Guild Wars 2

Here’s an idea, disable the combat speed nerf in PvP and W3. The mobs in W3 aren’t that combat influencial really. Most peeps just ignore them completely unless they are potential allies or a champ.

We put up a good fight for you BG guys at EB tonight, it was too much though. I don’t know how many bg zergs you guys had in a row, but it hurt. Hope we get a chance to return the favor.
Obsi – SoR

Stability doesn’t really help with immobilize, and rangers have very poor condition removal. In any case, why not simply remove that mechanic in W3? I mean no one stops to clear mobs there anyway, and they aren’t needed for any storyline narrative. It makes no sense in a competitive environment to have one class nerfed like that.

As a ranger, your pet can keep you in combat mode well after you’ve left the area. Even switching out pets doesn’t seem to help reliably. When outnumbered in W3, it doesn’t matter how big a headstart I have, I get caught everytime. Even using dodge-rolls, and a Horn/Rampage/Birdbuff/Horn speed buff combo that gives me almost 60 seconds of speed. Yet the whole time I’m barely moving because my pet hit someone a mile back.

For that matter, what’s the reason behind the combat speed-nerf anyway? I don’t really get it.

Thanks in advance, Obsi

Krosslite.1950:

Totally agree with OPs post.

Only read the first response and stopped. I hope someone explained what persistent means.

Having come from MUDs and played EQ for over 5 years. I still feel this is the first MMO that has returned to these root and I love it.
This to me is a welcome change and I am staying here for as long as possible

The topic was Guild Wars, not Guild Wars 2. Not sure if you knew that, your post seemed to indicate that. Hope that helps.

Velkyn.5168:

DegoLocc.5976:

None of thee mentioned above are personal insults or attacks.

I don’t really want to step into the crossfire, but maybe somebody here could do with some reading up on communication styles. Personally I’d recommend Marshall Rosenberg.

Lol, true. We’ve already got a warning anyway. :’(

I’ll shut up now.

I don’t mean to be offensive, but why do you keep using that phrase “ad hominem?” Why not just say “Don’t get personal please.”?

@Hydrophidian

It’s not the only sticking point, I had two others:

1) It’s not “massively-multiplayer,” meaning the multiplayer function is not on a massive scale. You can’t separate those two words in this definition.

2) Common Sense. I could probably find a point to make Paine’s pamphlet pertinent to this poignant palaver, but I’m too pooped.

Yay aliteration!

I think the OP just had too many players use the “GW1 wasn’t an MMO!” line to justify arguments about gear-progression. The problem is, one doesn’t really have anything to do with the other. So those other players remarks have somehow tainted this argument. I thought we were talking about the definition of an MMO. Whatever outside influence brought the topic to the forums is kind of irrelevant to this discussion.

I was just going by the wiki(bleh!) definition of the word, and its supposed origins. If someone can come up with a more valid definition I’m all ears. I’ll rehash an analogy I’ve already used to describe why I don’t think GW1 counts as an MMO:

If you put a drop of tequila in a glass of margarita mix, almost no one would call that a margarita.

Not the bartender, not the waitress, and certainly not the customers. But there’s always that one guy at the end of the bar that says, “TECHNICALLY THAT COUNTS!”

Use your head peoples.

@lagrangeify

y u so reesnibble!!

I’m onto you! You and your rational discourse and calm demeanor. How dare you soil these forums with reasoned compromise! Begone foul beast!!

Cereally though, I can totally agree to that.

Yeah, I’m not big on dungeons, so I may not get this monthly done. But so what? It’s just an achievement, and not a permanent one at that. Obviously they included the Fractals as a way to advertise them.

Just don’t do the monthly, problem solved. =D

What does gear-progression have to do with the definition of an MMO? It’s a gating mechanic that has no bearing on genre conventions. It’s also very sinister in its treatment of the player base but that’s another story.

Also,
I’ll quote from wiki since that’s where everyone is going, but I hate doing it:

“A persistent world (PW) is a virtual world that continues to exist even after a user exits it, and to whose state user-made changes are to some extent permanent.”

