Guild Wars 2

Entropy.4732:

Oh the absurdity! Where to begin… Let’s start with your claim that DH & IOJ never teamed up.

Please point out where I said no one teamed up! You seem to be having a separate conversation in your head than what is going on right here.. You also missed how it relates to exactly what you said, which was my point.

It’s wrong, it’s a game killer, and it’s just not fun.

I thought it made the last match more fun than it would have ever been otherwise. Subjective though, as not everyone on DH agrees.

MOST of the time the stronger server and the second place server Double-Team the weakest.

Yup, never said any differently. Thats why I went to so much length to describe what happened last match as how it is “supposed” to work. I even went into how anet could implement mechanics to encourage this since it doesnt usually happen (where the two weaker servers focus the strongest).

Anywho, you just carry on in your crusade. Good luck!

ArkAngel.7940:

Thank you, I am well aware of how the PPT system works and how to “win” WvW. However, my stance is why should we seek unguarded towers just so we can get those 15+ points per tick? Or sneak around a fight just to grab said tower. If you take a tower, it shouldn’t be so you can get those ticks. There are a lot more reasons to grab a tower. I digress though, we should be fighting, not stealth capping. Which is why PPT loses its value because of the lack of night crews. I’m not saying you are wrong. I’m not saying I’m right. This is after all a game we all paid for, and there are many ways to enjoy WvW. “Winning” a match up be kitten

I had no doubt you understood WvW and PPT. What you didnt seem to catch was my point, but thats ok. In the end, I really dont care whether or not you use it.

You are more than free to enjoy it in the way you desire, obviously. All I did was post a tactic. You said you care more about personal satisfaction than PPT, and also insinuate that it is either an invalid tactic, or dishonorable. However, whether or not it applies to you, or if you will personally use it, isnt particularly relevant for the very same reason you stated;

Everyone here paid for the game, I would assume.

A “mutually organized focus of one server by the other two servers with pre-determined ground rules” will never include everyone on the server, ever. However, its success is determined by how many are participating. If you say guilds like [Os] are not important to any outcome.. I am not sure what to say!

I can equally say that I never participated in the supposed double team between IoJ and DH, as afaik, one never existed except to troll the thread. See how that works?

All anyone needs to do is go read that thread. You posted in it, you know whats there.

Basically, DH is flat out the stronger server amongst the three, and because of this, they were a focus for the two other servers. This is exactly how the WvW system is supposed to work, and a shining example of how the 1v1v1 system can work as a balance. But, I think the only time it does is when the two weaker servers actually communicate out some ground rules during the match (which is exactly what happened in that thread).

And really, in the end, the double team arrangement made my NSP and IoJ made for one of the best matchs in a long, long time. Anyone who questions what happened can just read that thread. Like I said, its an excellent example of how the system is supposed to work. It goes to show that just being the stronger server isnt always enough, the other two, even if weaker, can pull off a win for one of the servers if they have large segments of the population that play in accordance to some ground rules.

Well, I suppose I will take the lack of response as my answer. :P

I have really been focusing on team synergies recently, so it would be interesting to discuss it. But, its build specific, so I feel it would be difficult to just do a general thread on it in each of the class forums.

Ah well, good build anyway. Regardless of my personal dislike of playing bunkers, it looks undoubtedly effective, with quite a few different options to cater to different playstyles while still retaining the core of the build. Good job!

Maybe we will run together at some point.

ArkAngel.7940:

If only you gained points from killing enemy players, then maybe we will see a lot less pvdoor and more actual battles. However, in the end, is winning by points more satisfying then winning fights? At least in sports there is an opponent defending as oppose to distracting their whole team with magic tricks and having one guy score a goal.

Its not really about subjective satisfaction…

Sticking with hockey, when a player gets a break away against an empty net, what usually happens?

Again though, its just not a matter of what you personally enjoy more. The game is about winning through accumulated PPT.

I have long been a proponent of including a game mode that doesnt do this, btw. My ideal game mode would be where holding objectives just gives a strategic advantage, and points are determined by player kills, with a ratio determining just how much each one is worth (i.e. a 5v1 kill would be worth less than if the one player was able to kill one of the five in the process, or something like that). It would also involve not just siege blueprints, but having to build all of our own structures, keeps, etc. We would have to determine where would be the best place to build a supply camp determined by the surrounding resources (kind of like in an RTS like Civilization).

Not going to happen, mind you, but I would love it to no end. But, this game is determined by PPT that accumulate in direct relation to captured objectives. So, overall, the strategies used are to get those “goals,” regardless of if there is a goalie or not.

hyjaxxx.1584:

advice and criticism as always is needed and appreciated , lets keep our community healthy!

I know that responding to my post may “give away” some of your tactics, but that is the goal I was trying to achieve.

Along with posting builds, I think it would be a good idea to also post how that build can work into other builds/classes, and how it does it. Both through synergizing cross-class traits, as well as on the field of play. By doing this, people can not only give their input on the build specifically, but also how it can actively be used in group play. When we get a lot of good minds all focusing on it, we are likely to come up with even more ways that we can make our builds work even stronger in a group!

