Guild Wars 2

chemiclord.3978:

I can’t say I like the “unlocking” mechanism at all.

I thought it was inane and stupid in GW1, and I don’t see how it’s going to be any better in GW2, especially if they start adding a bunch of traits. I hated having to hunt down a specific boss to find an elite I HAD to have if I was going to be accepted into GW1’s group play. I’m going to loathe it if it starts becoming prevalent in GW2 as well.

You don’t have to hunt them down if you don’t want to.

You can also just buy them:

As excited as we are to let players earn traits with feats of bravery and cunning, we know not everyone is the exploring or adventure type—which is why we’ve included the option for you to buy trait guides from profession trainers! The cost of current traits varies based on the tier of that trait. Newly added traits to the game will be set at a higher price point.

Lilith Ajit.6173:

What does this mean, I’m confused about the language?

All major traits will be locked on new characters.

Anyway, I thought the new traits they talked about were interesting. Weird that a lot of them had to do with healing or vitality though.

You know Major Traits (the big ones you can change)?

At the moment, as soon as you put 10 / 20 / 30 points in, you can choose any of the Major Traits for that tier? Well, in the update, they’ll be locking them on new characters, and players will have to unlock them. Kind of like GW1 skill hunting.

So, it’s confirmed that the Feature Pack will be out on the 15th April.

The first blog post shows the changes they’re making to Traits.

TL:DR

• Players will no longer require a manual to unlock trait tiers; they’ll be unlocked automatically at the appropriate level.
• New characters will now unlock Adept at 30, Master at 60 and Grandmaster at 80.
• They’re reducing the amount of points from 70 to 14, but each point will be worth 5 points.
• Players start earning points at 30, at a rate of one point every 6 levels until level 66, where this is increased to 2 points.

• Players can now reset their traits in the world providing they’re not in combat.
• Resetting traits is free!
• A minus button has been added, so you don’t have to reset if you mess up.

• All major traits will be locked on new characters.
• Players now have to hunt for Major Traits in the world (a la Skill Hunting in GW1).
• Players also have theoption of buying these traits from a guide.

• All professions will be getting new Grandmaster Traits for each line.

I for one welcome the changes to how Traits are aquired, as well as the ease in how they’ll be reset.

ZudetGambeous.9573:

Arnath.2319:

“We want to let you know that the ability to build your precursor will not be in our upcoming Feature Pack. The way progression and rewards work in Guild Wars 2 have changed quite a bit since we initially talked about that feature, and our main horizontal progression systems are about to get some additional updates in the upcoming feature pack. Because of that, we are looking into several ways to integrate building your precursor into our new updated reward and progression systems we’re working on, which is requiring additional development time and iteration. As always, we’ll share details on this system once it’s far enough along in production we’re ready to discuss it.” -Mark Katzbach

This is highly ridiculous.

How many times now have AreaNet lied to us? I can’t keep track anymore.

This was the number one most requested feature to be added since the launch of the game and they are still delaying it.

This feature should have been added in 2012, now we will be lucky to get by the end of 2015 if not later.

I am furious, i have every right to be furious, politicians lie less than ArenaNet.

But do not worry, instead we will get more horrible living world updates, more pointless zergs and achievement grinds that EVERYBODY hates.

Where are you seeing this? I didn’t see it in the link… It can’t possibly be true… not even Anet is that dumb…

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/crafting/gw2-precursor-recipe-scavanger-hunt-news/first#post3780700

While I do think it’s a bad move (at least with no other information at hand as to what these new systems entail), I’m not entirely sure where they ‘lied’.

EpicBanHammer.7521:

Aedelric.1287:

Nah, I would prefer Tengu first, I have been wanting to play as an Avicara Brave since Guild Wars one.

But then you can’t rename all your toons really cheezy bear puns.

Oh gods. I can imagine it now…it’d be unbearable.

Bread.7516:

TheDaiBish.9735:

I disagree with his statement, however. It’s just a case of different games requiring different types of skills. You wouldn’t use the same skills in GW2 as you would, say, EvE.

As I have no experience of EvE and just only heard stories from my friends i cannot comment on this, but generally I agree with what you say – some games require other skills as i hear EvE is a very economics and social based game.

On the other hand there are games such as diablo or even WoW (I know diablo isnt an mmo but a good example of an extreme) where as long as you have the gear and build a monkey can do PVE, this is what i was pointing to – the typical mmos floating around

Ahh, I get you.

Eh, for some aspects of PvE, that’s true (the open world mostly), but for others, you still require a skill called teamwork and co-ordination, as well as understanding your class. If you haven’t got the knowledge on how to play your class, then all of the gear in the world won’t help your group.

Azreell.1568:

Or you could say the opposite – Just because you dislike the trinity does not mean you have to deny it for everyone else.

Pot meet Kettle.

I don’t think it’s right for people to come to a game where it was advertised as ‘no Trinity’, and then expect them to put a Trinity in, but that’s just me.