None of the towns in GW1 have anything that can be changed in them, they are static. By the first assertion, GW1 only counts as an MMO in the towns. And by the second assertion, GW1 doesn’t count at all.

We could be here all day hand-picking quotes to support out arguments. Or we could try common sense. It makes no sense to call GW1 an MMO when you think about how that game plays out. No sense.

On a side note, what’s with the WoW assumptions towards people who think like this? I don’t get it, I’ve never played WoW, I’m a GW1 fan and proud of it. /shrugs

Besides, given the bad rep MMO’s get lately, I would think the GW1 crowd would want to distance itself from the genre. I’d be throwin the “coorpg” label all over the place.

I don’t know what gamers you’ve talked to, but almost everyone I’ve met, even in gw1, didn’t think it was an mmo.

And you can argue all you want about the towns being dynamic and such(I assume you are referring to holiday events), but your picking at straws. The scope of it actually does matter. You’re kidding yourself if you think a persistent dot on an entire instanced map means the whole thing can be described sufficiently by the dot.

You can put a Benz hood ornament on your Camry, but it doesn’t make it a Mercedes.

Not sure why this makes players so angry, it’s a simple formula. I’ll just rehash my last discussion about this to save time.

It’s massive. It’s multiplayer. But it’s not massively multiplayer. By your own definition it’s not an mmo because it’s not a persistent world. Persistent, in a game context, means the game world persists after you log off. gw1 doesn’t do that because there’s no need to…it’s only you and your party in the zone.

Besides, that little “ly” at the end of massive may make it look like an adverb, but it’s really an adjective describing “multiplayer.” And if something is massively multiplayer, then it has hundreds of people inhabiting the same world at the same time.

Now if you want to point to the towns in gw1 as your evidence, well that is your prerogative. I doubt any gamer worth his weight in Doritoes would count 1% of the game, and a non-combat part at that, as evidence for this.

Not sure why this keeps coming up. I mean, I left gw1 because I wanted to play an mmo.

True story: I typed in “coorpg” in my search engine and the first hit was an article about how gw1 isn’t an mmo. Typing in “guild wars mmo” just gave a ton of stuff on this game. :/

Personally for W3, I think a 1 to 2 minute timer on death before you get automatically ported to the closest waypoint would be nice. Preferably 1 minute.

The way it is now only contributes to the zerging because if you are in the larger group, it doesn’t really matter if you go down…someone will rez you.

Hmm, I wonder if the server differences matter with this. Isn’t the Southsun Shores area a cross-server zone with shards?

@Chaosbroker

If that were true, the humans would have followed suit with technology. I mean, they were at war with those Charr that whole time, and for a long time before that in the guild wars while the Charr were idle. And the simple act of throwing off the shackles of an evil diety shouldn’t make a race 10 times smarter than they were. ANet needed a steampunk race to fill that niche in the lore and the Charr were it.

@GADefense Not sure what WoW has to do with it, I’ve never played it. Cities XL I had to look up…seems to be an mmo to me at first glance, everyone is in the same world at the same time I think. Airplane games…um depends.

@Gehena As for GW1 I liked parts of it more too, like the arena pvp and skill choice. Heroes were nice too, great for soloing whatever you wanted. Same world ya, but not the same game by any means. Ironically, the lore of GW2 is what gets me down but that’s another story. I will say GW1 is a very unique and engaging game, and it has one of the strongest communities I’ve ever seen.

/shrugs

Hey I’m just going by the standard definition of an mmo, how the game industry defines mmo’s, how many, many players define mmo’s, and how game sites describe mmo’s.

An mmo isn’t this broad category or games that includes anything people can play on the internet with someone else. It has certain characteristics. I guarantee if you asked a gw1 dev about it they would say, “no, not really.” Why not really and not a flat out no? Because it can seem like one in some ways, and it’s unique—there’s not much to compare it to.

Frankly I’m surprised there’s so much defense for it, it’s obvious to most people.

We weren’t discussing the rpg part of mmo, leave it off if you want.