It seems to be something that is missing from almost every build in every class forum, so maybe its just me thats nuts. :P In fact, Im pretty sure thats the case… but since I am nuts.. how am I to know? HOW AM I TO KNOW?!

:D

Like Forty Seven Ninjas.6982:

Please submit a report with Anet. We absolutely do not condone it in any way shape or form. We all reported him when we saw him doing it on a keep, but I don’t think we had video evidence. If anyone has videos of people climbing walls or whatnot, please submit them to Anet.

If I am not mistaken, it also seems like this player has been doing this for quite a while…

When you have evidence, please report it to Anet. Its fine to post on the boards, but the only thing we can do is report it ourselves with evidence. Anet is the one that has to take action, and hopefully they will quickly.

ArkAngel.7940:

Why would I want to avoid conflict? Isn’t the point to fight other people? Not take a tower because no one is there. Towers and keeps are just bait to bring in a force to fight. it appears no one wants to fight if there is a chance of losing, which is why they hide by numbers, or if they are trying to level their other characters via the karma train zergs (which makes it incredibly easy to level) the only reason to withdraw from a conflict would to be to relocate to another position where you would have the advantage. In terms of terrain and not numbers.

The “point” is to get “points.” Just like in hockey, etc. Some people enjoy the mid-ice play, but in the end, the goal is to outscore your opponent.

To cater to your playstyle though, just replace “tower/keep/etc” with “enemy zerg,” which gives us:

Have a smaller force distract the front of an enemy zerg, while your main force moves in from an opposite direction while stealthed. Four or five players will not draw much notice to be perceived as a threat. While the small force has the enemy players attention, the large force has a very, very large buffer before effective response time.

Better? Same exact concept.

Campalishous.9076:

Not only is it not cheating, IMO when the new match up system rolls up a highly uneven match the game should implicitly support 2v1. Everything would work the same except the teamed side would be a single color & could use all the waypoints either of the teams controls.

Yeah, I think encourage it would be a good thing too actually.

In the last match with IoJ and NSP, it was one of the best matches that DH has had in quite a while. The issue, as others have stated, is that without actual organization and ground rules, it doesnt tend to be the two weaker servers against the stronger. I think actively encouraging it in that direction would be a good thing.

DH ended up losing, but the overall match was really exciting and fun. I think if they added some type of mechanic to encourage it, it might help with the server imbalances and wipe outs that happen, creating better matches for everyone. It could also be heavily exploited though, just like everything, so it would have to be implemented correctly.

HatasGunnaHate.3627:

Zergling forum warriors lol. :[

FPvP is the bestest.

We are only missing GIFs :\ To balance out our team, we need to train more GIF warriors. Its the weak link in our chain, to be honest.

cheshirefox.7026:

our previous opponents basically only knew how to accomplish things in groups of 20 or more.. the one server in particular, i’m pretty sure the only “tactic” they knew was port bomb.. it really detracted a lot of meaning from the game

My biggest disappointment with that is that portal tends to ONLY be used for portal bombs, when it is such an amazing and diverse tool!

There are so many incredible possibilities with that one skill alone.

Steve Whitley.8359:

but still there its a numbers game, because you’re tactic is to suddenly have more numbers than your opponent and to take whatever you’re going for before the other team can rally the same or similar numbers and be gone before they can match you. at least that’s what i’m assuming is going on.

if you really had numbers, and had skilled numbers and could what i call threaten with those numbers, you wouldn’t care who saw you or where they saw you, you’d roll up where you rolled up, take what you wanted to take, and move on.

this element of surprise IMO is a tactic used by a server not used to having numbers to get in and out before the other server knows they’re there to avoid conflict. maybe i’m wrong, but its not what i’m used to seeing. if you have numbers, why not use them wherever you are. from what i’ve seen so far, DH and HoD have similar numbers to BP and SBI yet they run around trying to hide themselves like they’re some small outmanned server all the time. come out and play, show force (silly chest bumping comment made me lol) and save the cloaking as a tactic for when you actually engage the other team… you’ll be pretty unstoppable if/ when you do that IMO.

Wait, you see this so commonly as to say both HoD and DH do it “all the time?” (bolded part of your post).

Remember too, all of these skills are just on a CD. You can use them again shortly after using them the first time. Do you by any chance remember guild tags, or have video? Id love to get into contact with the people on DH doing it, specifically.

And its not unstoppable, imo, Anet even implemented a hard counter with stealth traps.

ArkAngel.7940:

If you can in fact stealth a large force all the way to your objective, props, it requires a lot of coordination to do that just like a portal chain. Finding new ways to utilize skills is always a plus.

I do think its a pretty effective tactic.

When you think about it more, it really requires one person to know what to do and when to do it, and then people who will listen.

Just get a list of your mesmers, and thieves to hide the stragglers with things like BP. Tell which mes what to do and when, and just give a general rule to the thieves to cover as much of the stragglers as possible. Even if you dont get everyone, just seeing four or five players running randomly through the field isnt too threatening.

