(edited by Obtena.7952)
Well the F2P model is more profitable as I shown they could make profit without charging for the expansion probably even more. People keep telling me that Anet knows best but I doubt that so much.
According to the forum the sales will not be huge.Could be, but that’s not their business model so whatever you think you have shown isn’t relevant. Anet knows enough to run a game for 3 years, and likely more than that … and that’s enough. If you doubt, you haven’t considered all the factors here; primarily the fact that real businesses like NCSoft are still behind the game.
Furthermore, if you think forums is an indicator of anything, I question your experience with MMO’s in general.
Then check reddit its the second most popular topic the first being about builds.
Here, let me repeat this replacing Forums wtih Reddit:
… if you think Reddit is an indicator of anything, I question your experience with MMO’s in general. I don’t believe a significant portion of the MMO people actual ‘play’ on the forum, reddit, whatever you can think of. Many people just play in game. In addition, people who are happy with the game will be less apt to make a post about it than someone who is not; therefore, you will see the majority of threads and posts being negative. The forum is biased this way. Think about it a minute.
I0 don’t even get the relevance of your anecdote about SWTOR; GW2 has always been F2P and better than how SWTOR does it now. GW2 didn’t have to be reborn to F2P to survive like SWTOR; it had a sound business model right out of the gate and will continue to do so because reasonable people understand how cheap it is to play and like the content, the mechanics, etc…
(edited by Obtena.7952)
In PvE, I would almost say drop zeal in favor of Hunter/Radiance/Virtues. Hunter and Radiance have a lot of synergy together through Spears of Justice, and the versatility of Virtues is too good to pass up. Sorry Zeal :\
Though if no utility was needed I could maybe see dropping virtues…maybe. The 15% from Big Game Hunter seems like a more reliable damage boost over something like Unscathed Contender.
Cover your ears zerkers … even better, if LB has decent weapon coefficients, you can probably have very good uptime on UC and BGH simultaneously, along with the Pure of Sight trait. Camping LB might be a thing, to the dismay of people that don’t like ranged campers.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Well the F2P model is more profitable as I shown they could make profit without charging for the expansion probably even more. People keep telling me that Anet knows best but I doubt that so much.
According to the forum the sales will not be huge.
Could be, but that’s not their business model so whatever you think you have shown isn’t relevant. Anet knows enough to run a game for 3 years, and likely more than that … and that’s enough. If you doubt, you haven’t considered all the factors here; primarily the fact that real businesses like NCSoft are still behind the game.
Furthermore, if you think forums is an indicator of anything, I question your experience with MMO’s in general.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
“multiple ways to decrease recharge”
besides the refresh on kill trait, VoJ is a 21 sec recharge when fully traited into Virtues.
for 1 blind and 4 secs of 1 stack burning, that is a really kittenty activation.
So what? I’m still right. You can trait to recharge on kill and you can get lowered recharge from Virtue line. Even if you do reduce recharge even more, you’re still going to complain about 1 blind and and 4 secs of 1 stack burning. Reduced recharge is a pretty lame idea considering that anyone who is activating it won’t care about reduced recharge when they get on kill.
You haven’t considered that activating VoJ is awesome for groups. Solo it’s not that great for the burning. With your team it could be ridiculous. This ‘problem’ isn’t any different than AOE … usually suck for single targets, amazing in zergs. You can’t balance that kind of effect with more frequent applications because it still sucks on single targets and is still amazing for zergs.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Imo the active needs to apply 3 stacks of burn instead of a single stack, but reducing the cooldown just de values the reset on kill trait, makes the class more unbalanced in 1v1 etc.
I like this idea but …
If we had that, we would be procing Inner Fire ALL the time. It’s too much with all the crit we already have in Rad and the Fury uptime is 80% of the ICD for it.
I don’t think the CD on VoJ should change either. There are already multiple ways to decrease recharge on this skill in two different traits.
Or they could add more stuff onto it to make it worth activating.
