Guild Wars 2

SkyShroud.2865:

coglin.1867:

SkyShroud.2865:

unfortuantely, the game is heading towards a direction where the idea of “rebuilding” a server is quite impossible due to lack of population. as the population decline, wvw become inbalance and then it become less fun.

You are mistaken as I see it. The game is moving the the exact direction to build up a servers population. Nothing revitalizes and MMO like an expansion pack.

how sure are you the expansion will have a increase in lasting population? that’s just assumption isn’kitten

Fairly certain, but yes it is a very informed guess. I would hardly call it an assumption. If you wanted to call it an assumption, you would list me an MMO that didn’t increase in active player population with a major expansion release.

Secondly, Gayle has made multiple post proclaiming that it is a fact that the player population has increased significantly, starting immediately after they simply announced the expansion.

It is weird, because just looked through the bug section of the forums, in which everyone knows the devs read and post in the most, and I see no thread from you on the issue. Why didn’t you make a thread there?

Did you turn in a bug report?

Alteros.3019:

If only. The living story ate up all their manpower for over a year to the detriment of the exclusive WvW community. Combined with Anet’s ability to react dynamically (ironic I use that verbiage) to severe problems within the game being that of a sloth with arthritis, I’m not sure there’s going to be much to fix or implement when most of the WvW player base moves on.

You do not have the slightest clue what they have spent their man power on. For all you know, the manpower was spent designing the new WvW maps for the expansion and its new assets.

zinkz.7045:

HtFde.3856:

Zerg battles in WvW do require skill …

But not much…

Unless you think for example not having to decide your positioning (in any meaningful sense) as a melee and having your “driver” decide it for you takes skill.

Or that running in the melee ball where you have stability up most of the time covered by numerous boons that renders what should be one of the strongest aspects of PvP play – hard CC, a total joke most of the time.

and so on…

If you believe all of that, you are what we refer to as a “rally bot”. Every thing you stated is why players of similar mentality as yourself, in a zerg of 60, get one pushed by an organized group of 25, who understand their profession, their skill, and so on.

For example, you mention “stability up all the time”. Do you really think that just occurs naturally? That happens because players use “skill” that you claim doesn’t exist, to coordinate spacing, and timing, to use those at the right time.

Hard CC isn’t a joke. The problem is your mentality here. How unintelligent is it to try to CC the professions like warrior and guardian that have stability? Skilled players know that you damage focus them, while you focus your CC on the eles that are laying waters out for them to blast and heal.

styx.7294:

The only thing that people need to know is that transfers in general move from low tier to upper tier and in upper tier they quit. The small population servers are emptier than they were a year ago and then they were emptier than a year ago before that.

My server moved up a bunch of tiers from last year and it and the competition are emptier than tier 8 was last year.

This is the only problem in WvW worth talking about and as far as I can tell it’s never getting fixed (it was our first CDI! Remember that everyone?).

You really shouldn’t generalize. A few months ago, a good many guilds from T1 servers transferred to, what was then, a T3 server. It then became locked in at T2. Since then, several servers moved from T1 down to the varying T2 guilds. There are 4 servers in relative competition. Thus, one is generally stuck in T3. It is my opinion, that the surge in these complaints come from T3 having one sever around that generally has a much higher average playing population then the other 2.

So I feel your claim that guilds only move up is very untrue.

SkyShroud.2865:

unfortuantely, the game is heading towards a direction where the idea of “rebuilding” a server is quite impossible due to lack of population. as the population decline, wvw become inbalance and then it become less fun.

You are mistaken as I see it. The game is moving the the exact direction to build up a servers population. Nothing revitalizes and MMO like an expansion pack.

X T D.6458:

Here are 2 possible ideas to counter blobbing in its current form:

1) Lower the population cap per map- This could lead to more queues on certain servers thus more spreading out of forces on other maps and might help keep maps from being dead for long stretches. This way players wont need to join a map hopping group constantly and will be able to stick to one map. Will make it easier for Guild drivers to lead smaller guild raids against larger enemy groups.

That is an all around bad idea. I already see 3-4 maps with queues on any given day. There is no justification for making it 4 maps queued extremely often, or up to always queued. If you want to see less WvW players in general, artificially forcing them out by extended artificial queues is the fastest way to do that.

X T D.6458:

2) Increase scaling of Keep Lords- Increasing the scaling of the Keep Lords would essentially stop them from being melted in seconds by enemy blobs and leaving little time for defense or response teams, essentially promoting blobbing karma trains. If they were scaled say like a world boss is based on the number of enemies in the area to last longer it would make for a lot more interesting fights and make defense a little easier. Basically the more enemy players the more time it takes. The problem with this is that it might make ppt harder and take longer to cap so the scaling would have to be adjusted very carefully.

The other problem I see occurring, is if server A controls a keep. Server B and server C are assaulting it at the same time. B and C are fighting it out. they will each scale up the lord for the other. In this instance it unreasonably gives a large advantage to a very very late arriving defense force from server A.

Personally, on the latter issue, I prefer all around keep defense and use of siege to hold off larger forces, as a better option then artificially buffing the lord. I am not in favor of artificial means to tip the scales toward those who rally less players.

Dhuumfire is irrelevant. Between your sig and your Dhuumfire comments, your beginning to come off as an angry necro seeking revenge on another profession. Not saying that is the case, but it is sure starting to appear that way.

If they went off of one persons exclamation of nerf, thieves would have no stealth. Necro marks wouldn’t have a trigger or duration that they can paint the ground, they would activate when placed then dissipate at the end of that players suggested duration. Warriors wouldn’t have healing signet passive heals of any kind. Rangers would have no range. So on and so forth.

It seems problematic, that you believe your personal perspective of balance, is the end all be all of the matter in your eyes. I am not against some changes such as an interruptible cast time for healing turret placement, net shot, or over charge shot, with animation cues to boot. The problem is, you approach it as if your thoughts on the matter are unarguable and you state everything is an abrasive and aggressive manner, then go on to demand anyone who disagrees in any way as purely argumentative and dismissive.

