Yeah, putting this at the beginning of each fractal tier was a pretty silly design choice. Having it at every 9th level would at least make SOME sense, even if it would be kind of kittenty.
You can’t tell if a character is a failure until the story is over.
That’s like saying that you can’t tell if a meal at a restaurant was well-prepared until you’re finished eating the whole thing.
Which is a terrible point that is completely incorrect. A bad steak will taste bad with the first bite.
I’ve never had a meal with plot twists. Which many a critic has claimed to be the saving grace of a slow-starting story.
I don’t get how you’re missing the part where I’ve explained that it’s not the story itself that people don’t like. It’s the character. What they do with the plot is completely irrelevant because I already don’t like Scarlet.
And you said you didn’t like Scarlet because of the story/plot that she’s a part of, as well as her part in it. If you want to be taken seriously with your criticisms, you might want to get your arguments straight. Otherwise, it just seems like you’ve made your mind up on predeterminations based on your opinion of the game’s story in general. Which is pretty analogous to sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming LALALALALALA.
Please quote me where I said that I dislike Scarlet because of the story apart from her involvement in it, and then I might consider taking you seriously. Because I don’t like debating against a strawman argument.
The fact that the story is about her means you dislike the story, because you dislike her.
This isn’t exactly a stretch.
The stretch is that you are taking my saying that a poor character is ruining a story as me saying that the story is bad for reasons other than the character it is based around.
I don’t even know why I didn’t stop responding to you when I originally said I would, because you’re completely illogical and impossible to argue with.
You can’t tell if a character is a failure until the story is over.
That’s like saying that you can’t tell if a meal at a restaurant was well-prepared until you’re finished eating the whole thing.
Which is a terrible point that is completely incorrect. A bad steak will taste bad with the first bite.
I’ve never had a meal with plot twists. Which many a critic has claimed to be the saving grace of a slow-starting story.
I don’t get how you’re missing the part where I’ve explained that it’s not the story itself that people don’t like. It’s the character. What they do with the plot is completely irrelevant because I already don’t like Scarlet.
And you said you didn’t like Scarlet because of the story/plot that she’s a part of, as well as her part in it. If you want to be taken seriously with your criticisms, you might want to get your arguments straight. Otherwise, it just seems like you’ve made your mind up on predeterminations based on your opinion of the game’s story in general. Which is pretty analogous to sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming LALALALALALA.
Please quote me where I said that I dislike Scarlet because of the story apart from her involvement in it, and then I might consider taking you seriously. Because I don’t like debating against a strawman argument.
You can’t tell if a character is a failure until the story is over.
That’s like saying that you can’t tell if a meal at a restaurant was well-prepared until you’re finished eating the whole thing.
Which is a terrible point that is completely incorrect. A bad steak will taste bad with the first bite.
I’ve never had a meal with plot twists. Which many a critic has claimed to be the saving grace of a slow-starting story.
I don’t get how you’re missing the part where I’ve explained that it’s not the story itself that people don’t like. It’s the character. What they do with the plot is completely irrelevant because I already don’t like Scarlet.
The richness of her character is seen in the speculation of why she’s doing what she’s doing. Then again, I’m the sort of intellectual person who doesn’t need things spelled out for me every step of the way and repeated 5 times an hour.
Aaaaaaaand now you’re attempting to insult my intelligence because of a difference in opinion. This debate is now over.
Anyway, to post about the original topic, I alternate between a 30 valor build and a 0 valor build, depending on what I feel like playing at a given time. Honestly, while I won’t try to dispute the fact that the 0 valor build deals more DPS, the difference in time and difficulty in the dungeon runs I have between each build is pretty negligible IMO. Going 30 into valor isn’t going to kill you as long as you know how to build a reasonable amount of damage attributes and traits around it.
Once again, It resets. We need the classic non-resetable timer “kill it in X time or you’re going to wipe”
That would of been one of the best ways to fix TAFU back when it was around. I doubt groups would have had any problems with the tree if they were capable of killing Vevina in under 4 minutes (considering the lost time due to stealths and chaos storms)
No, what we need is the exact opposite of that. People are already too obsessed with speed in this game. Giving hard time-caps would only make the already divisive community that much more vile toward each other.
Think about it: when the height of what you can do with your villains is for them to be bland and forgettable, and any character you try to give them makes them outright hated, what does it say?
It says you hate the VILLAIN. Sounds like they’ve done their job. It might be popular nowadays to give antihero characters that the audience like more than the protagonists, but does that mean every villain needs to be likeable?
