Guild Wars 2

Pyroathiest.4168:

You missed a couple.

• Portal Entr/Exeunt: Despite previous statements, this isn’t a range indicator, it’s purely a tooltip.

Yeah, I was disappointed that a range indicator wasn’t added. It doesn’t seem too difficult to add that little red bar below the skill when you walk far enough away from the portal entrance. A timer would be nice too. Maybe next year.

Engineers are really strong against thieves. Their AoE counters stealth, and their CC makes it hard for the thief to do anything when out of stealth.

draxynnic.3719:

This is one of those ’can’t prove a negative’ situations. Does CoE represent a special case where the Inquest are able to force multiple corruptions where the dragons normally can’t corrupt another dragon’s minions?
Until the point where we see one dragon corrupting another dragon’s minions, we can never be sure they can’t.

No, this is not one of those “can’t prove a negative” situation. This is jumping to conclusions.

The litmus test here is that if sylvari resistance to corruption comes from already being minions, then sylvari should be vulnerable to being further corrupted by the Inquest just like any other minion. However, we don’t see this AFAIK – we do see other prisoners transformed, but not sylvari. So the question is… is this because they haven’t tried, or because they haven’t succeeded?

And this is begging the question.

The followup question is… do you really believe the Inquest wouldn’t have tried at some point? They in fact have more incentive to try on sylvari than other races, in order to try to discover how the sylvari resistance works.

Thus, I think the most likely explanation is that the Inquest have tried, and have so far failed. Thus, the sylvari resistance is stronger than any resistance that might come from already being a minion. Thus, sylvari resistance cannot be explained by minionhood alone – there has to be something stronger in play. As a result, sylvari resistance is not evidence for sylvari minionhood.

So is this.

Sylvari resistance remains evidence for minionhood. However, not conclusive evidence. I do agree that saying “Sylvari are resistant therefore they are minions.” is wrong, but that shouldn’t be warped to “Sylvari resistance is not evidence for sylvari minionhood.”

Again, we’re looking at the original thought process that lead to the formation of the theory here. At the time, we believed that Glint achieved freedom through a force of will inspired by a moment of spiritual and moral revelation – and the Tablet, which brought a similar revelation to the Pale Tree (particularly if the Nightmare Court are to be believed) would represent the same for the Pale Tree, explaining how she broke loose. We now know that such a measure is insufficient, and the theory is left with a torpedo hole in it where once it had a simple and compelling explanation.

I agree that the Tablet evidence is now very weak in light of new evidence.

In fact, the only means we currently know of to cleanse dragon magic is through Forgotten magic… of that of the Pale Tree through Caladbolg. A possible explanation for both of these points could be that the two are actually the same, and that an ancestor Pale Tree was at some point cleansed by the forgotten the same way Glint was. However, it’s also possible that the forgotten created the sylvari race themselves and infused them with their corruption-warding magic as part of the process – invoking forgotten magic as a reason for the sylvari corruption immunity does not require them to be descended from former minions.

Great alternative explanations. I like them. They don’t torpedo the Sylvari are minions theory, though.

I do… when people start from a basis of logic rather than starting from a conclusion and trying to justify it.

You do realize that the only person who brought up the four pillars arguments was you. Someone stated that he believed the Sylvari to be dragon minions. You then provided his arguments for him and tried to prove those arguments wrong.

So no, don’t copy and paste this every time people say they think the Sylvari might be dragon minions. It’s filled with logical holes and often doesn’t even address the point people are making anymore.

If you want prepare an argument that states why you think it is unlikely that Sylvari are dragon minions. Preferably something that starts along the lines: “That’s a very interesting theory. However, I’m not convinced that Sylvari are dragon minions because of X, Y, and Z.”

In fact, if you’ll look back, I actually participated in the original theory – however, the logical basis of that original theory is gone. Without a new logical basis, it should be recognised as being, well, baseless. Otherwise, people are supporting it because they’re convinced by the ‘cool factor’, not because of any sense of logic.

And this is ad hominen.

I say, if someone presents a theory and provides factually incorrect evidence, then feel free to correct them. If it’s an interpretation based on factual evidence or lack of, provide alternative interpretations, without disrespecting theirs. I would have loved to hear Feycat’s ideas, but he was shot down before he could even share them.

I don’t see Anet making special concessions for the RP community. Doing so would tacitly support RP in GW2, which Anet does not do. And they won’t because to do so would mean that they would have to go all in on making GW2 an RP-friendly game. Just a little change to support RP would encourage further demands from the RP community. For example, even the mention that there were paintings of horses got the mounts community in a tizzy.

I feel bad for the RP community, but it will adapt. The megaserver is a good idea for GW2 as a whole and won’t be demolished to appease a small number of players.

