They make outfits because it’s drastically easier to build an outfit than it is to build 18 armor pieces.
Some people are willing to pay more for more customizable gear. Anet should explore that space more, considering it’s their revenue.
You assume that they didn’t already crunch those numbers and do such a market analysis behind the scenes.
~EW
Where did they get those numbers they crunched if they did?
See, I don’t believe Anet has really done that. I believe they offered Armors, they didn’t do well, so of all the solutions, they picked offering Outfits instead, without a whole bunch of work to see if it was the best or even a good solution.
Why would you believe a multi-million dollar corporation would try to guess what’s profitable? They have stated time and again that armors are by far and away the most expensive asset to design and that outfits are much, much cheaper to make.
In particular, outfits are easier because five designs cover all possible configurations, whereas armor pieces need to matched against every possible other piece of armor. Outfits have fewer dye channels (four total, compared to 16-32 per armor set).
You’re not saying anything here I’m not aware of, yet I still want Anet to explore more customizable clothing options in the gemstore because I see elements I like, but not willing to purchase because it’s so limiting.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Imagine that … you win because you know how and when to counter your opponents effects. Sounds almost like skill determines how well you do as opposed to what is meta and not. Such a novel approach to playing a game. Oh wait, no it’s not .. .that’s how any good game works. I guess that’s why those guys are pro’s and mostly everyone else isn’t.
All that might be true. It has little to do with the problem that I and others see with outfits. People complaining that they can buy stuff in the gemstore is a rather stupid reason to stop offering things in the gemstore to be quite frank. The complaint wasn’t that they offered it in the gemstore, it was that it was in the gemstore ONLY. Exploring the space of more customizable skins in the gemstore could actually HELP deal with that.
Also, If someone is buying something transmutable, it’s also ridiculous to complain about the fact it’s transmutable. It’s also much less of a problem now that we get those transmutations as game rewards.
Regardless, those two points have little to do with asking Anet to explore the space of more customization on skins they offer in the Gemstore and I attest they should do so to optimize revenue.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Cyninja – I mean ascended armor does provide a stat boost however small. Saying it isn’t worth it is a matter of perspective, but mathematically wrong…
Actually if you look at the cost to stats ratio of Exotic and Ascended gear, I think it’s not mathematically wrong at all. In fact, it’s even more evident that Ascended gear is not really worth the cost. It’s a luxury and luxuries are only ‘worth it’ if the cost doesn’t mean much to you.
Sure, but I view 600g +- chests as worth it for the gain in stats as many players do. It’s all perspective and really not up to the player to dictate what groups require. What you are arguing has been discussed above. What I was saying is the gain in stats with always be mathematically beneficial for a group that is progressing.
Yes, but that’s not an objective measure of worth; cost/stats ratio is.
There is no objective measure of worth. Worth is subjective.
To someone with ten million gold a 3% increase in power for the cost of a measly ten thousand gold, a negligible one tenth of one percent of his total wealth, might very well be worth it. Others might consider ten grand for such a minor power increase to be excessive. Yet another millionaire might decide that he did not work his tail off earning such a fortune only to waste it on gear that provides a measly 3% power increase.
Completely subjective.
OK but the ratio of cost to stats increase is itself an objective measure. Don’t get lost in the pedantic arguments of what it’s called, then turn around and claim it’s a subjective measure.
Cyninja – I mean ascended armor does provide a stat boost however small. Saying it isn’t worth it is a matter of perspective, but mathematically wrong…
Actually if you look at the cost to stats ratio of Exotic and Ascended gear, I think it’s not mathematically wrong at all. In fact, it’s even more evident that Ascended gear is not really worth the cost. It’s a luxury and luxuries are only ‘worth it’ if the cost doesn’t mean much to you.
Sure, but I view 600g +- chests as worth it for the gain in stats as many players do. It’s all perspective and really not up to the player to dictate what groups require. What you are arguing has been discussed above. What I was saying is the gain in stats with always be mathematically beneficial for a group that is progressing.
Yes, but that’s not an objective measure of worth; cost/stats ratio is.
Only if you view worth as purely a monetary thing. Which is the point that was being made, is that worth is not strictly a monetary thing.
Sure, but if you’re not just here to argue with me over definitions, then even you can see that cost/stats ratio is an objective measure for armor.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
That doesn’t seem unrealistic to you?