Your last few post were all “we” and “us” when referring to engineers. When you determine a dis-satisfactory amount disagree with your aggressive demands of nerfs, and your attitude of certainty that your perspective is the only way, and everyone else is mistaken, it is suddenly “this community”. As well, you go on to claim everyone else is the problem for being dismissive to individuals rehashing old discussions and demanding the profession be changed for them, in a manner those is clearly against the balance philosophies.

Someone quotes a dev, and all of the sudden the community is in the wrong for going along with the official balancing philosophy, instead of steering away from official philosophy, to follow your ideas to the detriment of reasonable balance.

oneply.9586:

X T D.6458:

oneply.9586:

X T D.6458:

oneply.9586:

as other have suggested there are ways to thwart the blob. and that has its own fun involved.
but yes i agree with you that it would be nice if they designed things to incorporate multiple playstyles in WvW besides the numbers game. but it think that comes down more to map design than anything.
generic maps result in generic gameplay.
my biggest compliant where is the choke point that could allow a small group to crush a large one? maybe it will be in the HoT expansion but im not holding my breath.

choke points work for the group that uses it more intelligently

yup, but there are no real choke points in WvW, so…….

:o whoa what? no offense but are you playing with your eyes closed lol

yes there are “choke points” but theyre not good ones that are designed well. thats what i mean by “real choke points.”
mind point out where these amazing choke points are?

You mean you do not feel they are good? Because there is a difference between you not liking them or feeling they are good in your opinion, and your disingenuous statement in which you definitively declare none exist at all.

Typhus.3502:

Get rid of the aoe cap. Make it so that small skilled and organized groups can take down a “zerg” without having to blob up themselves.

At one point WvW didn’t have damage AoE caps. It was overwhelmingly demanded by the player base. They added a cap of 20. It was overwhelmingly demanded to be lowered further. hence we have it now at 5.

Experience has already proven your suggestion would be a detriment to the game. Why would anyone want to revert back to the way in which the feed back against it was overwhelming?

That is a fine scenario I guess, but it doesn’t really address my question. I guess what I was getting at, is do you feel you personally, can successfully deal with a turret engineer? If you have extreme difficulty, what profession do you have difficulty with? I guess it is probably more relevant to builds then profession, so I would like to know which ones you, personally, lack the ability to deal with a turret engineer on?

If you were worried about it being a bug, you would have

A. Posted this in the bug forums.

B. posted it anywhere specific, because it was never a bug inherent to WvW specifically.

C. Filed a bug report. Did you file a bug report?

Otherwise, I an having a bit of difficulty seeing where you are going with your most recent post. I can only surmise that English is not your first language, but your grammatical form makes a good bit of what your are saying, difficult to take in.

As of now, it appears you are berating me for asking you why you worded it as if you are assuming he is going to test if for you. The you go on to mention “honesty” in his results, as if he has some reason to lie to you. That was were my reference came from. If that displeases you, then chose your words more wisely, and put the thread in the appropriate location.

X T D.6458:

Heres the issue, people will naturally try to get as many as possible in one group because its the most effective strategy, and to counter an enemy blob you create your own, its kind of a vicious cycle. WvW has always been about numbers,

Not sure what you mean by “about numbers” in this particular instance. I do know though, that 3-4 nights a week, my guild had 40-60 on at one time. Often we have to split 30 and 30 on two separate maps. Sometimes we can get all on one map.

Are we a “blob”, a “zerg”, or an “organized guild group”? Why does the fact that we take the opportunity to play together as one unit create a “viscous cycle” ? As I see it it doesn’t. It creates an opportunity for use to play together, in close proximity as a unit. It allows us to regale our cool gear or mock one anothers character in jest, as we can all see one anothers character.

X T D.6458:

WvW has always been about numbers, you can have 20 very skilled players, but an 80man blob will wreck anything. Many players also do not like fighting and turtle up in towers/keeps and bunker up with siege which simply promotes more blobbing because ppt needs to be worked on at times and its easier to capture something with a blob when the objective is sieged up, or when you know the enemy might respond with their own blob.

An 80 player “blob” cannot wreck everything in absolutes though, a 20 “very skilled” players with a sieged up location can absolutely see to that.

X T D.6458:

Blobbing can be extremely frustrating when your facing one, and give you a feeling of confidence and safety when your in one. Its normal for players to act like this, like in pve when you have a massive zerg against one target, much of the game is based on this concept.

That does not justify trying to discourage players from having fun together in force though.

X T D.6458:

There is a lot of issues that can arise if trying to deal with blobbing. WvW is based around PPT and capturing objectives, therefore having a large moving force is necessary at times when the enemy also has a large force. And no matter what people will always try to find the most effective strategy.

The upcoming HoT wvw changes might change this, who knows. Im not hopeful but we will see.

I hope not. I rather enjoy large battles over a keep. Had some really great 3 way battles in a garrison last night as well as both in hills and bay. It was nearly 6 hours of constant large battles. Good times indeed.

ronpierce.2760:

I’m PLAYING the turret engineer. I have done various 1v3s and many more 1v2s. XD Why are you not reading what I’m saying…

So can you easily deal with turret engineers yourself easily, when you encounter them or do they generally defeat you or run you off?

That would not be “culling” anyway, unless you were fighting him in a large battle.

Roguefire.8174:

I recently hit the cap finally and have no use for luck. It is just stacking in my inventory. Here are some ideas that resolve the issue.

1. Add luck vendor
2. Give luck vendor value
3. Remove luck drops from accounts with max magic find
4. Add more mystic forge recipes for luck
5. Remove luck from account bound

Linken.6345:

maybe you shouldent have rushed it

haresean.3856:

Indeed, shouldn’t have rushed it.

Lazaar.9123:

Wouldn’t you just ask for a higher cap again once you reach the new one due to rushing?

Phoebe Ascension.8437:

That you got cap is YOUR fault, not ours. System works as intended.

Also posts like the above are just stating “deal with it” and are completely unproductive. No point in repeating the same thing over and over. People have hit cap, and now there is nothing to do with luck but endlessly deleting it… This is a legitimate problem and I would much rather have someone suggest that Anet just removes luck drop after max magic find that say something worthless like “you rushed it, your fault, this is not an issue”.

