Why is it even necessary to entice players to sell them, hoarding or not? Why is it always Anet’s job to ensure players get MC coins at the rate players see fit at the price they want to pay? That’s not how it works. I would hope an Economics major could get that.
The only problem with class balance is that players have some unreasonable expectations based on their own subjective biases. balance isn’t only a function of what a class brings to a team environment; It’s more complicated than most people imagine. That’s why it’s so hard for a game to achieve it.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I’m a fairly casual player and I mostly do solo PvE and fractals. How is revenant doing at the moment? I know every profession can be used but I’m a little bit obsessed with playing a profession that is useful. There seems to be a lot of complaints here and are they justified? Are there any buffs coming that we know of? How do they compare to the guardian?
Thanks for any help
Guardian certainly has more global appeal for any aspect of the game in PVE. Personally, Rev performs as well as Guardian in solo PVE, especially if you are camping Glint with the exception of cleansing conditions to close out fights. Conceptually, the Rev is difficult for customizing builds, simply because you really don’t … you just choose a legend and get a limited number of skills with it. Still, choosing the right legend for PVE is very easy to do. The complaints you see are the result of PVP … but of course people will soapbox in any thread they can, even if unrelated.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
The reason I dislike DS is that there isn’t much you can be if you are built into it with traits. I tested DS again and in even moderately populated areas, I was only in DS 50% of encounters I had. It’s not a sustainable approach and needs to be augmented when you can’t be in it.
I think to be fair, it’s safe to say Necro doesn’t have much choices outside of shroud because they aren’t that great of an OW class to begin with. If DS is included as an optimized OW build, then I would have to recommend something like Axe/Focus With Spite, Death and Soul Reaping and full minions, though I would sure miss RS buff with that.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Like The Ascension isn’t tied to PvP and Ad Infinitum isn’t tied to Fractals of the Mists? Both require you to play a LOT in their respective modes.
The point is, I have an option if I want a back item between two very different game modes. Not so for armour.
so your complaining anet hasnt commited suicide from caffeine working so hard to get 2 sets of Armour out at once and put them in different game modes at the same time? jesus dude give them some time! patience is a virtue.
Yeah, they’re really working at a strict pace here! We can’t expect them to pump out a single set of armor in less than 2 years, can we? That’s just absurd. We all know that normal teams would take at least 4 years to make it! They’re practically working at lightning speed here!
And you can produce armor sets with their engine faster?
They manage to pump out a gem store outfit every 2 weeks. Maybe if they dedicated half of the artists working on those to making legendary armor it wouldn’t have taken 2 years.
… and the game would have made less money, maybe causing them to fire a bunch of the people making legendary armor in the first place, making it take 3-4 years …
Speculation is so fun, but not a very relevant way to have a reasonable discussion.
Not all skins will appeal to everyone.
Well that’s obvious.
To be fair, so was your title. Of course legendary armor was going to disappoint some people.
Not some, majority.
… and that’s STILL not an unreasonable expectation. I don’t like them but then again … I realize how much time I would waste getting them if I DID like them, so that’s a win for me. I got lots of other things to do. I think the reasonable player that dislikes these is actually pretty relieved.
The problem with the idea that something is ‘too expensive’ is that it makes no sense. Take a car … don’t care what make or model … is it too expensive? For some people, it could be but for some others, it might not. The point … ‘too expensive’ is not an objective assessment of hardened leather price.
Therefore, to make an objective problem statement using it makes no sense whatsoever. If you have to ask WHO it’s too expensive for, and have no target audience, then how can you even implement a sensible solution to that? You can’t. The whole approach that everyone takes to complain about this simply demonstrates exactly what I’m saying here.
Anet has done exactly the correct thing here; allow players to take more control of the market by introducing more bandwidth to farm. The market will dictate the price all goods in it; it’s completely self-regulating. In otherwords, Anet has washed their hands and put the pricing in control of the players. Appealing to ’it’s too expensive’ has no impact on an entity that WANTS a self-regulating market to exist.
I love analogies. Let’s try this one out. Car market is OK, if anything cars are “too affordable” but who knows what that means right because it’s all objective. But the government looks and says “wow, this is way too affordable, every car needs to be gold plated from now on”. Prices for cars sky rocket. Now the government says “you know what, we are going to be ‘hands off’ on the economy, let’s just see what happens to car prices”. Car prices continue to sky rocket because they need to be gold plated.