Azreell.1568:

The game needs something beyond DPS. As it stand now GW2 combat is out classed by pretty much every other mmorpg on the market in terms of depth and required skill.

GW2 is training wheels for pretty much all other games.

It shouldn’t be that way but after a year stacking in a corner and being full zerk should not be the most viable way to kill most content.

This entire situation is brought on by the lack of a core trinity – Which is something they could move in a direction to and alleviate a lot of these issues.

It’s apparent this game will never have “the trinity” per say – but it could move a bit closer to it and appease both sides while at the same time at least giving some depth to the combat system.

I’d have to argue about the Trinity adding ‘depth’. If you require a certain group composition (and by require, I mean ‘need’ and not ‘want because it’s the most optimal way’) and there’s no room for adjustment, then there’s no depth, since depth is brought about through meaningful choices.

There are ways to use the current core combat system to add ‘depth’ to the game without the need of adding static, predefined roles that the Trinity would introduce. Mainly designing the content to utilise some of the less-used aspects of the system.

Maybe it’s just a case that you’re partial to the Trinity, thus you see the Trinity as the go-to solution.

As for GW2 being training wheels for other games? Can’t personally say I agree. I found a whole bunch of other MMO’s to be much, much easier, if we’re talking about level-appropriate content.

Azreell.1568:

Bread.7516:

required skill? mmo PVE were NEVER known for required skill or twitch reflexes.

Can I have the English translation of your intended response please?

MMO’s have never been known for needing skill and twitch in PvE content. His / her English isn’t so bad as you shouldn’t be able to understand it.

I disagree with his statement, however. It’s just a case of different games requiring different types of skills. You wouldn’t use the same skills in GW2 as you would, say, EvE.

Xillllix.3485:

Hey thanks for the reply everyone, I only wanted to get this discussion going and have people reflect upon the possibilities.

The mods would:
1- Function outside the main world economy (no rewards besides those that only work within the mod)
2- Would take place outside the main PvE story.
3- Could work in a similar fashion to the steam workshop, where content must first be approved by Anet.
4- About modding for a MMO environment. Well, Anet isn’t really an MMO. Everything is instanced, there is no monthly fee. I really don’t see the difficulty in adding a new WvW map to the dropdown menu. Anet could then have a WvW map contest for example and the winning map could be included to the rotation as they wish.

Nope, ANet is the developer, so you’re right there. However, to say GW2 isn’t really an MMO simply because of instancing and no monthly fee is the same as saying WoW isn’t an MMO because it has the majority of it’s endgame instanced.

The fact is that it’s an online game played by everyone, and thus opening the game to modding can easily lead to exploitation. While Anet could check all content first, it also means that they’d have to hire a team specifically for that purpose.

Now, the Steam workshop is slightly different. You aren’t directly modding the game (on the server side, at least). You’re submitting ideas to be implemented by Valve.

Now, I’d be all for something like that; a place where players can submit armour and weapon designs. Even designs for DE’s, dungeons, Fractals, maps ect.

However, directly modding the game outside the game’s implemented rules, so that it could potentially affect others too? Never in a million years can I see that happening.

I think the main issue with the removal of the Trinity isn’t the fact that it wasn’t replaced with anything (it was; the system we have now), but the fact that the content itself is designed in such a way that it doesn’t utilise the depth that the system implemented offers, whether that be through content design or flawed mechanics.

This isn’t saying that the system is perfect; certain parts (such as Defiant and the combo system) need working on, or even complete reworking. However, the system could work very well, as long as the encounters were designed to use parts of the system other than dodge and damage.

Another thing; you don’t need a Trinity-esque system of pre-defined, static and all encompassing roles (that is, roles that never change depending on the content) in order to have roles (which seems to be the main issue people have). Roles aren’t limited to the concepts of tanking, control, damage, healing, supporting ect. The term role in itself means your purpose within the group.

Look at the Effigy in CoF. If the fight worked as it was supposed to all of the time (needing to destroy the crystals, as opposed to brute-forcing them), then there’s an example of a role built into the fight, and unique to that fight.

As for controlling Aggro in the way of the Trinity; IMO, it’s one of the mechanics that limits AI.

A Norn walks out of a bar.

Nick.6972:

TheDaiBish.9735:

Nick.6972:

You know what will be great? If they released an update that had nothing to do with story whatsoever: adding guild features, fixing abysmal loot system, adding precursor hunt, fixing bugs and skills – all the features they promised in 2013.

Where did they promise these things?

Also, there’s supposed to be just a patch for features and QoL updates after the last LS patch in March.

Oh I don’t know, they said that they’re already working on precursor hunt back in January 2013 and that it will be implemented later than year.

Ah, so it wasn’t a promise.

Well, we knew it’d be pushed back until this year anyway. Colin said last October – November.

