Guild Wars 2

I think it’s time guardian had a unique mechanic more akin to that of the thief. i.e. spammable everything I’m sick of cooldowns galore.

I’m surprised people are crying/whining/screaming about this and making it into much more of an issue than it is, but I have no doubt Arenanet will capitulate.

tolunart.2095:

Buttercup.5871:

You know that Scarlet is going to be gone in a month right? No more invasions and such? No more Scarlett’s lair. No more sprockets. Only from the pick. And the pick probably provides 0.1% of the current supply.

Prices will shoot right through the roof, just like candy corn, snowflakes and taffy…

But they didn’t shoot throu… oh.

PjSmyth.9724:

Stealth is it over powered

In every game it has been implemented in. Yes.

I think it’s:
Favourite to win = Green
Middle = Blue
Outsider to win = Red

IchigoHatake.5098:

First of all 10 seconds isn’t really spamming,

I’d argue that it is.

secondly you can always dodge the earthshaker it’s way too easy to dodge.

That’s not necessarily true, either.

Grav.3568:

Oozo.7856:

I mean, what types of players?

The types that are too stubborn to transfer down for the good of the game.

Good shout, and 1st reply. +1 for you, sir!

THis thread needs to be moved to the Balance forum.

Forum Moderator – over to you!

Whatever Arenanet’s “vision” for the Thief was, it desperately needs re-envisioning.

THis is unfun.

Da Sonic.6521:

This should definitely be fixed. In the meantime though, I put 1 point into Supply Capacity and 4 points into Build Mastery, so I hold 16 supply when I get it from buffed camps, and spend 8 at a time, so I spend all my supply in two hits.

Does that work?

The Problem:
Build Master 3 does not synergise with Supply Capacity or Guild Supply Buff.

Example:
I have Build Master 3.
I have Supply Capacity 5.

As I understand it, Build Master 3 should allow me to spend 8 supply at a time. For example, if I have 15 supply it should spend:
8 on the first tick
7 on the next tick

What actually happens is that it spends:
8 on the first tick
6 on the second tick
1 on the third tick

What I think is going wrong:
You have Build Master 3, so the amount you can spend it 8.
So of the first tick it spends 8 as it should. 10-8=2.
THEN it calculates the amount of supply I have OVER the first 10. Which is 5.
BUT it rounds this DOWN because you spend supply 2 at a time. So it comes up with 4.
Then it adds the 2 left over to the 4 to give 6,

OR
It simply says spend all supply in multiples of 2 and if there is 1 left over, spend this at the end.

All of which means I have to wait an additional tick to spend my supply making Build Master 3 and over a waste of WvW points.

Oh no, please devs, don’t take this seriously. Downed State is just fine!

CntrlAltDefeat.1465:

You have your mindsets, but this is 2014. A lot of your new edition players

Yeah, Anet, this is 2014 New Edition!

timidobserver.7925:

you shouldn’t be having an issue with conditions if you are on a guardian.

Vs a zerg, you ALWAYS have issues with conditions, regardless of class!

Straegen.2938:

Match randomizer… working well?

Yes, much more even fights than before, thanks.

I can’t get these quotes to nest properly, but they are from Devon’s posts 2 months ago: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/members/showposts/DevonCarver-5370/1

DevonCarver

akanibbles.6237

Allisa Wonderland.8192
IDEA: auto teamups of the two trailing teams
When leading team score > (2nd + 3rd) / modifier then 2nd and 3rd become automatically allied and/or gain bonuses for attacking the leading team.

I like this idea. Too often the 3rd place team drops off and has no effect on the game other than to stop the 2nd place team be competitive to the 1st place team.

This is an intriguing concept. The original idea behind WvW was that this would happen of its own accord, but I haven’t seen that in practice. I think it could be much more of a part of the game if there were a way to do this. Would it make more sense to provide increased score from this or to increase the individual rewards? I would lean slightly towards the latter. I also wonder if it would work to be really heavy handed about it and actually put the two losing servers on the same team. Of course, that presents numerous problems including score tracking at that juncture. But I would think we can find some sort of system that encourages servers to work together to defeat a bigger server.

So Anet think teaming up should happen a lot MORE than it does at the moment.

GuestNull.6318:

It would only slow down by a few seconds the inevitable.

Jocksy.3415:

Attackers would have to split (given two points have to be uncontested to cap), while defenders can defend just one point.
Might be interesting in SM

Draygo.9473:

Um, will have to see how its implemented. But essentially you can cap an objective in GW2 after you clear enough of the defenders. Just having another location doesn’t make defense any easier, objectives are lost as soon as people cant defend them.

The reality is every time this is tried is the attackers don’t split, they zerg one point, then the other, then after they have killed everyone they send one guy off to cap the other point.

What happens on defense is that the defenders will focus on defending a single point letting the other one drop freely. Then it will be a zerg vs zerg over a single point.

Saying there are 2 points to capture is just marketing but really doesn’t change how the game is played.