Finally the government steps in and says “we’ve mostly been hands off but we’re going to open up a gold mine on government land, feel free to come here and mine gold, it only costs $1500/oz and you can take out as much as you want”. A lot of people say “I’m not doing that, I can get it for $1271/oz from China”. Some people use the gold mine though because they just like to mine their own gold. Car prices continue to skyrocket.
But don’t worry, the Government is “hands off” now. It will definitely equalize… right?
Absolutely the market in GW2 will equalize … but make no mistake, that doesn’t mean cheaper … it simply means TP volumes and pricing will reflect what people will sell and pay for leather; which is exactly why Anet implemented the what leather drops in Doric lake. I know it’s convenient for people to forget that, but it’s true. You’re analogy is not all that relevant for numerous reasons and my point still stands … ‘too expensive’ is subjective.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
You’re right there’s no point in trying to continue this discussion when the basic situation is I think some material is too expensive and you don’t.
Neither of us are likely to change our position. You’re apparently quite happy with the price, I’m not.
The problem with the idea that something is ‘too expensive’ is that it makes no sense. Take a car … don’t care what make or model … is it too expensive? For some people, it could be but for some others, it might not. The point … ‘too expensive’ is not an objective assessment of hardened leather price.
Therefore, to make an objective problem statement using it makes no sense whatsoever. If you have to ask WHO it’s too expensive for, and have no target audience, then how can you even implement a sensible solution to that? You can’t. The whole approach that everyone takes to complain about this simply demonstrates exactly what I’m saying here.
Anet has done exactly the correct thing here; allow players to take more control of the market by introducing more bandwidth to farm. The market will dictate the price all goods in it; it’s completely self-regulating. In otherwords, Anet has washed their hands and put the pricing in control of the players. Appealing to ’it’s too expensive’ has no impact on an entity that WANTS a self-regulating market to exist.
Again, that has nothing to do with the reason Anet implemented it, so like I said is true … your own expectations aren’t met. Maybe if Anet asked you what it should be, you might have a point. I’m pretty sure they didn’t.
If it’s faster to farm the gold and buy them, do that. Anet didn’t implement the farm so it would be faster than that … that would be completely stupid of them and anyone that understands how the economy in this game works would see that instantly. None of these arguments are new and have already been discussed at length. Anet wants you to use the TP, even if they implement farms, so no, Doric lake was NEVER going to be faster than farming the gold for leather and buying it.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I don’t know what other actual facts it will take before people realize it’s a failure.
No facts are necessary because Anet’s goal was simply to have a place where people could farm it … and they got that. Whatever actual numbers you want to use to prove it’s a failure are irrelevant because the goal never had any numbers associated with it.
I mean, you can’t argue Doric Lake ISN’T a good place to get leather … so if it’s a failure, that’s based simply on irrelevant player expectations.
The most egregious part is that people are trying to make the case that it’s bad for new players … except the fact is that if this ONLY affected new players, I doubt you would see such bleeding heart rhetoric concerning the prices. It’s complete self-interest that drives these discussions. I think the worst part is that it only gets easier in this game to get exotic geared … but the wailing only gets louder.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
If you get 25 bleed stacks applied to you in competitive environments, and you have 10 ways to clear them … and this is still a problem for you … it’s certainly NOT the mechanics of the game at fault here.
you seem to think once I clear a stack of bleeds that im immune to them or something lol
You seem to think we don’t understand how the game works. If that’s what you gather from what I’m saying, then why would anyone think you are here in good faith to discuss reasonable changes? Obviously you’re going to get the hostile witness approach … and gain nothing from it. If you have something of value to say, maybe do so in a more sensible way … otherwise, you could care less about anyone taking you seriously and you make your thread a joke purely by your own bad approach. /shrug. GL
OK, let’s say bleed is out of control … I don’t actually see how your suggestion would solve that; I think in fact, it makes it worse, because that forced restriction opens up the build capabilities; currently, bursting chill to apply that many bleeds takes all the skill bar slots to do so. Then what? What kind of necro build is that in those competitive environments? Sounds absolute crap IMO. I mean, don’t make it sound like I can Chill, apply 25 bleeds and ALL those other conditions at the same time … rendering your 10 cleanses completely useless! That’s silly.
