To make this thing more realistic and more annoying, I think you should need to run the story mode again after one explorable run.
Also add the engaging “contested” system to every dungeon. This was removed from the Ruined City of Arah dungeon which I think is a bug so it affects gem sales negatively.
If metrics still show that people are having fun then I suggest kicking people out of the dungeon if the entrance gets contested and also do this randomly to keep things exciting and fresh.
Ah yeah, I wasn’t posting as a counter to yours, you posted as I was typing so I didn’t see it. >.< I was just pointing out that frailty is a nice option even for people like me who DO lug around undead/justice/icebrood/svanir etc. sigils.
Yeah I suspected that but my post needed that clarification.
Anyways, when in doubt, gw2dungeons.net is your best friend.
You guys vastly underestimate Frailty. Even if Frailty contributes only one stack of Vulnerability, it is already producing significantly more DPS than Strength or Accuracy or Air or Fire or whatever else people use. Sure, you won’t always need the Vuln, but the times you do, and it contributes 3 or more Vuln make up for the times you don’t. And I would guess in daytime dungeons where most people don’t use slayer sigils for casual runs (CM, HotW) Vuln is needed in most of the boss fights, at least one stack.
3 or more vulnerability stacks don’t sound reliable. Against bosses you get 5 s base duration and depending on how unshakable works +30% duration gives 6.5 s or 8 s (anyone knows or can test?).
Optimally with 2 s ICD that maxes out with 2.5, 3.25 or 4 stacks.
With 2 hits per second (0.5 s attacks) on average you hit 0.25 s after ICD ends. With 50% chance you need on average one additional hit which gives total ICD of 2.75 s.
With more realistic ICD you get 1.8, 2.4 and 2.9 stacks.
Inactive names could be temporarily freed. If that account became active again you would lose your name and be forced to rename.
Nope. Names are first come, first serve, and Arenanet is gracious enough to allow for accent marks, umlats, and other non standard english characters for naming, and allows for first and last names (or even first, middle, last if you want)
I’d be okay with permenantly banned accounts having their names up for grabs again, but otherwise, get creative. An account in good standing losing their names because you can’t get creative is weak.
People go on breaks, it may be a several month break, but they come back and when they come back, they want their characters as they left them. A good way to make sure that players never return is to make them lose their characters or character names after going away for awhile. Now they got nothing to come back to.
That’s why I said “temporarily” and not “permanently”. I know my post wasn’t very clear but point is that if anyone takes your name you will get it back when you start playing again.
You guys do realize you’re so far off mark with the discussion now it’s not even in the same galaxy.
The math doesn’t matter. It’s human nature to find the best way to do something. It’s also human nature to want to find that and use it as much as they can when they do find it.
In order to give some justification for my posts I will claim that I partially tried to remind everyone that “best” a.k.a “optimal solution” is subjective.
To be honest I wouldn’t really call this a discussion.
If I had a problem using the word ‘option’ properly, I probably wouldn’t call this a discussion either.
If you merely assert that someone is wrong it bears no weight. If you have an esoteric tool, say, a dictionary, you can at least argue that, conventionally, a person might be wrong in their use of a common word like option. The person who can’t function at the level of basic English, however, is unlikely to move beyond assertions. Generally they function at the level of the ad hominem, never actually engaging with a stated proposition. Unfortunately, that is where you find yourself.
I really love these kind of thinly veiled insults which only further show your ignorance and level of “discussion”. I have nothing against people with a condescending attitude, but you better be right or it looks really dumb.
Of course they are different concepts. Why else I would need to define what better means?
A is my statement. How can I argue that my statement is something else than it is? And if what I’m saying is a tautology why are you arguing against it?
I have argued that true/correct means true/correct. Fairly straightforward I should think. You have argued that True/correct implies ‘better’—getting at the magic word optimal that has been a subject in this thread. I have argued that the solution to an equation of the nature of x=4 (what I was presented with initially) has no correspondence, whatsoever, with the notion of optimal. Values of x will be true or false for the equation, but none will be, in any sense, optimal. To understand this you would simply have to understand mathematics…and the definition of optimal. Optimal would imply the best or most favorable among options. You don’t have a lot of options in terms of the equation—simply true or false, correct or incorrect.
It’s gotten esoteric and probably incomprehensible for anyone who has not followed every post. My point is simply that ‘A’ = ‘A’. It is certainly interesting for me to watch someone argue against this proposition, but perhaps not beneficial for the topic at hand.
I have never stated that true means optimal. I have stated that a solution which is true can be optimal, if optimal is defined that way.
You don’t need a lot of options to have the best or most favorable. Even one option will do.
Of course they are different concepts. Why else I would need to define what better means?
A is my statement. How can I argue that my statement is something else than it is? And if what I’m saying is a tautology why are you arguing against it?