Nick.6972:

You know what will be great? If they released an update that had nothing to do with story whatsoever: adding guild features, fixing abysmal loot system, adding precursor hunt, fixing bugs and skills – all the features they promised in 2013.

Where did they promise these things?

Also, there’s supposed to be just a patch for features and QoL updates after the last LS patch in March.

ZudetGambeous.9573:

pandora eight.9451:

They could host a torrent download, that is always faster than their kittened launcher.

I think the problem is with your internet connection. The launcher downloads at 3.5MB/s for me. It maxes out my already blazing fast internet. I have no idea what the cap is, has anyone gotten more than 3.5MB/s out of the launcher?

My mate got something like 9.2MB/s.

I personally don’t see any problem with the concept of Vertical Progression. However:

• If a game relies too heavily on Vertical Progression (takes months to gear to a specific spec), then Horizontal Progression (that is, progression that gives more options) in the form of builds largely becomes pointless, since you can’t try different things out.

• Most games simply have a lazy, uninspired ways of doing it. Usually it’s ‘get X tokens to buy this piece of armour’ (which you’ll need to save the world / drive off a threat. It’s almost as though them Token-grubbing vendors don’t care about the threat) and that’s it.

Ideally, Vertical Progression would be either coupled with Horizontal Progression (Certain milestones in leveling and WvW Masteries being an example), or a focus on Horizontal Progression with minor parts of VP (finding extra Attribute points in GW1 being an example).

Also, Vertical Progression and it’s aquisition would make sense, so to speak. In GW1, you needed a certain essence to Infuse armour and take it to a Seer, thus providing protection against Spectral Agony.

In GW2, any Tom, kitten or Harry can craft these counters to a force you don’t actually understand.

I use the fall damage trait on my Warrior in WvW. Especially useful if someone is trying to get into a keep that has enemies outside.

Ghotistyx.6942:

What exactly becomes a gambit in open world would definitely need some deep thought, but honestly, I don’t see why it wouldn’t work well enough. Honestly, zergs will trivialize almost any content.

The Giant in Nageling is fairly hard to solo, is bearable with more people, but if you have 40 people poking his face, individually it doesn’t feel like much of a challenge. Certain gambits like “take more damage” would be significant (like, take double damage), or would completely alter your survivability (if you can barely kite something to death normally, you’ll probably die if you have an incurable source of burning on you the whole fight).

See, rather than simply making the content harder by raising damage and such, I feel that each ‘big boss’ fight (I.E. Jormag, Shatterer) should have their own scaling formula’s tied to their mechanics.

For example, look at the Shatterer and his healing crystals. Whether you have 10 or 100, the amount of crystals that spawn remain the same, thus the large majority of players can ignore that mechanic.

However, if the amount of crystals that spawned changed depending on how many people were there (say, and extra 1 for every 5 people), and these crystals spawned in random places outside a certain distance from each other, them all players involved would have to work towards this mechanic.

Well, there never was supposed to be a dedicated healer. That’s probably why there isn’t one.

As some people have mentioned, you can provide some healing to help offset the damage.

However, you could also make a support-orientated character, which is more about mitigating damage (Protection, Aegis, Condition Removal) before it’s happened, rather than simply healing after the damage has been dealt.

Instead of removing it, make it an unlimited withdrawal once you reach 100% world completion, like the achievement skins.

ColinJohanson.2394:

Potential different systems would create more diverse game play, but the challenge is making it not overly complex, and running the risk of driving players to force one specific type of game play they may not enjoy since they can’t earn it other ways. These are some of the challenges we face we looking at any form of horizontal progression, and some of the discussions that come up when looking at new potential systems as well.

Reuse the Skill Point NPC’s for some skills.

For example, one NPC teaches Defensive Stance for Warriors (Grants Stability and both incoming and outgoing crits fumble).

During the time of that challenge, the player only has access to this skill and dodge, and they have to survive X amount of time. Give the NPC’s a few moves that make Defensive Stance an effective skill to use against (say, next X attacks crit), and if the player uses the skill appropriately and survives for that time, they unlock the skill.

Re-use the world for others

Maybe an Elementalist needs to find pieces of a stone tablet that teaches a move that, say, refreshes all Attunement cooldowns. At the same time and location, a Necro might find a location of power where they have to summon a minion type, and has to beat it to ‘claim’ it.

Or course, to prevent people just looking up the location of these pieces, make the locations random for each player.

GW1 Skill Capture with a twist

Instead of this system capturing the actual skill, it captures an alternatively skinned skill with no extra mechanical effects.

For example, in Fractals over level 30, Necro’s can capture an alternatively skinned Wells of Power, titled Archdiviner’s Well of [Name], with a purple and black glowy effect like Entropy has.

pulupulu.9730:

No. Skill is needed to execute strategy and tactic. It does not make them the same thing.

A bunch of people here just label all 3 under “skill”. Which is either over simplifying or just butchering the language.