Frankly, if you are serious, then show us this build that’s OP’ed so we can talk about it, instead of just being ridiculous with 3 word sentences you know no one will take seriously.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
If you get 25 bleed stacks applied to you in competitive environments, and you have 10 ways to clear them … and this is still a problem for you … it’s certainly NOT the mechanics of the game at fault here.
man if it wasnt op you wouldnt see like every necro running it, I fail to see how one person stacking like 25+ bleeds alone isnt op
IIRC, I can do that with a pure Necro build … and for a matter of fact, get MANY more bleed stacked from a condi Ranger. I don’t know of other classes, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a few others that have massive condi damage potential I’m not familiar with.
So flip that question … if it IS considered OP, why is that amount a standard, not an exception for classes with focused condition builds? You fail to see how it’s possible, simply because you DON’T want to see it happen.
Now, if you were to provide actual reasoning why people shouldn’t be able to stack lots of bleed stacks, … let us know it.
necros can stack heaps of bleeds with high toughness and vit(and an extra hp bar), if they were squishy I wouldnt have a problem with it.
Let’s be clear here because if Necros could actually burst bleed you for 25 stacks, then maybe you have a point, but building 25 bleed stacks, with a Necro in PVP … that suggests more of a fail on the opponents part than anything. You point makes even LESS sense in non-PVE game elements because if you can’t react and deal with 25 stacks of bleed on you, you’re doing something massively wrong, tactically or strategically.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Nice of you to make these assertions. I was using this strat before Brazil even made the video. Before HoT even.
Despite the strat requiring a semi organised team to pull off? Aka, spotter, disc banner and fury (for the less than 30% precision build). And the actual Reaper spec since Death Perception only works in shroud and Death Shroud is utter kitten on its own.
Yes, i think it’s important for people to discard what they know, based on meta builds for dungeons, raids, etc… . Those are optimized for team content. Precision is hardly useless on a necro … In fact, if you are going to build with a weapon that has abyssimal power damage to start with (Scepter) then, I would argue that there is way more value in procing a crit with an effect than the regular damage hit with it. We are talking trash … the more attacks you make on a mob, the less effective you are.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
man if it wasnt op you wouldnt see like every necro running it, I fail to see how one person stacking like 25+ bleeds alone isnt op
IIRC, I can do that with a pure Necro build … and for a matter of fact, get MANY more bleed stacked from a condi Ranger. I don’t know of other classes, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a few others that have massive condi damage potential I’m not familiar with.
So flip that question … if it IS considered OP, why is that amount a standard, not an exception for classes with focused condition builds? You fail to see how it’s possible, simply because you DON’T want to see it happen.
Now, if you were to provide actual reasoning why people shouldn’t be able to stack lots of bleed stacks, … let us know it.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
As for Obtena’s comment about gaurdian needing traveler runes? Why use those when you can have perma swiftness?
There are options, but I prefer travelers; it’s true you don’t NEED them. It’s simply the easiest way to get a RS buff. I think it’s also the most economical, but I don’t have any analysis to support that other than my experience.
The point is that the lack of a permanent RS buff requires some thought behind how to get more speed on a Guardian, while on every other class, there is a signet or trait for it. Make no mistake though … getting some kind of RS buff is a requirement for optimal OW gameplay.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I don’t get it .. you just want fountains of blood everytime something is killed, just so you feel like your killing? There ARE other games for that. I also don’t get the point, conceptually or technically (that would be very taxing on the game’s graphics)
While deathly chill is a primary reason for condi builds to take reaper, I don’t think it’s true to say it’s the ONLY reason. The truth is that the effects you get with reaper are more about making chill work really hard for you, not that you get some bleed stacks. That’s OK because Reaper condi doesn’t replace necro condi; there is a loss of build freedom in reaper condi compared to necro condi that makes it a reasonable tradeoff.
I think the limiting factor for the design path isn’t Deathly Chill, it’s the linear approach of the Reaper line; you either focus on chill, because the traits make chilling things a worthwhile activity or you camp Shroud as much as you can. Whatever the next elite, I will have to really give non-shroud builds something to play with.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Well, I won’t argue about specific tactics, but strategically, the ideal situation are sustainable, frequent skills; Shroud isn’t either of those, and neither is wells. In fact the only well worth a kitten here is Suffering and it’s over 6 seconds … not really that good a trash effect. No doubt it’s necessary though, because Necro doesn’t do much better. Ideally you have a burst you can access on the frequency you encounter mobs.