Before I begin, I want to state that I think that the Sylvari being dragon minions theory is very unlikely. However, much of the evidence used against it either pushes it toward toward unlikely or doesn’t really impact the theory at all. Thus, people should be free to continue to explore the theory as a potentiality.

draxynnic.3719:

However, discoveries since the game released have torpedoed each of these pillars:

1) We see in CoE that being corrupted by one dragon provides no protection against being corrupted by draconic energy from another. Thus, sylvari resistance to corruption is not due to already being corrupted, but some other cause (for one possibility, see below) is needed to explain this.

Actually, CoE doesn’t prove that Sylvari aren’t protected from dragon corruption because they are already minions. CoE demonstrates that multiple corrupts are possible under certain conditions (i.e. whatever Kudu’s experiments did to them). Thus, the Sylvari are minions theory is just as good as any other to explain their resistance.

2) We learned in Arah that Glint did not simply ‘choose’ to shift loyalties. She may or may not have been aware that there was more involved in her change of heart (although given her powers and role, I’m pretty certain she did). Dragon minions, even the most important champions, simply do not have enough free will to contemplate betraying their dragon. Powerful forgotten magic was employed to return that free will to her, magic that was almost certainly not included in a stone tablet carved by a centaur, however enlightened. However, going back to pillar 1, this also shows that while being a dragon minion already does not prevent dragon corruption, there are magics in the world independent of the dragons that do.

This also doesn’t “torpedo” the theory that the Pale Tree Sylvari are minions who somehow are free of their dragon’s control. All it really tells us is that dragon minions can be freed of their masters. It is not likely that there is only one way to free them. Currently, if the Sylvari are dragon minions, we don’t know why they are free. Ventari’s teachings don’t seem likely because the Nightmare Court doesn’t appear to be filled with dragon worshipers.

3) In one of the sylvari personal story possibilities, we meet a sylvari (Malyck) who turns out to have been born from a different Tree and thus has no connection to the Tablet whatsoever. His overall behaviour and moral structure is… well, pretty close to human, actually. He’s a bit more ruthless than most Dream sylvari, but he shows loyalty to those who befriend him and compassion to the weak and vulnerable.

There’s a lot of mystery around Malyck. This was probably done deliberately. However, that he’s not spewing pro-dragon propaganda makes all Sylvari look less likely to be minions. This is a good argument against it, but not enough to destroy the theory.

4) This one has not been debunked per se, but there are plenty of other explanations – the canonical in-game explanation is that it represents Zhaitan (whom sylvari PCs have a Wyld Hunt to slay), and while that may be false, it could simply represent that there is some influence from Mordremoth in the Nightmare without meaning that the sylvari race and the Dream as a whole are spawn of Mordremoth that were somehow (mostly) cleansed.

So there’s your debunking. Mostly, the theory has maintained momentum because people want it to be true, and are either ignorant of or deliberately ignoring the flaws.

Hardly. The bigger issue is those that simply don’t want it to be true and will take any bit of evidence no matter how tenuous as conclusive proof that the theory has been “torpedoed”

Now, it has gained a bit more reinforcement recently on pillar 4 with the implication that Scarlet has been manipulated by Mordremoth through the Nightmare – however, that is following a convoluted path of logic that can diverge off to other conclusions at multiple points. Pillars 1 through 3, though, are all but completely demolished.

EDIT: Seriously, I’m saving this. Seems that whenever I’m active in the forum, I find myself repeating this once a week at minimum. Until and unless more evidence comes to light either way, I can save time by making use of copypasta.

You shouldn’t repeat this. It is wrong and rude to dismiss people’s arguments with forced interpretations of events not supported by logic or facts. I suggest rather you retract your statements and join in the fun of theory building than being a wet blanket.

Terrorsquad.2349:

Hurts me eyes and head for searching that last PoI or Karma Heart symbol on the map.
What if you’re in the map, open the Map and see what you lack with a flickering light on it or something?
I just started doing Map Completion for the second time for 3rd and 4th Legendary but atm, I’m more spending time looking at Map searching those last little symbols then actually doing the Map Completion.

Any ideas?

I like this idea. Tips/hints are currently available for achievements. Something similar for map completion would be nice too.

The new transmutation system is not really different than the old system. People who weren’t buying transmutation stones/crystals before are not going to start buying them in the new system.

The few exceptions will likely be for alts who now have access to newly account bound skins. However, these people would purchase just as many charges under the new system as the unlock system that I and others have proposed in this thread.

BloodyThor.3158:

Hi my question is, when we buy skins from the gem shop, like the primeval armour set, does that skin become account wide and can be reused?