A skill is something you do particularly well, something you have expertise in. It’s not oversimplifying it, or butchering language. That’s the literal definition of it.

What you mentioned is a skill in executing strategy and tactics. Someone who has skill in this doesn’t necessarily have skill in creating them, but creating and devising strategies and tactics can be a skill in itself.

Teofa Tsavo.9863:

In that context the conversation is meaningless. There is no base level player “skill” required to succeed in this game, other level based games, or in skill based games.

There are “skilled” players in every type of game. There are “unskilled” players as well.
Game companies do not set a standard of “skill” to play a game, they sell to a broad demographic. They do not base games on some arbitrary player skill standard.

Skill based is a description of a mechanic, no more. While it may salve some peoples ego to assume a game takes more “skill”, they don’t. A player’s skill level can make games easier, but is not required to be successful in any MMO I have played. Earth And Beyond, SWG, WoW, LoTRO, STO,GW1, AoC, Everquest 1 and 2, CoH, EVE, etc etc etc.

I play this with a severe manual dexterity handicap. I do not wasd. I rarely dodge. I don’t run about like a headless chicken. My chars are set up to be passively tough, and that gives me enough time to mash buttons with my one functional left finger. I have 9 level 90s with no problems doing whatever it is I want to do, in spite of lacking the “skillz” people here are going on and on about.

Knowledge is the only “skill” necessary. People fail in games by not understanding mechanics, period. Physical dexterity is only needed in certain forms of PVP.. and the most dexterous person on earth can be beaten by latency and bad connectivity… or, by someone who simply knows the mechanics better.

Touche.

Although, as a final note since your description does make sense, I’d say it depends on the context in which they used the term ‘skill-based’.

Teofa Tsavo.9863:

The greatest dodger and mover in this game will fail in GW1 trying to use those “skillz”. Does that make GW1 harder? No. No more than dodging makes this game harder. Not understanding the mechanics of either game will make them harder.. and that is it.

Well, I did say earlier on that different games require different skills, so I agree with you there.

Chris Whiteside.6102:

There has been a huge amount of discussion around sub classes. I would love to see you guys close out this particular area by either putting a sub class proposal together (Sentence detailing how it would work) or deciding as a group that it isn’t relevant at this point.

In my eyes, Horizontal Progression is all about widening options, not limiting players.

With that in mind, this is how I’d personally like to see how sub-classes would work if they were ever to be implemented:

Players aren’t tied to a particular sub-class. That is, sub-classes are merely a means to unlock further options.

For example, a Thief might choose to go down the road of an Assassin, thus unlocking skills based around striking from the shadows. However, any skills unlocked from a sub-class can be used for the player to create their own builds. So a Thief who’s unlocked, say, Garrote from the Assassin sub-class and Blinding Poison from the Poisoner sub-class, would be able to use both of them skills in the same build. The only time players would be limited to using sub-class skills is during tasks that the player has to do to unlock skills for that sub-class.

Gaining mastery in a sub-class unlocks a weapon unique to that profession.

So, keeping in with the Thief, an Assassain might unlock a Crossbow, while a Poisoner might unlock a Blowgun.

As well as these, players would get cosmetic perks.

Such as unique armour pieces (along with an account-based title track, with the ultimate title ‘Nothing To Wear’), titles specific to that sub-class (Adept Assassin > Master Assassin). These cosmetic perks, again, aren’t tied to sub-class, but they are tied to that particular profession (so a Thief, for example, would be able to mix and match armour pieces from the Assassin and Poisoner sets).

Teofa Tsavo.9863:

This is not a skill based game. It is a level and gear based game. Simple.

Pre NGE SWG was a skill based game. Eve is a skill based game. TSW is a skill based game. GW1 was a semi skill based game, far far more than this one.

In skill based games your char is defined by the skill sets chosen from a large pool and not limited to a given profession or level. Power of weapons and armor are dependant on skills invested in them, not level. In a skill based game, how you invest skill points are far more important than profession or weapons choice.

It is a very basic game concept that has nothing to do with button mashing “skillz”

When referring to skill-based, I don’t think they’re referring to the main focus being on skills, but that the game has a greater focus on player-skill and less on numbers in the back (block chance, parry chance ect).

Orpheal.8263:

@Dai: Tieing Cosmetics to Sub Classes isn#t dumb, its quite in fact very smart, and clever, because its the real only way how you could guarantee for this game, that players receive more ways how you can look different, than tons of other players.

How does restricting what people can wear by subclass give more ways for people to look different?

Forgive me for not seeing the logic in what you’re saying.

pulupulu.9730:

Wow, alot of people seem to be confused between skill, tactic and strategy… They are 3 different things.

Not neccesserily. A skill is something someone has an expertise in.

So, someone can have skill in creating and executing strategies and tactics.

Marcus Greythorne.6843:

Orpheal.8263:

You can use racial skills also only, when you play the correct race.
So whats the stupid problem now with sub class skills, that you can use now only, when you play the correct sub class?