~EW
Only if they revealed how much they sold and the profits they made from them.
Sure … my point isn’t that we don’t get armor sets in the gemstore. It’s that Anet only offers the minimum of customization on the clothing skins they offer.
You assume that they didn’t already crunch those numbers and do such a market analysis behind the scenes.
~EW
Where did they get those numbers they crunched if they did?
See, I don’t believe Anet has really done that. I believe they offered Armors, they didn’t do well, so of all the solutions, they picked offering Outfits instead, without a whole bunch of work to see if it was the best or even a good solution.
This whole game is based on mix/matching armor parts to get a look you like. Outfits don’t really work there. You’re right, I don’t have data to suggest something else is better than outfits over full armor sets or even what that something else would be if it did exist, but I do know I’m not buying more outfits because I can’t customize them enough and I think Anet could experiment more too see at what pricepoints people would pay for more ability to optimize skins. My proposal is just one experiment out of many they could use to see what their optimal ROI would be for skins. In fact, I think they would be terrible not to … it’s much of what the revenue for this game is based on; skins and convenience items.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Dear ANet
Do you realize that everytime we get an outfit, you are missing out on making sales in the Gemstore? How you ask? Because outfits are all or nothing: I have to either decide to purchase and wear the whole outfit or simply not buy it at all if there is a certain part of it I don’t like.
Do you realize I would pay MORE for an Armor set that I could mix and match with other parts because I believe it has more value to me that an outfit? Do you understand that I’m not alone when I say “Oh man, that’s a great helmet on that outfit, but the rest is ugly” and that prevents me from buying?
Just to make sure this doesn’t get dismissed as just a rant, I propose a solution: Do an experiment but offering the SAME skin in both an outfit and an armor, adjusting the price of each for what is necessary for projected revenues. See what happens. Make me eat words if I’m wrong. I will do so willingly.
Guess we don’t need to nerf Revenant now we don’t have stacked PVP teams of them ><
Cyninja – I mean ascended armor does provide a stat boost however small. Saying it isn’t worth it is a matter of perspective, but mathematically wrong…
Actually if you look at the cost to stats ratio of Exotic and Ascended gear, I think it’s not mathematically wrong at all. In fact, it’s even more evident that Ascended gear is not really worth the cost. It’s a luxury and luxuries are only ‘worth it’ if the cost doesn’t mean much to you.
Sure, but I view 600g +- chests as worth it for the gain in stats as many players do. It’s all perspective and really not up to the player to dictate what groups require. What you are arguing has been discussed above. What I was saying is the gain in stats with always be mathematically beneficial for a group that is progressing.
Yes, but that’s not an objective measure of worth; cost/stats ratio is.
And that’s the thing: Anet sold the idea, I didn’t come up with it, it did exist and they nerfed it.
Now wait a second here. It’s presumptuous to say Anet ever sold the idea that any class can be anything you want it to be; I never got the impression that the game concept for classes was that open and free; It’s never been that in fact.
What we actually have is what I have seen them promote and provide though; ‘play how you want’ combined with class choices and intentional class restrictions. This has always been a consistency with the game.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Cyninja – I mean ascended armor does provide a stat boost however small. Saying it isn’t worth it is a matter of perspective, but mathematically wrong…
Actually if you look at the cost to stats ratio of Exotic and Ascended gear, I think it’s not mathematically wrong at all. In fact, it’s even more evident that Ascended gear is not really worth the cost. It’s a luxury and luxuries are only ‘worth it’ if the cost doesn’t mean much to you.
Here is my Necromancer. Nothing special, but I like her.
Where did you get this armor? I can’t find it on any gallery.
I can see that view but I find that interpretation limited. I regard class swapping as a mechanism that allows me to play how I want. For instance, I like condition builds and my favourite right now is Necro … if Anet decided to severely nerf conditions on necro to the point where I was dissatisfied with the degradation, I would just swap to another class that satisfied my desire to play with conditions. I’m still playing the way I want when I do that. One could argue that’s also an efficiency based choice, but I feel I’m still playing how I want which is what I think is important.
My thinking obviously differs from yours and I know why now: I believe that we have access to various classes because they are designed to play numerous roles, but not designed to do any role of a player’s choosing. So if I want to play conditions, I have choice of profession, but not ALL professions.