It’s easy to say that’s the way math works in elementary school, perhaps harder to describe in what way it works in elementary school and what way it works in whatever exalted state you find yourself in. I would love to know and specifically in what ways my logic may be deficient. I love to learn.
Well, if I say that A is true you can’t disprove it by saying B is true unless B -> -A.
In this case:
A: Correct solution is better than an incorrect solution (when defined that way).
If you had written “That’s not the way math works in elementary school.”, then I could agree with you because that would be true. Unfortunately I’m not in elementary school anymore and have learnt that I can define things.
A correct solution can only be best if you view that as valuable. If, on the other hand, you realize that a false result can be just as valuable to understanding as a true one, then?
Correct and incorrect have only to do with correct and incorrect. That’s the key to understanding this. You need to have a mathematical mind. Value judgments about state are just that, something you’ve added to the overall evaluation. There is no best in terms of correct or incorrect only correct and incorrect. Both are equally valuable results as both will lead yo,u to the truth.
So can I say that a correct solution is better than an incorrect solution or not, if I define it that way?
You seem to over-complicate this whole thing with evaluations, calculators and mathematical minds.
To come clean, I don’t really care about this meta topic. But discussing logic is always fun.
One is correct.
Others are incorrect.
Not seeing in any way how you got to your previous statements, they just plain don’t make sense. I cannot explain your nonsense..
edit:
“If there are two options and one is better than the other then that option is the best.”
How are you determining this? I don’t see “options”.
Just like you guys are determining optimal solution. If you want to talk about optimal then you need to define what is the best. One definition is that the best means being better than everything else. Then you need to define what is better.
For GW2, you can define better as doing more damage, taking less damage, completing content faster, etc. There is no single way. Point is, you have to define something.
Similarly I can define for equations that a correct solution is better than an incorrect solution.
Whether you like it or not, definitions are important. A good example is this 27 page topic where people define things differently and then try to argue about them.
So by your logic if I say that a car is a car then it can’t be red?
Being a correct solution and the best solution aren’t mutually exclusive. A solution can be both correct and the best.
The funny thing about math is that you can actually define what is the reality. And that’s what you and others are doing when talking about optimal solutions.
I thought we talked about solutions, not meaning of expressions. So far your arguments seem to consist of “you are wrong” and “I’m right”. If you know maths as good as you claim, I’m sure you can do better.
The set set {2, -2} is not the best solution set for the equation x^2 = 4.. It is either a correct or incorrect solution.
--
So an incorrect solution is as good as a correct solution?
How on earth did you go from one statement, to the other? I’m not seeing how you came to interpret that in that way.
A solution can be correct or incorrect.
If a correct solution is not the best then that means it’s not better than an incorrect solution.
That leaves two options.
1) An incorrect solution is better than a correct solution.
2) A correct solution is as good as an incorrect solution.
bolded key sentence.
This looks like an incorrect assumption resulting in a failure of logic to me..
edit: I suspect failure of logic causes the incorrect assumption initially mind you.
I’m not really following you.
If there are two options and one is better than the other then that option is the best.
If there are two options and one is worse than the other then that option is not the best.
So if it’s not the best then it can’t be better than the other.
I thought we talked about solutions, not meaning of expressions. So far your arguments seem to consist of “you are wrong” and “I’m right”. If you know maths as good as you claim, I’m sure you can do better.
The set set {2, -2} is not the best solution set for the equation x^2 = 4.. It is either a correct or incorrect solution.
--
So an incorrect solution is as good as a correct solution?
How on earth did you go from one statement, to the other? I’m not seeing how you came to interpret that in that way.
A solution can be correct or incorrect.
If a correct solution is not the best then that means it’s not better than an incorrect solution.
That leaves two options.
1) An incorrect solution is better than a correct solution.
2) A correct solution is as good as an incorrect solution.
I thought we talked about solutions, not meaning of expressions. So far your arguments seem to consist of “you are wrong” and “I’m right”. If you know maths as good as you claim, I’m sure you can do better.
The set set {2, -2} is not the best solution set for the equation x^2 = 4.. It is either a correct or incorrect solution.
--
So an incorrect solution is as good as a correct solution?
If we want to talk about studies, I’m about to finish university with mathematics as my main subject. Mathematics is not as restrictive as you seem to think.
Fault me for a propositional statement I made, but don’t fault me for thinking math is restrictive. Math is not restrictive, but a simple algebraic expression will have a rather precise meaning. I faulted you on not understanding the meaning of a simple expression.
I thought we talked about solutions, not meaning of expressions. So far your arguments seem to consist of “you are wrong” and “I’m right”. If you know maths as good as you claim, I’m sure you can do better.
Show me why a set {2, -2} is not the best solution set for equation x^2 = 4.
If we want to talk about studies, I’m about to finish university with mathematics as my main subject. Mathematics is not as restrictive as you seem to think.