That’s the point: Who uses racial skills? They are designed to be weaker than the other skills because Anet doesn’t want to make any race required to be the best in what you do.

The same could be applied to subclasses. If subclass xy would be the best in doing dps, then it would feel as a requirement to choose this profession. Now because this would be wrong – what would we get? Generic skills like racial skills, which feel redundant.

I personally think racial skills are a failed design because no one want’s to / can use them in a serious build.

Heh, I used to use the Charr landmine in my Immobilize Warrior build, before Leg Specialist got a ICD. Although I didn’t pick Charr for that reason.

Orpheal.8263:

I want to ask you directly:

What is your problem with there being Sub Class Skills, that you can use only when you have chosen the corresponding Sub Class for it or with Armor Sets, that you can wear only, when you use the fitting Sub Class?

Personally, the issue I have with sub-classes is that it it limits choice even further.

We’re already limited by:

• Prechosen weapon skills and skill slots
• Professions
• Traits

Now, I’m not saying limitations are a bad thing entirely. However, when they force you into a particular set to build your character a particular way, then it is. What if I feel a skill from subclass A would go well with my build, but I’m subclass B? The only way to do that is lock viable skills with the subclasses, and that just takes away all of the depth of the system.

This is the main issue I have with weapon skills. The lack of choice. I like the aesthetics of the swords. However, since they’re a condition damage weapon, I can’t use them in a viable direct damage build. What if I could choose to swap the bleed out for, say, a bit of extra damage against Vulnerable foes?

You’re also talking about tying cosmetics to sub-classes, which, IMO, is kind of dumb in a game where you have the freedom to build your own look.

Scoobaniec.9561:

Skill based means u can be beated up by another player and dont worry about it as ur friends will rez ya in 2sec laughing at ur enemy. 10 skilled players vs 50 noobs? Np, even if some noob get downed he will stand up in notime to continue putting his head into keyboard and mashing 1 with nose

Skill based is Dark Souls and im sure that 90% playerbase of gw2 would ragequit at first boss with word f. it every 2sec. I rebember the rage about Liadri, yet its was really easy.

Or maybe 4 vs 30?

I got Dark Souls. For whatever reason though it runs terrible on PC (and no, it’s not my system specs).

Bagel.4598:

TheDaiBish.9735:

Bagel.4598:

What he is saying is that 90% of this game’s content and it’s mechanics could be done by a monkey in a straight jacket.

There is no need for build organisation between players, or group co-ordination in dungeons.

Anyone, running anything can come and steam roll it. Jump in to a zerg to do absolutely ANYTHING on the map.

Buy everything you need with gold.

The only exception to anything that requires thought and team work is sPvP, Fractals, Some WvW and maybe Arah.

You have a point about the open world (although I’ve yet to play a game where the open-world was actually challenging).

While the team skills aren’t as apparent all of the time, you still need personal skill to perform.

As you say, most of the teamwork is in the SPvP, WvW and higher level Fractals.

However, we aren’t talking about teamwork; we’re talking about personal skill, if the tone of the person I was replying to was any indicator.

For example, quite a few people called for nerfs on Tequatl , Liandri and the Clocktower. Some people have trouble with Jumping Puzzles. Some people can’t differentiate between the Mesmer and their clones. Some can’t tell when a Thief is going to attack.

These are all ‘skills’ in their own right that seems to have gone over that person’s head, either because he / she already had them, or simply because he /she doesn’t consider them ‘skills’.

And that right there brings us back to the comparison of GW1 to GW2.
You HAD to make your build work. You had to organise who did what in your party, what your heroes were running. How your build complemented theirs.
Go in to Ascalon city in GW1’s hayday, grab a random team of 8 and jump in to FoW, or a dungeon, or DoA and watch the slaughter begin.
Then it evolved in to requiring talented people to run complex builds each performing their own task within an area.
I guess I have to say it again, in GW2 ANYONE running ANYTHING can form in your party and steam roll through 90% of this content.
The skills are all chosen for you or put in a pool so tiny you don’t really have much of a choice.

There was a MASS of crying about teq on the first day of release. By the second day when everyone found out, lets all just zerg and stand beside him, throw some people on the turrets and we’ll complete everytime.

And this brings me back to my original point (my first post in this thread):

Different games require different skills.

GW1 required skills in theorycrafting / using Google, and knowing how to play that build, knowing the appropriate times to use skills ect.

GW2 has a different skill-set (depending on the content you’re playing).

Also, I’d say that a lot of GW1 content could also be done with AI.

Darkobra.6439:

BrotherBelial.3094:

When ever I’ve bought a game of a retailer for a PC, the retailer normally asks me can my PC run it, and that once opens it CAN NOT be returned. This is the norm in the UK.

Since when?

To be fair, I can never remember any retailers taking any of my PC games when I go to exchange them. I’d wager a guess because of the product key. All someone would have to do is jot it down, and then take the game back.