Based on your reasoning for how the mantra is violated, I can see your desire is to choose a role and expect the class to meet your expectations for performance. That goes against what is typically seen in MMO’s. What’s most odd with your statement is that of all the MMO’s I’ve ever played, the class system in GW2 is the MOST versatile I’ve encountered for this and allows most classes to be capable of any role, even though there are still gaps where some classes do poorly for.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Frankly, the whole concept behind Legendary Armor seems flawed to being with. The stats swapping is useless if it’s indeed its selling point. I would hate to see if the armor had visual effects like the weapons do. What a mess that would be.
Actually how the math works is important. If a specific gear load increase is 2-3% in damage for the whole group, but a group is able to beat the enrage timer by much larger percentage than 2-3% of the actual time before enrage … well, that’s a really good case for not needing an unnecessary specific gear load. The reward is only for beating the timer, no extra for how much you beat it by.
That’s fair and it’s as we understand games to be, Obviously that was a degradation from a change you weren’t willing to accept but on the other hand, I don’t think Engi was designed to be only a healing power class as you built them. Therefore, my response to you would be … time to experiment withother facets that make engi interesting to play … or if healing is your thing, move on to a better healer class. You don’t even have to be meta to do that.
When is the drop-off point past which statements are no longer something you can base expectations on?
Five years? One year? One day? The very moment the statement doesn’t match reality anymore?
The development lifetime of the average MMO lasts what? 15 years if you’re lucky? So where does 5 place you? Would it be all that unreasonable for a game dev to say “oh this policy isn’t working” after a few years and make an adjustment or abandon it altogether?
These policies are driven by the BUSINESS reality in the current time, not what happened years ago while the game wasn’t even released. In my estimation, it worked for a few years while they were ‘tidying up’ from the initial release when everyone was new, joining. Now we have a game of experienced players. Situation is much different. I don’t think it’s unreasonable the policy changes.
Yeah, that statement probably made LOTS of sense when it was made. Does it make sense now or in the future? Do you see a game existing for another 5 -10 years releasing content simply for the story and new skins with no gear progression locked behind some content? That’s a hard sell if I’m a shareholder and also if I’m a gamer looking to do more than log in for a daily reward.
Fact is that (I will say it for the 3rd time), holding on to someone’s statement as gospel truth for the lifetime of the game makes no sense, so when can you drop it? I would say it’s when you recognize the game has matured from infancy, or any other stage where the policy seems restricting to the growth of the game. It’s not a compelling argument to say “hey, here is your etched in stone statement about endgame gear from 5 years ago, now follow it”.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Those statements are 5 years old and I think it’s presumptuous to think they are still accurate statements. Again, everyone here is so focused on a statement from 5 years ago, completely ignoring how the game has developed. I mean, if people don’t see what’s wrong with clinging to a statement made on an MMO from 5 years ago and how a game evolves, I question the experience those people have with MMO’s in the first place.
To be clear, I don’t have a problem with a policy that makes skins or stats exclusive to instanced content; I believe that whatever is exclusive to a raid should not be necessary to access/succeed in content OUTSIDE of it; so far GW2 delivers on that.
My problem is that if someone doesn’t agree with either policy position, they just quote a 5 year old statement that may not be relevant to this game as it evolves and make pedantic arguments over it. It’s REALLY easy to turn you head away from that if your Anet.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
But that doesn’t explain what to do if the way you want to play is specifically nerfed or terminated.
That’s a pretty vague question and it’s not black or white; it’s a personal choice. I’ve always found builds that allow me to play how I want, it’s just a question of how effective those builds are and if I’m willing to adjust my tolerance for a degradation when there is a change.
I can’t imagine what ’way’s to play would be or have been terminated. Changes get made, builds go up or down in effectiveness because of them but the way you have been playing still exists. I can’t think of a build that has been terminated because of a change. You’re going to have to be more specific for a discussion.
There are always options that aren’t the meta … that’s my whole point. It’s not as if there is only one build … AND it’s always the meta. OR … there is the meta and every other build is some sorry fraction of performance compared to it. It’s simply not possible with all the combos of skills, weapons, etc… If you opt towards optimal builds, they you already decided you don’t care what you like, unless you get lucky and optimal and what you like = the same build.
Personally, if all the builds you like have been ‘removed’, time to move to another profession or another game. To be quite frank, I think that’s a rather sensationalist way to describe some changes and I don’t see that happening in GW2 too often though I do know of some instances. Even so, those professions didn’t die … people that a reasonable know that MMO’s change all the time and it should affect how they play. Those people adapt.
