Well if you don’t care to listen to anyone else’s opinion, not much to talk about. You’re not being reasonable. If the drop rate is high enough where it doesn’t matter….if people aren’t being disadvantaged by the new system then they’re not being disadvantaged by the new system.
Why should anyone even respond to you if that doesn’t matter? Your argument becomes invalid.
You’re completely misrepresenting what I said.
I’m perfectly willing to listen to what others have to say on the matter. But what they say should be relevant to the point I actually made.
Re-read my post a little more carefully, and you’ll note that my problem is in the type of delivery, not in the balance of the numbers.
Here’s an example.
Let’s say you wanted to do some good ol’ fashion PvE dungeons. But Arena Net decided they’re for some odd reason changing all of the dungeons into PvP maps, and are also increasing the rewards they give. Hurray!
Oh but wait, that’s no good, because you don’t want to do PvP. It doesn’t matter how the rewards are balanced, because how the content itself is being handled does not suit your preferences. You wanted to play some PvE dungeons, not PvP maps.
See the problem?
Now back to reality. What did I actually say in my post? That I prefer getting my shards through post-80 leveling (and I gave a reason for this) instead of through loot (and I gave a reason for this too).
It doesn’t matter if one gives more shards then the other, because that’s not where my concern lies. I’m okay with the numbers either way. My concern lies with the delivery, the method of acquiring the shards.
But without knowing the drop rate and what drops them, this whole conversation is premature. They’re not likely to be random like a legendary. We might end up with as many of them as we have of dragonite ore.
It’s just a huge assumption that somehow you’ll be disadvantaged. We saw the same posts about laurels when the dailies came out. You’re saying Anet could do X without even knowing if they’ll need to or not. Without knowing if you’ll get more or less under the new system.
Seems premature to me.
No, it’s not premature.
I know the method of acquisition. I could not care so much as an iota less what the drop rate is, within the context of this conversation. It’s irrelevant to me. I don’t care if it’s easier or harder to get them.
What I know is that it’s a drop of some sort (that’s all I need to know) vs the old acquisition method of leveling, which is to include the existence of leveling which keeps exp somewhat relevant post 80. That’s what I care about. And that’s what I think many people care about, the VS.
It’s not a big deal to me, I simply prefer getting them through post-80 leveling vs having yet another loot drop. Like dragonite ore. And bloodstone dust. And empyreal frags. And geodes. And bandit crests. And an assorted array of crafting mats. And more to come in the expansion too I’m sure.
Here’s some information that math doesn’t affect. One of the big problems reported with this game, is the lack of progression. Most people don’t feel they’re progression. Even if you get another skill point after a certain level, people don’t see it as progression because it doesn’t only move forward. When you spend them it goes backwards till you get more, That’s because it’s a currency.
With the mastery system, people will feel like they’re progressing…even if they progress more slower, because mastery points won’t go backwards.
Masteries can be added to keep the feeling of progression going.
The few people that feel that XP gain after 80 is progression are just that. Few people.
I don’t feel that it’s progression. I do however feel that it’s a better way to reward us with skills points (shards to be) then making them yet ANOTHER rng loot drop.
The other thing is that your post presents a false dichotomy. The mastery system does not necessitate the removal of post-80 leveling.
You can have both.
I really liked getting exp and being able to “level” past 80. It kept experience point rewards, something that permeates the game as a whole, relevant.
I don’t see why this (post-80 exp bars and leveling) can’t exist alongside masteries. Especially if the alternative to skill point (shards to be) is MORE RNG loot drops. We have enough RNG loot drop in the game, don’t pile yet another resource on to the heap.
Definitely agree with this sentiment. You can hardly notice the difference between day and night. I recognize that some people prefer it that way because they don’t want to deal with difficulty seeing at night, but can’t their be a simple option for that? “Enable Dark Nights” in the graphics option menu.
Nights don’t have to be pitch black. We’re not talking about obsidian sanctum dark room levels of vision here. Just dark enough to actually notice.
A malevolent dragon mind-controls a huge number of people, turning them against their own friends and causing a slaughter and ultimately devastation to an entire fleet. This is one recent example of terrible events in a world that is no stranger to deceit, death, and tragedy.