Thousands of players do inhabit the same virtual world, you’re right. But not at the same time. It’s a thousand copies of the same world for each player, not 1 world they are all in. And that, even though you may think it a minor detail, is actually the thing that makes it massively. If you don’t get that part then the argument is moot.

Call it an MO if you like, but it’s not an MMO.

Hydrophidian.4319:

Obsidian.1328:

Doesn’t the “MM” of MMO mean “massively online?” I was under the impression that meant open-zones, not instanced ones. How is it massively-online without that? Is that wrong?

Massively-Multiplayer Online. Many MMOs use a mix of both open world and instances, Guild Wars included.

Also, “persistent” means the things you change in the world stay changed after you log off.

Persistent means persistent: the environment persists after you exit. Guild Wars has a persistent environment:

“Thousands of players inhabit the same virtual world. Players can meet new friends in gathering places like towns and outposts where they form parties and go questing with them.”

But, again, as Crater has pointed out, this nitpicking of semantics is ultimately irrelevant. Use whatever label you like, it doesn’t change the underlying dynamics of the argument, regardless of how sincerely the OP may wish it did.

Lol, “…the environment persists” silliness. No, it means the environment persists with any changes made to it regardless of whether or not you are online. Persistent doesn’t mean constant.

And those thousands of players don’t inhabit the same world at the same time. That’s the whole point. Yeah, GW2 has overflow servers, but that’s only because of performance issues. GW1’s world is specifically the opposite.

And yeah, almost all use a mix of both, it’s what is the predominant one that matters. GW1 towns were the only part that were persistent. Calling that “massively” is like putting a drop of tequila in a glass of margarita mix and calling it a margarita.

A quote from the GW1 wikia:
A competitive online role-playing game (CORPG) differs from the standard massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) in that they are less focused on the massive group experience. All outside areas are instanced, meaning that a player and his group are the only ones there, so that every player gets his or her own unique version of the game’s story…

Also, “persistent” means the things you change in the world stay changed after you log off. If you logged out of GW1, the zone you just cleared would be full again instantly. If you restore a contested waypoint in GW2, it stays clear until another dynamic event triggers something to challenge it.

Crater.1625:

What bearing does the ratio of instanced to open zones have on any of the arguments that are currently taking place?

Hmm, I would think it has a lot of bearing. Doesn’t the “MM” of MMO mean “massively multiplayer?” I was under the impression that meant open-zones, not instanced ones. How is it massively-multiplayer without that? Is that wrong?

Edit note: I wrote “massively-online” instead of “massively-multiplayer” at first draft, sorry for the confusion.

@Electro

I think you are correct about how it’s not our prerogative as players to determine the nature of the professions we are playing. We didn’t design the game after all, ANet did and they can do what the bloody well please I suppose.

However, I would still counter that there is something called “common expectations.” It would be strange, for instance, if Elementalists could wear heavy armor and use hammers(extreme case). And there was some chatter about how Warriors have good ranged abilities in this game. They aren’t complaining, or course, because it provides much larger adaptability for that class.

As to your break-down of class mechanics: if you took away every classes’ special mechanic, all of them, except the ranger, would still deal good damage. Ele’s, War’s, Thieves, etc would still hit hard and be comparable on a dps level. Rangers wouldn’t. That the pet damage is unreliable in 2 specific areas of the game(WvW and dungeons) I think is the main issue here. Especially since those are considered 2 of the major end-content areas. Leveling to 80 through PvE only you wouldn’t notice this difference in dps very much.

Am I wrong on that?

^ Hmm.

And I’m just playing devils advocate here(I would agree with some of what you say), but should those conventions/expectations be something ANet should adhere to? Or should game company’s not feel any restraint about redesigning classes to suit their particular game’s mechanics?

IMO, they don’t adhere to what most people would consider a ranger. I think the name is what threw so many people off with this profession. People thought…awesome archer with decent melee skills, a few sneak & trap skills, and some pet following you around if you want. What they got was a broken beastmaster class that can’t do much of anything without the pet around.