For example … Sword on guardian or D/P theif. Those are great OW builds; the burst is basically every mob you encounter, along with good fight opening and closing. Guardian would be top if it wasn’t for the need to have Traveler runes.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
you can spawn wells, nightfall, locust swarm, gravedigger and you have a burst
While all those things are nice for a burst, I find that GS isn’t the optimal OW weapon; it’s strikes are large and heavy which make it’s skills overkill, making your game flow slower.
Unfortunately, Necro isn’t a very good OW class to being with, because shroud has little use in OW and many traits are hard to place because they are focused on shroud in numerous lines. Also, wells while good at burst are not very frequent for trash and have relatively long DoTs, so have reduced effectiveness compared to other AOE things from other classes, like Guardian symbols.
Still, OW build for trash kills, I would recommend the following:
http://gw2skills.net/editor/?vRAQNAodWjk0QLN2TD20AHOOwFK4AEAtwsIaiqIuB57HA-e
(edited by Obtena.7952)
TO be fair … open world is like fighting a non-offensive static golem …
on the other hand, swapping to shroud to get optimal damage for open world where most the encounters are trash mobs, makes no sense either, so it’s irrelevant if Soul Reaping Shroud build has the highest DPS.
There are two ‘best’ builds. One will be for soloing almost anything, the other will be the highest burst damage build to kill trash most effectively. And that’s a universal truth in this game because of the mechanics.
Frankly, I think the best soloing anything build for new players will be minions, with scepter and condition damage. Nothing touches you, you’re damage is very consistent and sustainable with easy rotation.
As for the trash bursting build … haven’t really convinced myself Necros have one; consider what a Guardian can do stacking symbols or a berserker with sword torch. Those kind of builds make OW feel like a relic. The necro class itself is a slow and steady sort of slog feeling to it.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I don’t get it … if you want the nostalgia of playing old, tired methods from decades old MMO’s … go play them. There is a reason things evolve and including things that are old ideas makes little sense.
The argument that it’s interactive doesn’t make much sense. I like interactive, but that’s not always a good thing. In this case, I don’t want to interact with a person to buy stuff. I see no advantage to that.
I think the difference here is … GW1 is not the same kind of game GW2 is, so dealing with exploits … (get ready for it) a different situation requires a different approach.
Maybe you are just making more kittenumptions. This time about the connection between how both games are run … not even sure how many of the same people are involved.
It’s not inaccurate that Anet didn’t make a post about ghost thief … inconsistent, yup, but not inaccurate. You don’t know if Anet considers ghost thief an exploit or not. kittenumptions don’t make good points.
Do you even read? Are you daft?
Or just dense as ascalonian bricks?
The point was if they consider one an exploit then to be consistent they would have to consider the other the same.
The fact you missed that after he rephrased it like 10 times is astounding. Or are you just feinting ignorance?
How am I daft? I’m simply saying they don’t need to announce other exploits like they did for Frost Gun. It’s a case by case consideration. Maybe it’s YOU that need to read.
So basically you would treat your MMO players like abused children and personal moderators for your short comings. Nice to know.
No, actually, I would hope to treat them like mature, responsible adults that have a clue about how MMOs work, avoid putting their game access at risk for using obviously exploitable situations and how to behave when playing them.
Being mature doesn’t mean handling a situation in the way in which you think it should be handled.
I wish people would stop using ‘mature’ as a buzzword cause it doesn’t actually mean squat. Unless you define it, it means nothing, and even then, EVEN THEN, people might, or will, and can disagree.
The scenario you just described is a dictators wet dream.
Finding synergies is the core of MMO builds. The fact you would call that ‘obviously not intended’ shows how out of touch with reality you are as a human being. I’m done with this topic.
You’re hung up on the synergies aspects … Anet isn’t addressing this because of synergy with traits. They are addressing this because of the obviously massive damage you can achieve from it. The obviously not intended part is not that there is a synergy with a trait and a condition. It’s the obviusly not intended damage. I can’t begin to understand how someone that claims to know about game development abd who plays this game would not see how unreasonable building 100+ bleed stacks on demand on a mob from such a synergy is not intended … especially after some game dev peer professionals tell you so.