Again, it isn’t the dislike itself that’s the problem, it’s that it’s for all the wrong reasons. We don’t hate her because she’s evil, we hate her because she’s an awfully written one-dimensional character that is portrayed as being such a powerful figure that acts like the annoying class clown and never does anything that actually feels consequential. Oh, we stopped her latest evil scheme? That’s okay, because it wasn’t actually relevant to her plans and was just her playing around, turning all of the world’s armies and factions into her puppets simply because she can.
The fact is that many of us feel like the current story that’s been written for us is horribly weak because the only link between all of these otherwise unrelated events is this flimsy excuse of an arch-villain that feels about as imposing as a chihuahua in broad daylight.
And how do you know she’s as powerful as you make her out to be? Because she controls Aetherblade pirates? Because she controls clockwork creatures which probably do all of her enforcing for her? She’s INSANE. The richness of her character is what makes her insane, and this latest installment of her story might give us some insight into that process.
If we could dispose of every villain during the first event we see him/her in, every new villain that shows up simply adds to the neverending chain of inconsequential baddies. Scarlet’s important because she’s got her fingers in so much of the living story…it adds scope to her reach and increases the buildup to the inevitable climax, which IS COMING.
The “Scarlet Did It” thing going around the forums lately is, in my eyes, more of a boon to her character than a detriment. It turns the whole living story idea into an ongoing struggle that can’t just be resolved in a day, just to repeat it with a new face next week.
I’d hate it if we had a revolving door of baddies every 2 weeks, personally. The current idea of it feels more like a good drama television series with continuity from one week to the next rather than a single 2 hour movie, or a tv comedy with little to no continuity. And just because some people want Harry Potter rather than Dexter, doesn’t mean it’s better, and definitely doesn’t make Dexter equal to Scooby Doo.
There needs to be a buildup to the climax. And I’m fine with the buildup they’re giving us.
There’s a reason why saturday morning cartoons are directed toward an audience of children. That type of simplistic writing simply doesn’t appeal to a more mature audience. As for the ‘richness of her character’, where are you seeing such richness? All I see in Scarlet is ‘Hi, I’m bad because it’s fun and I can do anything and everything’. You’re not looking very much into the details, which is fine for you I guess, but not everyone is going to settle for so little depth in a character and a story.
Also, we’re not crying out for a constant revolving door of new villains. We just don’t like that the ONLY one we have isn’t believable as a credible threat as Anet’s writers are trying to portray her as. We’re not bothered by the fact that she has her fingers in everything; we’re bothered by the fact that she just doesn’t fit the role of someone with that kind of leverage in the story as the character she’s been written to be. If they’re going to make one person be behind everything up to this point, make it someone who actually seems like they are capable of being behind everything.
Think about it: when the height of what you can do with your villains is for them to be bland and forgettable, and any character you try to give them makes them outright hated, what does it say?
It says you hate the VILLAIN. Sounds like they’ve done their job. It might be popular nowadays to give antihero characters that the audience like more than the protagonists, but does that mean every villain needs to be likeable?
Again, it isn’t the dislike itself that’s the problem, it’s that it’s for all the wrong reasons. We don’t hate her because she’s evil, we hate her because she’s an awfully written one-dimensional character that is portrayed as being such a powerful figure that acts like the annoying class clown and never does anything that actually feels consequential. Oh, we stopped her latest evil scheme? That’s okay, because it wasn’t actually relevant to her plans and was just her playing around, turning all of the world’s armies and factions into her puppets simply because she can.
The fact is that many of us feel like the current story that’s been written for us is horribly weak because the only link between all of these otherwise unrelated events is this flimsy excuse of an arch-villain that feels about as imposing as a chihuahua in broad daylight.
Cool down guys. You all have to know that the devs do not play the same game as the players so it is entirely understandable that they could miss it out.
Sometimes I wonder if the devs play the game at all, honestly. I mean, the guy in the livestream was using his healing skill at full health for stealth and apparently didn’t know what utility skills were.
Here’s an update: You are not supposed to like the villain. You’re supposed to hate the villain, hate what they do, hate that you don’t understand why or how they’re doing it and get so emotional that you call for their early demise.
Honestly, I couldn’t disagree with this any more if I tried. A villain with a somewhat justifiable motive, a villain that shows internal conflict, or even just a villain with some sort of history or backstory that shows what has turned them into what they’ve become is simply so much more compelling as a figure than someone like Scarlet who is simply bad because being bad is fun.
