For all of you shouting “Perplexity! Condi Spam!”… I run no condition builds for roaming, and yes I win more often than not.
So whether condi is meta or not… depends entirely on you.
And care to share what you roam with then? I’m sure it might be d/d elementalist or other class that can clear a lot of conditions really fast.
I have experience roaming on 6 classes, though I have favourites of course. Atm I prefer running warrior, elementalist or thief for roaming, simply because of the huge mobility each of them features, and which you need as a roamer if you don’t want to end up as zerg food each time you peak your head out of a tower.
The builds I use, though, are not above average in terms of condi cleansing. The warrior uses condi cleanse on use of the burst skill and has a lot of active defenses that make it possible to sit out the condi spamming on the part of other players. Elementalist is fairly strong on condi cleansing of course, but I run it as zerk making it rather challenging to survive. The thief build varies from d/p to d/d to s/d, so again not really a build created on countering condis.
Anyways, my point here is that although some people will say you need to go condi to win, that only applies insofar as you suck at playing everything else.
For all of you shouting “Perplexity! Condi Spam!”… I run no condition builds for roaming, and yes I win more often than not. So whether condi is meta or not… depends entirely on you.
Well the chance isn’t this high, but why not? I’m in.
Chance is higher than getting a precursor drop though… that’s like 0,0001% where this is 1/500 chance if the estimate is right.
Wawh that’s cool. I can’t imagine how it must feel to give away something that must have taken SO much effort, pain and will to complete. I think it’s appropiate to call you “happy”. It means you have enough with yourself and don’t need shinies to make your day.
Kudos to you, Maya! PS. add me
Oh and here: http://www.random.org/
this will allow you to randomize names effectively
The only Legendary about these weapons are they grinding time,nothing more nothing less.
and I just say I got more fans with this armor/weapon/shield than many others with full Ascended and 2-3 Legendaries.
THIS IS . . . . . . ! 
Why do I have the feeling we will have this conversation again in 6 months?
maybe , but not with us
and in chinese. :p
Redrex proposed a complete rework of Ritualist into Spiritualist long ago. I helped a little with suggestions, the thread died down, but the idea still appeals to me.
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/archive/suggestions/Concept-Profession-Spiritualist/
let us 20v20 and use pve gear and you’ll see that a large number of players will play this “game mode”
Lol, why PvE gear? Aren’t all of us PvP players looking for LESS balance-breaking and more actual skill-based fights?
PvE gear => Pay 2 Win; no thanks.
If this game had a GvG mode (no point capping, purely death matches) with PvP gear though… that would be nice.
Karl Marx has sympathy for you.
I don’t see how killing off another one of the ancient races actually adds anything to the game (addition by subtraction?) Unless they are trying to cut all ties to the past for in game characters and I concede that may be possible.
Jotun (idiots)
Mursaat (evil and hidden)
Forgotten (no where to be seen, maybe dead)
Seer (dead)
Dwarfs (sure lets kill of the last ties to Tyria’s past)I think the argument can be made why they shouldn’t be playable for reasons some of the previous posters have stated to add a more serious tone to the story, but how much will it really add? Making a race that VERY few of the player base has actually encountered in GW2’s Tyria finally snuffed out? Sure people that have followed the lore from GW1 will recognize it but I would argue several GW1 players (well in my circles at least) wanted to play as the dwarfs in GW2 not see them killed off.
Also, GW2 does not use a consistent serious tone. You can argue they should but currently it’s more lighthearted with the occasional bit of seriousness sprinkled in. The art design alone makes the game come across and “playful” and “fun”.
You forgot Margonite. I have no clue what happened to them when Abaddon died… do they still exist, cause hell, concept art looks beautiful.
Also, can you imagine Margonite + Chronomancer (see picture 2).
Attachments:
Problem with GW2 combat is this:
50 vs. 50 is usually a blob fight that is over in 30 seconds.
- if everyone gets around 50% chance to get a loot bag off a person, that’s 25 loot bags x 50 = 1250 loot bags
Now look at a fight I have had one time: 3 vs 10 fight took us 5+ minutes with constant retreating, might stacking, luring, CC-ing, healing eachother, stomping etc: basically very heavy action;
- slightly higher loot bag ratio (75%) because less people to share tag with
- 7,5 bags x 3 = 22,5 bags for 5+ minutes of fighting
My point: rewards are not balanced, and slightly bigger rewards should be given for smaller number fights, because 50 man combat always resorts into a lootbag massacre based very much on luck and having good people with you in your zerg, where anything below 10 is a strategic, hard fight that requires personal skill to win.
- Make the amount of objectives x10, and capturing a structure require capping different locations at the same time.
- I’m not keen on there being more objectives, but I think the structure capping requiring different locations is a great idea from TESO.
Yeah i’m not sure where I got the idea for making more objectives… I think diversity.