I can’t see how anyone doing this is not aware of what they are doing.. It’s not like frost gun stacks just show up in your inventory begging you to use them … It seems so dishonest to me that anyone using this synergy doesn’t see why it’s a problem and how it hurts the game.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Don’t know what to tell you … I don’t know about GW1. I do know that I’ve played plenty of MMOs that didn’t just call you an exploiter when you exploited .. there was action taken against your access. Frankly, I think this is a good example of Anet sending the message players need to hear if they are concerned about how they interact with questionable elements of the game.
It’s not inaccurate that Anet didn’t make a post about ghost thief … inconsistent, yup, but not inaccurate. You don’t know if Anet considers ghost thief an exploit or not. kittenumptions don’t make good points.
Do you even read? Are you daft?
Or just dense as ascalonian bricks?
The point was if they consider one an exploit then to be consistent they would have to consider the other the same.
The fact you missed that after he rephrased it like 10 times is astounding. Or are you just feinting ignorance?
How am I daft? I’m simply saying they don’t need to announce other exploits like they did for Frost Gun. It’s a case by case consideration. Maybe it’s YOU that need to read.
So basically you would treat your MMO players like abused children and personal moderators for your short comings. Nice to know.
No, actually, I would hope to treat them like mature, responsible adults that have a clue about how MMOs work, avoid putting their game access at risk for using obviously exploitable situations and how to behave when playing them.
Obviously exploit has a certain connotation in MMOs and I think with the use of that language, they want to send a message.
Or instead of sending a message they should have just disabled the gun without trying to paint those that used it as filthy exploiters ruining the integrity of the game. Because that’s the ‘message’ they are sending.
It doesn’t look good on them, and for you to sit here and say that an unintended interaction (non-bug related) is enough of a reason to ban a player, then i hope you never ever manage an MMO. Because your players would be leaving left and right.
That’s like accusing someone of kitten after you slept with them of your own will because you found out something about them you didnt like, or you felt bad afterwards. It’s bull kitten.
It’s the lesser of two evils, and it’s an easy way to deliver the message they want to send. Is there a better way? Maybe but I think this way is effective.
I would like to hope that if I did manage an MMO, the players wouldn’t be so clueless about the game mechanics that if they did encounter a frost gun situation, they would know enough to question it, report it and stay as far away from using it as possible. But lets be fair … has anyone been banned by Anet for using this? Let’s not pretend anything I think or might do reflects on the actual situation here.
It’s not inaccurate that Anet didn’t make a post about ghost thief … inconsistent, yup, but not inaccurate. You don’t know if Anet considers ghost thief an exploit or not. kittenumptions don’t make good points.
I don’t get your point … how accurate or exacting does the message need to be to actually tell people what you expect as good behaviour in the game? Drop the obtuse stance already. I think the intention is clear.
I mean, are you telling me after all this, your big problem here is you don’t think you were delivered the message properly and you don’t understand it? At least you dropped the ghost thief stuff.
Nothing incorrect about Anet discouraging players about using effects they didn’t intend resulting in damage far outside the range of reasonable damage. I mean, if we take your approach, we just outright ban everyone for the slightest indiscretion … so at least Anet has that ‘inconsistency’ going for them.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Obviously exploit has a certain connotation in MMOs and I think with the use of that language, they want to send a message. Is it exacting or accurate? maybe not .. I don’t think that was the point. If Anet wants to give you their attitude with that situation, I don’t see how using that strong language isn’t warranted.
Basically, that tells me that Anet considers achieving that level of damage something they could take action on the player. Message loud and clear. Players would be wise to acknowledge that with a tip of the hat instead of pushing agendas about using dictionaries and nerfing ghost thieves.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I don’t think knowing a minimum about the MMO industry means I work for Anet … I think it just means I pay attention, have an objective approach, can think … whatever you want to call it.
Again .. different situations require different approaches and everything you have presented is evidence of that, including the inconsistency of appropriate response based on the situation, including Frost Gun and SAB. Exploits don’t usually warrant an announcement; I mean, again, what announcement would they make for ghost thief? What’s the reason they would do it? You say it’s simple, only because you can’t see why it’s complex. SAB/Frost gun has announcements. I can see why, because I’m not bitter about losing to ghost thieves. Anet has reasons for making those annoucements.