Yup, it’s always going to boil down to what you like better: playing what you like or playing what is best. Could never figure out what why people play what is best even if they don’t like it.
Funny that people continue to bring up quotes from a man that has nothing to do with GW2 …. got to wonder how strong people’s anti-HoT/Raid gear arguments would be if he never made those quotes, making them completely academic.
The real question here isn’t even if there should be gear exclusive to a raid; it’s whether access to certain gears should be accessible through multiple methods and why … and so far, not any compelling reasons are being presented for why that should happen.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I guess the takeaway for me here is that players willing to adapt to whatever the devs throw at them area less likely to find themselves frustrated with game changes. That’s a universal MMO truth. I don’t see how the OP doesn’t avoid his frustration with the class based on this truth. Find a build he likes and play it; I think how optimal it is doesn’t enter the equation. If someone relegates themselves to optimal, then it’s only reasonable they recognize that what is optimal and what they like to play don’t necessarily coincide.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
That doesn’t make GW2 unique though … the mechanics of every MMO is set on the dev-side, yet there are other MMO’s don’t make their stat variations scale by efficiency on the player side.
Let me put another way; Take your Husk with high toughness as our working example. I don’t think devs introducing such an NPC to the game forces players to work against the design when they consider how to make a build. For me its the difference between micro and macro.
The high-toughness Husk is a micro impact and wouldn’t cause me to reconsider my build. My power build might be less effective against a mob like that, but it’s not made irrelevant. Other builds might be neutral or even boosted by such a mob. The time it would take to swap to an optimized build for that mob is not worth the difference in time killing with an optimalvs. non-optimal build.
But husks don’t live alone in HoT … they live with other NPC’s with different properties that have found new ways to screw over our builds .. and yet we still don’t go around swapping builds at every encounter. So if I have ‘Obtena Guardian Build #1.4" and I like it, and it works for me, I’m using it, regardless of the encounters.
The bold part is the macro consideration … When I first went to HoT, I sucked because I was still playing like it was OW Core. Sure I tweaked by build a little, but it was how I played that was most changed by those dev-side changes. My build still wasn’t rendered obsolete. Now that I’ve elited all 9 classes, I’m convinced that other than 1 or two classes, it’s not the build that get’s trashed because of dev-side changed, it’s the way someone plays.
So all this is just a long way to say; take whatever build you want and learn to play it. yes, it might be non-optimal and yes, you might have to swap a skill or a weapon in some more extreme changes, but you absolutely can play a build or at least some variation of some build that you already enjoy playing, even as devs make their changes.
That doesn’t make sense to me … NPC’s that have specific traits that deter certain builds/stats (like in your example for husks with high toughness) doesn’t mean players can’t play the way they want.
If a group of players WANTS to play Nomad’s in a 50 fractal, they do it knowing it will take them longer than a highly-capable zerker group. For some people, that isn’t a problem, clearly based on their desire to use Nomads in the first place. I think you have it backwards. No dev-side behaviour has been so extreme that it prevents players from playing how they want. If anything, it creates situations where players SHOULD explore alternatives to their playstyles and as players, we shouldn’t discourage that because it’s a good thing. It keeps things fresh.
This occurs because people accept the idea that they need optimal builds to succeed in GW2. They buy right into it for traits and stats so of course they are going to buy into it for Ascended as well.
Just because you can play passively as a Scrapper and it’s boring doesn’t mean you have to. I can do the same with hammer Gaurdian and #1 all day, but I don’t or any other class for that matter. It’s not the class that makes it boring, it’s the way you play it.
Massively multiplayer means that more people are playing the game online in same time! Group playing means you play same content tasks with other players.
What are you implying here? I hope it’s not that group playing doesn’t belong in an MMO.
Anet explained the lack of some passive RS buff for Guardians WAY back in Ready UP 13 I think. Go watch it.
The “entitlement” argument is ridiculous.
It’s actually not, because that’s exactly what you call people who don’t respect the rules and mechanics of the game that they think they should always win which leads them to believe it should be changed so they can win it.
Not sure if people realize this but … you don’t always win games, even ones you pay to get access to.
I don’t recall Anet EVER saying you won’t have to raid to get BiS gear.
I don’ recall ever seeing Idaho, which doesn’t change the fact that it exists.