Yes, this is the best advantage of the wardrobe system.

Stormcrow.7513:

Fenrina.2954:

Stormcrow.7513:

Am I missing something here? Is there a gold fee attached as well? I think most players have well over 100 stones in storage and many crystals as well. Is the gripe about having to use another skin to transmute to?

It boils down to lv79 and below characters having to spend the same amount of charges as a lv80. As a result, people who were wanting to use those stones will effectively loose two thirds of them. The cost to switch their gear will be tripled.

Oh I see. People wanted the wardrobe to be like HOM skins and have the ability to keep transmuting as their gear leveled up. I can see that being an issue but overall I think the QoL of the Wardrobe outweighs that issue with the exception of dual wielders.

Not for everyone. I will be keeping my armor out of the wardrobe. I currently have 3 sets of exotic berserker for my mesmer because I like to switch and mix and match between the looks. This takes up a bit of storage space, but I put up with it for the convenience of swapping my character’s armor. I wanted a wardrobe to address the storage issue. Unfortunately, the wardrobe system introduced does not help with this at all. So I’ll just keep playing the way I always have.

I think the new wardrobe system is a step in the right direction. However, it still doesn’t solve the fundamental problem for me: I’m reluctant to change my armor looks because of the cost.

I was hoping that the system would work more like this:

1. An armor piece can be unlocked for the account by placing it in the wardrobe (account bound).
2. Using a transmutation charge/crystal unlocks it permanently for a character (soul bound).

There would still be a use for transmutation crystals and people would feel more encouraged to buy new armor sets in the gem shop. As it is now, I won’t buy armor from the gem shop unless I 100% want my character to have that look for a long time. In fact, I’ll likely continue to horde stones/crystals until a perfect look comes around. So it won’t really change my gem purchasing behavior very much in the long term. In the short term, I might take advantage of the system for a few alts, but that’s it.

Under the system I hoped for, I would be more likely to buy armor and use stones/crystals to satisfy a desire for a complete set and to experiment with. In short term, I would likely use a lot more stones/crystals to unlock armors. In the long term, I would be more open to buying new armor sets to unlock. I believe that this system would have been best for both Anet and the players. So kind of disappointed by this change.

If dueling is added, which I don’t think it should be, please keep it out of PvE. I believe that overall dueling will create a lot negativity and complaints just to satisfy a minority who have viable alternatives.

Quarktastic.1027:

DaShi.1368:

Quarktastic.1027:

DaShi.1368:

Quarktastic.1027:

DaShi.1368:

BigHammer.5367:

Three words: Point. Blank. Shot.

I should also mention I’m primarily a PvE player and play a lot of fractals and dungeons, where stacking both the party and the mobs is standard. I see far too many bearbow rangers that love to just hit all their skills regardless of what’s going on, and PBS just loves to knock enemies out of all of the carefully stacked AoE, or out of range of the melee classes, etc.

It’s supremely frustrating, but it’s more to do with PvE content not challenging the average Ranger to become a better player before this point in the game.

This. 1000X this. Even if rangers get everything else fixed and improved, I will still not want rangers in my groups if Point Blank Shot doesn’t get fixed.

If by “fixed” you mean: “point blank shot is no longer a knockback,” I disagree. Point blank shot is fine.

It’s funny how much everyone hates on point blank shot, but completely ignore skills like:
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Knockback
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Launch

All of the skills listed in those categories are equally irritating when used improperly. (For the record, I have never once seen a mesmer use Illusionary wave properly)

Illusionary wave needs a much closer range, has a twice as long cooldown, and doesn’t knock the opponent as far as point blank shot. There is no equivalent to point blank shot in range, cooldown, and distance. It is a ridiculous skill that does not contribute to group play at all. The skill needs to be fixed.

Iwave has the same range as the original point blank shot. It also knocks back 5 targets instead of one. Gust knocks an enemy back 400 units (the same distance as a max range point blank shot), and has a range of 1200 (the same as point blank shot traited with eagle eye.)

None of them are as spammable as point blank shot, but the AoE knockbacks like Iwave and shield of absorption are far more irritating when used incorrectly. Point blank shot is a perfectly fine skill. Nerfing either the knockback or the cooldown will make the already undesirable longbow even less desirable.

Exactly, in order to compare Point Blank Shot, you have to cherry pick the situations. The problem is that while some of the other knockback skills have good range or distance (none have a good cooldown), Point Blank Shot has all of them. Point Blank Shot at its worst is still better than Gust.

Seriously? “same range as the original point blank shot”? What does that even mean? 5 targets vs 1 target doesn’t matter to groups when their target is knocked out of range. At least Iwave is useful for grouping enemies. You won’t see Iwave used as often because of its short range and high cooldown.