Fighting on different places at the same time is a must indeed if you want any good PvP experience, glad you agree.
- Make defending rewards similar to the reward for a dungeon run, based on how long you in particular were active in the defense.
- I don’t see why.
- This could be a massive gold-inflatory problem. While I can see that your counter being that it would be dependent on how long the defence was, I think this could be exploited far too easily. “Defend-Bots” would definitely be a problem for a number of reasons.
- Because defending at the moment is by most people ignored. I don’t think that the above karma-circling is what WvW should be. It’s a disgrace.
- I do think rewards for PvP should be at least the same or higher than rewards for a PvE (lol) dungeon. I agree that GW2’s system is bad: running past a structure then tagging an enemy while in the radius is enough to give you the reward for it. I’m sure there are ways to measure damage dealt, % gate repaired, siege built and used.
Hi Svarty, thanks for the response. As I said, it’s a WIP, hardly anything ready for release. I do appreciate debate around what would be better/more efficient, because that’s the only way we can get a change to anything. Here goes!
- Give weekly rewards for match-ups to all players.
- Please expand on this. Do you mean ALL players? Or people who did enough in WvW to earn these rewards? Are these rewards the same as the chest(s) we all get every week?
1) I ment all “active” wvw players, though I see several things that need elaboration.
a) How to determine who has been active?
I would opt for achievement-based. Give WvW players a ‘Match-up reward chest’ per week they play, based on completing achievements that boost your server’s score.
For example possible achievements could be:
- kill 20 dolyaks
- defend 5 structures
- take 15 ruins
- kill 20 sentries
- 20 players killed
- 10 camps taken
- used 100 supplies for repairing
- …
My guess is that there should be an achievement for everything, not with the purpose of completing them all (there shouldn’t be AP given for them), but rather for making sure nobody gets left out, whatever way they play WvW (albeit small scale, taking keeps, doing GvG…).
Rewards could then scale:
- Completed 3 achievements: Tiny Server Cache
- Completed 6 achievements: Small Server Cache
- Completed 9 achievements: Medium Server Cache
- Completed 12 achievements: Large Server Cache
This would eliminate abusing the system, because you’ll actually need to play the game for it.
- Give empty buildings (to counter PvDoor) npcs that scale with the amount of players inside: nobody inside? Add more npcs and give them the option to use siege weapons, supply and blueprints. This will promote the feel of a vibrant world, and will counter PvDoor.
- This one makes no sense. This idea promotes people vacating buildings.
- A better idea would be to have a certain number of NPC guards and spread that number across the number of objectives you own. Thus, if you own fewer buildings, you have more guards at each building. Conversely, as you gain more objectives, each has fewer NPC guards, allowing smaller groups of enemies to attack them more easily.
I saw the weakness in people leaving buildings because that way they can keep them, but I don’t know how else to prevent people from capping empty things all the time. I really hate the people that ruin WvW by karma-training.
You all have heard the stories about commanders saying “Yo, we don’t need you defending that structure, come join our zerg here cause it’s more rewarding to simply take things, we’ll just run in circles and cap things back once the enemy is gone.”
That’s really just degenerate and kittened. Come on, are we hamsters?
One thing I know is that if you added guards like these (in the current situation) hamster-people would be fighting ‘something’, and that’s really better than kicking in doors and killing the champ in 5 seconds, then moving on and on in a never-ending circle of loot.
Your suggestion, while interesting would not really change anything. It certainly wouldn’t stop the hamsters, because there are 2 guards more outside the gates.
Maybe if you combined your idea + guards that can use siege, it could work.
There are likely better ways to counteract PvDoor: rewards drop based on number of players that were involved in the defense.
5 defending vs. 50 attacking
>[less rewards than]<
20 defending and 50 attacking
- Add in risk vs. reward (small scale and guild groups > blobbing)
- I have two points about this:
- There is no point in rewarding smaller groups (virtually) materially for attacking larger ones. There are already many groups who run small groups and try to take on the skill-less blob. The motivation is already there. FUN.
- It will require a skills rebalance to allow small groups to take on huge blobs and win. At the moment there is an approximate threshold above which a smaller group simply can’t beat a blob, regardless of how much skill they have. I think this is probably working as intended and I’m OK with it.
I do agree that it is a lot more fun to do small scale as compared to autorunning and tabbing out behind a pug-commander (one of my friends was autorunning, steering into tower/keep/camp capture areas and chatting with 3 friends via whispers meanwhile).
I’m not saying that small groups should be given an advantage over big blobs, because that’s where risk-reward comes in. The chance that 5 win against 20 is small, but it happens.
+ see next post (okay wait, 10 minutes before I can post again…)
Made an Arah P4 kill everything LFG posting. Group has filled and includes a p4 newbie.
WISH ME LUCK.
am I reading correctly?
’Yesterday, 03:35" – begin
’Yesterday, 07:32" – end
I admire you. Really, I do.