In a large battle, you can also use stealths at clutch moments if your team is sustaining a lot of damage. If everyone can get through, it basically breaks all targeting and can give some breathing room for a short time (to heal, regroup, flank, etc). AoEs still get through, obviously, but that can be minimized by just switching direction/location once (quick 90 degree turn, or a portal).

ArkAngel.7940:

maybe your point was trying to sneak a zerg around the map, which I agree is silly. But your statement on “number advantage” is what irks me. There will always be large forces running around, its just the nature of the game. But to think that the only way to win is with numbers is ridiculous. In high tier sure, buff your numbers, but down here, there is more possibility of getting small group plays in. I hate fighting high rank servers due to the fact that the zergs just keep getting bigger and bigger.

Not sure how silly it is, to be honest.

I have not seen one of the zergs I have been in use the tactic, but I have seen it used against us in conjunction with portals, etc.

It allows for a large amount of players to suddenly “show up” in a certain part of the map, which gives them a much, much larger buffer before effective response time.

Attack one place with enough people to draw attention, trying to grab attention of everyone possible. While doing this, have the majority of your players in a fast moving, mostly stealthed zerg, attack a target that is far enough away from the initial attention grab, and you can essentially cap whatever you want before anyone responds.

Its fine by me if no one sees the value in it though, especially DH’s opponents. :P

Steve Whitley.8359:

Tuluum.9638:

You just blew my mind sir, in so many ways!

the small and simple minded are easily amused (and in this case blown away it seems).

cheers to large zerg stealthed roaming and trebs drops at doors (and the pugs who will actually build them).

Uh huh…

Just remember, I offered my explanation as to why I, frequently a solo roamer, tend to avoid even single players in the field.

This would presume that I am not a part of the stealthed zerg, as I am the one being attacked by said zerg.

Shotgun trebs can be quite handy, btw, even if they are quite supply intensive.

Steve Whitley.8359:

no, its pointless, because the moment you attack something… what happens? big orange swords appear on the map.. so.. everybody knows youre there. stealth does nothing to hide you other than 6 seconds hiding.

I’ve seen stack / cloak during a skirmish but not while roaming (doesn’t make sense and I think you guys missed the short bus there but that’s my opinion i guess). you guys confuse the hell out of me, kind of like how you took valley last night in less time than it took to put swords on it with no siege (going to catch that flying mesmer or door glitcher, but i guess that’s a conversation for another time)… a truly amazing bunch that i’m not sure quite gets is, but has been fun to play nonetheless.

You just blew my mind sir, in so many ways!

I am not even going to attempt to detract from your artistic impression of “life as we know it.”

ArkAngel.7940:

“Large zergs” “threaten by numbers”. I guess stealthing a force is not logical or tactical, let’s just add more people and thump our chest because we will just outnumber them and call ourselves “tactical”. In fact, let’s stop using any skills in our skill slots and just get more people and just out zerg zergs. Group play be kitten .

Hmm, actually, that does sound better.

I vote they just replace all of our skills with two;

1) “Thump Chest”
2) “Head Bash”

Before battle, we can all stand around thumping our chests, then in battle, we just hit each other with our heads repeatedly!

What do you think?

Entropy.4732:

Then we got paired with the same servers the following week and they were too ashamed to double team. We fought the game with no alliances. Guess what happened? We won the whole thing in first place by 12,000 points.

Victory feels better when it’s honest.

Yeah…

I do encourage everyone to go read the last match thread mentioned. You will see a much different story. It wasnt even remotely hidden that NSP and IoJ double teamed DH. I mean, the involved people were completely open about it!

And no one on DH really minded that much, it ended up being a great match. Its a bit disrespectful, imo, to not give credit where credit is due (and that is you achieved your victory with organized help from IoJ, to the benefit of everyone involved in the match).

edit: Link and link and to correct myself, it was not an “alliance,” it was a “mutually organized focus of one server by the other two servers with pre-determined ground rules.” Hell, even at the end of the match there are numerous NSP giving credit to IoJ for helping them attain victory!

And again, it ended up being a great match! This also goes to show it can and DOES happen when the two weaker servers focus on the stronger. But, they have to agree to it and lay down some ground rules, instead of just letting things take their course, imo. When its done effectively, like in the last match, it really creates a great time for everyone!

Steve Whitley.8359:

yea, i’ve noticed this tactic this week on a number of occasions… its interesting to see new things from lower tier teams (now that that’s where were are).

honestly… what does this do for you? hide your numbers for 6 seconds? and that gets your what? 6 seconds of surprise on your enemy?

wow. what a pointless tactic. part of having a large zerg is to threaten with numbers, this does just the opposite of that.

good bye logic and reason, maybe that’s why it took most of our wvw population leaving for DH to pass our wvw score… sad.

Hiding your troops movement isnt even remotely pointless, its actually quite effective!

As someone who roams a decent amount, it can be a bit annoying, but the reasoning behind it is sound.

