, here’s an infographic!

http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/rhetological-fallacies/

Same reason they give Sylvari Gaelic names and posh English accents I suppose.

Also, just to be fair, some Irish accents are really hard to reproduce and understand. My godparents are from Derry and have really thick accents. I can still only understand about 80% of what they say; I just have to infer the rest from context.

I think this is a problem with the game design overall. There are huge opportunities with skills chains, combo fields and finishers, weapon switching, etc… that are being passed by for simplicity at the expense of ‘fun’ (Ranger shortbow being a great example).

spacemayu.4817:

• Proposal 1: My proposal is to add a .5/1 second cooldown to all initiative skills. This would still allow the thief to spam these skills, but would lower effective DPS as skill activation will be delayed. Players that do not spam a single skill will be unaffected.

This destroys the reason for initiative. Thieves have initiative specifically so they can spam skills if they want. I think a better solution would be to make many of the spammable skills part of a chain, each allowing different bonuses and disadvantages.

For example: Wanna spam heartseeker? That’s great, but make it part of a chain. The first part can be activated at <60% (for increased damage) at 6 initiative, the second <40% (for increased damage) at 5 initiative, and the third <20% (for increased damage) at 4 initiative. This allows for a progression which can equal HUGE overall DPS but is easier to counter, as one break in the chain requires a complete restart.

There’s very little reason to name the buggers. I used to constantly switch out my pets depending on the situation and they always reverted back to ‘juvenile’.

This is generally the case after you hit level 60 or so. The AI changes tactics and almost always ignores your pet from that point on.