That being the case I find your concern, about an isolated tribe reacting with hostility to a preaching outsider, to be a bit out of whack. Or perhaps just a tad over-sensitive to the subject.
Even if the Itzel weren’t justified in their action, I not only find it to be an acceptable inclusion, but an outright good addition to the game. It is, after all, a story. Nothing wrong with portraying evil or negative events. It’s part of a good narrative.
Given the likelihood of hostile behavior being exhibited by isolated tribes towards outsiders, particularly if they are preaching about and trying to convert the tribe to a different way of life, I think it would fit well in that context.
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/hot/release-date-and-price-we-have-it/first#content
Already been brought up and thoroughly debunked. Retailers know nothing. It will be mid to late August at the absolute earliest.
You (correctly) brought up the fact that those are bogus dates, retailer placeholders, that have been debunked, but then push your speculation of a release date as if it’s accurate?
Your “august at the earliest” is about as reliable as amazon, so I’m not sure why you bothered mentioning it in such a fashion :/
The undead are still in Orr (yes, in lore too) even after Zhaitan’s death. There’s no reason to think Mordremoth’s death will mean the end of the sylvari.
I can see this in WvW.
A commander with a trojan horse going around and surprising 5 people with 80
Commander chariots that can hold 5 people, movement speed equivalent to perma-swiftness, grants protection to those onboard, and features a ram at the front.
Counts as siege, requires supply and plans to build.
=D
Mounts though? no thanks. I was a big mount collector in WoW, really liked it. But gameplay wise I find them to generally be clunky (mount up and dismount every time you move over to kill something, ugh). Waypoints make them kind of irrelevant in many cases. And it would soak up more resources from the art team to make them.
I like the trade in idea. Stat changing gives it a bit to much freedom (or inversely, not enough permanence), but a trade-in system would be great.
You should lose runes in the process of trading in the gear, and perhaps a very modest cost (a couple silver per piece). The idea here is that gear for specs rendered nonviable or undesirable by the evolution of the game’s balance (or you just happen to want to make a long term build change) doesn’t go to complete waste, forcing you to farm from scratch for new ascended armor. Farming new exotic gear is fine, because it’s so low cost, but ascended is too huge of an investment to be forced to go through again.
You don’t want people flip-flopping back and forth between gear, there should still be incentive to making multiple sets, thus the reason for the restrictions. But there does need to be something to help those who are doing a long term build change, particularly if forced to due to changes to the game’s balance.
If your city gets destroyed, but your country is fighting a war on a battlefront far away, you don’t just leave your city in shambles because of the war. Resources and manpower might be scarce, but you still rebuild. You need that space so that people in-country can continue to live their lives, and you need that infrastructure and productivity to support the country, and by extent it’s war efforts.
Furthermore, the pact and LA are separate entities. In fact, each major city is a separately governed entity. They’ve only come together now to deal with the ED threat.
“Brainstorm” sounds like an excellent name for the new guardian spec.
I’m assuming it will be some kind of “commando” with pistol, perhaps with gadgets as utility skills, much as I loath that idea.
Staff is nonsensical. Doubtful rev will get a melee staff too. Maybe a regular magic staff with a couple melee abilities, but doubtful of a full out melee build staff.
That’d be pretty ridic. I do think the scaling per enemy hit is a bit whacky though, and they have talked about changing it, so:
The shout summons 1 insert-minion-here (perhaps fleshreaver) if an enemy is hit, plus an additional jagged horror per enemy hit.
So hitting 5 targets would summon one insert-minion-here and 4 horrors.
I’m confused about the shouts.
THE benefit of AoE is that the more enemies within it’s reach, the more effective it is.
This actually creates some balance issues, inherent to the nature of how AoE works. The more effective something is single target, the greater it becomes when it hits multiple targets. There’s a multiplying effect.
This can be a problem though, since skills can then either be too powerful when hitting the maximum number of targets, or lackluster if only affecting one target.
With shouts, it sounds like they took that and compounded the problem.
Quote from the blog:
“All of these shout skills act as attacks that can hit up to five enemies and scale in effectiveness based on the number of targets struck. In this way, the reaper is rewarded for diving into the thick of battle to engage as many foes as possible.”