Thanks for the replies. I think that you’re wrong, GuestNull.6318 and Draygo.9473 in suggesting that it would not be any different than it is now.

I believe that the two-point system implies that it would be more easy to hold-off or frustrate attackers with a smaller group than it is at the moment.

I think you, Jocksy.3415 and Draygo.9473, hint at the far more complex gameplay that this seems, to me, to be encouraged by this new system. Imagine having a small group to kill the single-person who gets left to capture a point on his own. Imagine that group avoiding combat with the zerg and just hitting whichever capture point is held by least enemies.

Hills outer wall is a waste of resources, surely the defenders would just use the cliff for most of the structure. On the below image, the blue is the wasted outer wall and the red is where it COULD be. Or is there an even more efficient placement?

A certain rival game with similar large-scale gameplay to WvW has announced that instead of having ONE capture point in it’s objectives, it will have TWO.

I would like to discuss how this might work if implemented in Guild Wars. What would be the ramifications? My first impression is that it would mean the zerg have to wipe everybody in the objective before thinking of capping.

John Smith.4610:

Buttercup.5871:

OK, I know this is in the area of tinfoil hats and everything, but in my experience, the results of the first BL key is usually pretty good. This got me wondering – because if it’s programmed like that, it would be pretty smart right? (you get the taste of success, so you continue gambling!). So I tested it, because using 25 keys at once rarely got me anywhere.

So, I used 1 key a day. Surprisingly, this netted me with consistent scraps, I’d say one to two full tickets per 25 keys. And if I didn’t get a scrap, I got another good result (e.g. an expensive BL item). It was slow, but at least I got my scraps. In this manner, I got at least twice as many scraps as I would opening many BL chests all at once. I’d really like to see the test results of others over, say, 25 days, but I also realize noone would be even remotely interested to replicate my crazy tinfoil hat experiment. Plus, this experiment was done before the recent overhaul, so it might be completely outdated information anyway.

I promise you, there are no secret mechanics involved in the chest openings.

Could you give an example of a secret mechanic in the Guild Wars 2 please?

I agree with the OP. This should encourage people to explore more.

I agree with the OP. Damage is too high across the board and has been forever.

Point #1
For WvW: This change will have no effect on WvW zerg bunker Guardians. Mine has 5% crit chance.

Point #2

True active defence promotes skillful play but are dodges the active defence we want for Guardian’s – A heavy armoured warrior. I feel NO! I’m no acrobatic thief that dodges all over the place.

I’m THE GUARDIAN – the defender at the front protecting all my friends punishing all who would attack.

I don’t want to dodge. I’m a Guardian, I want to defend and punish any for attacking me or my friends. Give me more blocks, more counter-attacks, punishing reflects and maybe a little more invulnerabilities.

Where this is concerned it raises interesting questions about how well Arenanet’s varying visions of what the Guardian should be fit together. For example, see how the guardian emblem is the Ankh on a Shield.

1. The Ankh is a symbol of life – like the regen and healing we get on Virtue of Resolve. By contrast, the warrior has no such emblem, but far better regen and healing.
2. The symbol of the shield is obviously one of protection and defence, but where is that in the game? In WvW, for instance, one would be rightly mocked for reaching for a shield as opposed to any of the two-handers, regardless of sigils (so I have no idea what the devs were talking about on the livestream regarding this).
   A second example of this would be the legendary shield “The Flameseeker Prophecies”. Clearly themed around the original concept for the Guardian, this shield is barely ever seen wielded by one, and is far more common on engineers!

TL;DR for Point #2: the guardian doesn’t fit the original vision of the guardian.

Players take WvW much more seriously than Arenanet do. So for them it’s a part of their job of keeping people playing Guild Wars 2 (whichever sub-game). Do they care? Of course – but to them it’s not the serious business many players think it is.

I’d just like to add that there is very little no merchandise aimed solely at WvW, so why should Anet focus specifically on polishing it when their money comes from all aspects.

They had this “big thing” they couldn’t talk about that they said would explain a lot of the decisions they announced. The market is betting it’s Ascended Trinkets.

Night capping – final solution … = BAN NIGHT TIME!

fadeaway.2807:

Biggest tip for new players I could possibly give : never buy anything RNG from the gem store, you will be disappointed.

Never RNG anything. Ever.

I would like this, but remember that floating mob names wouldn’t vanish, so it’ll look a bit ropey imo.

There’s not much water left in WvW Just saying.

hihey.1075:

Working as intended.

Indeed. Sadly the intent is somewhat questionable.

fadeaway.2807:

It’s perfectly playable if you are good at dodging, don’t waste aegis, know when to blind, when to reflect, when to cleanse and when to shelter.

Oh sorry, I didn’t realise this class was solely for elitists. My bad.

Flissy.4093:

Simple question, I’d have thought the price would have start to decline now “rushers” are finished with their armor. But it’s still going up and up, with no sign of stopping.