What do I do with all my extra gold?

I have thousands of gold I have no immediate need for. You demand they invest development time into creating an NPC especially for you. I demand they take a developer away from insignificant ventures such as a luck vendor, and add a specific one for my needs that has rare items that are exclusive to those with excess gold.

I am curious what your post would be if they informed you they were adding new legendaries that you bought with luck. Then had them inform you that they recend that idea because twice as many people have excess karma or gold.

DarkSyze.8627:

azyume.6321:

I don’t know what exactly you are talking about.

However, if you mean the damage by attunement, it isn’t a bug.

Sunspot: Inflict damage at your location when you attune for fire.
Damage: 122
Number of targets: 5
Radius: 180

Electric Discharge: Strike your target with a bolt of lightning while attuning for air.

Earthen Blast: Damage foes and cripple when attuning for earth.
Damage: 73
Cripple: 3 seconds
Number of targets: 5
Radius: 240

Healing Ripple: Heal nearby allies when attuning to water.
Healing: 1302
Number of Targets: 5
Radius: 240

You are missing the fire burst damage, but what you list is what is happening. Is it possible to test them and see if they are firing behind your back? be honest with result k

Why do you assume someone who already explained to you that it is not a bug, will “retest” something for you? If your making the claims of accusations, why do you not go test it yourself if you feel it is a problem?

Deli.1302:

Arius.7031:

Deli.1302:

Chaba.5410:

Deli.1302:

Everyone is allowed to enjoy the game the way they want to. So obviously the majority of players enjoy playing in an active environment where they can get fights in rapid succession.

The general trend for 2+ years has been to transfer to higher tiers. The only time that there has been mass transfers to lower tiers was during the Kaineng bandwagon and the HoD bandwagon. Those were free transfers. They were also both disastrous.

Yup. They tried to do that with RoS and then with Blacktide too but all the guilds left and transferred back up eventually. And those servers were left drained off all recruitment potential and even native guilds followed suit and transferred off. So anyone suggesting guilds from high tier servers transfer down to theirs does not realize how much harm will happen to their server. I can guarantee that if the Kaineng bandwagon never happened, Kaineng would be a much higher tiered server now.

Bandwagoning, whether down or up, is always bad. You can’t make the jump from “these instances of destacking are bad, therefore all are bad/are probably bad”. That leap cannot be made. We have bad examples of destacking, because they were done in bad ways. Then again, what about all the servers that have risen out of bronze to silver successfully? Why are you ignoring those (Dh/IoJ/HoD/EBay/NSP)? Also, kaineng was rank 24 server until an initiative to stack it that was pretty popular on the forums back near launch. I have no idea why you think Kaineng would be higher than they are if the bandwagon hadn’t happened, they were dead last lol.

Most of those servers rose up because others around it died/imploded and I’m pretty sure attrition had something to do with it.

Although I want to point out, it is not simply a matter of players “stacking”. To a very very large extent, it is likely that the natural progression of MMOs, in which the population often declines over time, left an innate imbalance aspect as well. It is also one reason for initial imbalances.

Rimmy.9217:

Chaba.5410:

If you’ve been out of the GvG scene for that long and haven’t followed the meta, you really don’t understand then why the windmill is now considered a terrible place for it, which explains also your EOTM suggestion. In other words, your suggestion may seem like a solution, but it isn’t.

I still see people using the windmill. You know your tier isn’t the only place that people GvG, right? That whatever culture your server or your tier uses isn’t the only one, right? And I wasn’t offering a solution – that people want to get together in the game and do something that is possible in the game but isn’t specifically supported isn’t a problem to be solved.

Yes, it actually is a problem to be solved. We have OS for GvGs. Otherwise, it creates queues for players who desire to fight for territory. It quite literally violates the ToS as well.

Chaba.5410:

The most widely stated reason given to me for why guilds pick the server they do is “stability”. They are looking for server stability. That doesn’t always equate tier balance unfortunately. If Anet could somehow provide better stability to servers, maybe through more predictable match-making, it may help to stem players from leaving. But Anet can’t be solving instability caused by drama between guilds and players on each server.

The most widely reason I see is:

A. We have been here since launch.

B. As with most MMOs, over time friends and guildies quit. I met some folks in PvE and they were on a different server, so I moved.

You really should put all your eggs in one basket in that your “experience” with very few guilds suggest they prefer stability. Unless you have a reason to believe you have spoken to more then half of the players on all 48+ NA and EU servers, and the China servers, then you have in no way, even remotely touched upon the majority.

ronpierce.2760:

That’s what I meant all along. I was suggesting it’s uptime was too high for no risk, the risk was implied as being no cast and instant, that’s why I pointed out those facts. Uptime would also drop not only as a result of a tell, but a cast time would technically add to its re-use time. In the process it could use some connection fixes and maybe even added velocity to fix some of the obstruction issues it hits.

It was? Strange. I looked up risk, to see if I missed that definition, and didn’t see that anywhere. Your doing yourself or the debate no benefit by attempting to claim it is another players fault that you offered a poor explanation, then attempt to lay blame on them because they didn’t intuit your intent or meaning.

ronpierce.2760:

It never got to those points of discussion because it turned hostile too fast. I said it was too good of a set up because it had all of those perks combined, and doesn’t need nerfed in every angle, but it does need some sort of counter play other than just out-ranging it or abusing it’s obstruction issues. If you improve those it does become rather too potent in its current implication.

Hostile you say? Why did you get so hostile then? Certainly Your not assuming I was hostile for disagreeing with you. It doesn’t help that you both assume others can read your mind and intuit your meaning, and you assume to tel them what they meant. Approaching matters in that aspect is simply unreasonable.

As far as counter play. It has counter play. Dodge. Reflect. Light strafing and very minimal movement causes it to miss. Stun breaks. Blocks?

