Guild Wars 2

Nobody can beat – kill to be more precise – a D/P thief. Unless he takes high risks the thief can always safely disengage with combo-field stealth or shadow refuge. However, that does not make the thief overpowered or broken. A warrior with greatsword and sword/warhorn can also escape from every fight.

The ability to disengage poses a problem only in the open deathmatch arena of WvW. Without opportunity costs mobility is king. The problem with stealth and other skills to disengage is a fundamental flaw of the gamemode.

Jayne.9251:

The best way to beat a skilled d/p thief is to make your own, learn the tricks and timing involved, then you can reasonably predict and counter on your main class.

It is true for any class.

The best way to beat a skilled d/p thief is to make your own, learn the tricks and timing involved, then you can reasonably predict and counter on your main class.

I am strongly against plate bikinis and heels in battle, but I agree with OP that there could be more sets that look both practical and feminine.
Look at human cultural t3, for example. It looks like something you could actually wear into battle, but it also has this beautiful little touches to it, like wings and tunic.

“I need armour fitted to the female form, elegant and graceful. Something that a dextrous woman would wear to battle. Personally I wouldn’t wear anything that slows me down too much. "
Trust me, if you were going into battle, you would probably want to ditch the high heels and bikini armor for something a little more masculine. I don’t mind graceful armor, but I think this could be accomplished with the sort of graceful styling of the armor from the LOtR films for the elves instead adding silly ribbons and bows and heels to armor that clearly does not benefit from the addition.

“I also feel that from the very start of the game heavy armour looks way too plain. I hate to wear it, I would rather fight mobs naked and be a papertank until I get something somewhat pretty. Light starting set is so gorgeous I can’t help but think why these starting sets are within the same game.”
I actually agree with you: the starting armor sucks, not just for women but just in general. But I actually think the light starting set for women was horrible too: early on, I tried having a female norn elementalist, and she looked so incredibly stupid in the outfit I had to delete her. Here I am as a drinking, boasting, wild-woman norn, living by the skin of my teeth on a frozen mounting, fighting the wilderness to live and I’m dressed like I’m auditioning for Toddlers in Tiaras. I don’t care what your sense of style is: that’s stupid.

“I don’t want to hear complaining in this thread about issues I have already mentioned. You can tell me as much as you want that you’re a woman and you find skin offensive, that’s your opinion and it will never, ever, ever be my opinion. We are all beautiful and artistic, let us express ourselves and express yourself how you want.”
So…. if we can all express ourselves how we want, then why do you prohibit people from complaining? Welcome to the internet!

“Just personally, I would love for my character to look similar to how I am in real life, mainly meaning my style. Expressing myself like this is one of the things that makes me happy. I understand my style is not for everyone.”
I’m going to guess that, in real life, you wear jeans, t-shirts, cardigans, jackets, stylish boots, skirts, etc etc… you know, normal people clothing. Right? Well… in real life, you’re not running around with a greatsword that is your height and twice your width. At least, I’m pretty sure you don’t. It really just doesn’t make sense reasonably for them to add in the stuff you want. Adding in bikini armor would be blatantly sexist (I would be happy to debate anyone on that point) and adding flourishes like bows, ribbons, and high heels are just kind of condescending to me. I do agree that more elegant armor could be added, but I think it can be added without compromising the dignity of the female characters that wear them.

So there is my rant: take it or leave it.

You’re not going to like me I think, so I’ll just go at it. I just want to say that, while I respect your opinion, I also respectfully disagree. I’m going to respond to what you said that I think warrants a response… which is most of it. Let me sum up who I am: I am a guy gamer who takes the subject of sexism and its role in video games very seriously.

“I mean this for all races in the game, and though I do not play Asura or Charr their females are badly misrepresented.”
Their females are not “badly misrepresented.” If you are referring to the lack of breasts and butts, then I suppose they are lacking those, but that does not make them bad. They are their own species, they don’t need to fit a human ideal of beauty. They would be attractive to members of their own species. If you want more detail on why Anet did not give the Charr breasts, you can find it in an early design document about the Charr. The design of both races would have suffered from such a modification in my opinion.