Their design direction for the shouts seems to be “let’s make them great in AoE situations”. Or, read in reverse “let’s make them utterly lackluster to use single/duo target”.
Wouldn’t you usually look for ways to alleviate the AoE balance problems, not make them more extreme?
So… how is Reaper any less generic than the Dragonhunter, which people raged like mad about being so generic?
No less generic a name then warrior or guardian. That wasn’t the problem with DH though. People calling the DH name “generic” where just poorly articulating the issue with it.
Reaper follows the established, expected, and desired naming convention, and is thematically compatible with the profession and elite spec, without overstepping it’s bounds and treading on the territory of another class.
Therefore, it’s good.
I completely agree with OP.
Melee staves (hit-you-with-it style) are incompatible with the staff design in GW2. In GW2 they are magical implements and highly decorative in design.
These are NOT bo staves, or anything of the like.
This isn’t a matter of “realism”, it’s simply nonsensical. Imagine making a sword who’s abilities fire arrows, bow-style. Or a hammer who’s abilities are all focused around slicing/cutting.
If ranger/druid staff has an ability or two that uses the staff to smack at an enemy, that’s fine. But it shouldn’t be implemented as a primarily hit-you-with-it style weapon.
A melee/bo staff would be a cool addition to the game, but this would not be the way to do it. Do it properly if at all.
A couple notes on Dragonhunter. We went with this name because we felt it was evocative of the medieval witch hunters. Guardians consider themselves protectors of the innocent. Followers of their faith be it in honor, valor, etc. The origin of the dragonhunter is a more subtle nuanced version of this. Guardians fight for justice and the dragonhunter faction believes justice is the eradication of dragons and their minions. I understand this is a lot more high concept than Mesmer but at the end of the day we felt like we wanted to try and push a more mature theme here. I hope this helps explain our thinking. We had other generic names in mind but felt like it was important to have a mix of spec names that are generic fantasy, more Tyrian fantasy, and more high concept. This one falls more in the third category.
Thanks,
Jon
That’s way too vague. Perhaps if the term “dragon hunter” didn’t already exist, and if you made greater connection to a witch hunter theme, it might come off that way.
But that’s not the case, and it ends up feeling like the name is grasping at straws.
Judging by the pace and content of the blog releases, and the betas, I’ll optimistically guess at a July release window.
August seems likely too. Though I’m not buying any of these “coincide with the anniversary” theories. Games never actually do that.
Doubt a forum post complaining about it is going to make Anet tell us any sooner though.
I feel as though traps should work similarly to mesmer mantras.
Not the fact that you have to channel them, but rather the charges.
It’d be really cool if ranger traps had, for example, 3 charges each. Each charge has it’s own individual cooldown, and you could either set them up all at one ontop of each other, spread them out to cover a wide area, or save them and use them sparingly over time.
But based on what we have seen none of the announced elite specializations seems to make the base classes inferior, seeing as they don’t focus on the same thing.
The specializations add things that the base class could not do before. That doesn’t automatically make it superior seeing as you still lose out on a whole trait-line in order to use the Elite Specialization.
I think there will be many builds that are still perfectly viable, if not the strongest, that do not use elite specs. The warrior has more weapons(and thus total skill pool) then the thief, but that doesn’t necessarily make warriors the stronger profession. The number of skills you have active at one time does not change after all. Same can be said about having additional utility skill options.
However there’s a problem with distinction under the current system. The elite specs get all sorts of exclusives, on top of what ever the base class has. While the base class has little to nothing exclusive to it.
I think the guardian’s virtues were handled well. The old active functionality was replaced by new functionality, rather then outright adding new virtues.
I feel they should have applied this to their design in general:
1 utility skills type, 1 weapon, and 1 trait line (containing related utility and weapon traits) should be exclusive to the non-elite spec version of the class.
In this way, you can feel like “I’m a Guardian, I can bring things to the table that no dragonhunter can.”
The elite specs get to be distinct. I think the base specs should too.
The elite specs will be trait lines. When you pick that trait line, your class icon changes to that of the elite spec, you can equip the new weapon, and you get the new utility skills.