Low-brow mouth breathers on this forum keep trying to claim that all problems have an optimal (singular by definition) solution. It’s simply not true. I’ve provided theoretical examples on how it could be done in video games, and I’ve provided examples in math. If a problem has two solutions that are equally valid, an optimal solution does not, by definition, exist. Evolve more before you try to out logic me again please. K thx.
Sorry, but I took some high tech math stuff on my elementary school and I copy paste some random stuff from internets so whatever you say must be wrong.
I’m pretty sure the definition of an optimal solution doesn’t mention T-rated games in any way.
Certainly can’t fault the statement in any way. But, it is a non sequitur in terms of the current discussion. Did you intend to contribute to the discussion?
I will let you guys go when you stop hurting my maths.
That’s a mathematical equation. There is no optimal answer to a mathematical equation. Optimal means there are sub-optimal options. Mathematical equations do not have sub-optimal solutions.
Find an example of a game rated T or above where there is no optimal set of conditions. Then come back to us and present your case.
Until then, you’re just proving that you fail to grasp the fact that there will always be an optimal build for every situation.
I’m pretty sure the definition of an optimal solution doesn’t mention T-rated games in any way.
If they added content which required some kind of brain activity most people wouldn’t be able to complete it. They would cry rivers regardless of how innovative, creative and awesome the content was.
I’d say Wethospu’s estimates were pretty accurate. I was going to do this for every dungeon boss too, but I imagine I’d find a similar pattern, and honestly this took way more time than I anticipated it would.
It pained me to not be able to see your name on that list Wethospu.
I still occasionally watch your videos because it is just amazing to think how much further ahead of everybody you were at the time… it is remarkable. You’ll always be the best soloer and warrior ever imo!
I’m sure you know who to vote for :>
With 3 solo videos this year I definitely shouldn’t be on the list.
I would have probably done more if it wasn’t so pain to get to interesting encounters. Like waiting 30 mins to get someone help me on ooze puzzle.
—
Them kicking the host and the only person that lived won’t keep them alive and won’t let them win the fight don’t match any model of player behavior I can conceive of, at least not if that’s all there was to the story. It just doesn’t make any sense.
Stories that don’t make sense that just happen to prove a chosen argumentative point on the part of the teller deserve skepticism.
It takes only one person to initiate the kick and one person to accept. So one jerk and one sheep. No need for 4 jerks as you mentioned in one post.
If by model you mean nice, then yes, lots of people don’t seem to act nice. If one of the players was looking to maximize his gain then logically it would make sense to kick me. Based on this assumption I would have very low chance to win and just drag the fight. He just came to the group so breaking the instance wouldn’t matter much for him.
What im trying to figure out is what anything he said had to do with the zerk meta or a dps meter. He solod a fractal. Invited random people in and they kicked him out. Yeah im flat out sure there kittens. But theres kittens in EVERY single aspect of the game.
—
As astral explained and you pointed out, point was that some people are just jerks. I’m bit tired of hearing people justify everything based on “zerk or requirements = elitist jerk” and “cleric/pvt = good guy”.
If you are worried about quality of posts I would take look at that “meta” topic.
It was also interesting to see whether anyone would defend these guys because they weren’t standard elitists.
It’s too ludicrously 1-sided. At the very least the safest bet in the world is that if we could dig up the other 4 players their versions of what happened would be substantially different.
The whole thing, to be frank though, is just too convenient.
He just solo-ground for fun, and then just when he got to mai grabbed some random people, and then they just failed immediately, and then they kicked him for ‘not talking enough’.
Most of the individual pieces work, but taken together it’s pretty hard to swallow (and that’s taking the 15 secs/30 secs hyperbole out of it)
That would be pretty interesting. I would also like their arguments for joining “free daily” and then kicking the host.
I didn’t solo just for fun, I also collected data for my dungeon site. You can’t really filter who joins you from LFG, so yeah, random people.
Perhaps you don’t know the boss but it’s pretty brutal if you don’t know what you are trying. I didn’t have a timer so numbers can be bit off but rest of the team wiped before we even got the shield off. And I was left with pretty low health for trying to revive them. I didn’t really see what they typed on chat, but they wanted me dead.
I still remember soloing fractals up to Mai Trin, practicing it a bit and then putting a lfg so 4 random guys could get a reward for free. No restrictions, no requirements.
Only to have them faceplant in about 30 seconds and me getting kicked in about 15 seconds without any warning because they wanted to retry. And when I asked why would they kick me and destroy the instance when I had spend hours soloing it I get answered “because you didn’t talk to us”. Yeah sure, I will do some casual chit chat when I’m on low health and fighting to survive.
So based on this, I rather keep “elitist” requirements to weed out “non-toxic”, “relaxed” and “respectful” people like these.
I’m sorry, that story just doesn’t parse.
Oh? Why not?
Only people with zerk gear can do stupid things.
If you have only 2k ap, nomad gear and play necro, condi mesmer or staff guard you automatically can only do good things, behave well and pay taxes.