“I am not asking for it to be a bikini, though I in no way object to the addition of it for the sake of variety. You can argue whatever, if seeing a perfect body in a bikini offends you, go work on your self esteem and don’t blame the game for it. I feel the lack of variety is making people bored.”
To assume that the viewing of a “perfect body in a bikini” is only offensive due to a lack of self esteem is a rather close minded and blatantly pretentious opinion. I would find it offensive because the hyper sexualization of women in games is already blatantly sexist and backwards as it is, and I approve of the small steps GW2 has taken in the other direction. For this reason, I have no light-armored female characters, because I don’t want a delicate flower in lingerie on the battlefield; I want a strong, powerful character that looks like she can actually take on what she confronts. For this reason, both of my heavy armor characters are women: I have a female human warrior and a female asuran guardian. I find the bikini warrior offensive because it portrays that character as an object of sexual attraction that just happens to be holding a weapon instead of a strong heroine. The bikini warrior has been dubbed the “fighting f*** toy” which I think is an appropriate name for such an insulting portrayal of women.

“I am talking about details, engravings, bows and ribbons. I am talking about high heels on some boots, shoes or sandals. I would like to see some variety please, instead of bucket on foot and head. I would like to see masks/gems/crowns. I think you need to get some more women working on designing the heavy gear :P”
High heals would be absolutely stupid. I’m sorry, but it would. It’s not practical for a person running into battle with a battle hammer. That kind of silliness belongs in other Korean MMOs, but not in GW2. I personally like it that the armor for both male and female characters look the same for the most part: I always found it disappointing when the male armor would be strong and intimidating, but then the female armor would be almost the same… except the metal somehow manages to wrap perfectly around both butt cheeks, having a cut for the cleavage, and lacks a few of the protective armor sheets that the male version had. It just makes no sense to do this, and only serves to punctuate their role as a “fighting f*** toy” instead of a real warrior to be taken seriously.

EDIT: As a side note, Anet’s lead fashion designer is a woman.

Realism is generally not an extremely important factor in an MMO, however, GW2 is realistic in a lot of ways, every single race in the game has a somewhat coherent explanation regarding how they operate biologically, Light Armour is meant to look cosmetic (because realistically, it offers no protection whatsoever), Medium Armour tends to look like it can protect you from the weather, and Heavy Armour is meant to look like your character’s vital organs are protected, but it tries not to look extremely impractical, you’re asking for high heels and other extremely impractical stuff.

I’m not saying it would look bad, but it would be absolutely ridiculous, how the hell do you expect someone to dodge roll with high heels? You’d never get back on your feet after dodging, or at least you’d be dead before you did.

It would also be pure fanservice, and ANET isn’t known for promoting that, just look at female Charr and Asura.

Sorry but I don’t think it’s gonna happen.

+1 to both. I also like to organise my own bags and never use Compact, nor do I want to. (Pressed it once by mistake, it messed everything up, never used it again.)

Niim.9260:

Dhampyr.2104:

The utter lack of understanding of WvW in the QQ of this thread is amazing, and I’ll leave it at that.

Don’t like WvW? Go do some PvE stuff and have some fun. It’ll save us from having to see the QQ in map chat. You’re happy and having fun, we’re happy and having fun. Win all the way around.

So says a zergling from a zerg guild.

Personally I do not mind the zergs nearly as much as I mind that the game seems to have set the skill cap one notch above ‘dreadfully easy’ and seem content to leave it there.

Some commanders yea they are using skill and tactics, no question. Some of the siege placement guru’s, yea they are using tactics as well. The map PPT strategists, I appreciate their skill. So if you have all those on a map at the same time that is what 5-10 people using skill and strategy while the rest follow them around like sheep spamming their tagging skill of choice?