I’m not sure what Anet could add but I’ve always pushed for making the GM trait in Virtue benefit active VoJ. Doing something there could be a reasonable place to ‘fix’ this issue. Frankly, I don’t think activating VoJ has a problem. Getting a blind is sometimes a nice choice you get to make.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Valid choices were increased, worthless choices decreased. This is a good thing.
It wasn’t the trait change that made more “valid” choices, it was the change to conditions and how they are handled. They could’ve done that WITHOUT changing the trait system.
That being said the trait system change is PURELY about pvp 5 man group balancing. Period.
That might all be true, but that doesn’t change the point he’s making.
And please tell me which [viable] builds would see good use out of going full Radiance in its current state outside of Burn.
Lots of builds. Rad has only become better since the patch, not worse and it was a staple line prior to the patch as well.
The number of viable builds that exist using Radiance now isn’t going to go up by making a change to an Adept trait based on a single weapon, especially considering your whole argument is based on the fact that Radiance is a ‘bad’ traitline because it’s GM’s are not good.
The sword adept is inline with the other weapon-specific traits and probably one of the better ones as well. If the line is bad because GM traits aren’t good, wouldn’t it make more sense to address the GM traits instead?
Yeah, I believe the GM’s in Radiance aside from AW are absolute crap. That’s why I mentioned switching PI and Sword trait, or perhaps at this point a more 1-hander focused GM. I believe it’d be more appealing.
Admittedly, I think 2 of the GM’s in Rad are not very good, but I don’t see how any of the ideas you’ve presented fix that; swapping PI with sword trait to make 2 good GM traits is not better, it’s just the same … you still have the same bad traits, they are just spread out more.
Not saying I agree with the OP however it seems to me responses are unnecessarily unhelpful / unfriendly.
The way I read it, the OP would like more choice, as in far more choice. Any infringement of that warrants expressing some frustration. Also a good time to advocate for more of what you want…
As I say I don’t have a position on the OP. I would however say that we are the customers & should be asking for what we want. The OP was classier about that than the responses.
The response are re unnecessarily unhelpful / unfriendly because the OP isn’t asking for any help and seems that he’s complaining about a problem that doesn’t exist. It’s still play how you want; in fact, now that traits no longer hold stats, the design is even more flexible and friendly to using what ever build you see fit and having less angst from certain portion of the population.
You also still have choice. Less? Maybe, but from where I sit, it’s less but more meaningful instead of more and meaningless choice.
What they offer for a price and the price are different of course.
I feel for what I THINK is being offered, $50 is not unreasonable. Of course, until I play it, I won’t know definitely if the expansion was worth $50 to me but based on what I have experienced with the last 3 years, I think it will.
Pricing will NOT change because of player feedback on the forum because players do not understand the impacts of price changes on the company; it may change if they don’t sell enough copies. Shareholders do not respond well to that kind of whimsical corporate behaviour.
Just because your posts are not deleted does not mean Anet is not opposed to what you think. Our censorship in NA tends to be less strict as what may be experienced in Asia. Organizations are more tolerant of dissension.
You have no idea if a certain number of players in Asia is a hit for GW2 or not … maybe their target was much lower than they actually got. We don’t know and they aren’t going to tell us either. If the Asian release of GW2 couldn’t be sustained because of low population, it would have been shut down by now. Obviously that’s not the case yet. It’s quite irrelevant if GW2 only has a small fraction of the total Asian market. That’s not a measure of how that portion of it’s market contributes financially to the game. Maybe Asians spend more money in the gemstore than NA’s players… THAT’S what is relevant.
It’s way more complex than “Oh, we only got X million players in Asia … we fail”. That’s an overly simplistic view.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
If you owned a piece of Anet or were employed in their business development group, what you think might matter to them.