OK let me rephrase then: Anet never said that to players.
Raids are dungeons/dungeons are raids; It’s just a label. You ALWAYS needed to do them to get BiS gear.
This is a falsehood. A complete fabrication. It would be accurate if you exchanged the word ALWAYS with NEVER. I really hope that claim represents ignorance of the facts on your part rather than intentional dishonesty.
Oh I get it … you’re one of those people that argue the details and miss the meaning. OK, that’s fair enough. You get BiS gear from doing ‘activities’, regardless of what you want to call them and Anet never gave anyone the impression you shouldn’t have to do these ‘activities’ to get BiS gear either. I could be more vague, but then you would just troll me because I’m being to vague /sigh.
Its not about minor details, or being vague, or even, “activities.” You claimed that getting BiS had ALWAYs required doing dungeons. That is a complete fabrication. It is the opposite of the truth of the matter.
Anet has stated that Raids are endgame. They have set raids up to be played post level 80. Anet stated that BiS would be earned by level 80, not post level 80. They have since changed that intention (understandably so even if not everyone likes the change), but it was very specifically indicated that BiS gear would not be earned doing post level 80 content. You may not have seen the articles where the statements were made, but that does not mean that they were not made.
I’m sure this has already been covered, but why does raid gear invalidate the promise that “BiS” gear would be earned by level 80 and not afterward? You can obtain gear with equal stats. I don’t see where they promised that all gear would be available prior to or upon reaching level 80. Simply that the gear you obtain after reaching level 80 will not have a statistical advantage. Is that not the case with legendary items?
Further, are there not legendary items available via sources other than raids? If ANet delivered a paid expansion that only made these items available via raiding then I agree that they should provide new legendary items for non-raiders. And why would anyone have a problem with that in a game like this?
But honestly, I am so confused by this thread. It seems simple, as an outsider (new player). With no statistical advantage to gear, it’s all down to fancy skins and bragging rights, right? So why can’t raiders have their fancy skins and bragging rights, and everyone else can have theirs, too? Are resources so short that we need to fight about skins? That gem store seems pretty full of them! What’s the deal? I really don’t get it!
It’s confusing because people like to interpret the different things Anet says in convoluted ways, then use that against them to pretend they were cheated, lied to, etc… in order to make some wild claims for restitution or compensation. It’s rather ridiculous.
No one needs to even consider what was said by Anet; it’s a simple matter of looking at the reality of the game we play and see how that compares to the ideals that Anet desires for the game. I personally don’t see a disconnect between those two things; game is very casaul-focused and still provides genuine rewards for people who want to ‘push it’. The heart of the thread is really about who should get legendary armor; the answer is simple: The people that can complete the content to get it. Mature, responsible gamers already know that.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I know what the thread is about and I’ve read the whole thing as a matter of fact. Me responding to your posts IS relevant to the thread because raids are related to HoT and it’s not unreasonable to address people’s specific posts in it, especially when they are highly questionable and suspect … you DO know how the forums work (that’s not a question, but more of a reminder).
let me remind you that it is YOU who brought up how you felt cheated by HoT, so if you’re going to accuse someone of being off topic due to talking about HoT and not raids, have a chance to review your own threads first and foremost before trying to accuse others.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
No one is saying you can’t come on the forums but if you’re going make false claims about how Anet “changed content” on you to cheat you from your money, l will certainly have no problem asking you to clarify what you think was changed in either of the pieces of content you purchased that give you the IMPRESSION you were cheated from something.
I don’t think it’s too much to ask that people behave like mature and responsible adults; if you think you were cheated, you’re going to need to explain it because from where I sit, Anet was VERY forthcoming with alerting players to the differences in difficulty between HoT and Core and at no time during HoT release was either of those things changed in difficulty to ‘trick’ players like you seem to be implying.
I mean, if your asking Anet to fix something because you’re disgruntled based on your own kittenumptions or lack of due diligence for purchasing HoT … I think you’re going to be even more disappointed than you are now. I doubt those are good reasons for them to reconsider how they have implemented the game, regardless of how many people feel the same way.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
To change the nature of the product after people have put thousands of hours and in some cases a lot of money in to it just seems dishonest to me.4k hrs played £4000+ uk spent on gems 166 mastery points,hive master and golden child titles 44k ley line crystals and similar amounts of other useless currencies.What sort of company takes that sort of time and monetary investment and turns round and changes everything? ANET
Before raids i could have the best gear now i cant.