This game is designed to be played on auto pilot while you watch TV. I cannot think of a game that has as low skill cap as this one, granted I haven’t played hello kitty island adventure.

You come off as one of those WvW people who take a camp and then sit on it so you can fight the people that try and take it back. Hey, I’m sorry that this game doesn’t have sPvP that allows you to use your pve gear. That’s an issue you need to take up with ANet.

As for the bolded part above, you do realize that much of the tactics that are used depend on numbers don’t you? One fine example is that siege you mention. What piece of siege equipment costs 10 supply to build, or even 15 for that matter (when the buff is up)?

WvW is about taking and holding control over the camps, towers, keeps and castle to accumulate more points than your competition. This means taking these points of interest from them and you use what is available to do this. Siege, tactics, and even numbers. Having superior numbers is a perfectly viable warfare tactic and the team with more numbers should not be punished. The team with fewer numbers need to take the initiative to recruit more people.

You can play the ‘semantics’ game all you want but if you are having ‘duels’ and some “zerg” wipes you out. To bad.

Though i dont realy agree with compact being broken (you should look into just getting some 18 slots bags and do away with the organizing bags and dont show separate bags imo) I do like your option 1 idea. the other one is kind of iffy beause it seems like a very niche concept

tldr + 1 to option one idea

Even so it can be irritating when you click it by accident and it shuffles all your other bags.
I’m +1ing the OP’s suggestion, as there can never be too much UI customisation.

I feel special skill animations should remain reserved for Legendaries. And no, I do not have a Legendary.

cheshirefox.7026:

also, if you can add “determined” buff to the ‘obsidian sanctum’ that’d be great

so make the pvp jp pointless?

Remove stonemist and you remove the best place in wvw to get loot.

On the contrary, I think they should add more castles.

DoctorFaust.7103:

AndrewSX.3794:

Where are al those ppl who said “Screw balanced matches, we want variety!” now.

(not pointed at you rof guys.)

Right here, buddy! I, for one, am very glad to see more volatility in the matchups.

Me too! It’s nice to see Arbor and Gunnars putting up such good fights, though this is probably the best of it.

Honestly, the rewards before the last update were okay with me. The new chests are just icing on the cake. I make most of my coin selling mats. Spend most of it wvw. Repair bills, imo, are as negligible as waypoint costs in PvE.

2. this despite the terrible rolls this week that gave us the one matchup we absolutely did not want.

the new system is not intended to lead to ‘stable’ matchups, it’s intended to make the ratings more accurate, especially between tiers. in order for the ratings to stay accurate (and therefore for the rankings to be meaningful) it will be necessary to play opponents outside of your tier from time to time.

as a side effect, the new system also eliminates the problems of tier stagnation where you play the same opponents over and over and over, and color stagnation where you always find yourself the same color (hindering map completion).

-ken

2.

Being a competetive tier 7 server placed into tier 9 means I can go look into a couple new games knowing i’m not missing anything to do on GW2. Not even really being sarcastic. Games are addictive and once they lose that and the purpose being in them it means you can try all those games you’ve had on a to do list for a while so i’m cool with it.

Lolol this is funny all the 2 s and then all the threads hating it but I’m giving my vote to 2. Because why not randoms ok with
Me they could narrow the rng factor but hey first week

for now il say the 2nd system but we will have to wait and see only been 1 day of week 1

2, though it’s too soon for things like this to be of any use.

2

The resets are really nice now because you don’t know who you fight next. Nearly everyone’s enjoying it on Elona.

The best explanation from the other thread (seriously people, how many one up one down threads do we need?) is as follows:

Every week will have a T1 server playing a T2 and T3 server, no matter what.. this pattern continues all the way down the ladder. IE T2 server will be playing a T3 and T4 server..
No one in T3 will want to win because they’ll get smashed by whatever monster from T1 loses and no one in T2 will want to win because they’ll get thrown in with 2 T1 monsters.