And usually… its not just one mes, but they are chaining stealth to constantly hide movement. You might see one or two, that werent able to get the stealth applied, but thats ok.

So, its very logical and very reasonable to do this. Being able to hide mass amounts of your people to scouts is a very smart thing to do. Doesnt make it less annoying to a roamer, but its a completely valid and useful tactic whether it is to hide overall movement, or hide a flank in the middle of a battle.

Agriope.4523:

I was looking forward to seeing some of these “in your face roamers” as it’s been decidedly lacking since AR had eBay. I’ll try not to judge too harsh based on today’s encounters. Single person vs. single person, so you run to the cannons and guards? Wut?

I honestly cant count the number of times I thought it was just one person, only to find it was actually the lone straggler who didnt get to the veil in time, lol.

“Ooh! A nice duel!”

30 team mates appear out of thin air

“Uh oh.”

Where are you HoD?

I miss you. :’(

GUFF.5692:

Frankly, it skirts around the issue with the sword instead of addressing it head on.

There is no issue for some of us. Thats the point. It may require more resources to add a weapon, but it also addresses a myriad of other issues beyond just one small aspect, where one percentage of the population struggles. Again though, some have an issue with the sword, some dont. I think they should put resources into areas where the issues are more universal, or where the solutions address class-wide problems, if you want to go down the “resource” route.

The rest is just rehashing what has already been said. Hell, I have even said I might end up enjoying the dodge in the middle of leaps. But, it absolutely would require me to change my playstyle. To be blunt, I would know this better than you. I do not have a typical playstyle on any class, and the fact that no one uses my builds reflects this.

I had to change my playstyle drastically with the last patch as well, but I have ended up enjoying the new build I am working with.

Keep on keepin on though. :P

DarkWasp.7291:

We shouldn’t have any greater or lesser concerns or worries.

This game needs more viable builds to keep it fresh, especially in PvE.

That includes every weapon, various traits, conditions and the way we move.

I completely agree, and that goes for every class too.

They (anet) said they are aware of this though, so hopefully we will see some improvements

Shiren.9532:

For as long as the sword holds the mantle as the highest DPS weapon the ranger has access to it needs to be usable in every setting, particularly group PvE. The crappy root effect might not matter so much in sPvP but it in PvE it kills the weapon for any challenging content.

I will have to concede this point, as I dont know otherwise.

I try to stay out of PvE as much as possible, and it really is a different ballgame. Of course, doing something with the sword is the least of the Rangers problems, afaik, when it comes to a lot of PvE content like dungeons.

GUFF.5692:

@Tuluum

So you don’t agree with giving the ranger the ability to cancel the leap animation during the sword autoattack by hitting the left or right strafe key? You don’t agree even though this change would in no way effect your gameplay or use of the sword? Is this correct?

If that is what the majority want, then I will have no choice but to go with it.

It would change my gameplay, thats the thing. I do not spam 1-1-1-1, I very selectively choose when and where to use each part of the chain. When I really want to stick to someone, I target them and follow.

I suggested a different solution, but people get stuck on what they want, including even saying things like they “get stuck in the animation for 10 seconds.” I mean, come on…

I offered a different solution, and many still seem to stick on “Nuh uh! I want it MY way, and you are all elitist for liking it!”

Do as you will, I definitely dont care about it as much as you guys.

@Guff;

I am not so sure that it is so clearly divided as you present.

I am not saying “learn to play noob.” But, the 1h sword DOES require some practice. There are many more viewpoints than just elitists vs “everyone else.” I actually think that attitude, specifically, is more divisionary to the ranger community than anything that is said about one specific aspect. It doesnt just happen with the 1h sword either, the attitude is present in almost every aspect of online games and I feel it is detrimental across the board. And not just because of the elitists, but also because of those who broadly paint others as elitists regardless of topic.

The thing is though, I do not feel the weapon is flawed. It does seem out of place in respect to other weapon choices across the class spectrum, but I do not feel that leads directly to a conclusion of a “flaw.”

The reality, however, is that Anet is going to do what Anet is going to do.

What we can all agree on, again, is that Ranger (and every class really) has some major room for improvements.

I know that anet has said they want massive amounts of build diversity, but not many (none that I am aware of actually) classes have this.

I think the only issue in having an “eccentric” weapon like the sword is that there arent many options that are available for melee gameplay.

I think this issue could be resolved by either implementing new weapons to fill in the gaps, or giving the ability to customize attack animations and specifics (but not damage) through skills that can be achieved through play. Perhaps even a combination of the two.

At the extreme end (to make a point), I dont think any of this would even come up as a topic if every class had access to every weapon. Some would be harder to use, some easier, but it would have a higher likelihood of an individual player finding that weapon set that just “works” for their playstyle and mindset.

Trying to get each and every weapon to appeal to everyone may be more difficult than simply giving many options that are cosmetically adjusted by skills that are earned in-game.

I think we are all looking for the same thing, but we should focus on a concept to achieve that, instead of focusing on very specific aspects that will not address the problem as a whole.