I (as well as what seems like the majority of people here) don’t hate her for the reasons that one would hope to dislike an antagonist for. We hate her because she’s just a terrible fit for the role that she’s been placed in. The playful prankster personality type just doesn’t work when you’re portraying someone who is supposed to be as seemingly all-powerful as she is, and the fact that she’s behind every single unrelated conflict for the past 4+ months without any sort of tying of loose ends or even any sort of explanation for why she’s here to begin with just makes it so much worse.
The only way they can make that happen is if they give faster attacks to the enemies. Currently the bosses just hit you so hard they 1-2 shot you regardless of tankiness. lots of small attacks that you can’t dodge all the time is really the only way to encourage healing/survivability. Dodging/blocking/aegis/evade/invul + high dps is just currently better than building for survivability at the expense of dps.
Honestly, this is the direction the game needs to be going in. It simply needs enemies to attack faster and have less HP. This would encourage more varied playstyles and also make things like confusion and retaliation more effective in the process. It seems like fractals is starting to take a step in this direction by introducing difficulty with instabilities rather than just making mobs more tanky, which is really nice IMO.
I do not like Scarlet Briar. It isn’t the hate you feel towards a villain or stuff like that when you get absorbed by a story or something. It’s just that she sucks as a villain – just plain crazy and unoriginal and always behind everything villainy just because she wants to be a villain, i.e. too shallow a character. The only thing good about her is her voice actor.
This. I want an antagonist that I dislike because they are intimidating and threatening. I get neither of those vibes from Scarlet because she’s just too much of a Mary Sue and a clown to be THE head honcho. There’s no explanation for how she got to be as all-powerful and seemingly omniscient as she is, she has no explained motive for why she is doing the things she is doing, and she simply lacks personality beyond the simple prankster archetype that just doesn’t fit with the role she’s supposed to be filling. It’s really disappointing to see such a bland character being behind every loose end we’ve encountered so far without any sort of depth or insight into the backstory of the character herself even, especially when there are so many other possible candidates that would have done a better job of filling that slot.
It would be better if we could pull infusions out and use them to upgrade to the next one. As it is, let’s say you get a +10 (currently 450g on BLTC, though that will surely go down quickly) and put it in a ring. Sorry, can’t use that as part of your 11 upgrade, it’s just wasted and you have to trash/replace it later. Which just encourages NEVER actually using these things, but hoarding them in your bank endlessly. Very annoying.
I agree with this. The current implementation is good IMO with the diminishing returns, but they need to give us the option to remove infusions, otherwise it’s just too tedious to upgrade once you use an infusion.
That being said though, there’s a new item that’s been datamined that will remove upgrades from items without destroying either the upgrade or the item. It’ll probably be a gem store purchase, but if it’ll remove infusions I’d take that over spending hundreds of gold on the TP.
If someone in your party is in a dungeon instance, you will receive a prompt upon entering the zone that the dungeon entrance is located in. Occasionally it won’t give you the prompt though, so in this case you just reload the zone and it should pop up.
Honestly, don’t worry about your build. If you want to do well in Arah, learn the fights and know which utility skills are useful and where.
To this extent, smoke screen is a great skill to have for a lot of encounters there. There are a lot of projectiles and a lot of trash mobs that hit really hard. Smoke screen can save you and your group with the right use.
People love to get caught up on builds, especially on forums, but having a group of people that know the fight mechanics of the dungeon will always, always be more important than what build or classes you bring into a dungeon.
I agree with this. The utilities you bring are far more important than the exact build you run. That being said, I run a 10/30/0/15/15 and it seems to suit me just fine.
Nobody here is a ‘wanna be forum police’; we just don’t understand why you made another post while KNOWING that there were existing posts without answers on the same topic.
Honestly, it’s a gimmick trait. The purpose of aegis is to block large single-hit burst damage attacks; this trait encourages players to burn through their aegis skills and their dodges when it isn’t needed, and consecration duration/cooldown for PvE and retal duration for PvP is a much better option IMO.
If you know that there are already lots of posts on this, then why did you make a new one? It’s already quite clear that Anet hasn’t bothered looking at the numerous other ones.
I think it should be changed, but more towards the leader position. Now everybody can kick you by just 2 votes, when we would have one leader with rights to do everything, it would prevent chaos from occurring. Also, dungeon leader would be responsible for group and would command people, as now lot of ppl just dont know what to do and nobody wants to lead.
I’d rather not have a party leader, honestly. People who try to command me around in dungeons when I already know how to handle things just kitten me off.