You may have had some experience with other classes frustrating you with their knockbacks, but Point Blank Shot is still the most complained about because of its range, distance, and spammability. Other knockbacks just aren’t as prevalent as Point Blank Shot. The longbow remains the most common weapon used by rangers and Point Blank Shot is the most annoying skill for group play. It needs to be addressed if Rangers want a role in groups.

Iwave is 600 range, point blank shot was 600 range before being buffed to 900 range. And if you’ve nothing bad to say about Iwave, then you’ve never played in the same group as some of the mesmers I’ve had the unfortunate pleasure of encountering. Mesmers in lane 5 of the marionette were especially fun. Nothing like hitting the boss with an Iwave and pushing all of its copies everywhere.

Congrats. You now understand the feeling that the rest of us have with Rangers. Only we have it all the time with shorter breaks between annoying knockbacks, longer distances knocked back, and from ranges as far back as 1200.

You may have had some experience with other classes frustrating you with their knockbacks, but Point Blank Shot is still the most complained about because of its range, distance, and spammability. No other knockback compares. In addition, other knockbacks just aren’t as prevalent as Point Blank Shot. The longbow remains the most common weapon used by rangers and Point Blank Shot is the most annoying skill for group play. It needs to be addressed if Rangers want a role in groups.

dkspins.4670:

Not a bearbow, and have 3 80’s along with 11 other 80’s (at least one of every prof) I agree Point Blank shot is quite a nuisance as is the pet’s wonky unpredictable AI, but I wonder how many of those who dislike Rangers have been rezzed by some lame ranger’s pet. I think I’ll fill that slot with another skill in the future <smile>

Probably about as many that have seen the rare Spotter or Frost Spirit. Despite so many people playing rangers, that trait and that skill aren’t common at all.

Quarktastic.1027:

DaShi.1368:

Quarktastic.1027:

DaShi.1368:

BigHammer.5367:

Three words: Point. Blank. Shot.

I should also mention I’m primarily a PvE player and play a lot of fractals and dungeons, where stacking both the party and the mobs is standard. I see far too many bearbow rangers that love to just hit all their skills regardless of what’s going on, and PBS just loves to knock enemies out of all of the carefully stacked AoE, or out of range of the melee classes, etc.

It’s supremely frustrating, but it’s more to do with PvE content not challenging the average Ranger to become a better player before this point in the game.

This. 1000X this. Even if rangers get everything else fixed and improved, I will still not want rangers in my groups if Point Blank Shot doesn’t get fixed.

If by “fixed” you mean: “point blank shot is no longer a knockback,” I disagree. Point blank shot is fine.

It’s funny how much everyone hates on point blank shot, but completely ignore skills like:
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Knockback
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Launch

All of the skills listed in those categories are equally irritating when used improperly. (For the record, I have never once seen a mesmer use Illusionary wave properly)

Illusionary wave needs a much closer range, has a twice as long cooldown, and doesn’t knock the opponent as far as point blank shot. There is no equivalent to point blank shot in range, cooldown, and distance. It is a ridiculous skill that does not contribute to group play at all. The skill needs to be fixed.

Iwave has the same range as the original point blank shot. It also knocks back 5 targets instead of one. Gust knocks an enemy back 400 units (the same distance as a max range point blank shot), and has a range of 1200 (the same as point blank shot traited with eagle eye.)

None of them are as spammable as point blank shot, but the AoE knockbacks like Iwave and shield of absorption are far more irritating when used incorrectly. Point blank shot is a perfectly fine skill. Nerfing either the knockback or the cooldown will make the already undesirable longbow even less desirable.

Exactly, in order to compare Point Blank Shot, you have to cherry pick the situations. The problem is that while some of the other knockback skills have good range or distance (none have a good cooldown), Point Blank Shot has all of them. Point Blank Shot at its worst is still better than Gust.

Seriously? “same range as the original point blank shot”? What does that even mean? 5 targets vs 1 target doesn’t matter to groups when their target is knocked out of range. At least Iwave is useful for grouping enemies. You won’t see Iwave used as often because of its short range and high cooldown.

You may have had some experience with other classes frustrating you with their knockbacks, but Point Blank Shot is still the most complained about because of its range, distance, and spammability. Other knockbacks just aren’t as prevalent as Point Blank Shot. The longbow remains the most common weapon used by rangers and Point Blank Shot is the most annoying skill for group play. It needs to be addressed if Rangers want a role in groups.

Quarktastic.1027:

DaShi.1368:

BigHammer.5367:

Three words: Point. Blank. Shot.