Not to mention for MMO’s (or any game with DRM), it could be a case that code has been tied to an account, making it worthless to the retailer.

Bagel.4598:

What he is saying is that 90% of this game’s content and it’s mechanics could be done by a monkey in a straight jacket.

There is no need for build organisation between players, or group co-ordination in dungeons.

Anyone, running anything can come and steam roll it. Jump in to a zerg to do absolutely ANYTHING on the map.

Buy everything you need with gold.

The only exception to anything that requires thought and team work is sPvP, Fractals, Some WvW and maybe Arah.

You have a point about the open world (although I’ve yet to play a game where the open-world was actually challenging).

While the team skills aren’t as apparent all of the time, you still need personal skill to perform.

As you say, most of the teamwork is in the SPvP, WvW and higher level Fractals.

However, we aren’t talking about teamwork; we’re talking about personal skill, if the tone of the person I was replying to was any indicator.

For example, quite a few people called for nerfs on Tequatl , Liandri and the Clocktower. Some people have trouble with Jumping Puzzles. Some people can’t differentiate between the Mesmer and their clones. Some can’t tell when a Thief is going to attack.

These are all ‘skills’ in their own right that seems to have gone over that person’s head, either because he / she already had them, or simply because he /she doesn’t consider them ‘skills’.

CoRtex.2157:

can’t actually believe people think there are skills in this game lol :P it’s faceroll, you don’t even have to know what you are doing in a dungeon and you can still complete it easly. OR… OR.. maybe… people confuse skill (like in how good you are) with skills (in like abilities of your class), hmmmmm, wow, mind blown,, i had to dig so deep in to my brain to figure out how n00bs think, it’s like, they are living outside ‘the box’. Mind blown… really..

So what you’re saying is that you’ve never died, you don’t use exploits in dungeons, and that every dungeon run you did you did first time?

Pip.2094:

No way now, don’t say there are many “viable” builds that go fine here

Builds exist, they are fun but they are not, in any way not even close, as good as dps.

Viable and optimal are two different things.

pandora eight.9451:

My retailer does refunds, it is ArenaNet which prohibits the refunds for my country.

What country would that be?

I think ‘skill-based’ is a misnomer.

Every game is ‘skill-based’. They just require different skills.

Zeldain.5710:

TheDaiBish.9735:

nexxe.7081:

There would be more coordination, and if Person A taunted first, and was about to die, Person B could taunt it off, or the other Persons could use combos on Person A and heal him.

Except this tactic is already in the game in the form of stuns, knockdowns, knockbacks, and pulls.

Not the same, and since no one groups thanks to open tagging and shared resources, there’s no communication to pull this stuff off.

I was referring more to instanced content, which is more focused on groups.

I also fail to see what shared resources (I’m assuming you mean nodes) and open tagging have anything to do with the conversation, but OK.

nexxe.7081:

Yes, but the mob would still be randomly attacking anyone, instead of focusing on the player who taunted. Those skills aren’t as effective, especially in large zergs in the open-world.

Well, since you mentioned the Trinity, I assumed we were talking about instances, since the Trinity is rarely used in the open-world anyway.

Sirendor.1394:

My main point is that combat becomes utterly meaningless if it’s all about stacking as much points in power/prec/crit OR condition damage, and then relying on CC, skills, dodges to evade damage. It’s pointless and it destroys every single support element in combat.

In terms of PvE, is this the combat systems fault, or encounter design for not utilising these aspects?

I keep speaking in terms of PvE, since I don’t have much in the way of experience of high-end PvP.

nexxe.7081:

There would be more coordination, and if Person A taunted first, and was about to die, Person B could taunt it off, or the other Persons could use combos on Person A and heal him.

Except this tactic is already in the game in the form of stuns, knockdowns, knockbacks, and pulls.

Swagger.1459:

TheDaiBish.9735:

Swagger.1459:

Cdi is great, but I think there should be in-game surveys as well so y’all can get a better finger on the pulse.

Eh, I dunno.

I mean, if I’m in game, it’s because I want to play, not write a paragraph on what was good and what wasn’t, and if it’s just a rating system, it doesn’t really go into ‘why’ the player feels that way.

You can check my edit as well.

Regardless, there are more ways to gather information and stats that reach the majority of players. Example… Click box in-game survey reveals that players would like the next forum cdi discussion to be 1. Professions, 2. Housing, 3. Mounts. So the monthly topics become those three. Same could go for forum surveys.

Ahh, I get you now. Not so much a full feedback, but an indicator as to what the key issues are for a more focused discussion.

What I also think would be useful is a feedback thread after every release. Not only does this give a place where the discussion is focused, but it’ll also (hopefully) reduce 10+ threads of the exact same issue.