Just change the name.

Personally, I think ANet had decided to make Rangers inseparable to their pets a long time ago and just haven’t worked out all the kinks yet. I kind of wish they had made this more clear at the beginning.

I get the feeling many players had the following thought in the first week: “Huh…I guess you can’t play this class without your pets. Wierd. Oh well, extra damage can’t hurt, right?”

Given the recent discussion on pets and the pro’s and con’s(mostly con’s admittedly) of that mechanic, I thought I would throw out this very basic question.

If the pet AI attack issues were fixed, was it a good choice for ANet to tie so much of the ranger class to pets and pet mechanics?

And why or why not?

Also…

Kodan: Eskimo
Tengu: Native American

and…

Quaggan: Sesame Street
Skritt: Beavis & Butthead
Hylek: “Chet” from the movie Weird Science

Dee Jay

Ya I’d say it’s a mindset, but not really “involvement” per say. I mean you can be a hard-core RPGer and still be considered a casual. Hard-cores are content devourers, pvp fanatics, and dungeon/raid hounds. Casuals just enjoy the game for what it is, not what they can get out of it. You can be passionate about a game and not be hard-core about it.

Perhaps I’m using too wide a definition. :/ Maybe we should start finding a term for those in-betweeners too.

Xenon.4537:

Casuals are fickle, whimsical, flaky, unreliable, annoying little kittenhats. It breaks my heart that developers are forced to hand tailor games to suit the casuals more and more every year just because they outnumber hardcore players. Casuals love to argue that they deserve all the accommodations because they are the majority. They don’t give two kittens if this means the game becomes cheapened, watered down, or dumbed down.

Here’s a thought: If you are too casual to keep up with any particular game, why don’t you go find a more casual game and stop trying to make all of the hardcore games less hardcore?

Since when was GW2 ever described by the devs as being a hard-core game? By my reckoning, we took your advice and came to this game because of it.

Anyway Naryu, being a casual isn’t determined by time spent in-game or on the forums. It’s a state of mind. I could spend 20 hours a day in the game and still be casual. It has nothing to do with time expenditure.

Nayru.4537:

Fritz.5026:

Nayru.4537:

Fritz.5026:

Dee Jay.2460:

Fritz.5026:

Dee Jay.2460:

A few notes about “Casual Players”.

1. Casual Players don’t read the forums. They take the game as it is and have little interest or involvement in what goes on around it.

2. They don’t generally feel entitled to anything. They will do content that they can, and ignore stuff they cannot do.

3. They aren’t very vocal, considering their portion of the player base.

4. Time spent playing isn’t actually all that an important indicator for player mentality.
_________________________________________

People who post on the forums are naturally more engaged in the game than most players. They care more and are more invested. Hence they are more opinionated too.

I would say you are wrong on nearly all counts. your notes and definitions are your opinions, and i would personally disagree.

just because someone is not hardcore does not automatically mean they dont care about the game or wont post on the forums. thats just being ridiculous.

But it isn’t. People like to title themselves “casual” because it makes them appear more balanced.

The vast, vast majority of the game’s player base simply does not care about what goes on around the game. They don’t care about content they can’t beat and don’t care about items they can’t reach.

I assume you are an “involved Gamer” who likes to think they are “casual” but the fact that you are posting here and discussing the game proves that you are 10 times more involved with it than your average player.

again, i would disagree with you on pretty much every single thing you said.

if a person puts time into something, if they are casual or hardcore, they will generally care about that thing. saying otherwise is just pretending human nature doesnt exist.

a casual person may post on the forums more than they actually play because they have time at work and constant access to a computer, but cannot actually play games. pretending forum posting is some type of indication of being hardcore is just ignorant.

i cannot find anything logical you base your opinions on except that you just want it to be that way in your own mind.

I’m certain casual players dont post on the forums while at work, I don’t think you know what you’re talking about.

i suppose it is completely unheard of for people who work at computers all day to get bored and post on forums to kill time.

i mean thats just crazy talk right there.