Seems to me you just got an axe to grind about ghost thief and this is a really bad way to do it. Pretty funny you want to complain about ghost theif in a thread about Frost gun nerfs. GL with that.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
No point has been missed; it’s a simple matter of understanding MMOs (at least for me) Let me ask you a question .. why do you think Anet made that thread? When was the last time Anet announced an exploit in this manner? What makes this situation different? What other MMO annouces exploits to players in the way you suggest should happen ‘for consistency’?
Sorry, it’s you that doesn’t get it. MMO devs don’t exploits known to players. MMO devs determine what things in their games are considered exploits. maybe not worth repeating but obviously, this requires an exception. Labeling things as exploits and making announcements to players about them are completely different things … of COURSE they determine what things are exploits … obviously they want to fix them. That goes without saying.
I mean, you’re asking them to make a post about other things that you consider exploits … that’s a list or whatever you want to call it; it’s irrelevant. For some reason, you’re hung up about the existence of other exploits you think they should announce because you misinterpreted the point of the Frost Gun post.
The LAST thing they should do, based on MMO industry experience, is announce exploits with more consistency … that’s just a bad idea. You clearly haven’t thought this through. If ‘consistency’ is the best reason you can come up with, you should have a wider survey of the MMO industry to educate yourself a little bit … and most people would think it’s obvious why game devs shouldn’t announce exploits … /shrug
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Hey, like I said, the point wasn’t to announce exploits, it was to give fair warning that Frost Gun was being disabled.
It’s inconsistent exactly for the reason I told you; each situation is different. I can see how an over-active imagination would lead you to the conclusion that Anet should be announcing other exploitable situations in the game, but I can assure you that will never happen. You can condemn that ‘inconsistency’ all you like, but it’s just the nature of the beast. It’s certainly no reason to ignore the mechanics of how Anet deals with them and give bad implications.
Have you even given it a thought as to what might happen if Anet start telling people what they consider exploits? I can assure that 30 years of MMO industry experience will all give you the same answer as to why that’s a terrible idea.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I don’t see the need for it; they didn’t make the announcement because Frost Gun is an exploit … they announced it because people would go into the game and try to use it or buy it and it wouldn’t work. They simply didn’t want people to get ingame and go ‘WTH?, why my frost gun don’t work?" It’s simply a pre-emptive announcement. There is nothing to ‘buy’ to have a ghost thief; how would that announcement even look?
In fact, IIRC, they have never announced other exploits and you can bet there has been some. It just so happens that this one requires something that players might buy and waste money on and they want to mitigate that risk. You’re reading WAY too much into this announcement. Again, jumping to conclusions and making assumptions … bad. Anet is not going to start an exploits list, for various reasons, just like no other games do, for the same reasons. This is really just a PSA, I can’t believe you think there is some nefarious going on here! LAWL!
(edited by Obtena.7952)
So OK … You are RIGHT … ghost thief is an exploit!!!
Now what? Anet SHOULDN’T fix Frost Gun? People abusing the frost gun situation ARE NOT exploiters? … and yes, I admit Anet is inconsistent in their response because it’s a reasonable approach to different situations. I’m agreeing with all your points and …
Nothing changes. Anet has declare this an exploit. All the points you make have no impact on the fact that these situations are assessed and responded to on an individual case. I mean, how else can it be?
Again, you’re beef simply seems to be that Anet doesn’t consider YOUR own priorities for fixing exploits. I don’t even see how that relates to Frost gun … maybe you think it means they aren’t dealing with other ones? Who knows. Assumptions are bad.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
It’s only simple if you don’t understand what makes it more complex. Anet defines what is an exploit. I mean, I think it’s pretty funny you’re equating the two at all. There are factors there you aren’t considering or even ignoring, just to create the illusion that this inconsistency theory holds water at all.
Again, I get you want to drag this out over the ghost thief … I don’t see how the existence of other exploits should prevent Anet fixing any particular one of them or justifies players USING anyone particular one of them … That’s a non-sequitur.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
So applying the same level of response, regardless of the infraction for different situations just for consistency sake … shows competence? And you want Anet to treat customers fairly? That’s awesome. I’m bookmarking this thread. Definitely one of the more enlightening discussions I’ve seen for a while.