This baffles me, are some barons buying lots up to dump at a later time?

It’s going to go up and up because Anet changed the recipe.

I’m frustrated by the sale. I want the mining pick that is part of the “Gathering Tool 3-Pack”, but I have 2 other perma-tools, so I can’t get the pack.

swiftpaw.6397:

Svarty.8019:

11k HPs on nearly all the best DPS builds?! IMHO That’s simply not playable.

Where do I even begin…

Begin away!

11k HPs on nearly all the best DPS builds?! IMHO That’s simply not playable.

If you run a WvW spec in PvP, you won’t be able to kill anything and will thus die to zerk specced anything. I don’t know what the best spec for this is, but I hear good things about “Healway”.

In WvW if you run PvP spec you will die in blob vs blob. So you need an “Altruistic Healing” spec with full/near-full soldier’s gear.

I’m more of a WvW player myself and it’s a completely different world to PvP. Totally different skills, different playstyle – i.e. in PvP you need to be totally aggressive with blinks to get “into the face” of the enemies, whereas in WvW it’s all about buffing the team, taking conditions off them and putting out much smaller numbers across a larger number of enemies.

All this said, some people run small roaming groups using PvP specs in WvW. This means you will certainly die if you try anything alone. Lesson = don’t try anything alone in WvW spec.

My advice is to stay with the blob OR hang around near a doorway so you can get back inside.

IsilZha.3608:

So to clarify: Intensity boons stack up to 25. Duration boons stack up to 9 times (except Retaliation, which is 5?)

The Wiki includes duration boons, like swiftness, in it’s list of boons with no indication that there is a 9-stack limit (which says nothing of the intensity of each stack, you could get 9, 20s duration stacks for 3 minutes of swiftness.)

What the heck is this? New rules nobody knows?!! A year after release?

… well that was surreal.

Changing the equation from 2 scraps to 3 really broke some immersion for me. It seems most distasteful to change the laws of physics mid-game.

Cactus.2710:

Svarty.8019:

But seriously, why should I have to have cat-like reflexes just to survive three hits?

LOL. Yeah … let’s slow down the game so that reaction time doesn’t play any part in it.

Sanduskel.1850:

the problem is that you assume zero lag. Thieves benefit from lag more than any other class. I’ve seen enemies unresponsive to my burst thief simply because all 4 hits land at once from their perspective. they tell me later that it looks as though they got hit for 20k all at once. you cannot respond to that. sorry.

frans.8092:

That is not a problem with the profession but with the system as a whole – trying to play with real-time action mechanics on an architecture that is inherently laggy.

Here’s the case against forcing people to have uber-reactions.

… but teh stealth trap! TEH STEALTH TRAP!

Okaishi.8320:

Svarty.8019:

mrmadhaze.8706:

Svarty.8019:

I’m pig sick of this:

Breakstun if needed and dodge.
It’s not so hard to do…

It IS hard to do, especially given the short timespans involved.
I’m sick of all the L2P.

Sorry but if you can’t manage a dodge/stunbreak before the backstab lands your reaction time is quite slow to say the least.

Please! Personal insults are against the TOS! But seriously, why should I have to have cat-like reflexes just to survive three hits?

Okaishi.8320:

Watching your surroundings helps a lot as well, it’s not like a triple signet thief will come out of nowhere. A single dodge would have won you that fight as a slight breeze will be enough to down such a thief, and to be honest I’m sick of people complaining when they QQ about things that are easily avoided.

This is simply untrue. Thieves can facetank guardians. It’s not like they drop quickly at all.

I’ve been pointed at this build, but I am concerned about a lack of Vitality. Could someone please explain why Vitality is not an issue when there is such high spike damage in WvW?

mrmadhaze.8706:

Svarty.8019:

I’m pig sick of this:

Breakstun if needed and dodge.
It’s not so hard to do…

It IS hard to do, especially given the short timespans involved.
I’m sick of all the L2P.

I’m pig sick of this:

Gudradain.3892:

When we remove the waypoint upgrade, what should be put as a new upgrade to replace it?

A couple of ideas:

• Golem workshop. Repair old golems, Customise by adding a single weapon from a list.
• Greased floor. Swiftness buff for allies when inside the keep.

Silent Shino.7239:

fyi, I’m a guardian who gets their backsides kicked by mesmers, is about equal with condition engineer and obilterates thieves. So I know the pain of roaming more than most people.

You can beat thieves! Impressive! I can’t face any other class at all 1-on-1.

Stealth – implement for grief.

Needs to happen. DAoC learnt this way too late.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Lengradde.2967:

Penguin, your response isn’t applicable to the data under scrutiny.

It is when you have conspiracy theorists shout “manipulation” in the trade forums.

Manipulation/Speculation is part and parcel of the “free” market economy. I don’t understand why people find it so difficult to simply say it. Perhaps they are trying to keep a lid on the can of worms that would be opened up if they did.