I should also mention I’m primarily a PvE player and play a lot of fractals and dungeons, where stacking both the party and the mobs is standard. I see far too many bearbow rangers that love to just hit all their skills regardless of what’s going on, and PBS just loves to knock enemies out of all of the carefully stacked AoE, or out of range of the melee classes, etc.

It’s supremely frustrating, but it’s more to do with PvE content not challenging the average Ranger to become a better player before this point in the game.

This. 1000X this. Even if rangers get everything else fixed and improved, I will still not want rangers in my groups if Point Blank Shot doesn’t get fixed.

If by “fixed” you mean: “point blank shot is no longer a knockback,” I disagree. Point blank shot is fine.

It’s funny how much everyone hates on point blank shot, but completely ignore skills like:
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Knockback
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Launch

All of the skills listed in those categories are equally irritating when used improperly. (For the record, I have never once seen a mesmer use Illusionary wave properly)

Illusionary wave needs a much closer range, has a twice as long cooldown, and doesn’t knock the opponent as far as point blank shot. There is no equivalent to point blank shot in range, cooldown, and distance. It is a ridiculous skill that does not contribute to group play at all. The skill needs to be fixed.

BigHammer.5367:

Three words: Point. Blank. Shot.

I should also mention I’m primarily a PvE player and play a lot of fractals and dungeons, where stacking both the party and the mobs is standard. I see far too many bearbow rangers that love to just hit all their skills regardless of what’s going on, and PBS just loves to knock enemies out of all of the carefully stacked AoE, or out of range of the melee classes, etc.

It’s supremely frustrating, but it’s more to do with PvE content not challenging the average Ranger to become a better player before this point in the game.

This. 1000X this. Even if rangers get everything else fixed and improved, I will still not want rangers in my groups if Point Blank Shot doesn’t get fixed.

I’m very excited about this. I felt of the major gold sinks, trait reallocation was the least effective one. Now we can experiment more freely and change builds for different situations rather than trying to find a one size fits all trait set up.

11. Unpleasant and forced. For all her crimes, she was no longer a threat and should have been captured, charged, and tried. Justice was not served that day.

True it will be hard stigma for the Sylvari to overcome, but giant killer robots are never going to recover after this.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

You’re missing the point.

Yes, it could very well been with her all along. But people are taking it as a fact that it was.

No, there is no evidence that it “hopped on”, but similarly there’s no evidence that it was with her all along.

My point was that there’s multiple interpretations to it, not that my example is the case. All that’s a fact is that “it was with her when she entered the machine” – there is no evidence in any direction for when it became ‘with her.’

Again, this is not the way you presented it. The rest of that post, you went on a long rant clearly dismissing “all along” possibility while promoting an unsupported “hopped on” theory. Your point may have allowed for multiple interpretations, but you clearly (and wrongly) excluded the “all along” one.

I wasn’t dismissing. I was offering alternatives.

Again, this boils down to how everyone’s treating their interpretation of the past couple updates as the only interpretation – as if they are fact. I am here, have been here, presenting alternative interpretations. Yes, interpretations that goes against theirs and for mine, but even if I were for their theory I would play the devil’s advocate and bring these very same interpretations up regardless, just to show they exist – that their interpretation is not the only one.

Calling something a red-herring is not offering an alternative. It’s insulting to him that you would treat his interpretation so, and insulting to me that you think I would fall for the “it’s just my interpretation” excuse. You are not presenting any alternative interpretation other than saying “you’re wrong!” with no supporting evidence.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

Bold was my argument in that point. Alone, it is far from full-proof, but one point of evidence is never enough to utterly settle a wide-spread discussion.

Yes, but you have used that point (incorrectly) as a hammer to crush other people’s theories. If you truly believed that it is so far from full-proof, it would not be used in such a way. If there is other, better evidence use that, because the CoE argument is a dead-end atm.

I fail to see how CoE becomes a requirement for there to be no mid-way.

You frequently cite CoE to demonstrate that minions can have multiple corruptions. Yet for that point you said that corruptions are complete and there can be no mid-way. You want to have your cake and eat it too.

Please re-read my points. I explicitly stated that those are the similarities shared amongst all, and I explicitly stated – in multiple posts – that there are also differences. But per Jeff Grubb’s own words, there are similarities across all Elder Dragons, and those three points are shown as the only similarities – and all equally so – amongst the Elder Dragons we have reliable evidence of in those points.

But, like CoE, you use that statement to crush any theories of corruption that go beyond those points. While you are trying to sound reasonable here, you were not when you used these as counterpoints.

I would like to correct you on something. While called “eggs”, they are only so in purpose – that is, being incubation pods for destroyers. Destroyers do not get pregnant, as we see in that same storyline that we get not just destroyer crablings, but full grown destroyer crabs and destroyer trolls as well. These “destroyer eggs” function no differently than the ice crystals in the Claw of Jormag event chain, or the Strange Crystal – both of which ‘spawn’ dragon minions from within.