It’s easy for them to justify frost gun and not ghost thief . They don’t have the same result. Maybe if ghost theif applied 100+ bleed stacks on mobs on demand … it would probably get nerfed too. I don’t doubt it actually.
Different situations require different responses; inconsistency isn’t a result of incompetence; it’s dictated by the concept of having a reasonable response to the situation.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
That’s your opinion but Anet defines what is an exploit.
And we are here to dispute that. Do you actually read? The message is I N C O N S I S T E N T.
I’m waiting for you to tell me how that matters. I’ve already explained why various situations requires different responses leading to what you call inconsistencies. Are caps a new way to avoid my reasonable questions? Maybe I need to write in caps to have a discussion with you as well?
This has nothing to do with understanding values and opinions. I’m simply asking you how inconsistency in their approach to various exploitable situations is unreasonable … given the fact that different exploitable situations require different responses. If you truly believe that inconsistency is such a bad approach to various situations, you have a reasonable answer to that. Perhaps we try again without the caps?
Are you seriously arguing the virtues of consistency for a business? Like consistency isnt needed or something?
So you’re equating Anet applying an appropriate level response to various exploitable situations as an inconsistency that’s inline with a lack of business acumen? That’s just wow. I guess if you call treating customers fairly with reasonable responses to questionable activities, then yeah I am arguing the for lack of consistency … because call me crazy, I just don’t think every single infraction deserves the same response.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Anet defines what is an exploit, not you or any other player. Is that a hard concept? Apparently for some people … it is.
It’s not a vote between players … Anet defines that.
We aren’t saying that ArenaNet can’t call it a exploit.
We are saying that ArenaNet’s choice of calling it a exploit is moronic since it implies that using trait synergies is a exploit. They are literally implying that Necros trying to maximize Deathly Chill is a exploit.
No, that’s what YOU say Anet is implying. I didn’t get that implication at all, probably because I understand the result of the synergy here. If you can’t see why this is an exploit … well, that only tells me you have much to learn about the game.
Ice Bow is a major DPS increase for condi necros using Deathly Chill. Is using Ice Bow a exploit?
I don’t define that, Anet does. If Anet thinks it’s an exploit, they will fix that too. What my opinion is here matters little. Again, it’s the RESULT that concerns Anet … does Ice Bow with Deathly chill give the same result as Frost Gun with Deathly Chill? Not even close. You’re thinking about this incorrectly; you made assumptions about why this was considered an exploit, then you went to town with it to question Anet’s reasoning because of other traits or effects procing. Trait procing isn’t the reason, it’s the damage that’s the concern.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
It’s not a vote between players … Anet defines that.
We aren’t saying that ArenaNet can’t call it a exploit.
We are saying that ArenaNet’s choice of calling it a exploit is moronic since it implies that using trait synergies is a exploit. They are literally implying that Necros trying to maximize Deathly Chill is a exploit.
No, that’s what YOU say Anet is implying. I didn’t get that implication at all. It’s the result of the synergy, not the act of the procing that is the concern Anet has here. If you can’t see why the result of this synergy is exploitable … then I can only think you really don’t know what’s being discussed here.
If you couldn’t understand that procing 100+ bleed stacks consistently wasn’t some unintended result from this synergy, then I can only accuse you of not being honest with yourself.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I don’t get the hang up you have with the inconsistency and I’m not attempting to say they aren’t … but there is a reason for this inconsistent response that you don’t seem to want to recognize. Are you saying that every single unintended action any player takes should be met with the same response, regardless of the severity? That makes sense how? I mean, you’re complaining about how Anet is labeling and treating customers poorly, then you turn around and imply there is a problem with having various levels of appropriate response for different situations as inconsistent … and that’s a bad thing? OK then. That seems like a pretty good treatment of players if you ask me. The response SHOULD fit the offense so yes, by the vary nature of treating people reasonably … you see inconsistencies between different situations. I don’t get how that’s bad and I don’t get how you can have a discussion with those conflicting ideas in a reasonable way.
Then after all that you’re looking for an apology for exploiters being ‘labeled’ as exploiters as the icing … laughable!