Let’s not be delusional here… you’re not here posting to enlighten Anet about their impending failure of the HoT release in Asia because of wrong pricing … you’re just a dude that simply wants it to be cheaper. So claiming their model is wrong is a little silly. According to you, half of their customers are in the Asian market so Asia has been good for Anet .. not by chance either.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
You’re points don’t seem relevant. The game is priced according to according to a business model. If the economic situation of any individual doesn’t allow them to play GW2, they don’t play it, regardless of the country they live in. If Anet’s model is correct, they have already priced the game according to the game’s current demographic, which would include the Asian markets as well as the NA ones. If they priced HoT at X dollars in Asia, it’s because they think it will sell for X dollars. Asian culture factors more into how the game is marketed, not to it’s price.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
These comparisons are really quite irrelevant and obviously cherrypicked to make the cases of the people presenting them. If pennies per hour of entertainment is too rich for people, then I have to question how they can afford to eat or pay rent.
If you don’t want to pay for the expansion, then don’t. It’s not necessary to justify on the forum why you won’t. If you can’t pay for the expansion, then you have larger life issues than access to it.
Let me tell you something about Asian culture they are people who do not move out of their parents house until they get married and they get married late. And that is mainly only for the second or third child if there is one and for girls. The first born will stay with his parents and his own family. Imagine this you can not feed yourself and pay rent by yourself but when there are 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 members living in the same home that is gonna be possible.
And you do not have larger life issues how its a issue when most live like you? Its only a issue when not being able to afford GW2 is the exception not the rule.
Edit to add things:
Prices for food and other necesities and some luxuries are way lower there so people can afford them with the paycheck they get there. 500 dollars a month in USA means you are poor and have issues 500 dollars a month in China means you are a well of middle class.I don’t think Asian culture or economic differences drives Anet’s decision to price their game … at a reasonable price point I might add. the fact is that the game is not made in Asia, so the business model that dictates it’s price is not relevant to what happens in Asia or what Asians think is expensive/cheap.
I am sure its made in Asia and around half of GW2 players are Asian.
I’m pretty sure it’s not: Anet’s corporate HQ address: 3180 139th Avenue SE, Suite 500, Bellevue WA 98005. If you check any of the job postings, it mentions all those positions are in the studio in Bellevue.
That’s not in Asia.
Furthermore, if as much as half of GW2’s population is Asian, living in Asia making Asia wages, then there really isn’t a problem with the price of the game for Asian gamers in the first place. Besides … saying $50 for GW2 is not reasonable for Asian market would imply that similar games in Asia, not made in Asia, are not priced in the same range? I say Bull on that.
Maybe if an MMO was developed in a sweat shop in Beijing, you could expect it to be $10, but this one isn’t. The price reflects the Standard of Living and business environment of where it’s made. If that’s to expensive for a country where SoL is much less or where cultural differences would make it not succeed, that’s too bad. Anet wouldn’t focus on those markets anyways. For instance, I don’t anticipate GW2 is making a big splash in Bangladesh and I doubt Anet puts Bangladesh on their radar either.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
These comparisons are really quite irrelevant and obviously cherrypicked to make the cases of the people presenting them. If pennies per hour of entertainment is too rich for people, then I have to question how they can afford to eat or pay rent.
If you don’t want to pay for the expansion, then don’t. It’s not necessary to justify on the forum why you won’t. If you can’t pay for the expansion, then you have larger life issues than access to it.
Let me tell you something about Asian culture they are people who do not move out of their parents house until they get married and they get married late. And that is mainly only for the second or third child if there is one and for girls. The first born will stay with his parents and his own family. Imagine this you can not feed yourself and pay rent by yourself but when there are 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 members living in the same home that is gonna be possible.
And you do not have larger life issues how its a issue when most live like you? Its only a issue when not being able to afford GW2 is the exception not the rule.
Edit to add things:
Prices for food and other necesities and some luxuries are way lower there so people can afford them with the paycheck they get there. 500 dollars a month in USA means you are poor and have issues 500 dollars a month in China means you are a well of middle class.