When you don’t have the elite spec trait line active, your class icon is normal, and you no longer have access to the new weapon or utility skills.
It also thematically clashes with the Ranger.
Even if elementalist gets sword, physical skills, and a gruff aesthetic, naming it Gladiator would be clashing with Warrior.
Even if they went with a darkness/subterfuge direction for necro, naming it Assassin would be clashing with Thieves.
Chronomancer literally means a Mancer of Chrono, a Practicer of Time. A Time Controller. I just, im really agast at how there’s so much outrage against the timplicity of Dragonhunter when Chronomancer was the same thing. Is it just because its Latin? Dracovenotar sounds wierder to me.
“mancer” is typical suffix for different types of magic practitioners. Like necromancer, pyromancer, etc.
Chronomancer feels like a “proper” name as a result. Where as using a two word descriptor like “dragon hunter” sounds a little uninspired.
It’s honestly not a big deal, I just think they could have found something more appropriate and better sounding.
Like if necromancers get shouts and are called “Banshee”, that would be cool. Thematically appropriate and speaks to what they do/what skills they got. But if they were called “Voice commanders”, no matter how appropriate of a descriptor it is, it doesn’t sound like a good spec name.
Imagine if warriors were called “Weapon Fighters”, engineers were called “Gadget Users”, mesmers were called “Illusion mages”, etc.
They all work as names, it’s just not a very appealing naming convention to follow.
Yeah it is too early to say how this specialization will play out… It has interesting concepts/mechanics, we will have to wait for the livestream…
The one thing I’m a bit skeptical of…is the name. I mean Dragonhunter? They could’ve named it Warden or something. Sounds so cliché…
Why do people keep talking about the name being cliche?
How is Warrior, Ranger and Engineer any less cliche?
Dragonhunter. We have traps, and a bow, and we’re hunting elder dragons.
Rather then a name, it’s more like description. It just feels uninspired.
Rather then a two-word descriptor, I would have expected a name or term that encompasses what they do/are. Warden was a good one. Or arenanet could have done their research and found a name related to some light-worshiping tribe of hunter gathers. Something, anything other then “I hunt dragons, therefore dragonhunter”.
Things like warrior or ranger are staples of RPGs, so their fine. They also conform to the naming convention I just mentioned.
Um… hm.
“Dragonhunter”
I’m not one of the people who wanted it to be called paragon, in fact I’m not much of a fan of that name either for it. But dragonhunter is a pretty bad in so far as spec names go.
edit: name aside, it seems quite excellent.
(edited by Arewn.2368)
@Menaka’s most recent reply to my post
Of course choosing the chronomancer trait line presents a trade-off. Obviously. That’s the exact same trade off we’ve had since launch. Whether you’re picking chrono, or illusions, or dueling, or whatever as one of your trait lines, you are always finding yourself with that exact same trade-off situation. The “flexibility” one gives up by choosing the chrono trait line is the exact same as when you chose any other trait line.
If you were to look at mesmer and chrono and say “all things held equal”, this common trade-off they both have to deal with would be one of those things.
And core builds? to heck with core builds. Core builds have, and will continue, to be developed regardless. Some will incorporate the new chrono additions, some wont. It’s irrelevant to the argument at hand.
If on one hand I’m presented with a mesmer, and on the other hand I’m presented with a mesmer with all the bells and whistles attached (read: chronomancer), then obviously the one with all the bells and whistles is going to be more enticing. That doesn’t mean it will be stronger, and that doesn’t mean it will have the build I ultimately end up using, but it will be more enticing. It has more to offer, even if that doesn’t translate into additional combat prowess.
Picking chrono by default net’s me some extra features compared to just mesmer. And from there I just pick two more trait lines, any of which I want from the mesmer profession, and make a build out of it. Same way you would when picking a profession at character creation.
If I need a music player, and what I need from it is just the ability to play music, then obviously all the additional features of an Ipod are worthless to that goal. And I could listen to music perfectly well, perhaps even with better quality, on some no-name mp3 player. But that doesn’t mean the Ipod’s additional features don’t exist. That doesn’t mean they aren’t nice to have. That doesn’t mean they don’t hold some value or feeling of attraction. Those additional features sell Ipods, and are subsequently used by the users.