What made the destroyer eggs so unique is that they seem to form the destroyers (as well as being brand new tactics for Primordus) within the “eggs” which made it seem like they were more traditional eggs, thus the theorizing by the mentor that it could be either a pregnant creature that was corrupted – something new to Primordus but not other Elder Dragons – or made by a new type of dragon champion – which is also something new for Primordus. Either way meant Primordus changed tactics, and that’s why it was so astonishing for the mentors.

First, thank you for the additional information. Second, my point was that there are methods of corruption used by the dragons that differ the other dragons. This lends some credence to the Sylvari being possible minions.

I hope the Durmond Priory displays the Undead Sea Scrolls from the Royal Library of Arah.

Back to the topic at hand. To address some of Konig’s points:

Konig Des Todes.2086:

And as Crucible of Eternity shows, it is possible for a dragon minion to be corrupted by another dragon.

CoE is a unique situation. The subjects there were experimented on. If we saw something corrupted by two or more dragons naturally, then you’d have a stronger argument that Sylvari can’t be minions because they can’t be corrupted. CoE tells us that it is possible, but not the circumstances under which it could happen. Under the right circumstances, Sylvari might be corrupted by other dragons.

However, I disagree on the “partial corruption” – no dragon minion thus far can be “partially” corrupted. You either are, or you aren’t. There is no mid-way in this topic.

There would have to be for the CoE argument to hold. A doubly corrupted individual can’t be a complete servant of both Jormag and Primodus. And someone else mentioned Kellach.

• They all consume magic and spread corruption.
• All of their minions are fanatic towards them.
• All of their minions hold an elemental theme to them.
There is no reason to believe that 1 or even 2 of the 6 Elder Dragons would differ from the other 4 in these three points, especially since for Mordremoth the first is already confirmed, and third is highly probable.

Beyond those 3, there are differences. Jormag and Kralkatorrik corrupt environments. We’ve seen no sign of this from the other dragons. Primordus turns rocks into minions and, interestingly, his minions can product eggs. Also, none of his minions can communicate with non-minions. It’s quite possible that Mordremoth and Bubbles could have some unique characteristics to their minions that differ significantly from the other dragons.

From this, people are saying “Mordremoth was always with her, proof that sylvari were born dragon minions!” but that’s not what Vorpp is saying. All Vorpp is saying is at that specific time, Mordremoth’s influence was already tied to Scarlet in some ways, and that he theorizes that the Dream is involved.

That’s a very narrow interpretation. It could very well have been with her all along. There is no evidence that something “hopped on” to Scarlet just before she entered the machine. In fact, Vorpp believes that it is something that was walled off in Scarlet’s mind and is related to the Dream. This seems like something that was with Scarlet (and other Sylvari) for some time. Until evidence arises saying when Mordremoth or whatever it was entered Scarlet’s mind, it is reasonable to assume that it was with her anytime from then to her birth.

Ever heard of a red herring? ArenaNet has used them before, it wouldn’t be a shocker if they did this again. Nor would it be a shocker if they decided to say “it was Vorpp’s semi-educated guess, and not concrete proof” no different than them saying the History of Tyria was human legends and not the actual history of the world.

This is the very cherry-picking you are accusing arlowix of. It’s unfair to dismiss arguments in this way.

Do you have solid proof that there isn’t? Four out of four Elder Dragons who’s corruption we see is capable of corrupting both land and flesh.

Jormag or Kralkatorrik have a very distinct way of corrupting land. Other than creating minions from rocks and lava, Primordus doesn’t corrupt land in anyway similar to Jormag or Kralkatorrik. Zhaitan corrupts environments with something similar to miasma, but the land itself is unchanged. Zhaitan also doesn’t corrupt living things. They need to die first. In addition, you are asking him to prove a negative, which is impossible.

Please correct me if I am mistake on any of these points. I am not as well versed in the lore. I will also add that I am not convinced either that the Sylvari are dragon minions. However, I do not believe that there is enough evidence to say definitively that they are not.

LumAnth.5124:

DaShi, please do not make this worse by involving random personal issues. In fact, it makes you look lIke the Internet troll / bully.

Like you are doing here.

I’ve been a long time fan of GW lore ever since reading up my first article on the Guild Wars (1) wiki, Urgoz’s Warren, and loved lore, loved seeing the debates in the GW guru Lore section.
I’ve known (“lurked” LOL) some of Konig’s post in both GW wiki and Guru, because mostly, they were backed by proof, something that is severely lacking in some theories. By all means, speculate all you want in the Trading Post and make thousands, but as my English teacher would say, “Your thesis and theories are nothing without evidence”

There’s no problem when he backs his theories with proof. But theories themselves are not facts.