All that and more, yet you claim no counter play? If you want to go that route, it can easily be argued that any ranged skill in the game has no counter play.

ronpierce.2760:

Just for instance, as turrets. I’ve decapped far before and backup came, standing on the edge I instantly immobilized them about 200u from the point. Because they can’t dodge roll if I successfully land it, overcharge shot near the end and start my rocket turret. Unless it’s one of the few with a ccbreak+ stability, the rocket can knock them down again and shortly after I can attempt to immob again. I’ve secured so many decaps and caps by timing my ccs in order that for many builds it could be considered relatively hard to counter. Not to mention, many times those people are pretty close to read if they aren’t tanky, but not often do people send tanks to contest me. Then I still have a thumper. Which chains well with the immob too.

Again, changing skills based on the weakest players in the chain is unreasonable.

Why is it that you, personally, have so much difficult dealing with a turret engineer?

Why would we want to redesign the game mode to promote my guild “not” to play together in WvW?

I know I enjoy playing in large fights. I see no reason it should be changed to satisfy those who don’t. They have sPvP conquest if they want small fights. As well they have stronghold coming in for that.

ronpierce.2760:

There is clearly no explaining to you, you’re in hyper defensive mode.

You have used nothing but extremely subjective terms to argue your perspective. So instead of offering reason and logic, you attempt to place the burden on me. I am not being hyper defensive by seeing reason in a a few skills not changing. You are simply being irrationally aggressive in demanding the game changes to bend around your personal needs, instead of comparative balance.

ronpierce.2760:

There’s no sense in explaining it to you. But I was suggesting in terms of real time use and how people actually play these builds, not napkin math in which you think flurry is somehow more problematic than netshot.

Yet you used nothing but napkin math as your only actual fact in your perspective. Everything else was subjective bias on your part. you very literally and specifically used immobilize up time per skill as the only fact in your argument. Yet when it is used against your argument, all of the sudden, math is not a compelling fact point, by your own words here.

Engineers do not dominate PvE. They are not part of GWEN. They are solid in PvP, yet you do not see 3 on a team at high level. There value across the game as a whole, does not display a need for change in any of the areas mentioned.

ronpierce.2760:

Also, it’s an “absurd” (objectively speaking) point OF these meta/winning builds.

Exactly. It is “objective” not solidified evidence of a need for changes. Yet you disingenuously argue it in sentences of statement and misrepresented as fact.

ronpierce.2760:

But alas, you’re not here for discussion. You don’t want to give anything up, and that’s fine I guess. But there’s a kitten good reason Celest Rifle engi and Turrets run Rifle and not pistol/shield or pistol/pistol.

I am certainly here for discussion. You appear to have popped in here and demanded skills need a change. You never asked. You never offered a compelling argument (all your offered was subjected personal wants). You even used terms such as “up time” as your only actual supporting fact, just to reject it as reasonable when it no longer supported your argument.

ronpierce.2760:

The major reasons being Overcharged Shot and Net shot. No cast time makes them incredibly easy to execute and not interruptable, and if used in close range hardly avoidable (especially following a knockdown like overcharged shot, slick shoes, a thumper turret, rocket turret, and so on).

First off, you chose to take the perspective of demanding a need for up time nerfs. Untill now, this conversation never went in the direction of cast times or animations as far as your argument is concerned. I am in favor of both being needed. Every skill in the paragraph above can have a cast time and animation to see it coming as far as I am concerned.

ronpierce.2760:

I think you’re ignoring the part where I’ve been playing the Engineer coming to this conclusion. Turret Engies and Celest Rifle Engies are both two of the most absurd builds in the game. I find it hard to deny that point.

Absurd? Oh I see, we are not worried about “good” or “meta” or “winning” builds. You demanding your nerfs based of how much it feels “absurd” when used against you. Got it.

ronpierce.2760:

Also, there is a lot more practicality to Net Shot to Flurry. For one, it’s not used very frequently considering combustion shot is usually preferred to ensure condition removal. Additionally, Adrenaline has to be built, very rarely is it feasible to use a tier 3 flurry every 10 seconds. In fact it doest happen at all. It’s also melee with practically the worst mechanics. And warriors start with 0, net has no build up and is easily accessible.

Practicality? I consider an AoE, that does exponentially more damage as practical. So far all have have done is toss out subjective buzz words. Then claim ranged CC with less up time as more practical then a solid damaging CC with more up time, in a game in which damage is extremely important.

Second, you go on to irrationally justify your odd explanation because you claim flurry isn’t used much? That is totally irrelevant.

You use extreme objectiveness and irrelevance as your main argument points?

ronpierce.2760:

Warriors are also nothing compared to the potency of the said above builds. The most notable warrior build (that even uses flurry) is Shoutbow, and doesn’t have even close to half the CC as engi and is hated for (possibly valid) other reasons, namely ease of play and heal potency.

And? Engineer doesn’t have half the condition cleansing potential of warrior, nor half the ability to deal with CC or stability.

Ease of play? I haven’t seen any evidence that you can make it look easy, much less claim it so in comparison to warrior or thief.

Thank you for clarifying your motive though. You show a bias in your constant description of “hate” and “annoy” as you go on to mention CC. Obviously this is about you personally disliking being CCed, and balance is irrelevant.

ronpierce.2760:

Also, it’s set up potential is higher than average not because it’s an immobilize, it’s becuase its a no risk-10 second cooldown. You can set up frequently and soon again on a failed attempt. Hell a missed flurry wastes all of your adrenaline, even.

No risk? If that is your argument, then any ranged skill in the game is “no risk”. Yet anything that keeps you in range of your targets skills is “at risk”.

ronpierce.2760:

Erm, I have explained why. A ‘potential’ 20%+ up time Immob (of course you won’t land 100% but that’s any skill) low cooldown (Low risk) INSTANT immobilize, arguably one of the most potent conditions in the game is absurd. I’m not understanding how you don’t see the problem it holds… Most immobs are placed on a higher cooldown and long very notable cast times for a good reason.

Actually no you haven’t. You simply listed what the skill does. Then appeared to incorrectly conclude others would inherently agree with you.