This is the kind of value I place on the chronomancer’s(elite specs) additions. And this is the kind of value I would like to find in mesmers(baseline specs).
I don’t want to see base specs remain mundane in an ever growing pool of special elite specs. I want them to be distinct, and hold their own exclusives.
I’m going to try to re-identify my problem for you here. Maybe from this perspective it will be easier for you to get where I’m coming from.
Base mesmer is facing an identify crisis. Chrono Mesmers will have everything base mesmer has, plus chrono additions making them distinct. When we get more elite specs, each of those will have what base mesmer has, plus new-elite-spec additions making them distinct.
Base mesmer has no such thing with the current direction they are taking.
“oh you’re a chrono? so you have X defining characteristics available to you.”
“oh you’re an elitespec2? so you have Y defining characteristics available to you.”
“oh you’re an elitespec3? so you have Z defining characteristics available to you.”
“oh you’re just a mesmer? no elite spec? so you have no additional defining characteristics available to you. Chrono, elitespec2, and elitespec3 can each potentially bring the same things to the table as you.”
I would have expected that some aspect of base mesmer remains unique to the base mesmer.
Yes, if you’ve unlocked all the elite specs on your character, you could just swap to them and have what ever you want from it. That’s more options for the class. That’s great.
Yes, you can make viable (potentially even the strongest) builds using just the base spec. But where’s the identity? What defining characteristic does base mesmer have that makes it shine? The fact that it can’t use any of the other specs’ defining characteristics isn’t much of a defining characteristic. “I’m special because I lack something special!” doesn’t fly with me.
…and I’m seriously going to cry if you keep mis-representing my point. I’m not working under the assumption that elite specs are better
I do not think elite specs will necessarily be better then base specs.
I do not think that base specs will be trivialized by elite specs.
I do not think that base specs will be bad compared to elite specs.
I do not think that base specs will be nonviable compared to elite specs.
I do not think that the elite spec line will be better then the the base spec lines.
I do not think the extra options that come with the elite spec will necessarily make it stronger then base specs. (otherwise warriors would be the strongest class)
I do not think chrono is an objectively better choice for all builds.
And I never claimed any of the above to be the case.
@Mikkel
Yea, that’s about right. The f5 shatter is supposed to be complimentary to the shield, to compensate for the fact that a single off-hand weapon has less abilities.
That still leaves an identity problem for baseline mesmers, who have nothing distinct compared to chronomancers who get the new weapons and abilities (wells).
Holy c….
I have, many times now, explicitly stated that I do not think elite specs will be stronger then baseline.
I though I had been very careful to explain that I think baseline specs will still be viable, and perhaps even stronger then chrono (depending on how balance pans out).
Fay, you said it yourself, chrono will get wells, chrono will get f5, (and chrono will get shield).
And base mesmer will get?
Nothing, right? baseline mesmer will get nothing additional compared to what chrono will get? Is that statement correct? if so, then
THAT
IS
MY
PROBLEM
There are no trade offs for the things chrono will get that a baseline mesmer spec will not get.
You’re so busy telling me over and over again that I’m “wrong” that you don’t seem to be taking the time to properly read my post.
Like seriously, you said “this is wrong” TO THE PART OF MY POST WHERE I AGREED WITH YOU.
Do you realize that? I agreed with what you wrote, and you responded by telling me I’m wrong.
In fact, I saw what you wrote in another thread, thought to myself “oh yea, that’s a good point” and then went out of my way to take note of it in my post earlier in this thread.
Now here’s something I can work with:
You mentioned taking the chronomancer line doesn’t give you: torment on shatter, lower cooldowns on staff, more reflects.
You’re right, it doesn’t. Other traits line give you those things. Trait lines which you can take along side your chronomancer line. You can, after all, pick 3 trait lines.
You don’t “lose” an entire line of traits if you pick chrono, you opt out of several trait lines. The same way you opt out of chaos and inspiration in my above example. It’s the exact same trait line choice trade-off we’ve had since late-beta before GW2 launched. It’s not a trade off related to what chronomancy is getting, it’s just a regular trait trade-off, of the same kind you’d have to make regardless of which trait lines you pick.