Einlanzer.1627:

GUFF.5692:

Almost forgot. No new weapons until what we have are addressed and balanced. Adding something new without a solid foundation is always a recipe for disaster. That’s why I cannot support dagger as a main hand option until all ranger weapons are working optimally. We have some weapons still that need work.

The problem with this mentality is that balance is an iterative process and will never reach perfection. If this is the design philosophy, we’ll get nothing but back and forth tweaks from patch to patch without ever getting anything new.

We do agree on that.

Even in an ideal, perfect world.. such balance is very, very difficult. And we dont live in an ideal perfect world.

If they decided to “perfect” what they have, I dont think anything new would ever be released again.

Its just a matter of balance (ironically), gotta make adjustments, but still add in new things. Nothing will ever be perfectly balanced, and even if it was, I am not sure there is any metric or objective measure to truly determine it.

Regardless of how any of us feel about the 1h sword, I think we can all agree that “perfection” is simply not available. Trying to achieve it isnt necessarily a bad thing, but doing so at the expense of new additions will lead to many that stop playing.

I think the slow addition of more weapons for different classes can kind of remove the stagnation that slowly arises. I really wish they would implement a system where we could collect skills, similar to GW1. Perhaps not in the same scope, or even the same implementation, but the same concept.

Heck, maybe even just cosmetic changes to a skill like Maul, where you can select what “animal” or whatever shows up when you do the attack. No balance needed for that!

Thanks for the reply.

How are each of the characters built?

Given that you are essentially a bunker, do you have a glassy character?

I have always viewed a group, regardless of size, as sort of a single entity. It just has many, many more variables than with a single character.

So, this allows one character to build VERY strongly in one direction, while others build VERY strongly in the opposite direction.

So, in your usual group (of ranger, necro, thief, engi, ele), one of the options I would explore is the following make-up;

Necro: Set up as very glassy, and wells focused. The necro sticks with the other DPS/glass characters so that to get to them, the enemy needs to go through wells and conditions like blindness chill. DPS characters are advised to stay within the wells themselves.

Thief: DPS, but with a focus on blindness. DPS because, well, why not on a thief? The blindness will compliment all of the conditions done by the wells, but the thief does not have to rely on them for protection. Which means they can go out on their own, and take down enemies that are trying to retreat to either heal or reset. Traits like caltrops on dodge can help keep people inside of the wells, without actually losing a utility slot.

Engie: Healing focused, using bombs. They have the unique advantage that they can build for group support, but thakittens done through damaging attacks. Would basically run around inside of the necro wells to damage enemies at the same time as healing allies. Can also use the wrench to set up projectile barriers, pulls into the wells (and a subsequent focus fire by the group), and cripple to keep people in the wells death trap.

Ele: Focused on DPS and support. Using the staff, the strategy would be to immobilize the enemy within the well using things like static field, then supplementing the damage by firing off a meteor shower, and other AoEs

Ranger: Focus on support and pulls. Using the axe, the ranger can pull the enemy into the death zone, and supplement things like static field with muddy ground, frost trap, and entangle.

If you add a guard into the mix, they can use binding blade to frequently pull people into the death zone too. The overall concept would be to pull people into the wells, and keep them there for as long as possible.

This isnt necessarily posted as a suggestion to you directly, but more as just an example of ONE concept of group make-up and how to focus on one aspect (necro wells) as the mainstay of the groups power. Of course, doing the same thing every time not only leads to complacency, but also the risk of the enemy adapting!

So, in your group, do you do anything like this?

Aria.5940:

lol Tuluum, did you by accident borrow one of my pets? That description almost matches them perfectly.

Nah, they are mine!

But, I suspect that all of our pets go through the same training center.

They really, really need to hire new people..

As others have said, it varies greatly.

It can be one of the fastest ways to level, but it can also be one of the slowest.

If you enjoy it though, the speed of leveling may have nothing to do with the idea that it may be the “best” way for one to level their character.

Only one note though, some level ranges are much stronger than others, due to whatever system they have in place to uplevel. Some are INCREDIBLY strong, but others are equally weak. Expect some frustration in some of the level ranges! In the end though, its a bit like having time period where you play better, and other time periods where you are just off your game.

If you enjoy WvW more than anything else in the game, it is unquestionably the best way to level. At that point, speed wont matter too much, and you will be having a blast all the same.

Lord Trejgon.2809:

as for now I would agree with both sides.
from one side – actual 1hsword auto when learned can give You some kind advantage but in the other hand skill from autochain should be breakable by dodge – but there is a problem here.
2 of 3 skills placed on auto-chain is “leap” kind of skill – allowing in mechanics them to be breakable by dodge would also mean that we could dodge in the middle of the air while using “Swoop”.

Thanks for expanding on something which I was struggling with explaining.

also I agree that giving rangers dagger as mainhand weapon would be good thing.

I think it makes sense really.. Logically, it doesnt jive with me that we can somehow use a weapon in our “off hand,” or weak hand, but not in our main/strong hand.