It’s both, actually. Both dungeon rewards and the dungeon designs themselves need to be reworked in order to make the content as valuable as the reward for getting through it.
You totally missed my point, however, the irony is you’re proving it with a statement like that.
So I rest my case.
Uhm… What? Are you sure we’re on the same page here?
He isn’t talking about rewards, it isn’t about rewards. Content can be as difficult as you make it. Setting difficult goals for easy content is the only way to challenge yourself and have fun as a competitive gamer in this game.
It’s both, actually. Both dungeon rewards and the dungeon designs themselves need to be reworked in order to make the content as valuable as the reward for getting through it.
That was the exact point that I was making; that the game needs to make people want to play through the content for the experience of going through it rather than just for the things you get by doing it.
It’s both, actually. Both dungeon rewards and the dungeon designs themselves need to be reworked in order to make the content as valuable as the reward for getting through it.
You totally missed my point, however, the irony is you’re proving it with a statement like that.
So I rest my case.
Uhm… What? Are you sure we’re on the same page here?
People are “mean” because they only care about the end reward. It’s not about having fun or enjoying combat. It’s about loot Loot LOOT!
sheds tear
I still think it’s a huge problem this game needs to address.
Nah.
What this game needs to address is the lack of CHALLENGING content.
Current dungeons are way too easy, and very dull mechanics-wise. And you wonder why the hell people only care about finishing a boring dungeon? You think people have fun fighting bosses with no particular difficulty whatsoever? Because we don’t.
It’s both, actually. Both dungeon rewards and the dungeon designs themselves need to be reworked in order to make the content as valuable as the reward for getting through it.
Rude and obnoxious people in my party. Had a pug earlier today that called me bad for missing a dodge on kholer’s pull because I was running sword/axe on my ranger (and whirling axe and serpent’s strike were on CD) instead of a shortbow, because ‘range’ is in the name of the class.
So basically, rangers are worthless unless they use a single build that consists of a sword where you just use the auto-attack all day and the other skills to dodge, which also roots you in place, frost spirit which is a very much passive utility, and spotter?
Its no wonder I rarely see any rangers using this; its very boring to use and the way the sword auto-attack works only causes frustration. I’d rather use something like a longbow and enjoy myself, or just hop on another class, than have to use a build like that!
Not really. GS is a good alternative to sword if you have trouble with the rooting, and longbow is one of the strongest ranged weapons in the game when implemented correctly (and the Dec. 10 patch should make it much easier to use effectively).
I’ve done 5 man bearbow runs (primarily for the lulz) with a group that actually knows how to play ranger, and we’ve actually cleared things pretty smoothly and easily. Just take some time to learn the ins and outs of the class and you should be able to make your way through dungeons just fine.
A well-played ranger can be as useful as a warrior in terms of offensive support in dungeons. The difference is that they have a higher skill curve to play effectively.
I have yet to see a ranger managing to evade as well as other classes do because of sword, and I don’t believe anyone can unless proven wrong. That being said ranger’s unique offensive support abilities are great as you say and I feel they are indeed sword #1 remake away from being great pve class. Funny thing is if sword chain was similar to other weapons in game ranger would actually be one of the more evasive professions.
Also don’t hate on bears, they are op and double bear is the only pet choice for me when i play ranger.
And that’s exactly the problem. I despise 1h sword on ranger, yet I find myself using it more often than not simply because offhand axe and warhorn are much too useful to not run it.
Well, people here are just going to call you bad for wanting to use ranged. Anyway, from what I’ve heard (and I could be wrong because I don’t actually have any experience with it), staff ele is very good for ranged DPS if you spec full zerker, but it’s VERY squishy.
A well-played ranger can be as useful as a warrior in terms of offensive support in dungeons. The difference is that they have a higher skill curve to play effectively.
The gravelings have a very obvious wind-up animation before they use their knockdown. You can avoid it pretty easily if you just time your dodge well enough. Also, stun breaks and stability are your best friend in AC, so make sure you bring those along as well.
Unfortunately none of your trinkets other than the backpiece can be transmuted, so you’re kind of SoL on that. But honestly, if you want to start running fractals on your warrior you might as well just get new trinkets for it entirely. 15 AR shouldn’t take very long to get, especially if you have laurels and/or badges to spare.