This is what you don’t seem to understand.
If I pick Domination, Dueling, and Illusions, I get everything that is standard to mesmer, and three full trait lines of traits.
If I pick Domination, Dueling, and Chronomancy, I get everything that is standard to mesmer, and three full trait lines of traits, PLUS an extra f5 shatter, the ability to wield a shield, and wells added to my ability list.
Do you see the difference there? The chronomancer gets more ‘stuff’. More importantly, they get more ‘stuff’ without losing some old ‘stuff’ to compensate.
Perhaps to you this isn’t a problem. Perhaps to you it’s okay so long as baseline remains viable.
To me, it is a problem though, and that’s what I’m trying to make you understand. It’s a problem to me because it means elite specs get more resources, more ‘stuff’. Not necessarily stronger, but a larger pool, greater variety and flexibility.
They are mesmer+
Now if you want to reply, can you please address these points. Don’t come back if you’re just going to continue giving me snarky responses and misplaced “I told you so’s” without properly reading what I posted.
@Ross Biddle
I responded to you in-part above, but to save you from that wall of text:
I did not claim elite specs will be stronger then baseline specs. You misunderstand.
I wrote:
“Does that mean baseline specs will be irrelevant, or nonviable? of course not.”
&
“Does that mean you’ll be unable to create strong builds, perhaps even the “best” builds, using the baseline only? of course not”
In other words, my claim is that baseline builds will likely be just as good as elite spec builds, perhaps even stronger then elite spec builds. However, since the elite specs get more abilities and weapons then baseline, I find this makes it feel like baseline is being treated like “second class citizens”.
(edited by Arewn.2368)
People are forgetting that these are the first set of elites, and the idea is very specifically that they specialize your class ‘further’ (seemingly support in the case of Chronomancer), and with their additions are considered entirely new classes.
Future elite specializations are mutually exclusive, so while the first elite may seem powerful to the base, I -believe- the long term goal is to make each specialization unique and powerful in the way that they specialize where as if you go full-base you will be more “well rounded” around the core base-class. which always feels underwhelming compared to any deep specialization.
Expect in the future most builds will be 2 base spec + 1 elite. In the mean time, there will still likely be scenarios where the 1 added ability and new traits are not as useful as just going full-base specializations if the elite doesn’t lend a hand well to what their goals are for their build.
I think that’s a great part of the system. It’s one that can be easily expanded upon in interesting and fulfilling ways.
Each new elite spec will be mutually exclusive from the others, making each of them distinct and having unique benefits over the others.
My problem is that they are doing precisely NOT this with the base specs. There’s nothing unique or mutually exclusive about being just-a-mesmer. Which in turn makes being just-a-mesmer (or just-a-insertbaseclasshere) lesser compared to the elite specs. Like I’ve been careful to say, that obviously doesn’t mean base specs are out-and-out weaker or unviable. It does however mean they are lacking compared to elite specs.
-snip-
Right, and the problem with this is that I already read your post in another thread. And because I already read your post in another thread, I wrote something in my post with the very specific purpose of addressing what you wrote.
Since you didn’t seem to read my post though, let me outline the part I’m referring to:
“Does that mean baseline specs will be irrelevant, or nonviable? of course not. But it does mean they are going to be “second class citizens”.”
You have done absolutely nothing to address any of my points with your post.
My problem is that elite specs will have objectively more then their baseline.
Baseline will be just that, baseline. While elite specs will be baseline+1.
Does that mean you’ll be unable to create strong builds, perhaps even the “best” builds, using the baseline only? of course not, don’t be daft. It does however mean that the baseline will be lesser. They’ll have less variety, less tools available to them, and in some cases weaker as a result. You have only to gain by switching to the elite spec.
Now if “literally every sentence I just wrote is completely and totally wrong” then please, I’m honestly asking you, tell me what I’m wrong about. I started this thread with the explicit intent of gaining information.
So tell me, where are the trade offs? What do you lose from mesmer when you spec into chronomancer?
Because currently, I don’t see anything being lost. Only gained.
And picking a trait line isn’t a chronomancer trade off. It’s a normal trade off. No matter how you spec, you are ALWAYS making trade offs between the trait lines you pick. This is not an example of an elite spec trade off.