The main principle of the combat is:
- Everyone can heal/support (role 1)
- Everyone can deal damage (role 2)
- Everyone can tank (role 3)

And this is the issue with your argument. These aren’t the main principles at all, if I’m understanding you correctly – that is, you’re saying that players can choose between tank, healer or DPS on every profession.

Firstly, ANet got rid of dedicated healers and roles dedicated to keeping aggro. Following that line of thought, shouldn’t that tell you that you shouldn’t be trying to play a dedicated support / damage / control?

Secondly, healing is only a small form of supporting others, and yet this is the only part you focus on. You even go as far as to expect a dedicated healer (which doesn’t exist, remember?) to be able to do a decent amount of healing to the point where it counteracts damage. In the post where ANet said why they got rid of dedicated healers, they said because they want a more proactive form of support (popping Protection just before a big hit), and less reactive (healing after the big hit).

Thirdly, there are no ‘tanks’ in that sense. There never was meant to be, as evidenced by the lack of aggro control abilities. Toughness is not meant to make you a juggernaut that can make you take hits while a dedicated support character focuses on keeping you alive. It’s more of a safety blanket than an iron shield. That’s the only purpose of such high-scaling defensive stats; when you’re the focus of the enemy. As for defensive abilities, such as blocking, they can actually be used to help team members, since you can intercept projectiles.

The actual principle is that, while in the flow of combat, you can have a character that is full on damage, or a hybrid that can move with the flows of battle when needed (going from damage to control, for example). Not having every profession fit into dedicated roles before you’ve even gone into the dungeon.

As for taking care of yourself, for the PvE side, maybe, but for PvP, especially WvW,I disagree.

However, this isn’t the same as me saying there aren’t flaws. I just feel what you’re stating as flaws aren’t actually inherently flaws.

Firstly, there are some mechanics that need improvement:

• Defiant – Needs to be changed so control is viable, but doesn’t allow for players to simply stunlock. Maybe have it not trigger if you interrupt, or have it decay over time.
• Conditions – Not so much an issue in dungeons with an organised group as in the open-world, and too effective in PvP.
• Boss attacks – more frequent, smaller hits, less big, one-shots.

Secondly, speaking from a PvE aspect, I don’t think it’s so much the fault as letting players build dedicated roles, as encounter design doesn’t utilise the depth that is there.

For example, we have control, boons, condition removal, conditions, damage, fields, traits to strengthen these aspects and so on.

However, most encounters a) either focus on damage or b) have mechanics that can be brute-forced through sheer damage.

The CoF effigy fight, in my eyes, is a good example.

You have 2 roles: destroying crystals and damaging the boss. Even if they’re more focused on the damage end, it’s still two roles (that is, your purpose in a fight). You still rely on the player to do their role properly.

However, one of them mechanics (destroying crystals) can simply be ignored through sheer damage (eased along with an unhealthy dose of Poison).

Now, say we tweaked this mechanic so:

• Alongside the (boosted) regen, the crystals also provide stacking damage + condition reduction.
• Destroying crystals applies a stacking DoT and Vulnerability to the player
• Bigger crystals occasionally spawn, that if the Effigy consumes it, it gains a barrier.

So, instead of just the damage aspect, we also have:

• Control – Stopping the effigy from going by the big crystal.
• Awareness of party members – knowing when to swap.

Then, for players to fully utilise their toolset, have encounters with a variety of mechanics. Maybe the boss before applies Burning and Bleeding frequently, meaning Condition Removal is needed.

TL:DR – Combat can be greatly improved by a) having a variety of mechanics, making players consider what skills to take and b) building roles into the fights with mechanics that can’t be brute-forced.

Swagger.1459:

Cdi is great, but I think there should be in-game surveys as well so y’all can get a better finger on the pulse.

Eh, I dunno.

I mean, if I’m in game, it’s because I want to play, not write a paragraph on what was good and what wasn’t, and if it’s just a rating system, it doesn’t really go into ‘why’ the player feels that way.

Enjoy: Exploration, Weapons being more than just a stat stick, the lack of feeling that I need to log in.

I wouldn’t say there’s anything I hate, so much as a list of things I’d like to see improved.

So you didn’t buy it directly of ANet?

Refund policy is the responsibility of the company that you bought it off. They are the ones that should have told you it was non-refundable.

Depends on what part of the combat system.

Fixed, pre-defined roles and the ‘static’ combat? No thanks (I’m still convinced it’s not the getting rid of fixed roles that’s the key issue)

The character building part of it (Attributes and Skills)? Yes please. Personally, I feel the defining factor of GW1 skills wasn’t the amount, but how you had a variety of ways to link skills together, and how they had their appropriate uses (for example, Glowing Ice on a Hexed foe). Although I’d be happy with a middle road of just giving us 2 – 3 skills for each weapon slot if it helps with balancing.

Bagel.4598:

Magnus Steelgrave.6580:

Don’t need more tiers but a MF recipe to upgrade lessendaries to ascended stats I think would be a good thing

Wat

Lessendaries – The weapons that aren’t of Legendary tier, but require close to that much effort.