USA != the entire world population.

If you’re annoyed by so called “night capping”, don’t sleep. Ever. Now to sit back with my popcorn

ResJudicator.7916:

There’s a pretty simple solution to this that would make both camps happy.

Just make it so each player has the OPTION of using normalized models for other players. This would work the same way that the “Show Team Colors” option currently does:

If I check the “normalize models” option, then everyone else’s character will always appear to me as a regular-sized human. BUT, each player will still see his own character as he originally designed it. So if you play an Asura, you will always view your character as an Asuran. You can play in all the tournaments, etc., and on your screen your character will look exactly the way you designed him/her. However, on my screen, your character will look like a regular-sized human.

This solution let’s people keep their character customization, but let’s the hypercompetitive players maintain and even playing field. As far as tournaments go, it would be up to the Caster to decide whether to check the “normalize models” option or not.

I’ve seen other people suggest this solution before, and I don’t claim to have originated it. In fact, it’s already been implemeneted with respect to team colors. I could deck my character out completely in pink, but if you have “Show Team Colors” selected, then my character will look either “Red” or “Blue” to you depending on my team. It is only logical to apply this same idea to the character-race problem.

Brilliant! I was pushing for a “tournament mode” – locking easily distinguishable models for each profession for “serious” play, and it never occurred to me “normalization” can be done client side. If that happens, nothing stops ANet from going one step further and allowing players and casters to set customized models for each profession, additionally enhancing visibility. Tip of the hat to you, good sir!

ResJudicator.7916:

There’s a pretty simple solution to this that would make both camps happy.

Just make it so each player has the OPTION of using normalized models for other players. This would work the same way that the “Show Team Colors” option currently does:

If I check the “normalize models” option, then everyone else’s character will always appear to me as a regular-sized human. BUT, each player will still see his own character as he originally designed it. So if you play an Asura, you will always view your character as an Asuran. You can play in all the tournaments, etc., and on your screen your character will look exactly the way you designed him/her. However, on my screen, your character will look like a regular-sized human.

This solution let’s people keep their character customization, but let’s the hypercompetitive players maintain and even playing field. As far as tournaments go, it would be up to the Caster to decide whether to check the “normalize models” option or not.

I’ve seen other people suggest this solution before, and I don’t claim to have originated it. In fact, it’s already been implemeneted with respect to team colors. I could deck my character out completely in pink, but if you have “Show Team Colors” selected, then my character will look either “Red” or “Blue” to you depending on my team. It is only logical to apply this same idea to the character-race problem.

I agree with this guy. somone pay the man.

Playing as an Asura in PvP is like playing as Oddjob in multiplayer Goldeneye.

Cheap.

…although I did laugh last night playing sPvP when I saw a tiny Asura Engineer called “Net Turret”.

Quite an effective ruse, haha!

There’s a pretty simple solution to this that would make both camps happy.

Just make it so each player has the OPTION of using normalized models for other players. This would work the same way that the “Show Team Colors” option currently does:

If I check the “normalize models” option, then everyone else’s character will always appear to me as a regular-sized human. BUT, each player will still see his own character as he originally designed it. So if you play an Asura, you will always view your character as an Asuran. You can play in all the tournaments, etc., and on your screen your character will look exactly the way you designed him/her. However, on my screen, your character will look like a regular-sized human.

This solution let’s people keep their character customization, but let’s the hypercompetitive players maintain and even playing field. As far as tournaments go, it would be up to the Caster to decide whether to check the “normalize models” option or not.

I’ve seen other people suggest this solution before, and I don’t claim to have originated it. In fact, it’s already been implemeneted with respect to team colors. I could deck my character out completely in pink, but if you have “Show Team Colors” selected, then my character will look either “Red” or “Blue” to you depending on my team. It is only logical to apply this same idea to the character-race problem.