I don’t think Asian culture or economic differences drives Anet’s decision to price their game … at a reasonable price point I might add. the fact is that the game is not made in Asia, so the business model that dictates it’s price is not relevant to what happens in Asia or what Asians think is expensive/cheap.
here is my story … I’ve been playing computer games since the C64. Even as far back as then, games were priced in the $30-$50 range, depending on how many disks it was, etc… Even console games were around that price. MOST of those games don’t give the entertainment value that games do now.
$50 now is a joke to pay for a game and a person gets far more replay value than they ever did for that $50.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Don’t Worry. Anet has recognized the OP’ed condition meta, bugged traits, etc… Either it’s intended and people can stop complaining (but they wont) or it will be fixed and a more balanced state will exist. Frankly, I think everything has been pushed a little bit too far. I’m killing trash in 1 weapon rotation. Might as well just mail me random loot every day.
Please let me know what happens to my GW2 if i am unable to afford expansion pack but wish to carry on playing GW2
I can’t believe that this expansion is pricing players out of the game. This game is truly becoming an art for elitists. Not just in price but in in- game politics too.
My heart simply saddens the more I learn about Heart of Thorns, as these thorns have truly scratched this gaming community. This will become a thorn in everyone’s side.
This is ridiculous … $50 has been a ‘pretty standard price for gaming since as far back as I can remember; the fact that gaming exists for decades indicates $50 is not an excessive or unreasonable price. If people are priced out of gaming because of $50, they need to re-evaluate there financial priorities. $50 is not a price point for ’elitists’.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
These comparisons are really quite irrelevant and obviously cherrypicked to make the cases of the people presenting them. If pennies per hour of entertainment is too rich for people, then I have to question how they can afford to eat or pay rent.
If you don’t want to pay for the expansion, then don’t. It’s not necessary to justify on the forum why you won’t. If you can’t pay for the expansion, then you have larger life issues than access to it.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
And please tell me which [viable] builds would see good use out of going full Radiance in its current state outside of Burn.
Lots of builds. Rad has only become better since the patch, not worse and it was a staple line prior to the patch as well.
The number of viable builds that exist using Radiance now isn’t going to go up by making a change to an Adept trait based on a single weapon, especially considering your whole argument is based on the fact that Radiance is a ‘bad’ traitline because it’s GM’s are not good.
The sword adept is inline with the other weapon-specific traits and probably one of the better ones as well. If the line is bad because GM traits aren’t good, wouldn’t it make more sense to address the GM traits instead?
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I could be changed but your statement that it has no real use for most builds is not credible. Additionally, how does buffing a weapon specific trait make Radiance a more useful traitline for more builds? I don’t see how it does.
It seems you’re more wanting sword to be better and looking for a reason to have it buffed.
If Radiance should be changed, I can’t see it being done because it has no real use for most builds.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
It might seem weak now but remember, these changes are in concert with HoT. We have an idea what is planned for DH spec. Throwing a whole bunch of burning stacks on VoJ would break with some of the things we know are inc.
I want to clarify that I am not “envious” about ppl that want to spend money like this, I just think that a price should be fair.
That’s a pretty interesting customer model you have come up with there. What in your mind, determines a ‘fair’ price for the expansion and furthermore, what information do you have that allows you to determine that it’s not? Promise I won’t roll my eyes or laugh when you give an answer.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
So.
This is a supposed picture of the back cover of the HoT box (it is from a well trusted if not the most trusted online retailer in my country).
No mention on it of new PvE maps, “challenging group content”, PvP or WvW. If this cover is real then… this won’t end well.
It’s sad that people think such a link is a comprehensive description of what HoT offers because it’s not.
You implied it … otherwise you wouldn’t be complaining that there is no worthwhile adept traits in that line for you unless you have a Mace. This isn’t different than we had before; I had to take Radiance traits that weren’t good for me when I used hammer in PVE before the patch. This isn’t a new issue, it’s just a different form of it because trait restructuring. If Anet didn’t see fit to ‘fix’ this after a whole trait restructure, sort of makes me think it’s intended to work this way. It makes people think about what they do in their build and why they do it and how the choices they make impact their play. From my perspective, that’s a smart thing to do. Not everything in this game needs to be so dumbed down; there is enough of that going on as it is.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
There is nothing new here to complain about … we have always had traits aimed at specific weapons. If you took those lines and didn’t use those weapons, same as before. Patch hasn’t changed anything in that respect.