Your posts often come off as harsh and disrespectful.

To state it simply, the theory has not been debunked. It may have been to your satisfaction, but many of us have different opinions and disagree with several of your interpretations. It’s one thing to correct knowledge of the lore, it’s another to impose your interpretation of that lore.

As for your anger, I suggest you let it go and respect other people’s viewpoints. That are some very valid points in this thread and others that you have rudely dismissed.

In short, discussion of lore should be fun. You are sucking all the fun out of this forum and intimidating others from sharing their ideas.

Happens a lot to my sylvari necromancer.

It’s another RNG that favors the blessed few and leaves the rest of us behind.

Yes. You can go through it again to get the chest. After beating the holograms, a chest will appear in the middle of the room while Scarlet hobbles away.

You also didn’t miss much. About 3 obby shards, some greens, and a chance at a rare or better.

Invulnerability doesn’t work for me. She still knocks me around like a ping pong ball despite invulnerability and stability.

1/10 Definitely the worst of the LS. So many bugs. It’s like they took all the wrong lessons from the previous installments. 1. Zerg content. 2. Unskippable cutscenes. 3. RNG. 4. Bosses than are just hp tanks. 5. Story full of large plot holes. 6. Tedious achievements that promote selfish gameplay 7. Many gamebreaking bugs.

We got to fight her during the Jubilee. That was a more satisfying fight than this.

Zaxares.5419:

Don’t worry. If you miss her, there’s always the TA Aetherpath.

It’s too sad now.

style.6173:

Moa never really concerns me. Actually, I can’t remember the last time I died after someone used that skill on me.

Agreed. It’s only useful against certain types of players.

I’d rather have a personal story to fight the next dragon than a living story with limited time content.

I agree with pretty everything here. Also, not sure why we couldn’t just knock her out and interrogate her on our own terms.

Tried 3 and got nothing. They should tie the loot to completing the events, like they do with the large bosses in the open world. This is not fair to a lot of players who suffer enough from the immense disparities in drops.

I’m going to miss Scarlet. I wish we could have arrested her instead and have her rambling in a cell somewhere. It would have been fun to visit her. She wouldn’t be a major player in the LS anymore, but she could have offered some clues about the dragon for LS 2.

Menzies The Heretic.3415:

Please nerf this skill to the ground.

I was fighting a 1 v 1 when a glass mesmer came in and moa’d me straight away. Seriously, press to win button in this situation.

Because your build is not supposed to lose to mesmers?

Polla remains the darkest thing to come out of GW2.

Lambent.6375:

Remove the account bound status?

I’d like to buy them cheaply on the tp.

Me too. Others may get a good drop rate on them, but mine is terribly low.

Every class has a good chance against MMs. However, not every build does. And glass cannon builds have to be extremely careful because they won’t have a quick fight.

Mesmers can beat MMs because their illusions/shatters can make short work of the minions and a necro without minions doesn’t have enough damage to deal with the mesmer and her illusions.

Thieves have a little more difficult time. Offhand dagger thieves can Cloak and Dagger off of minions, but being in stealth isn’t safe for thieves against many MM necros. Once they hit stealth, most will hit unholy feast to stack retaliation and cripple the thief. Also, they will pop their bone minions. If they have death nova too, this will destroy most glass cannon thieves. Then there are those with staves. Thieves have a lot to worry about with necros in general. Thieves built in acrobatics instead of stealth will actually have a better chance.

Guardians and warriors have a really good chance against MMs because they can outlast them. Tanky guardians can usually kill the minions with their burning and retaliation and wear the necro down. Hammer guardians do even better. Warriors have a good mix of AoE, cc, and defense to outlast MMs too.

Elementalists need to be traited in water and go D/D to be truly effective against MMs. This allows them to strip off the MM’s cc quickly, destroy minions with AoE, heal rapidly, and keep the necro busy with their own cc.

Engineers are obviously strong against MMs with their intense AoE and ample supply of cc.

Rangers might actually be in the worst position against an MM. Even the spirit rangers have difficulty because minions frequently eat spirits. I play around with rangers more to see how they can overcome MMs better.

Kanenas.4906:

VaaCrow.3076:

Played mes exclusivley for almost 1 year, i only use moa on annoying thieves who spam d/p stealth, because they cant stealth as a moa and killing them when they are a helpless bird is priceless. Moa is a SITUATIONAL tool, it is not overpowerd, you can dodge it, block it, stability im 99% sure stops it, you have plenty of opportunities to stop yourself being moad, it even has a blatant cast animation, its not our fault if you’re too stupid to avoid it. and doesn’t need to be nerfed.
I nearly always run mass invis op, BUT when faced with a particularly annoying thief who abuses his ability to steatlh, or an annoying warrior, i slot in moa morph and do my upmost to destroy the turkey before it escapes.