Yeah it is, you’re talking about casual gamers. They don’t do that. They play 5 hours a week. They don’t roam game forums all day at work.

lol ^ this guy.

I’m a casual gamer and I do exactly what he said. I am on the forums more than I play the game, while at work. I play a couple of hours a night, I just now got to 80 on 1 character(all the others are below 20). Some people just like to a) go to the forums to stay up with what’s going on in the game, and have the time to do so and b) don’t have a lot of time to actually play the game.

I love the game, but I know I’ll be playing it for years so I don’t care how long it takes me to get top gear or even what I get done on a certain day. Hell, I can spend a whole night jabbing to other players sometimes or just trying to climb some mountain that isn’t supposed to be climbable. The forums are great for someone like me, a casual, and it doesn’t automatically make you not so by posting in here.

That’s just silly.

I cheated and bumped myself 0.0

Nageth.5648:

Someone needs to calculate the size of the planet and how fast it is rotating.

LOL

It is too fast though really. I mean sometimes I get up to use the bathroom and it’s night already. Then I’ll go have a smoke later and it’s day again. I’m aging so fast in this game!!!

Cereally though, why not an 8 or 16 hour day instead? That way it won’t the be the same time of day in-game as it is in real life everyday. And peeps woudn’t be forced to play at the same game-time every night or whatever.

Makes sense to me. /shrugs

Donut.6914:

Actually the human male’s have a pretty good run animation compared to the rest of the races. I’m a runner myself and I can say that Human males are the only race/gender that have good running form. They lean over in the front which increases speed and they bend their knees appropriately to help run for longer distances. Compare it to something like the Sylvari females who cross their arms (which greatly decreases speed) and flail their limbs about like a newborn. The only thing I don’t like about the Human male running animation is how tight they keep their arms/elbows. It looks very uncomfortable and I always want my character to relax his arms like the Sylvari male does.

Whuuuuutt?

Female Sylvari’s have excellent running form in their legs and torso. The arms are a bit off I’ll grant you that, but that natural stride and high kick is beautiful. Human males have a much smaller stride comparatively, almost no kick, and an odd rocking motion.

I’m a runner too, sir, and I say the Sylvari female stride is much better. I challenge you to a run-off!! My lithe Sylvari gazelle vs your clodhopper man!!

Dustfinger.9510:

Obsidian.1328:

I don’t see the point in trying to justify the reasoning behind it through lore or magic. It’s just a simple game mechanic to make the experience more enjoyable and convenient.

I can only speak for myself but I enjoy finding the line between what’s lore and what’s game mechanics.

Oh. Erm…is this a nerdy lore kinda thing? Because I can uderstand that lol. I thought you guys were actually trying to find honest ways to justify why it’s not real. :P

Sorry about that.

Defrost.1679:

pierwola.9602:

*add show/hide name button to the game
*remove red color from enemies armor

No. Period.
It ~ will ~ never ~ happen.

People will be tracked/hunted/griefed by name or armour dye set up. Which is EXACTLY what Anet does not want.

Why do you care how the enemy views you? Come on, say the truth :-) … YOU want to see people’s name/armour colour, for griefing. That’s the ONLY reason anyone would ever care about how the enemy see’s them.

Oh that’s silly. I’m a lousy pvper who loses a 1v1 fight 9/10 times. But I think this would be great for competition. Knowing who your up against changes your play-style immensely, and that’s not a bad thing. I view pvp just like I view RL sports, and how many sports out there have the word “player” written on the back of their jerseys?

PvP is not PvE, it is a highly competitive form of gaming that mimicks RL sports in many ways(Esport?). “Griefing” really came about from open world PvP where PvEer’s had no choice on the matter and got ganked even if they hated PvP. And I solidly believe in keeping them separate. But having specific places for competition(PvP/W3) there’s no reason why you shouldn’t know who you are up against. I would say area chat and whispers is not a good idea at all given the personal nature of it and the spying factor, but simple names so you can identify other players you have rivalries with is fine.