£4000+ and 4k hrs for second rate gear.
This was already explained to you multiple times and everytime you choose to ignore it, I will gladly reiterate it to you: the nature of the product you purchased was not changed. Core did not change and neither did HoT. They might be different from each other, but they did not change. Furthermore, that difference was known to people before HoT was released. You purchased HoT and either 1) you ignored what you were told or 2) made assumptions about what it was. Either way, it’s your fault if HoT didn’t meet expectations you invented.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
That’s why this game is great … if you’re burnt out playing it for whatever reason, you can leave and not feel like you’ve wasted some money maintaining your access to it because of no monthly fee.
I’d like to know why ANET wants people acquiring gear they can’t use.
They don’t. Anet really doesn’t care if people acquire gear, whether they can use it or not.
The “entitlement” argument is ridiculous.
It’s actually not, because that’s exactly what you call people who don’t respect the rules and mechanics of the game that they think they should always win which leads them to believe it should be changed so they can win it.
Not sure if people realize this but … you don’t always win games, even ones you pay to get access to.
I don’t recall Anet EVER saying you won’t have to raid to get BiS gear.
I don’ recall ever seeing Idaho, which doesn’t change the fact that it exists.
OK let me rephrase then: Anet never said that to players.
Raids are dungeons/dungeons are raids; It’s just a label. You ALWAYS needed to do them to get BiS gear.
This is a falsehood. A complete fabrication. It would be accurate if you exchanged the word ALWAYS with NEVER. I really hope that claim represents ignorance of the facts on your part rather than intentional dishonesty.
Oh I get it … you’re one of those people that argue the details and miss the meaning. OK, that’s fair enough. You get BiS gear from doing ‘activities’, regardless of what you want to call them and Anet never gave anyone the impression you shouldn’t have to do these ‘activities’ to get BiS gear either. I could be more vague, but then you would just troll me because I’m being to vague /sigh.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
for the role that guardians need to play in this meta (decent/mediocre roamer mix between rev and thief) sword is absolutely the best weapon
Oh yes, I forgot … something is only relevant from the eyes of people who are at the top of the ladder. ><
Anyone estimating time need to implement anything in a game where they have no idea of what’s required is just being disingenuous to make their argument appealing … and it fools no one, especially the people who would actually need to implement said thing.
And I do think that makes the argument, because then all you’re missing is a skin. It’s ok to have skins tied to particular content.
I’m not saying that skins aren’t suitable as a reward here, or even make them exclusive to some kind of particular content. I don’t particularly disagree with anything you’ve said, other than you don’t consider Legendary BiS (if it’s not, then what is?)
My particular issue with threads like this is that people who make them do not respect the very things that make this a game; the rules, the mechanics and the winning condition. They simply desire to win and if they see the rules/mechanics are a roadblock to them, they don’t resign themselves to the fact that they can’t win the game, they take the route that they are entitled to the win (even if they don’t say it explicitly) which means that through some way, the rules and mechanics need to be changed.
This should not happen on a whim, but of course there are real business impacts so Anet should consider it, based on purely the rules/mechanics of the winning condition.
BUT … we already have ‘winners’ for raids … by a big margin too. So from that standpoint, I can’t be convinced that anyone else who is willing, can’t meet the winning conditions as well. Therefore, I see little incentive for Anet to reconsider the rules and mechanics that dictate the winning condition for raids.
Consider for a moment Anet’s decision to have an alternative rules/mechanic they introduced for Legendary Crafting. I believe that was based on an assessment of the old way because there was something lacking there for players (sense of achievement) and Anet has improved that; now we have two approaches. The same could happen in raids, but I don’t see anything lacking that would make Anet to conclude some alternative approach to get Legendary Armor.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I wouldn’t say sword is the best main hand weapon we have at all. It’s pretty crap other than #2. And yes, Sw/F is clunkly.
On the other hand, everything about Mace is win, you just have to build more around it’s abilities because it actually HAS Guardian-esque elements attached to it’s skills like symbol, blocking, etc…
I don’t get it … logical conclusion is that you like Necro more because of it’s skills, etc…. so play it. If you like Guardian more, get over “the other kids got better toys than me” syndrome. Don’t be one of these unhappy people that always wants to play optimal, because someone is always better than you are.