Out of the 40 or so immobilized in the game, there are 6 skills that have a higher immobilize up time ratio. 4 other skills that have the same up time ration. I do not see you making an uproar about those. Where does the bias come from?

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Flurry is double the immobilize of net shot. It is AoE. yet I look through your post history and see no complaints about it. Where does the bias against engineer come from I wonder?

ronpierce.2760:

Even look at things like panic strike. It’s. 2 sec immob on a longer cooldown when hitting an enemy under 50% and that’s considered a very valuable talent.

Wait, what? Your comparing thief traits to a MH weapon skill? You feel your argument is so weak that you have to try to use comparisons of trait to weapon skill?

Body shot, infiltrators strike, surprise shot, all offer over 50% up time of immobilize on each individual skill. The obvious level of intentional bias is, well, obvious.

ronpierce.2760:

The immob itself isn’t just over powered but th amount of set up and execution it allows over a fight, as immobs prevent dodge rolls you can chain to ccs such as overcharged shot or otherwise with the greatest of ease. I’m going to have to be honest, you’re over reaching to defend it by attacking me. I play with it relatively often. It’s far too potent as a skill. Please just read it…

Instant cast. 10 second cooldown. 2 second Immobilize. 1000 range (even if it’s not always best beyond 500, it still works a good deal of time beyond that. Especially against fleeing targets.)[/quote]

Yet the other skills with more immobilization up time are okay with you, and all of the ones of equivalent up up time are as well.

This rant, particularly this section, is appearing to be more of a story about a butt kicking, then downed when trying to run? Thief? Necro?

ronpierce.2760:

It simply has too much set up potential too frequently and is too easy to land in a close quarters fight, which, let’s be honest, is where you end up anyways to land grenades effectively.

List the immobilize skills that have no set up potential?

Looking through it, I see you went on several complaint trends in which you complained about engineer condition a while back. Now with celestial making rifle a solid weapon, you want to complain about that. Again with the bias.

Holesale.2640:

I think the change was needed because just like the auto elixir S trait

That is not even remotely true either, in my experience. I know this trait is quit handy in larger fights in WvW.

probably not, but I do have that weird home video you made with those 7 cans of whipping cream, 2 live chickens, and a weed whacker.

Chaith.8256:

coglin.1867:

Yeah, actually you kind of did. I didn’t ask for advice here, but you sure feel the need to flex your ego and repeatedly try to cram some down my throat though.

Do you have any video evidence of me cramming things down your throat? Don’t presume to tell me what I’M cramming down your throat, speak for yourself.

I can appreciate your humor when it is clear something is meant to be funny, but as often as you see clowns trying to give false weight to their opinion in PvP by dishonestly claiming to speak for others, i am rather surprised you support it here.

ronpierce.2760:

Holesale.2640:

ronpierce.2760:

Sort of surprised Net Shot wasn’t included in this. :P 20+% immob uptime, only 10 second cooldown AND instant. GG :P

This Requires it not being Obstructed all the time or shooting into the sky when the target is directly in front of you. xD

Granted, it does have its bugs, that doesn’t really excuse its potency. It should just be fixed, and more reliable, but also tuned down. It definitely needs its fix though.

That said, its not alone in the “doesn’t work well with any sort of terrain” group.

You realize making irrational declarations of random skills nerfs, is pointless unless you offer some form of reasonable explanation or justification?

As of now, all it appears you are doing is random crying about skills that you feel are annoying, with no logical justification beyond the fact that they annoy you, counter your build because you refuse to change your build to counter them, or you need to learn to play to counter them.

Alteros.3019:

coglin.1867:

Alteros.3019:

coglin.1867:

Yes, because Videles for example, doesn’t realize this is not how math works.

If there is one player against 5. And you make said player 5 times as strong as each of the others, then by focusing them one at a time, the 5 would be destroyed every time. The over all damage output may be similar. The problem is, that defensive effects/stats will be spread out over 5 players compared to that of 5X the offensive output per the one player.

It is the equivalent mentality of illogically believing that it is an even fight if it is 5 people versus 1 and you give the 1 an uzi and body armor. That doesn’t make it into an equivalent battle.

As opposed to how it currently is when 1 player (or entire server) is outnumbered 5:1 and is insta-melted through raw damage and stun-locks?

What did those 5 players do wrong? They deserve to be innately punished simply for logging in? You have evidence those specific 5 players did something personally to cause a population imbalance? if not, I find it odd that you support creating an artificial imbalance against them.

Those 5 players didn’t do anything wrong, just as the one guy didn’t do anything wrong either. Its just not an even fight. From the sound of it, there will never be a numbers balance in WvW. So if you 1) can’t force people to move, 2) can’t move people by force or against their will to another server, 3) or merge servers…what other option do you have but balance the power levels between servers?

Well recruit for one. As we have a sub forums for that, and I look and see almost no one here who is complaining, making recruitment threads, I have no sympathy for their low numbers.

Alteros.3019:

coglin.1867:

Yes, because Videles for example, doesn’t realize this is not how math works.

If there is one player against 5. And you make said player 5 times as strong as each of the others, then by focusing them one at a time, the 5 would be destroyed every time. The over all damage output may be similar. The problem is, that defensive effects/stats will be spread out over 5 players compared to that of 5X the offensive output per the one player.

It is the equivalent mentality of illogically believing that it is an even fight if it is 5 people versus 1 and you give the 1 an uzi and body armor. That doesn’t make it into an equivalent battle.

As opposed to how it currently is when 1 player (or entire server) is outnumbered 5:1 and is insta-melted through raw damage and stun-locks?

What did those 5 players do wrong? They deserve to be innately punished simply for logging in? You have evidence those specific 5 players did something personally to cause a population imbalance? if not, I find it odd that you support creating an artificial imbalance against them.

Zefrost.3425:

Slick Shoes – Nerf the duration of the oil on the ground to 1s. This will make the skill do what it was originally intended to do.

Super Speed – Nerf this cooldown back to 45 seconds again.

Gear Shield – Nerf the cooldown to 30s.

Incendiary Powder – Nerf it.