@DarkWasp – it isn’t random direction – if you don’t target anything it always will be – in direction which Your character by mechanics face – so If you want to leap in another direction just press RMB rotate camera in required direction and click “1” (be carefull that isn’t working with LMB)
also argument with clicking 1 – with gs auto You also need to use it manually for most of time, because auto wouldn’t launch.

For me, this was one of the biggest keys in learning the 1h sword. Target selection becomes different in its importance. Usually, I will only have a target locked for the third step of the chain, and the rest is done without a target. In practicing this, I actually noticed I became a lot better in overall combat movement, which was great because it directly translates to any class I play. Given that I have a few classes at 80, I love when I can learn something on one class that improves my play on the others!

In the end, I dont necessarily have a horse in this race, so I just dont care too much. But, something which would solve A LOT of issues would be a public test server where things could be tried out on a large scale, without actually putting it into the game. In the end, I may even prefer it with a dodge, at least until the nerf came lol

GUFF.5692:

Some of us think your mindset is elitist (and those of others) because you don’t want a weapon changed that has obvious flaws because it somehow suits your personal gameplay and mindset. We also can’t wrap our mind around the fact that you don’t want full control of your character. Have you not fought against other rangers using the sword and timed your CC for when they started on their sword autoattack chain? I love waiting for this since I know they can’t dodge once they start leaping towards their target. Same thing when they use their number two chain. They have a weakspot in their transition from evade to camera rotation and leap. That’s when you nail them with soft CC.

Consider me an elitist as you will, it doesnt mean much.

Under the same criteria that I am categorized as such, it would also implicate you. Though, you might not realize that. After all, you are just trying to change it to suit your personal gameplay and mindset.

Listen, this is a dead end road. You dont see where I am coming from, and even if I do understand where you are coming from, its a two way street.

All the best!

Einlanzer.1627:

I’d like for someone to coherently explain to me how it would hurt you to simply be able to interrupt the attacks with a dodge. That’s what doesn’t make any sense about this argument.

I have said it repeatedly, but Ill expand on it.

The first issue is that it has the strong chance of becoming overpowered.

The second issue is that that rooting can be used to ones advantage if used properly.

If you start to consider how many evades, vigor application, and overall endurance regen buffs, the root seems like it is there for the simple reason of not allowing for more survivability. As it stands now, people already complain about how much the weapon set has, especially when in the hands of a truly skilled player.

In the end though, I know that there is no convincing anyone of anything really. The best anyone can hope to achieve is understanding where another is coming from, but that desire is as rare as hens teeth.

After all of the complaints, I have pretty much resigned myself thakittens going to change. It just doesnt mean I agree with it. I fully understand that you likely do not see my reasons as valid, so I will just take my leave and go to greener pastures.

GUFF.5692:

I am still flabbergasted that anyone at all thinks that the lockdown ability of the sword auto attack chain needs to be changed to fix this problem. It does not. Just simply allow the user to break the animation chain by simple ui interaction. Character movement could be one trigger (strafe left right for example). Allowing the user the initiate a dodge roll could be another. This would allow the user to keep the stick like glue ability when wanted but gives you the option to break the chain and actually pull off a defensive maneuver. It would allow the elitist sword crowd to keep their candy and the rest of us who value complete character control at all times to be very happy with this exceptional weapon. The sword is one our best weapons by far but don’t downplay poor game design just to satisfy your ego.

I love the projection.

Again, I am nothing more than a slightly above average player. I enjoy the sword because once I learned how to use it effectively, it really complemented how my mind works.

If you think I am somehow an elitist for enjoying a weapon as is, I am pretty sure we will not be able to have a reasonable discussion. Then again, I am pretty sure most people dont want that to begin with.

Honestly, one of the only things I would change about it is saving what step you are at in the chain after using other weapon abilities. At this point, it resets once you use another skill. It has a good chance of being overpowered though.

I just use monarchs leap, or one of our many movement skills, to retain control of my character in different situations. If I had dodge, I suspect it would make me, an average player, overpowered. And its not like the animation of each step is that long to begin with. I dont just mash 1-1-1-1-1, I selectively choose when to press it and it tends to be on a different target for each step of the chain. Its that requirement that is one of the reasons I enjoy it so much.

I am not against having them test it on a public test server though. Oh wait.. :P

DarkWasp.7291:

Tuluum.9638:

Its very simple, some people have zero issue with how it currently is.

So they say, but that’s called pride. They choose to overlook the situations where they accidentally pressed 1 one too many times and the game picked a random direction and launched them off the cliff. Or the times where their finger got tired after long hours of play due to mashing 1 over and over (and over). Or most importantly, where they couldn’t dodge until 0.02 seconds too late despite the fact that they played cautiously with the 1-1-1-1 mashing.

But noOOoo, this is the “l2p” community where we don’t have a stat website with our K/D ratios so we get to make up just how good we are and tell everyone else how much they suck.

I really don’t see what would be so bad about letting us interrupt the skills with dodge. I’ve been playing ranger as my main since release (with roughly 2 months of break) and the 1h sword has been my primary weapon for most of that time. I’m very PvE sided.