I’ve never been a fan of leaderboards in video games, and this is certainly no exception. All this is going to do is make room for more pug scrutinizing and ego flexing.
ranged(sitting 900-1200 away) players don’t get aoe boons (most utilities and aoe combos have small effect radius), cannot effectively revive or be revived, does less damage in general (with few exceptions)
so why would one choose to play ranged in coordinated small group(dungeons)?
its hilarious when 4 players got banner buffs, fury, 25stacks of might, and there is that one ranger standing 1500 away w/o any buffs, and later complains why no one wants him
Honestly, all this proves is that distance-based damage mechanics are incredibly dumb, which we’ve (or at least I have) known from the beginning. While I typically don’t have a problem with stacking in most cases, it just seems so contradictory of Anet to rave about this risk/reward setup between melee and ranged only to ruin it with bosses like the spider queen and subject alpha.
Long story short: Just more proof that Anet needs to get their dungeon design kitten together.
Alpha is higher risk and higher reward at melee. You are guaranteed to be standing on the ice spike. At range spider does more damage, in melee you can’t run out of its range if you get too low.
Alpha is NOT higher risk when stacked on, because 2 of his 3 potential attacks cannot hit a target that is on top of him.
And if you range and side step at all times you also completely avoid 2 of his 3 potential attacks.
When you stack you avoid those attacks without sidestepping. Less effort for the same result, therefore less risky.
ranged(sitting 900-1200 away) players don’t get aoe boons (most utilities and aoe combos have small effect radius), cannot effectively revive or be revived, does less damage in general (with few exceptions)
so why would one choose to play ranged in coordinated small group(dungeons)?
its hilarious when 4 players got banner buffs, fury, 25stacks of might, and there is that one ranger standing 1500 away w/o any buffs, and later complains why no one wants him
Honestly, all this proves is that distance-based damage mechanics are incredibly dumb, which we’ve (or at least I have) known from the beginning. While I typically don’t have a problem with stacking in most cases, it just seems so contradictory of Anet to rave about this risk/reward setup between melee and ranged only to ruin it with bosses like the spider queen and subject alpha.
Long story short: Just more proof that Anet needs to get their dungeon design kitten together.
Alpha is higher risk and higher reward at melee. You are guaranteed to be standing on the ice spike. At range spider does more damage, in melee you can’t run out of its range if you get too low.
Alpha is NOT higher risk when stacked on, because 2 of his 3 potential attacks cannot hit a target that is on top of him.
If you’ve ever fought subject alpha without first pulling him into the corner, you’ll find that even upon stacking on him he will back away between attacks so that they will hit their intended target.
Sortof. The only attack that fails in very close quarters is the earth attack. He only backs away like this in paths 1 and 3 right before he uses the attack. The fire and ice attacks both hit in melee range and the ice attack wipes bad groups who stack and can’t dodge.
The real problem is that the boss AI is terrible and Alpha’s attacks and movements are totally predictable and boring. He will use the earth attack on a schedule and will use it regardless of whether or not it can actually hit anyone.
Imagine the PUG tears if they tried to stack on him in path 1 and he just ran far out to the middle of the room and popped two earth attacks in a row.
That was kind of the point I was trying to make, but I suppose maybe I didn’t word it quite clearly enough.
Feels good to have been doing this run instead of the boat skip the whole time and being the only one at the end while my party struggles to get through.
Feels bad because they yell at me for not waiting up
kitten please, I could probably even beat you there on my ranger.
Nothing to elaborate on the bolded, I simply don’t believe it to be true. Feel free to post a video proving me wrong and I’ll gladly admit error.
I’m pretty sure he means that he was unable to interpret what you meant with that sentence due to poor grammar structure, and he was just asking for a rephrasing of it that is easier to understand.
Exactly, thanks. English is not my first language and sometimes I get lost.
I don’t understand what he said.
It’s okay, English IS my first language and I still didn’t get it.
Endure pain no longer negates killshot damage from deadeyes. I believe renewed focus still works however since it’s an invulnerability instead of just a 100% damage reduction.
R U SERS
I don’t play warrior, but as far as I know from my buddies that do it’s been that way for a while now.
Endure pain no longer negates killshot damage from deadeyes. I believe renewed focus still works however since it’s an invulnerability instead of just a 100% damage reduction.
Nothing to elaborate on the bolded, I simply don’t believe it to be true. Feel free to post a video proving me wrong and I’ll gladly admit error.
I’m pretty sure he means that he was unable to interpret what you meant with that sentence due to poor grammar structure, and he was just asking for a rephrasing of it that is easier to understand.
Well, if you’re a good thief then it’s their loss for kicking you. Thief has some of the highest base DPS in the game, and can provide far more utility than just stealth.