You lose a phantasm which is pretty big in certain cases. For example fractals there’s lots of ranged fights so you’re pretty much stuck with iBerserker and therefore phantasm build is pretty much out. Although it seems Chrono won’t work as well anyway with phantasm build anyway…
Chrono shield has a phantasm on the block ability.
Well that’s a terrible system. I’m completely un-enthused by elite specs now. It’s a bad idea.
Chronomancer will have MORE then baseline mesmer. They will be, in essence, Mesmer+
That’s a mistake. Baseline mesmer was supposed to be it’s own independent but equal entity, relative to the chronomancer spec.
The same can be said for all elite specs for all classes.
But now, they won’t be. Chronomancer will, objectively, no arguments to be had, have more then baseline mesmer. But baseline mesmer, in turn, will have nothing over chronomancers.
I would have expect for there to be trade offs. Continuem Split should have been f4, replacing distortion when spec’ed as chronomancer. Wells should have replaced one of the utility types when spec’ed as chrono. The chrono trait line should have replaced one of the other trait line. And the new weapon should have either been baseline, or replaced one of the current weapons.
You should have had the option to either be “mesmer spec” with its own unique benefits. Or “chrono spec” with its own unique benefits. But that will no longer be the case. You can spec as either one, but mesmer will be mesmer, while chrono will be mesmer+ extra.
Alternatively, everything should have been made baseline, with chrono simply being a new alternative trait line to spec into.
Does that mean baseline specs will be irrelevant, or nonviable? of course not. But it does mean they are going to be “second class citizens”.
And this will continue to be a problem as they expand the system and add new elite specs. Each new elite spec will have something unique, spec defining, and exclusively available to it. Which is honestly great, I think that part is a good system. Until you consider the baseline spec, which outright receive less then the apparently aptly named “elite” specs.
Truly, they will be “elite”. Better then the baseline. And that is a mistake.
Perhaps this has been established already, and I simply overlooked or misunderstood it, but:
As a mesmer who has unlocked the chronomancer elite specialization, will I be able to use a shield and the new F5 shatter even when I do not have the chronomancer specialization active?
In other words, once unlocked, will shields and F5 be baseline, or will they be unique to Mesmers spec’ed as chronomancers?
New main hand weapon for sure.
Alacricy looks interesting, and hte new f5 shatter looks awesome. And I’m very happy about getting shields.
But we are in such terribly desperate need of a new main hand that I would forgo all of the above for one.
Really….
I mean, really?
Shield is nice, I’m happy to get it, it’s one of my top picks for new weapons… but this class is swimming in off-hands already, meanwhile it’s in desperate need of more main hands.
I really hope whatever this “something just as good” is will be something that alleviates the lack of main-hands.
No matter how good or interesting the “new” thing is, it all seems in vain if they don’t address the more fundamental problems.
It’ll probably be fun, and I’ll probably be happy to get it, but if I’m still stuck with sword and scepter as my only options alongside a growing plethora of off-hands, then I’ll still be faced with the same old problem.
kitten … looks like you’ll have to pay for some new content, sucks how that works, eh?
The Taunt they proposed for GW2 is great. I think a lot of the people hating on it are seeing the word “taunt” assuming it’s an aggro grab, and hating it as such.
In reality, the Taunt effect they are bringing to GW2 is just a new form of CC and I’m actually really happy to see it included.
It’s kind of like a reverse fear…. except it doesn’t count as a condition, and you can auto attack during it.
Unless taunt skills have like 25%+ uptime, I don’t see how this will cause a trinity though lol. Not to mention defiance.
I think they are pretty much the same. You have kill waves mobs until they stop attacking, kill mobs until you hold a point, kill mobs as some npc walks next to you, with the condition being kill/tag X mobs to get gold
Don’t want to stray too far off topic here, but just to give a quick reply:
Like I said, GW2’s are better integrated/structured. Where WoW’s are just “go do X”, GW2 integrates them into the map, encouraging meaningful player cooperation/interaction and (with the more recent content in particular) essentially making map-wide mini-games. And as a dev consideration, I’d also wager the process of making a map full of DEs is more involved then populating a map with quests.