Some people enjoy the sound of their own voice .. or their fingers typing I guess.
None of the points the OP has presented can be absolutely attributed to the fact that Rev is OP. I’m more apt to think that it conscious strategy that these pro players played something that people aren’t as familiar with to throw off the other teams. #switchhitter
It’s always funny to see what little tidbits people will grasp onto to justify changing something they don’t like. Pros stacking a profession … that’s a new one. /puts in back pocket.
OK thread owner … Rev’s are OPed because they were stacked by pros in a tournament? Fine … what do you suggest get changed? Obviously you have many pages of ideas that are going to be easier to debate than arguing with you about some matter of opinion … WHAT YOU GOT?
Already stated previously so let’s work together to come up with a solution.
We would love to but it’s not going to happen if you leave us guessing what that OPed thing is that causes pro’s to stacking Rev in PVP. It’s nice that you have a hypothesis that Rev’s are OPed because of your observation that pros stack them in PVP … I agree. That still doesn’t get you anywhere to solving ’Rev’s are OP’ed" problem because you aren’t telling anyone the cause of the OPedness.
If you have come to the conclusion that Rev’s are OPed through a LOGICAL process, then you should be able to tell us what is it about Revs that is causing Pros to stack in PVP. This is what we need to know to help you come up with a solution. Otherwise, you just got a bunch of people looking clueless on the forum going “DURRR Rev’s OP but dunno why!” Show us the way please!
Please read the thread starting from page 1 again. This was covered and I asked a specific question.
I thank you ahead of time
No need to thank me … I read it. I’m with you … Rev’s OPed … just tell us what the OPe’d part about stacking Revs in PVP is and we can talk about a solution. I didn’t see anything specific we could really talk sensibly about. Covering all bases efficiently isn’t really what makes Rev’s OPed … other classes cover all bases pretty efficiently as well … they weren’t stacked in PVP to this extent ever!
Even if you don’t want to tell us, surely you have some ideas of your own about how to fix this problem we can talk about. Otherwise, you claim Rev is OP, don’t say what makes them that, then you want everyone BUT you to come up with solutions to Rev being OP … looks, smells and sounds like a troll … probably is.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I’m not really willing to get into a pedantic argument here because I don’t see how that makes or breaks any of the discussion here but to give you my personal opinion:
Legendary gear is BiS, not only because it has the highest stats in game, tied with Ascended, but because (if I understand correctly) it will have the ability to swap stats on the fly as well. That added function does make it better than Ascended, even if that function has questionable usefulness. If it doesn’t have that ability, then I’m inclined to agree with you … seems like it’s just a skin, which is rather questionable as a reward from the hardest content in the game.
Even if a person doesn’t consider Legendary gear BiS … Anet STILL never said players wouldn’t have to raid to get BiS gear.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I don’t recall Anet EVER saying you won’t have to raid to get BiS gear.
To paraphrase: ‘Explorable dungeons are the Raids in GW2.’ At the time that was the plan, the dungeon gear, while BiS, was not the only way to get such stats.
Then there was, “Everyone, including casual gamers, by level 80 should have the best statistical loot in the game. We want everyone on an equal power base. The rare stuff becomes the really awesome looking armours.”
You can see both the paraphrase and the quote here: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-09-27-guild-wars-2-preview?page=3
So, BiS shouldn’t really be the issue, raids or not, because ANet basically did create a game where you did not have to do raids or their equivalent for BiS gear. You’d be better off focusing your disdain on the idea that apart from a marginally valuable stat switch feature (given the relative ease of changing Asc. stats), Legendaries are not better than stuff available via crafting, much as was the case with explorable dungeons. The Eurogamer article, as much as it has been quoted to protest Asc., in that light becomes a defense for placing Leg. Armor in raids. It is, after all, rare and desired almost entirely for its looks.
I don’t see how any of that invalidates. Raids are dungeons/dungeons are raids; It’s just a label. You ALWAYS needed to do them to get BiS gear.
“best statistical gear” is just a fancy way of saying “From a performance evaluations, statistically, the gear you can get at level 80 doesn’t differ from BiS”. Unfortunately, developers should never speak in absolutes so there is an exception to this; Ascended weapons. Otherwise, I don’t see too much of a problem here; I think it was always the intention to make people do teamed, instanced content for most of the BiS stuff … it would be kind of stupid for them not to.