Every update I jump down to the patch notes to the ranger and look for sword changes.

It really doesnt matter if you think I am saying to l2p, and that I am so deceived by my own pride that I think the 1h sword is utter perfection. None of that is true, and none of it matters anyway.

Some of us enjoy the sword in its current state. Full stop. I havent found another weapon that enables zerg surfing to the degree of the 1h sword. It needs to be played differently from every other weapon in that game, and it does take time to master. Some people really do enjoy this, and yes, their enjoyment of something that takes effort can turn into pride and schadenfruede towards those who struggle with it.

I am not against allowing a dodge, but at the same point, it would be extremely overpowered for some of us. Its an idea much like adding a blast finisher to GS Maul. I actually like the idea in concept, but in execution, it would undoubtedly be overpowered for a large segment of the population who have learned how to use it effectively.

To be perfectly clear, I have never stated I am anything but a slightly above average player.

I think the better way to satisfy the community is to introduce a weapon that satisfies the want for a different weapon. I think the dagger would be the best choice for this. It would satisfy everyone from those who enjoy the sword as is, to those who are looking for a different melee experience than it provides.

Like the rest of you, I’m scared to death that once they notice it they’ll nerf it (and then buff the warrior’s axe just to spite us,) but something does need to be done. Even though I’ve gotten good at choosing my situations and halting my 1-1-1-1 spam to prepare for a bailout, my finger still gets tired after of couple of long boss fights and I still consider the fact that my DPS drops a little bit when I have to stop attacking to prepare for a dodge.

Have you tried setting up your hardware differently? I tend to spam 1 on every weapon on every class. I hate auto attack on every single weapon. But, I also have a setup that allows for this relatively easily. I have bound it to both right click, and a thumb button on my mouse. I found the thumb button worked out better for me (which was a surprise, but veers OT).

You can be 100% certain that if they allow for a dodge, that it will be nerfed at either the same time, or shortly thereafter.

So, instead of trying to change the game to suit my own personal needs at the expense of others, I am suggesting that we try to come up with a solution that can make all of us satisfied with our choices.

I think the best way to do that is with a MH dagger, which is something that has not only been suggested countless times anyway, but completely fits in with the Ranger class as well.

This would allow for those who enjoy the sword as it is to continue enjoying it, but give a similar option to those who struggle to use it effectively. There are a ton of different ways it could be implemented, but that is for another thread.

Einlanzer.1627:

People, the problem is one of asymmetry. Why should ranger 1h sword be the ONLY WEAPON IN THE ENTIRE GAME that has an autoattack skill that requires micromanagement?

I can see why it might be desirable if they didn’t have EVERY OTHER #1 SKILL IN THE GAME just autopilot with no issues, but currently, it just creates annoying asymmetry and needs to be addressed.

Plus, it’s a simple change- dodging should interrupt animations anyway, they do on most attacks. I don’t think anyone is requesting that they rework the skills entirely, like everyone seems to assume people that make this request are suggesting.

Its very simple, some people have zero issue with how it currently is. Beyond that, we are able to use it greatly to our advantage in its current form. Is it for everybody? No, it isnt. But, it does appeal to some of us who actually like to practice with their weapons to get good at even the basics.

I think a better solution, rather than satisfying one set of players at the expense of others, would be to implement MH dagger with the attributes that many are seeking with the 1h sword.

Einlanzer.1627:

Yeah, I really don’t know what their aim is with pets. I strongly feel like they just made some mistakes in the design of the pet system which is causing most of the problems with the Ranger class. Instead of making the ranger weak and giving so much damage to the pet, ranger weapon skills should roughly the same DPS as every other profession’s weapon skills, and the pet should be mostly utilitarian. That’s what they need to fix across the board.

That is what almost every ranger on the forums here have been saying for quite a while. Hopefully they will listen at some point!

Adjust the proportion of damage between the ranger and their pet. Currently, it just doesnt seem to be working. WAI? Yes, it absolutely is working as intended. Its just that that “intended” is not really working. Dig?

Einlanzer.1627:

Good, I’m glad. It’s about time people started recognizing my omniscience!

Yes, I am sure it feels good to be vindicated. Just make sure you arent 1000 units away, or you are boned!

On a slightly serious note, I think Anets overall goal was a good one. However, the method used to achieve that goal seems pretty skewed. They say they dont want power creep, but seem to effectively be choosing the polar extreme.

I still feel like they have a balance team for each class, but that they dont communicate with what the other teams are doing. Internally, the changes to the bows seem to work for their intended goal of balancing the choice between LB and SB. However, it now runs into SB vs Axe, and I think that is an easy choice. Perhaps they will now nerf Axe to make SB more “viable,” but will increase the damage by 3% to substantially solidify its role.

Einlanzer.1627:

Nah, I was educating you on the facts of the changes. Then I gave my opinion about it.

Oh, ok. Thank you so very much!