True, but not true. But previously we did more other choices. Did you look at the new adepts for Honor? mace, falling damage and revival traits and nothing else. They are not exactly something you would pick previously, no? So the patch did change in that respect: less other choices. Tell me, if you don’t use mace but need to take honor line, which other adept trait that you would use?
Not every trait spread is going to yeild you optimal results … just like before the patch. Nothing new here.
There is nothing new here to complain about … we have always had traits aimed at specific weapons. If you took those lines and didn’t use those weapons, same as before. Patch hasn’t changed anything in that respect.
It’s interesting people question if it’s worth $50 … considering the hundreds or even thousands of hours they get from playing the game. The price per hour of this kind of entertainment is actually ridiculously cheap compared to lots of other entertaining hobbies you could be doing.
No, $50 is not much to pay, even if it’s just ‘one map, one new profession’, like someone people are proclaiming.
$50 is not much to pay?
A player posted this:
So what? That has nothing to do with my argument; I don’t play whatever that other game is and it’s not related to GW2.
Again, calculate how much you pay per hour for this game. It’s CENT’S. Are you trying to suggest that paying Cents/hour is too expensive and entertainment cost? I beg to differ.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
It’s interesting people question if it’s worth $50 … considering the hundreds or even thousands of hours they get from playing the game. The price per hour of this kind of entertainment is actually ridiculously cheap compared to lots of other entertaining hobbies you could be doing.
No, $50 is not much to pay, even if it’s just ‘one map, one new profession’, like someone people are proclaiming.
Under contract ArenaNet is offering Core + Expansion to every purchaser and only delivering Expansion to existing users.
Actually existing users can get exactly the same thing offered to first time buyers. Both get a new account with both core content and HoT included. The existing user, of course, has the option to forgo, at their discretion, the new account in favor of linking to an existing account.
I wouldn’t expect many existing users to choose not to link accounts, but the option to have exactly the same as the first time buyer is there.
Good point.
Although, to be fair to some of those criticizing the pricing, this still means that veterans aren’t offered anything for their years of loyalty. (Well, ‘nothing’ aside from a great game that has given them hundreds or thousands of hours of entertainment, which is probably how NCSOFT and most other game publishers would think of it.)
Why do I keep seeing this argument? Veterans should NOT be offered anything for years of loyalty. This game doesn’t work on that model; it’s not sub based or pay as you go. Someone that plays 5 minutes has as much impact as someone that player 5 years. If there is any patronage (and I don’t think there should be), it’s to the people that buy gems.
First thing … you’re proposing the same build for wvw/PVE and PVP? NO build you’re going to propose will work well for all three of those simultaneously.
How about this?
- Shield of Absorption cooldown goes from 30s to 24s baseline.
- Shield of Judgement cooldown goes from 25s to 20s baseline.
Added to the release notes maintained in General Discussion.
Edit: For clarification, the shield recharge trait is still there on top of this. It brings the cooldowns from 24>19s, and 20>16s.
I’m going to have a go at you a little here because I don’t feel you have taken the time or effort necessary to address shield properly. I expect better. Your suggestion is not well-thought out and I will even go as far as to say not even well-intentioned; I feel like we are getting a CD reduction just to placate us.
If you are serious about addressing shield, go back and think about what kind of weapon it should be and if it accomplishes that under the current parameters of everything else that is happening. If you don’t have the time to do that properly before the next patch, then forget about your reduced CD idea and come up with something better for the NEXT patch cycle.
We have had 3 years to figure out what doesn’t work on the shield. I feel the posters in this thread have correctly expressed what is wrong with shield. Start from any of those and see if they match what kind of weapon you want shield to be.
ive been using GS Mace/Focus for solo PVE in ORR and Silverwastes for some time now and its pretty good currently. Seems like it will be even better next week.