And yet crafting remains a viable means to obtain BiS stats, with only a few prefixes gated, and only at the moment.
I don’t get your point … Anet never said players wouldn’t have to raid to get BiS gear. Not all BiS gear is obtainable by just crafting; many of the mats you need come from raiding. There is no contradiction between things people invent in their heads that Anet said and how the game is realized.
The bottomline here is simple … If you want legendary armor that bad you do what EVERYONE else needs to do to get it. No special snowflakes here.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I don’t recall Anet EVER saying you won’t have to raid to get BiS gear.
To paraphrase: ‘Explorable dungeons are the Raids in GW2.’ At the time that was the plan, the dungeon gear, while BiS, was not the only way to get such stats.
Then there was, “Everyone, including casual gamers, by level 80 should have the best statistical loot in the game. We want everyone on an equal power base. The rare stuff becomes the really awesome looking armours.”
You can see both the paraphrase and the quote here: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-09-27-guild-wars-2-preview?page=3
So, BiS shouldn’t really be the issue, raids or not, because ANet basically did create a game where you did not have to do raids or their equivalent for BiS gear. You’d be better off focusing your disdain on the idea that apart from a marginally valuable stat switch feature (given the relative ease of changing Asc. stats), Legendaries are not better than stuff available via crafting, much as was the case with explorable dungeons. The Eurogamer article, as much as it has been quoted to protest Asc., in that light becomes a defense for placing Leg. Armor in raids. It is, after all, rare and desired almost entirely for its looks.
I don’t see how any of that invalidates. Raids are dungeons/dungeons are raids; It’s just a label. You ALWAYS needed to do them to get BiS gear.
“best statistical gear” is just a fancy way of saying “From a performance evaluations, statistically, the gear you can get at level 80 doesn’t differ from BiS”. Unfortunately, developers should never speak in absolutes so there is an exception to this; Ascended weapons. Otherwise, I don’t see too much of a problem here; I think it was always the intention to make people do teamed, instanced content for most of the BiS stuff … it would be kind of stupid for them not to.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Some people enjoy the sound of their own voice .. or their fingers typing I guess.
None of the points the OP has presented can be absolutely attributed to the fact that Rev is OP. I’m more apt to think that it conscious strategy that these pro players played something that people aren’t as familiar with to throw off the other teams. #switchhitter
It’s always funny to see what little tidbits people will grasp onto to justify changing something they don’t like. Pros stacking a profession … that’s a new one. /puts in back pocket.
OK thread owner … Rev’s are OPed because they were stacked by pros in a tournament? Fine … what do you suggest get changed? Obviously you have many pages of ideas that are going to be easier to debate than arguing with you about some matter of opinion … WHAT YOU GOT?
Already stated previously so let’s work together to come up with a solution.
We would love to but it’s not going to happen if you leave us guessing what that OPed thing is that causes pro’s to stacking Rev in PVP. It’s nice that you have a hypothesis that Rev’s are OPed because of your observation that pros stack them in PVP … I agree. That still doesn’t get you anywhere to solving ’Rev’s are OP’ed" problem because you aren’t telling anyone the cause of the OPedness.
If you have come to the conclusion that Rev’s are OPed through a LOGICAL process, then you should be able to tell us what is it about Revs that is causing Pros to stack in PVP. This is what we need to know to help you come up with a solution. Otherwise, you just got a bunch of people looking clueless on the forum going “DURRR Rev’s OP but dunno why!” Show us the way please!
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Sure it was, you were discussing the rewards level. I suggested an amount.
But an unconstructive amount.
This should simply be analogous to dungeons. Easy mode dungeons aren’t done for loot, so I don’t think easy mode raids should be either. It’s a story thing.
Do you mean Story Mode? Nobody runs story mode more than once. It would not be worth them making a version of the raid that people would only run once. Having a reasonable level of reward gives people a reason to run it multiple times. People suggesting “zero reward” are just people who don’t want the mode to exist in the first place.
Yes I mean story mode. You put the cart before the horse my friend because there isn’t much support for making an easymode raid that you can get the same loot in the regular version.
Maybe I missed but, what kinds of rewards did you intend drop in this easymode raid? Certainly nothing equivalent to the regular version, which in that case would make me question the whole point of it.
For me, the only point of the easymode raid is to let people experience the story, not to reward them for being bad at the regular version of it.