Its awesome you take all this so very seriously. You have me in a state of awe of your omniscience.

edit: To be clear, I dont think the changes (overall) are as bad as many have made them out to be. I am using the LB more than ever, but have discarded the SB entirely in favor of the axe. You are still so awesome though, dont let anyone tell you otherwise.

Einlanzer.1627:

Was this sarcasm? You realize the reduction to the aftercast and increase in arrow flight speed alone means Longbow is doing about 25% more DPS than it was before.

Also, the Shortbow #1 skill was somewhat overbuffed way back around launch so it operates perfectly as a 900 range skill and the other shortbow skills were buffed pretty substantially to compensate for their reduced range.

It’s pretty much working the way it was always intended to, and I’m honestly glad for the change.

I have no idea what sarcasm is, but thank you for educating me on your opinion of the changes.

Falunel.7645:

They do keep track. Type /deaths in chat.

563 on my level 80 ele main, if you were curious.

Does anyone know how this actually keeps track?

I do very little PvE, but I play quite a bit of WvW, and I have suspected that it doesnt accurately keep track of deaths in WvW.

I have 20k+ kills in wvw, but /deaths says I have only died ~400 times? As someone who has no regard for my characters safety, in any way, that number is FAR too low. I know it is specific to one character, but adding up all of my deaths gives that 400 number. It just cant be right.

Einlanzer.1627:

Not exactly, to make LB more viable, it was buffed and given a more distinctive role. SB took a range hit to allow for this but also received some damage buffs.

Yeah, youre right.

I am loving the increased damage and control capability on the LB, and the damage buffs on the SB are absolutely game-changing.

:D

Jaxx, just because I am curious;

How have you built your roaming squad to complement each other?

What kind of strengths and weaknesses have you intentionally put in so that the team is stronger as a whole?

Id love to hear about it I have no interest in the build itself (like I said, I just find bunkers boring as hell lol), but I have always wondered how GRIM builds around each other, but I only see stuff about your char.

I think that this type of play will really move some people forward, that may not have thought about the fact that you can make up for weaknesses in a team, and it allows for much stronger strengths, so to speak.

Esplen.3940:

That’s why you run Norn with the biggest possible size. It doesn’t matter about the animations anymore, you’re blocking the screen and with similar names/looks, it’s hard to tell the real one[s] apart. Especially because I was running clone and the other guy was running phant.

This is actually the only aspect where I feel one race truly does have an advantage.

A single norn mesmer with all clones out can really make targetting difficult. Add in a couple more, all dressed the same, and it looks like there is a freaking army. Cant target a darn thing other than clones.

Do I think it should be changed? No, absolutely not. Kind of brings quirks to the different races. If you havent noticed, Asura also have different animations that to me, almost make it easier to see when they are doing something. Many of the animations have the asura, literally, float up into mid air and twirl around with all kinds of particle effects.

lunyboy.8672:

I am not from your server, so I don’t really have a dog in this fight, so to speak… but it seems like you might be better off in the long run.

Also, welcome to that match!

They might have lost a lot of dedicated dubveedubbers, but if they are anything like that ALS guy, Id just be happy they are gone!

McWolfy.5924:

not too loud buddy… GS nerf inc :p

I know this was put as a joke, and many will take it as a joke.. but consider this…

To make LB more viable, SB was nerfed. Dont like how LB and GS compare? How do you think they are going to handle that?

hides his ranger in a cave

One day..

The pets will rise from the years of oppression! They will conquer the world in a mass of bear butts and bird tails!

Beware their retribution.

Or, they just wont listen to a single command you give them. Mine really like to just put their f2 on full cooldown without actually doing anything.

One of my favorites is what I call the F1-F2-F3 dance! Wherein, you press F2, the pet hears “F1?! OK!!” and goes to attack. You press F3 to recall, and they come back to your side seemingly willing to adhere to your every command. But then.. press F2 again, and all they hear is “F1?! OK!!” and they go to attack again. Rinse and repeat for justice.

I swear I see a smirk on their face when they do it…

As an Asuran ranger, I have zero issue with the swords mechanics. I do like other weapons animations/play style more though, in the end.

However, it is REALLY effective once you get it down.

Either way, if Anet “addresses” the 1h sword, it will be with a nerf that is covered by a slight adjustment to the root. Watch it happen!

zTales.4392:

Though, of course, I do agree that IoJ helped beat DH down a lot. They clearly focused DH, as well.

Fair enough, lol.

There wasnt an alliance, just a mutual focusing on one server by the other two. :P

zTales.4392:

It was openly admitted, yes.

By 1 of 12+ active commanders on NSP. Who I’ve only actually seen in-game once because he’s apparently a night commander.

What does that say to you? None of the other commanders agreed to it, as far as I know. Many of them openly stated that they were against it, and the same goes for our normal players. I’m not even a commander and I’ve lead a couple of attacks on IoJ’s towers. xD

You all did a great job, but its a bit disrespectful to say IoJ had nothing to do with the win. I think many on IoJ and DH wanted a nice close match, and that is what we got.

All you have to do is read the thread, and have watched the map during the match.