Invigorating Speed – Nerf the cooldown to 10s.

Kk thnx then engi = balanced.
bye

None of that makes any sense. You offer no reasoning or justification for any of that.

When you propose things in this manner, you leave folks to have fun with assumptions as to why you want these unreasonable changes. One could even assume you are one of the most bottom tier players, and posted an unreasonable nerf demand for every profession. I mean your so unreasonably saly, we can literally follow your trail of salt all the way back to the warrior and necro threads.

I think the video below is what this guy really wants.

ellesee.8297:

Lol I actually agree with Slick Shoes nerf! That skill is pretty overpowdered! The single strongest lockdown ability in the game combined with one of the shortest stunbreak cooldown duration in the game that also refreshes at low health! Yeah pretty overpowdered! But the rest of the things on the list are lolz! And I’m surprised Overcharged Shot isn’t on that list! That skill single-handedly carries cele Engis!

Wahoo! Bye frands!

Actually there are 6 stun breakers out there with lower cool downs and 6 with equal innate cool downs.

As well, their are weapons that do great damage whose skills also chain easily to offer longer lock downs then that.

Not to mention that they are 100% negated by stability.

Anything not a kit is arguably under powered. As you give up a space that could use a kit, in order to use one of those other skills.

joneirikb.7506:

Videles.6759:

Make the outnumbered buff dynamically. Are you outnumbered 3 to 1 then every character should be as strong as three players. Als reduce the amount of supplies needed by the outnumbered team dynamically. This at least in some way equalizes it is a bit

They will never add mechanics that changes the playing field of a 1on1 much. If they did that, it would create some really crazy situations in the game, and probably drive away large parts of the people interested in actually fights in WvW. Just imagine how this would affect single roamers taking camps in enemy borderland, if the home server got 20 people in citadel, and 20 out patrolling and guarding etc. That single roamer is strong as 40 man ?

Yes, because Videles for example, doesn’t realize this is not how math works.

If there is one player against 5. And you make said player 5 times as strong as each of the others, then by focusing them one at a time, the 5 would be destroyed every time. The over all damage output may be similar. The problem is, that defensive effects/stats will be spread out over 5 players compared to that of 5X the offensive output per the one player.

It is the equivalent mentality of illogically believing that it is an even fight if it is 5 people versus 1 and you give the 1 an uzi and body armor. That doesn’t make it into an equivalent battle.

insanemaniac.2456:

coglin.1867:

Last year, my guild transferred from a T1 server to a T3 server. If we ran as a guild group, we destroyed any group our size, be that 5 to 55. The level of organized fighting was a night and day difference. The type of gear players were wearing were very different, changing the fighting dynamics. The way they used siege was completely different. Every thing they did, put them at a disadvantage to how we played. We were baffled at how easy the fights were. So you really need to put this diluted notion a side that creating artificial queues by any means is one of the worst ideas possible.

Your ideas also artificially handy cap players in off peak times. I work rotating swing shifts. During the weeks I am on a night schedule, I and many I know, play late at night and early morning. Folks like you, tend to make an attempt to call us “night capers” as if it is some negative connotation. In the past, you have made many suggestions to limit points we can add to the score simply because we play in off peak hours.

i dont think an off-prime guild should have expected challenge when moving to a matchup where most of the bodies play at prime… you would have prolly needed to play during prime time to see anybody worth fighting. thats why big off-prime guilds dont exist outside of t1/t2 any more, and its a positive feedback loop. :/

We are not an off prime guild. I think your confusing me having discussed my guild, with that of me and my coworkers oft off time schedule. 50% of the time, the small group I was referring to are on nights. I was referring to the 20 of us that work together and play, not the entire 400 players of the guild. Do not blend my discussion points for my guild with that of me and my coworkers, separate experiences.

So if you want to discuss the solution to that topic in which you quoted a post. why didn’t you do so there, instead of trashing up the front page of the sub forums with yet another thread on the same topic?

Particularly since the topic was created by the forums specialist?

lil devils x.6071:

Widebody.5071:

lil devils x.6071:

Widebody.5071:

It seems like instead of balanced matches people would rather have unequaled gank fests.
How can someone complain about unbalanced matches turn around and champion the idea of being able to stack on a few select servers, then justify it by saying it creates a more competitive or exciting venture? SHHHH….they just want easy mode.

It’s gotten so easy that now people are staying away from wvw and you see people baiting others out with an alt on one server just so they can have someone to attack with their main on the opposing server. If you think about it that is pretty sad and pathetic.

Maybe if everyone would stay put and stop jumping ship for the next flavor of the month server things could stabilize.

Most games are engineered pretty well, it’s just that once developers start catering to whiney players things go down hill real quick.

It’s gotten so easy where? Come JQ and have the other 2 servers map blobs in your keep at the same time not attacking each other and tell me how easy it is. That isn’t easy mode..

If it is too easy where you are, you need to switch servers for a challenge currently. They need to resolve that issue so every server that is available will have challenging game play. The only way to do that is to either remove servers all together or reduce them to 3-6 so there is always a challenge.

Most games reduce servers when the population declines, that is the one thing Anet has not done for wvw is why that has not been resolved yet. They did this for pve, they just need to do this for wvw as well to resolve the problem.

You misunderstand my friend… I’m right there with you experiencing the double teaming from two servers that outnumber us that also block for each other.

That’s the easy part I’m talking about and those are usually the people championing more fights, hating on defenders, bad talking PVEers and talking about how broken Pvp arenas are. They don’t want a balanced game or even matches, they want a gank fest and that my friend is not cool.

You solve the problem of a gank fest by making sure all the servers are populated and balanced so it is much more difficult for one to stack on the others. Now of course then it comes down to a matter of player skill, and that is not as easily balanced, as even with even numbers, you will always have players at different skill levels. The cool thing about wvw though, is you can have players of different skill levels all helping one another, since there are always different jobs that need to be done.

No, you do not even remotely solve that problem. You appear to have this diluted misconception that 80 vs 80 = Balance. Amount of each profession that is on, matters more. Amount of players in TS, matters more. Amount of organized commanders, matters more. Amount of players willing to volunteer to join the pool for a scouting rotation matters more.