Aeonblade.8709:

Don’t joke about bringing the trinity and team strategy that goes with it back into the game. It’s a wet dream I have from time to time

Yes…‘team strategy’

Someone heals, someone repeatedly gets hit, and 3 people deal damage.

It’s a pretty one-trick strategy.

There’s ways to bring strategy into the game with the current group mechanics, without resorting to pigeonholing people into fixed roles and the reliance on certain members otherwise it’s an automatic fail.

Ethics.4519:

Lol, now he’s defending the company by a completely hypothetical future maybe.

The LS has failed so far. The only reason activity is as high as it is right now is because of A ) Hype and B ) waiting on other releases coming soon.

By this logic then, we should go back to the hard Trinity of Tank, Healer and DPS, and go back to instanced raids instead of open-world fights, because the because the system we have now doesn’t work, and although there’s potential for improvement, it’s hypothetical.

Also, where was I defending the company exactly? All I said was because the LS doesn’t compare to an expac now (which I haven’t the slightest on how you’d consider that ‘defending’), doesn’t mean that it can’t. Saying that the LS can only be what it is now is a logical fallacy.

Aeonblade.8709:

No one in their right minds compares the horrors of LS with true expansion content.

An expansion:

• Adds several permanent areas to a game
• Adds new skills/classes/races
• Adds more than one new dungeon
• Adds a lot of skins and weapon skins

LS has added:

• Temporary Content that if you aren’t so hardcore you never log you’ll never see all of
• A zone that is now dead sans botters
• Gem store cash grab skins

I fail to see the connection between LS and an expansion. I fail to see the connection between LS and content updates at all. Temporary content =/= content.

juno.1840:

You’re a bit like a broken record in this topic Nabrok. If you think that LS is on par with a true expansion, I’m not sure what you’re smoking. Also the amount of “permanent” content you list is trivial (Tequatl, really?).

Just because it hasn’t been on par, or hasn’t included what a traditional expac would, doesn’t mean it can’t.

For example, if we, say, had a LS based on the Tengu.

After aiding them in their time of need, trust grows, and:

• Tengu becomes a playable race.
• Tengu teaches some of their ways, unlocking a new profession.
• DoW opens.
• It leads onto a story where you help the Tengu take Cantha back. In exchange, they pass on what knowledge they have of the Elder Dragons.

caiomacos.1694:

Harbinger.8637:

I have Mjolnir, Infinite Light, and Immobulus. Guess what I did with them? Transmuted them to ascend.

If you had 600g to craft Mjolnir, I think you’ll be fine crafting an ascend weapon to transmute it.

But thats not the problem. The thing is I gotta be rewarded for my effort, so I should be stronger than someone who can only get an easy to acquire ascended weapon.

You are rewarded, except it’s with a rare skin instead of higher stats.

Also, why should you be stronger?

Shongaqu.5279:

@Orpheal
Would a deck system that unlocks unique profession specific appearance items by using the ‘deck’ to complete content fulfil your idea of the sub-class? This does not require the addition of sub classes per se but creates recommended builds that when a player selects the deck it will change their skill bar and spend their trait points as well as recommend the optimal stats/sigils/runes. By completing content with the Deck equipped your xp gained would work towards unlocking unique cosmetic items. A necromancer who uses the corruptor ‘deck’ would unlock armor that leaves behind poison pool footsteps while a lich deck causes the character to gain a spectral sheen. As new skills and weapons become available new decks would incentivize players to try the new skills/weapons with their characters.

If it’s more or less the same system used in The Secret World, I think it would be a brilliant alternative to sub-classes.

Not only does it give the player choice (use this build or make your own), but it also helps the newer players without the need to go outside the game.

So…we need more gear tiers why? What purpose would it add?

Ethics.4519:

Yes, I agree people in this thread are blowing things way, way out of proportion. I think the amount of blowing is equal on both sides.

Pray tell how the people trying to explain how everything wasn’t guaranteed are blowing anything out of proportion?

Fror.2163:

No, they promised if all goes well. But you didn’t read/understood that. Not their fault you read only what you want!

I should have included a sarcasm tag. My apologies.

I personally understand that. Some in this thread doesn’t.

Ethics.4519:

Oh yeah. It makes it okay? Well, next time I have a project at work that isn’t done. I’ll just go in a week before hand and say “Hey, sometimes stuff gets pushed back”. I’m sure my manager would be perfectly happy about that.

Just as an FYI, it’s okay to like the game and still see fault in actions of the company.

I’d say it’s more like a client requests something, you give an estimate on how long it takes, and you let them know if certain things are going to take longer.

And yes, it’s ok to critisise and like. However, I feel most people in this thread are blowing things way, way out of proportion, to the point they ignore the fact that we were told certain bits wouldn’t make it in before the end of 2013.