Mace is one of the better (or perhaps the best) solo PVE setup for farming trash in zones like that. I won’t be surprised if stuff is going to die before a full AA rotation on Mace after the patch.
RIP PVE Guards … funny joke. If people don’t like the changes, they should just say so instead of making sensational, nonsense statements.
Guardians are meant for back field defense.
No, they aren’t and Anet has told us as much. Even if Guardians WERE back field defense, then 90% of our toolset makes no sense to me, including shield.
That’s only true if someone is making their build to consider a very specific team makeup so to say it’s not offering anything desirable to a PVE Guardian isn’t not completely true.
Considering burning now stacks in intensity and you can run Cavalier and STILL get very high crit rate with Radiance, I would say it has a massive appeal to PVE Guardians. Until the theory guys work it through, I don’t think we can dismiss Radiance just yet.
Whatever happens, please do NOT add a block to sheild. We already have that in Focus and it still wouldn’t make Shield any more of an attractive weapon over Focus. It would also be OP’ed to be swapping between two offhand blocker weapons while both their cooldown traits are in the same line.
We aren’t getting a Focus that applies protect. It’s a trait that we can CHOOSE if we want it. That’s a VERY different thing. Putting a melee blocker on Shield is NOT going to make it a more used practical weapon in any aspect of the game as long as we got access to a blind AND a 3 shot blocker on Focus. It would also be extremely OP to swap from Focus to a Shield with a melee blocker, especially considering BOTH offhand cooldowns are in the same traitline. It’s ridiculous to propose such a thing.
Let me ask this: If PVE is all about damage, then what sensible change could possibly be made with shield to make it useful for PVE and compete with the other offhand options? It’s clearly more suitable for PVP applications. It’s silly to even think they should change it to accommodate people that want it for PVE when it’s clearly not for that.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I’m not going anywhere. Just because you don’t agree with me or care about what I say doesn’t mean I need your permission to post. A reduction of 5 seconds on those skills is significant, even if you want to downplay it to make a case for what you think shield should be.
We aren’t getting a shield that blocks melee because we already have an offhand that does that … quite awesomely I might add. Therefore, if your suggestion to make shield ‘practical’ is a melee blocker, it’s a bad one because unless it’s better than Focus 5, no one will use it.
I don’t need strawmans … your suggestion makes no sense all on its own. Last thing we need is Focus part 2 with just a different name that we can swap to with both weapons having CD reduction traits in the same line. Not OP at all.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
CD was always an issue since the beginning of the game! I don’t imagine this stuff!
It’s a lame reason but I don’t think shield is going to get alot of super good effects as long as it’s buffing defense. It’s there passively, it’s skills are probably not going to get too flashy or over the top.
None of this QQ is new and the reasons for it are still silly. In a game where PVE is balanced around Green/Yellow gear, it’s frankly quite dumb to complain that the gear two levels above THAT balancing point is getting a buff. Carry on.
None of your derision is new and the reason for it is still silly. In a game featuring a steady character power progression it’s frankly quite dumb to expect people to swallow a sudden spike right at the end of the curve or be satisfied with never completing that progression. Carry on.
It would be dumb to expect that people swallow a sudden spike, but this isn’t a spike and the armor is still not needed for playing the game. In addition, if people haven’t ‘rushed’ to complete their ascended armor in the last 1.5 years they have had to do so, what the hell do they care all the sudden now when the game isn’t balanced around it in the first place? First world made up problems. No problem … I’m poised to take people’s money if they still think they ‘need’ ascended armor.
One thing is for certain. Anet do know how to reward people for keeping up and sticking to the game.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I don’t see an issue with 5 but 4 has a problem with it’s geometry; we are front line players so applying protection to players in a wave IN FRONT of you is nonsense. As it stands, 4 seems like a damage button and not a very good one at that.