Last year, my guild transferred from a T1 server to a T3 server. If we ran as a guild group, we destroyed any group our size, be that 5 to 55. The level of organized fighting was a night and day difference. The type of gear players were wearing were very different, changing the fighting dynamics. The way they used siege was completely different. Every thing they did, put them at a disadvantage to how we played. We were baffled at how easy the fights were. So you really need to put this diluted notion a side that creating artificial queues by any means is one of the worst ideas possible.

Your ideas also artificially handy cap players in off peak times. I work rotating swing shifts. During the weeks I am on a night schedule, I and many I know, play late at night and early morning. Folks like you, tend to make an attempt to call us “night capers” as if it is some negative connotation. In the past, you have made many suggestions to limit points we can add to the score simply because we play in off peak hours.

it is clear you are more then happy to diminish other players experiences, if they play differently then you, or on different schedules then you, for the pure benefit of yourself. This is further supported by your notion of creating maps based around the lowest populations, and crating artificially queues for the other servers, literally locking them out of the game for having more players logged on at the time.

Personally, I feel having this discussion before HoTs release is asinine. Gayle has already stated that it is a fact that there has been an injection of players coming back to the game since its announcement. With more coming in every day when they announce something new. It seems to me, that any changes would likely be harmful to the particularly large influx of players we will have during HoTs release.

Chaith.8256:

Not so much me ‘telling you’ what you like, more like just pointing out that of course anyone would have liked to have the old Rocket Boots back, just without any self-CC.

Yeah, actually you kind of did. I didn’t ask for advice here, but you sure feel the need to flex your ego and repeatedly try to cram some down my throat though.

Chaith.8256:

Seeing as you could simply cancel the propulsion and enjoy a 16s traited blast and stunbreak if desired, it’d be overpowered. And woefully underpowered when breaking stuns only to lock yourself in a 2 second CC. Even a lover of the retro Rocket Boots as yourself have said the self-CC component should have been removed. Do you see why it was a pretty opportune time to rework it? Can’t be balanced whether it’s CCing you or not.

Yes, it can be balanced. You can lower the range of movement it gave, and/or lower the AoE damage it did and/or change the blast finisher aspect and/or adjust the cool down.

Chaith.8256:

I respect your love for the old rocket boots, but now it’s widely enjoyed by much larger audience. Especially when traversing PvE, WvW.

Try Super Speed, that’s a short cooldown Stunbreak that gives you a quick gtfo’

Wider audience? Oh are you suggesting you have evidence they are used more commonly now? Would you mind linking that for me please? I am find it hard to buy your notion that players preferred using a utility slot for a mobility skill over that of a stun breaker with the shortest cool down.

As to slick shoes, no need for you to bring them up. I have advocated them for some time now. I find them very handy in the WvW community. You seem to forget, in the WvW community, we do not bolt our minds to the term meta.

Chaith.8256:

Oh, and I’ve mentioned this several times, but Rocket Boots really needs a directional input like the Warrior Greatsword #3 ability / Fiery Greatsword #3. That would blast the Rocket Boots off in the right direction, for sure.

What is your thoughts behind this suggestion? You launch the direction you are facing. Thus your camera is your directional input. I see no reason to ask the devs to spend time adding an unnecessary step. Unless there is an aspect of this that I am missing, behind your intention. As of now, you already blast in the right direction.

The problem is that 50% of the way through the animation, they often take a 90 degree turn to the right or left, or a 180 degree back to your point of initiating origin. I am not entirely certain why you feel adding an unnecessary step would aid in solving that bug.

Wow, an entire thread of players admitting that they cannot defeat a turret build? Do some of you not find that embarrassing? The build is rather easy to play against and dispatch. Doesn’t a build need to be difficult to play against and dispatch to be problematic?

ozzy.8059:

just go where the engie isn’t you say…. ok what happens if there is 2 of them one on home one on mid now that?

if your not capable of handling one of the weakest builds in the meta right now, you rotate out to an unoccupied node or one in which you outnumber the foes, and let a more capable player rotate in for you.

Rimmy.9217:

coglin.1867:

Rimmy.9217:

dancingmonkey.4902:

Jim Hunter.6821:

Oh so I’m childish for calling you selfish for wanting to maintain a broken system that favors the minority?

You consider full servers with queues, in comparison to empty servers that folks are complaining about being empty? What logic path are you using to develop that conclusion?

You understand that full servers with queues means that there are people who want to play WvW but can’t, right? That’s definitely the opposite of healthy.

What are you talking about? I was referring to artificial queues by lowering the player cap, from what it normally is, in order to only allow the more populated server to have similar population in the world based on the opposing servers in the match. my point was that I feel it is a bad idea to to artificially create unnaturally high queues in such a punishing manner.

I wasn’t replying to you in that one, but I agree. I don’t care for the idea of dynamic caps, as stated in my post just above this one.

Bah, I mistook your post when I read it. Sorry bout that.

Jim Hunter.6821:

coglin.1867:

Jim Hunter.6821:

coglin.1867:

So you hose 2 servers for the sake of 1. Again you create sever negative effect for 2 servers for the sake of 1. Yet you call it a “fair” solution.

No that is the situation right now when a server that massively outnumbers the other 2 servers gets thrown in a match with them. This makes the match boring for all 3 servers. Not sure why you think that is more “fair”.

I never remotely suggested that was “fair”. I simply suggested your suggestion was worse.

Which is your opinion based on zero evidence. Not saying you are wrong but we won’t know if we don’t give it a try. I thought I would absolutely hate the removal of white swords but I ended up loving it. A floating cap is something they could easily implement with no permanent consequences, unlike destroying servers, turning WvW into a megaserver, etc.

I will tell you right now, I have absolutely nothing against weekly trials in which they try something every week or every other week.

For the sake of testing alone, I am with ya. I would be more then happy to try it for a week. I may feel it will be detrimental, but I agree that it wouldn’t do any damage to try it, or a good deal of other ideas for that matter.