WoW comes out with an expansion every 1.5 to 2 years with almost nothing in between…and you pay a sub for that. And there’s a cash shop.
I don’t even play WoW and even I know this assertion to be false. Or are you going to play the “well I consider content patches featuring storyline continuation, new raids, new in-game armor sets, etc, to be ‘almost nothing’”?
They average 1 content patch every 7 months, and an xpac every 2~ years.
If you want to boil it down: Content patches typically consist of 1 mini zone that acts as a daily quest hub, 1 raid tier which consists of an instance with roughly 10 bosses, 1 or 2 weapon skins per weapon type, and 1 armor set per class plus 1 extra armor set per type (cloth/leather/mail/plate).
Roughly speaking.
There’s also quality to consider. GW2 skin’s are much higher quality then WoW’s. On the other hand WoW’s bosses are finely crafted and heavily scripted, generally better then GW2’s bosses. Once again on the flip side WoW’s daily quests often boil down to box with story quest “go kill 10 of X” while GW2’s, erm, ‘quest alternatives’ are more intricately put together/structured into well integrated group activities and the like.
etc etc.
sigh Did they really need to add more conditions to the game, at this rate they will have to add resistances and diminishing returns to counter conditions because it sounds like it will be getting out of hand, limited cleanses on long durations are not going to cut it anymore. The game is becoming too condition based gameplay for my taste.
Other than that, Revenants sound like they will be awesome, in fact so much so that it will definitely change the gwen meta up, cough gren cough.
um… did you completely miss the new boon they’re adding?
It makes you immune to the effects of conditions while it’s active.
Even if they released an exact copy of GW1 GvG in GW2, GW1 players would still complain because “the classes are different so the balance isn’t right!” or whatever other insert"thisisntGW1"reasonhere
Oh, oh! and while we’re at it, I want to be able to equip my boot as an off-hand weapon.
Abilities could be boot-smack and boot-a-rang.
And it makes sense as a weapon, because getting hit by a boot hurts.
heh, and so many ppl are still so blind, did no one even read what i just said or are we now all of a sudden suffering of tunnel syndrome?
People didn’t answer because
a) not many people have even posted in this thread in the first place
b) what you brought up isn’t really a problem, so no body cares
For real? this is a concern?
Who cares, so you can’t see “Level 80” next to the person’s name, you see another number instead.
You can’t see their true level when their downscaled (or upscaled wvw) either. Makes no difference.
Someone’s level 14? great, you see that their 14. Someone’s level 79? great you see that their 79. Someone level 80, but it shows mastery points instead? wow, big deal…
And you could always, you know, just ask what level they are.
These complaint and “concern” posts are getting inane.
The heck are you talking about OP. You’ve answered your own concern.
And you can’t just say “I understand it’s not flying” but have your complaint complete disregard the fact that they are different.
It’s like saying “I understand that it’s not blue, but my problem is that it’s not blue”.
This isn’t flying. It’s not supposed to be flying. It works differently then flying.
It’s gliding, and gliding is decidedly not flying.
We’re not getting flying mounts, nor is the intention of gliding to give us unrestricted aerial movement.
Why? because it’s gliding.
Somebody linked a wind waker video, and that’s a perfect example of gliding with a limit, and that limit being a good addition to the system.
A gliding limit is not decidedly unfun (though it potentially could be), you’ve simply decided it’s unfun without even seeing it, let alone trying it.
I’m going to be frank, you put up a huge wall of text that does little to say more then “because I don’t like it”. It’s difficult to even address your post because it’s so large and vacuous. Reads more like a rant then feedback, so you might want to do some work refining it.
Also (humorously), what in the world is a GW1 player doing complaining about GW2 balance :P
Nope! i don’t mean an open beta. I mean as i say. & yes, they prolly are beta testing the game prior to it’s release. But what i’m suggestion as you can properly read on my question, are they going to do it extensively with more then 1000 playtesters to make sure the game is fun? Why is that not clear?
Software goes through beta testing. Period. The mere fact that you framed the question “will it be beta tested” made it unclear whether you were referring to open beta, closed public beta, or private beta.