Being singled out by a particular player would only make me want to get better and rise to his/her challenge, isn’t that what competition is all about? As it is now, everyone is just a faceless mob…almost like a PvE mob it seems. Where’s the fun in that?

I’m a 90% casual player atm, but even I don’t think “casual” and “pvp” should be in the same sentence. Thoughts?

p.s. ~and for those who say “just go do sPvP” that’s a decent point, but there’s little “epic” factor in arena PvP. I mean, one of the biggest selling points of W3 is its grand scale and potential for epic battles between armies of players(minus the bugs of course). Anyone else feel this way?

Why does this need explained? Video games aren’t supposed to adhere to the laws of physics or even basic math. It’s silly to try and force every real-world mechanic on this. I mean, how come our characters don’t eat, or sleep, or use the bathroom?? How can we carry 10 stacks or iron ore in our backpack(with no change in encumbrance) and then magically send all of that to our bank, do our packpacks have tiny wormholes in them?

Some games out there try to do this with varying degrees of success, but I don’t see the point in trying to justify the reasoning behind it through lore or magic. It’s just a simple game mechanic to make the experience more enjoyable and convenient.

Eh…aside from any pc issues, why not just plan that load-time into your schedule instead of letting it frustrate you? I mean you could get home from school/work, log in the game, then go shower or eat while it loads. It’s odd it takes that long, but surely there are a few things you can take care of in your daily life. :P

Almost afraid to pitch in here. o.o

I read somewhere(can’t verify) that originally DR was supposed to reflect the 3 major human cultures. By major I mean Tyria, Elona, and Cantha. Sub-cultures like Kurzicks or Vabbi I’m not speaking of at the moment. At any rate, somewhere along the development line, this “3-race representation,” for lack of a better phrase, got phased out.

Why? Well, it seems obvious to me they wanted you to think of the races as Charr, Asura, Norn, Sylvari, and Human. And not Elonian, Canthan, etc.

The human differentiation got indistinctive and subsumed in GW2 in favor of the other “species.” Good or bad…I dunno. But it seems plain to me that’s what happened.

“These graphics are horrible!”

“Guys, we’ll be fine…I got Prayer to Dwayna in my skillbar!”

Yeah no need to justify “guns should only shoot 6 times before reloading” or anything. This isn’t one of those FPS RPG’s where you’re running around counting bullets. It’s easier for me to think of this game as 5 different games that met in some weird game twilight zone.

Classic-fantasy humans, steam-punk tank cats, mad-scientist gnomes, ale-guzzling vikings, and some english-gentrified garden elves all mingling together on a borrowed world to kill a lich dragon.

It’s got something for everyone!!

draxynnic.3719:

Obsidian.1328:

@draxynnic

Nice post, I’m glad you pointed out the inherent flaws in wiki, and all wiki’s for that matter. And I appreciate your scholarly take on lore gathering. My question is, since we know the wiki to be unreliable, what sources, other than playing the actual game, can we look to for legitimate source material?

Lore documents such as the GW1 Manuscripts, the Movement of the World, An Empire Divided, and the Ecology of the Charr – most if not all of these are available on the wiki copied verbatim from the original sources, and those are valid since they’re pristine copies of things that ArenaNet lore people actually wrote. Note that they should still be taken with a grain of salt, however, since they represent what people in the world believe, and said people may be wrong (the Prophecies Manuscripts is especially suspect in this regard, as it’s been proven wrong in a number of places).

There are also a lot of interviews spread across the internet, and the odd lore article (although, unfortunately, one of the ones that gave a lot of information about the war between Abaddon and the original gods has been lost), which do have information directly from.the developers.

Ok, so in the case of the Prophesies Manuscripts you mentioned, you would rather take as fact something written by a later author on an editable format, then something written by the earliest writer on an uneditable format. That makes no sense.