I guess we will just have to live with inconsistency, so that people get labelled and dealt with appropriately based on the severity of the exploit.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
You have no response in regards to their consistency and prevents. Are you going to start dating bring inconsistent is a good thing now? Are you employed at Arenanet?
If I don’t have a response to that, neither should you … yet you seem to think you have a firm grasp on how Anet gets this wrong. Based on what, I can’t imagine because I’m willing to bet you aren’t employed at Anet either … that sword has two edges.
The best part is that isn’t not about right or wrong … it’s simply how Anet defines what exploits are and how they decide to deal with them. You can claim there is inconsistency all you want … that’s the kind of argument that a person makes to claim some exploits are OK to use. Being obtuse, clueless or ignorant will not excuse anyone from the consequences of using exploits, ever. That’s not just a GW2 thing … it’s every MMO I’ve ever played; it’s the minimum expected behaviour between an organization that runs the game and the people that play it. I mean, since when did “Don’t cheat” have to become a rule that people would be offended if they got caught?
There is no debate if this is an exploit. It’s not a vote between players … Anet defines that. The irony is that you quote the part from Anet that literally tells you it’s an exploit. What more do you want?
(edited by Obtena.7952)
It could have done lots of things but why would they do that? Why would the have a soft stance and a lame response to this? Exploiting the game is a serious issue. The strength of the response is appropriate to the situation. It not a label if it’s true. perhaps the idea here is; if you call out people appropriately, they might think twice before they do it again … See? being called an exploiter isn’t fun is it?
I get that people don’t like getting in trouble … well, it’s deserved. What do you want? Hugs and a safe spot with a get out of trouble free card? I don’t think that’s reasonable.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I don’t get that apology … people that exploit are exploiters. If people don’t want to be labelled as exploiters, then they shouldn’t do questionable activities in the game. What else do you think they should be called?
maybe people should be less offended by what they are called and pay more attention to how they act in the game, then they wouldn’t have to be offended for acting in questionable ways …
Why do these discussions always boil down to people not wanting to be accountable for their actions?
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Yes .. those unintended effects are massive amounts of unprecedented damage. Any other interpretation is simply ridiculous and disingenuous. Procing from traits is intended … 100+ bleed stacks from a player isn’t. Any reasonable and informed player can conclude the damage is the reason for the change, not the procing synergy.
So back to this good example, apologetic Anet … what’s that look like? What is the apology actually for? From where I sit, this is a standard game fix of an exploitable situation … Where is the offense to the player that warrants the apology?
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I think it’s really disingenuous of you or anyone else to try to make this seem like it’s being changed because of procing synergy … that IS being obtuse. It’s clear why this is being changed and if the argument is about whether this is an exploit, make no mistake … ANET defines that, not us … and based on their response, you should have your answer to that question.
Perhaps I should ask again: What this good example Anet is supposed to be looks like … what apology you seem to be looking for. You seem admant it’s some reasonable requirement in this situation and if you’re genuine, you have reasonable answers to those questions; if not, you’re just upset for little reason and you’re being called out for it. It’s hardly fair to ask for those things in such a vague way, then accuse Anet of not doing it.
So what is it?
(edited by Obtena.7952)
What it’s called is irrelevant; clearly, Frost Gun and it’s chill proc with deathly chill wasn’t intended was it? And the fact that people we using effects in unintended ways … is not an exploit?
We have no idea what is or is not intended by arenanet. The only way we as players can make judgements about what is or is not a exploit is by precedent that the developers set.
By declaring Frost Gun a exploit, ArenaNet is setting the precedent that using <item> that interacts in a positive manner with <trait> is a exploit. Which is a huge problem because tons of bundles have interaction with various traits. Are those all exploits? Is picking up a Ice Bow on my necro a exploit? Are all bundles with chill skills a exploit? What about grenade bundles that interact with engi traits?
There is no problem here … anyone that can’t conclude that the way Frost Gun and Deathly Chill were interacting to give unprecedented stacks of bleed resulting in ridiculous damage levels is just being obtuse. It’s not getting nerfed because of procs or synergy or anything like that … it’s getting nerfed because of unreasonable and easy to access damage levels. Nice try guys. Let’s not pretend this throws into question procing effects, because that’s obviously not the WHY for the change here.