Jim Hunter.6821:

coglin.1867:

So you hose 2 servers for the sake of 1. Again you create sever negative effect for 2 servers for the sake of 1. Yet you call it a “fair” solution.

No that is the situation right now when a server that massively outnumbers the other 2 servers gets thrown in a match with them. This makes the match boring for all 3 servers. Not sure why you think that is more “fair”.

I never remotely suggested that was “fair”. I simply suggested your suggestion was worse.

You can try to tell me what I did or didn’t like all you want I guess. Fact remains, I loved them as they were, and argued for them not to be changed when the conversation was going. I really enjoyed the very short stun break that also placed me out of the immediate area.

So you hose 2 servers for the sake of 1. Again you create sever negative effect for 2 servers for the sake of 1. Yet you call it a “fair” solution.

Both lil and Jim are arguing for artificial caps that punish populated servers. The only solution they offer are for larger population servers players to suffer irrationally artificial queues or transfer. Why make a change to shift the suffering from the small populations to the larger populations articially? It would be simpler to have lower population deal with low populations or transfer rather then force larger population’s to deal with irrationally forced queues or transfer.

Grimwolf.7163:

coglin.1867:

Actually, there are skills you can use when stunned. Such as FT number 5. At that time, I really liked the EG/FT with rocket boots combo plus the kit refinement. So every time I armed one of those kits, an AoE condition cleanse, and either AoE damage, or heal.

(what was the original kit refinement effect for med kit? I forget. Anyone remember?)

I think it created a weak AoE burst of damage. 100% random and arbitrary because they just couldn’t think of what to do with it.

Oh yeah. I believe you are right. I recall having a great deal of head scratching discussions about it here. It seemed so many posters were wondering why it didn’t create a heal or cleanse of some kind, as it would seem to be more thematic. If I recall correctly.

RashanDale.3609:

kefro.9312:

We want 5 servers on the same map!

Speak for yourself!

Close the current BL they are old and no one likes it

Again, tahts just your opinion. I like them. Theyre old and stuff but still not bad.

I have to agree, who is this “no one” you refer to? I like them a great deal. Perhaps you would server the discussion better if you stick to speaking your opinion for yourself, and avoided disingenuously claiming to speak for others.

Actually, there are skills you can use when stunned. Such as FT number 5. At that time, I really liked the EG/FT with rocket boots combo plus the kit refinement. So every time I armed one of those kits, an AoE condition cleanse, and either AoE damage, or heal.

(what was the original kit refinement effect for med kit? I forget. Anyone remember?)

“Usually”?

You mean it put “you” in worse situation. Possibly because you were not aware enough of your positioning. I on the other hand, found it to be an incredibly useful skill. All it needed was the removal of the self CC, that was the only thing I felt held it back from being one of the best utilities engineers have outside of kits.

rocket boots used to be a stun break on a 20s cool down, back when it launched you back words precisely like acid bomb did. I loved it as a skill. The problem was the posters, here that ruined it, by demanding they change it to a forward, movement skill, as it is now. So we went from the lowest CD stun break in the game, with a blast finisher, to a movement skill with a blast finisher, because a few pushed really hard for what I felt was a bad change.

The odd part about the skill was that it effected you similarly to over charge shot. In that it CCed yourself.

Phineas Poe.3018:

coglin.1867:

And who is this “we” you refer to builds and stun breakers? If you want to be taken seriously, do not dishonestly claim to speak for anyone other then yourself.

To be fair, most engineers do only run one stunbreaker: either the Elixir Gun, Elixir S, or Slick Shoes. And he did say “we usually,” not “all of us.”

That is all fine and dandy. None of that changes the fact that the OP opens himself up to such opinion by over reaching in speaking for more then himself. I, personally, see it as a poster feeling that facts and reason are weak in their argument, so they are trying to dishonestly and artificially give it weight by claiming to speak for others, but that is just my personal opinion. I would be willing to bet, if I see it that way, many others may as well.

As of right now, my real problem with them, is the bug that send you back to your point of origin or off sideways.

I think it is unreasonable.

And who is this “we” you refer to builds and stun breakers? If you want to be taken seriously, do not dishonestly claim to speak for anyone other then yourself.

As far as one stun breaker, I can only guess from your wording that you referring to meta builds. Personal, I am a big fan on not adhering to the meta for the simple sake of following the meta.

Your right, they didn’t have this system. They had the one your suggesting Anet adds. I am guessing you don’r even know what MAG is, so how do you know how its system compairs?

Victory.2879:

Here’s a nice easy topic for you to ‘report’ on Marmatt:

Explain why wvw achievements have never been amended in over 2 years despite everyone pointing these out repeatedly. Probably take someone a day to restructure them to something meaningful with some pretty titles, rewards, etc.

Who is “everyone”? You lose any semblance of credibility when you dishonestly begin to speak for anyone other then yourself.

By the way, you do understand, his job is not to explain a single thing to you. His job is simply to relay information he judges pertinent to those on Anets side he communicates with.

Victory.2879:

Ach points fall out like water in pvp, pve, events, etc but if you play wvw, you’ll get 10 AP in 20 years time after chasing your billionth dolyak.

Why would you play WvW for AP?

lil devils x.6071:

roxybudgy.8205:

lil devils x.6071:

Problems temporarily solved:

Fixed that for you.

As long as players can transfer servers, there will always be a population “imbalance”. Forced transfers only kitten off those who did not want to transfer, and ultimately solves nothing in the long run.

No, it solves it permanently since there are not as many servers to transfer to, allowing for all servers to be equally populated. If one server is stacked they will be the only server with massive ques in this system, thus if they want to play the game they will move to another server to balance out the ques. You cannot stack one server in this plan due to event maps only appearing when all servers in the matchup being qued. ALL servers will be populated, and with bonus maps appearing on an" as needed" basis, you will never have too many on one server and not enough on another, otherwise the server with the stacked population will not be able to get their guilds on the map to play.

Experience says your incorrect. MAG only had 3 factions, never balanced population wise. ESO, 3 factions, not even close to a population balance.