Still doesn’t fix the problem with shield…
Which is what? AFAIK, the primary problem with shield was the CD’s. Reduction of the CD’s fixes yes? The offhand traits in Valor look REALLY attractive at that point.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
You’re talking about Kindred Zeal combined with AW? I will admit that I haven’t done any math with the new condition conversions and stat changes to calculate absolute numbers but I think you have made the numbers seem more significant than they are.
KD gives a Condi damage buff based on 10% of power. That’s not a whole lot if you look at what that means in real burning damage. The difference between 3 and 30 for actual damage increase is not a deal breaker considering people have HP in the range of 7000 and up.
Besides, is that difference in damage not offset by what you might get from choosing another line? I think it’s hard to say it’s not until you play it. Forest vs. the tress thing here.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I don’t see how a sword user boned if they don’t use signets; Amplified Wrath and Radiant Power have excellent synergy and it’s very easy to imagine a build criting and burning it’s way around using sword … and that’s just done in a single trait line to achieve that. There are two more to polish that kind of a build off.
I don’t see why anyone would want to do Zeal with a sword. If I was sword in PVP, I would be thinking something along this:
(edited by Obtena.7952)
If the question is about balance of signet/crit build, I don’t think Perfect Inscriptions really unbalances such a build. That trait is just kind of there. I don’t think it has the same impact on the game as Monk’s Focus.
Obtena: I’m absolutely happy that you see these changes as a challenge for us. Like ANET sees everything and they measured every options and they brought up these changes so we all get happy as the whole community and not just the guardian players… Fine…
Do you have any good answer why Shield is untouched? Just curious….
My option is: They don’t give a kitty!
:D
I think you’re right … if Anet thinks it’s how they want it to work, why would they change it?
Nothing needs to be in the GM slot to support crits in Radiance; this line is ALREADY stupid with all the crits it so freely hands out. I’m a little disappointed it’s so strong in crits and little else considering the lines no longer have stats attached to them.
We waited a year for them to address certain issues but nothing was addressed at all to help either spec be viable or needed in a composition, but haven’t gotten anything at all.
That’s not a reasonable expectation. If you wish to be continually disappointed, then continue to expect fixes to things that no one has committed to fixing or may not even be considered a problem to the devs.
A shadow step on our contemplation would solve a lot of issues actually for many reasons you can’t seem to comprehend. Explaining it is meaningless.
Perhaps, but this isn’t “Build-a-Profession” so imagining what would ‘solve’ some particular issue isn’t relevant. Having a procing Aegis every 1/4 second would solve a lot of issues too, but that’s not going to happen either. Not because it’s unreasonable but because what I think doesn’t actually matter in the design.
Yes but having that shadow step which cleanses condies and heals would solve one core issue of guardian unlike having aegis every 1 sec. And if they didn’t want us to engage then they need to give us better tools to sustain ourselves while not disengaging, which they fail to do.
No argument from me … yes having that would solve something. I just don’t see how it’s relevant to the discussion here. It is actually intended that professions have deficiencies, like not disengaging easily, or an I WIN button that heals, cleanses and ports. I would also argue that having Aegis every fraction of a second helps solve the most important issue of all … being killed.
If you want to be more tanky and sustain, you can build for it. If you aren’t capable of playing a build that’s offensive and doing that, it’s what you should think about doing. Anet doesn’t need to implement anything there if they actually want players to have that freedom to choose builds that suit their play style/capability.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Not a huge loss considering there are wasted traits right now if you use specific weapons with certain lines. This isn’t new.
While this in itself isn’t a large or new problem, I do feel it is an issue that we can’t take lower tier traits into higher ones.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
A shadow step on our contemplation would solve a lot of issues actually for many reasons you can’t seem to comprehend. Explaining it is meaningless.
Perhaps, but this isn’t “Build-a-Profession” so imagining what would ‘solve’ some particular issue isn’t relevant. Having a procing Aegis every 1/4 second would solve a lot of issues too, but that’s not going to happen either. Not because it’s unreasonable but because what I think doesn’t actually matter in the design.