At this point I don’t really care what the subject is, but you’ve got to be kidding yourself if you think that just because ANet hires an author 5 years or so after the fact and something he writes about the first game somehow supercedes lore that was already there?? They didn’t have the same writers when the original game came out. It would be silly to assume anything written by a GW2 author takes precedence over a GW1 author, just like it would be silly to think GW1 lore about Zhaitan or the Sylvari carries more weight than the modern lore. They didn’t know jack squat about the dragons back then because they didn’t care, it wasn’t essential to the game until Eye came out.

Every piece of lore by a writer isn’t automatically canon. You’re talking about a whole team of writers, and almost a decade time-span now since development started on Proph. There’s going to be inconsistencies all over the place. The lore writers probably don’t really care if every little thing adds up, hell some of them aren’t even with the company any more.

But I would certainly take the writing on the sleeve of a game box, or the words on a stone somewhere in the actual game, over an article posted online that is free for basically anyone to edit. If the later lore doesn’t match the stuff in the original game or in the original manuals, then it’s that writer’s fault for not researching enough and his lore should remain suspect.

If you asked a Chinese government official about Tiananmen Square, and he shows you a history book written in the late 90’s that says nothing about it, are you going to believe him? That’s an extreme case, but given the fact that lore from GW1 is one of the few things specifically mentioned by GW2 staff as something they plan to adhere to, it would be prudent to refer to the original lore as more valid than anything written later.

Althea was the mesmer trainer in pre. :’(

I swap birds for swiftness. 10 sec long aoe and 20 sec cooldown, not too bad. Attacking anything that has a health bar triggers it, so 1-shotting any whites like flies or rabbits will set it off.

As for weaps, I prefer sword/dagger. The “sticky” bug can be annoying but you get the timing down pretty good after awhile. And having 3 non-dodge evasions is nice.

Dante Dragonhand.2538:

ChillyChinaman.6057:

How about an ability that marks enemy player/mobs near the ranger with minimap pings? It could fit anywhere except marksmanship. You don’t actually see them, but you know they’re there and to be on your guard. The range should be kept relatively small, no more than 1500 or so, for the players sake and the enemy. You don’t want your whole map obscured by pulses and the enemy won’t want to be running with blinkers on them.

It should probably be at least a 20pt trait, probably 30pts. The ranger has 1500 detection radius and anyone ~300 away would benefit.

Nah, it didnt help in wow it wont help here. Even when we see thieves coming the problem is they can stealth constantly and kill in 2 seconds. I fought a thief the other day in a duel for 8 minutes and all he did was cloak and dagger me, literally. His damage was weak but he stayed stealth nearly the entire time and every time I started to get him low enough to kill he would stealth and come back full health, while I remained in combat, so I started running out of combat to heal. Eventually I quit caring and running and he won, but it took 8 minutes, against a thief with a useful build unless I can get lucky or time a perfect counter they kill me in short order. I started using GS tho for the thief counter, hopefully that helps.

Wait a sec, does stealth grant a thief “out of combat” status? Meaning he gets the non-combat heal-regen rate?

All they really need to do is rename the profession “Beastmaster.” Then everyone will say “oohhh…I get it now, it’s not a ranger.”

Also, we’re approaching 70k on this thread, keep it up!

Who is he?? 0.o

mak.9027:

I’m still playing it, though I’m losing interest cause enemies can always be revived.
Let me better explain, defeating someone should give you a strategical advance, that is that player should have to run back to the battle (adding waypoint automatically to the garrison would reduce annoyance here), so for a brief time you can use that advantage. This would greatly help small groups fighting large ones (otherwise the large group can alway revive their members killing any possible strategies you may have).
In WvW should really be possible to just revive downed players, not defeated ones.

I like this notion. It’s the strategic advantage of thinning out an enemy that is non-existent currently. Add to that downed or dead players often get used as rez traps, and dead players can effectively just stay there dead and scout the surrounding area indefinitely.
The large emphasis on anti-griefing is a very good thing, but PvP is a different ballgame than PvE. While I agree there should never be a gear advantage, player competition needs to feel visceral and personal. Not being able to see actual names is a big turn-off for me personally. Yeah you can do in sPvP, but those tiny maps just aren’t the same as the W3 zones.