You should save your tears to complain about real class balance issues such as the place of rangers and how they are compared to thief/warrior in pvp meta. This is a L2P issue. not a cry nerf cause it killed your op healing signet warrior issue.

This guy proves why Moa should be fixed. He just admits that the skill is a I WIN button. He slots and uses it for an easy win whenever he feels like he is gonna have a good fight.

He swaps skills based on the situation and you think that’s a problem? If it was an I win button, why not keep it all the time?

livlaender.8790:

for stealthed mesmers: if the phantasms/clones land a hit on the enemy the player gets revealed (exception block/invulnerability) (same on thieves shortbow nr4)

I agree with this one, except for deceptive evasion clones and decoy. Successful phantasm summoning should definitely break stealth, imo.

Bazzoong.7145:

^ Told you they want you to stand there and take their 1 spam to the face, if you do not they get “frustrated”.

Calling PU cheese with the current state of warriors and to a lesser extend guardians makes people look stupid, not just a little stupid but really stupid.

Stealth and invisibility is the only way to deal with focus fire and PU is the only reliable way for a mesmer to get not AoE spammed to bits even while invisible because of the really “cheesy” stuff.

People made the same complaints in GW1. Warriors frequently complained that caster classes actually had skills that helped them survive warriors’ high damage attacks. The majority of complaints here come from glass cannon players who expect to be able to kill everyone in a few seconds or engineers (the true bane of WvW) who think they are invincible. I don’t play PU, but I still get the same whinging about my mesmer from these same types of players. It doesn’t matter what defensive skills a caster class has, these people won’t accept it. Every singe mesmer defensive skill has been complained about in these forums. In their minds, other classes, especially casters, just aren’t supposed to beat theirs.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/balance/life-blast-x-6-17k-in-spvp/first

“I don’t like PU mesmers because I can’t button mash to beat them.”

I dislike this idea. I’ve already seen a few cases where people in the same guild get into Survival together and gang up on other players.

Maybe if there was a separate, team version only of this, it would work.

Also, if you are a glass-cannon berserker build, don’t expect to take out an mm easily. Most of them are tanky and can eat your bursts while shredding you with minion and auto-attacks. As Bhawb says, it takes patience to kill them, like any bunker build. So approach them that way, not as squishy spellcasters.

Specific Game Mode
PvE, but really any game mode that has rangers play with groups.

Proposal Overview

Change Point Blank Shot to Daze instead of Knockback. Increase range for greater functionality.

Goal of Proposal

This skill offers very little to no benefits to groups and frequently hinders other players functionality. As a Knockback, its range is too far and its recharge is too short allowing it to be spammed safely and conveniently from range. However, it is not safe or convenient to other players in the ranger’s group. It knocks opponents out of their melee range frequently caused allied attacks to miss and either rescuing opponents or putting melee allies in greater danger. Thus, it serves little purpose in group play and causes frustration to those who have rangers in their groups.

The proposed changes will keep/improve the functionality of the skill as an interrupt without making the ranger a nuisance to group play.

Proposal Functionality

“Daze your foe with a point-blank shot. The closer they are, the longer the duration of daze.”

Activation Time: No Change
Recharge Time: Increased by 5 to 20s

Damage: No change
Daze 1s for range greater than 900
Daze 2s for range between 300-900
Daze 2s, Stun 1s for range less than 300
Combo Finisher: No Change
Range: Increase by 300 to 1200

Associated Risks

Basically, this is a longer range/duration version of Concussion Shot. The addition of Stun at 1s is less useful in PvE, because most monsters behave as if stunned when dazed anyway. Also, a 2 second daze might still be overpowered at 20 second recharge, but trying to keep this skill as powerful as before while getting rid of its annoyance factor to allies.

Azkal.9340:

Exosferatu.2961:

My theory is that Scarlet will be killed by whatever comes out under the old Lion’s Arch.

Agree! Scarlet will wake the dragon, dragon says thank you and begins it’s new life with some lovely salad. I also like that because I don’t think any of the characters should kill her.

Or more awesome: Scarlet kills Kasmeer. Marjory in a fit of rage grabs Scarlet and they both fall off the drill into the depths and die. But Anet prob don’t have the balls for that.

To be fair, Kasmeer already doomed them all to die by saying what a wonderful group of friends they have formed.

Huh, I thought those ultimate bags only gave out several greens and a rare.