Originally I figured they would replace it with one of the superior stat combination versions (Berserker’s/Knight’s/Rampager’s for Explorer’s, Rampager’s/Carrion for Traveler’s, Soldier’s for Wayfarer) but then I remembered that there’s still the MF jewels/inscriptions/insignias so more likely they’ll make a new stat combination for those to fill and change existing items to that one.
Obviously Giver’s jewelry will get a new stat combo. Probably Toughness to replace the MF like Giver’s armor.
Asari
Wrong game >.>
Also, +1, I support this. Game could use an exposition fairy and he seems a good choice for it.
Undercutting: What is the problem?
Getting to be first in line without losing an amount of money anyone remotely cares about. Sometimes not actually losing any at all due to rounding.
My point is that they need to be buffed so we can kill them. It is a joke that this class is allowed a GOD mode in wvw. No other class has the ability to kill everything at will and no be killed. And before you childish thief’s jump on and try and defend your class Seriously think about it. You have to be one really bad thief to die in wvw and that is the problem. You have no repair costs, you take badges and loot at will and no other class can do this and that is an unfair advantage to all other classes.
That means you want a stealth nerf, not a stealth buff. Buff=make stronger/better, nerf=make weaker/worse.
Which is why thieves weren’t jumping down your throat and others were, they thought you wanted stealth to be stronger.
My guess is the 2 POIs added to Southsun after the settlers moved there.
Axe 2 should be a whirl finisher(it already looks like one)
Axe 3 should be a blast finisher (also looks like a blast finisher)
Warhorn 4 should be a projectile finisher
Focus 4 should also be a projectile finisher
Also Dagger 5 should be a blast finisher.
You all forget that the best class to contest keeps is a necromancer.
After a patch a while back they can use a trait and actually lifesteal of walls = contested waypoint (and dont tell me you can defend ALL your walls from all possible sides)
Yes, it WAS stupid.
Because in reality, that patch REMOVED the ability to do that. The patch note is a typo.
Go actually try it for yourself.
As for hacking that wouldn’t be a problem if there was a decent system in place to permaban anyone who used them…
Or if they just, say, required the lord to be dead to be removed from the altar.
Yeh, though a mesmer could still hack in and portal in a zerg. Would obviously mean he either pretended to have hidden there, or have a pretty dodgy server/guild group
Still better than before since at least the hacker needs accomplices.
All on crit sigils share a global CD, hense why you can’t use two fire sigils or a fire and an air for example.
Read the thread before responding. In the circumstance he creates it doesn’t come off cooldown EVER until relogging.
As for hacking that wouldn’t be a problem if there was a decent system in place to permaban anyone who used them…
Or if they just, say, required the lord to be dead to be removed from the altar.
Have mesmers use/chain Moa Morph > burst him down
Use a lot of CC, like guardian weapon skills.
Place stealth traps in front of each gate.
Stealth traps? Apparently no one wanted to use them. The idea was floated in the chat but no one bothered to buy any.
Isn’t that your problem then? ANet has literally given you something to help in a situation and your server refused to use it. I have no pity for you guys despite agreeing that it should tap more than tap to contest a wp.
Going into stealth costs nothing. Traps cost 15 badges (and do hold some value). In the time it’d take to kill the thief, for him to respawn, and hike it back from the WP to his intended target, the WP he’s contesting will not have dropped its swords.
Yeah…
… Which is why you then bunker down, drop some ranger traps, send out some scouts, and murder every rabbit that comes within 100 yards of your keep.
And then watch as you still can’t actually stop them from reaching the gate, you can only maybe stop them from getting away afterwards. Which they are unlikely to care about. And then they’ll be back by the time the swords run out again.
If that’s the case, then any profession could just run up to some gates, hit them, get killed, and then run back. The only difference is that they could do it with more range. A ranger could do it from 3000 units away. A mes could use clones to distract NPCs and then hit the gate, all while teleporting around traps and juking you out. A guard could just bunker his way through damage up to the gates. An ele could RTL/Lightning Flash/Mist Form/Earth Armor/Swiftness his way right up to the gates. So this isn’t an issue about thieves, then, it’s about players being too incompetent to stop somebody from touching a gate. Which is extremely easy to do, particularly when you know where they’re going anyways.
Yes, exactly. Except for the last 2 sentences, where you don’t understand that the problem is that a completely insignificant amount of damage is able to contest the keep for who knows how many people, and you clearly don’t understand how easy it is to reach the gate if you don’t care about your own survival.
Also, this thread is about the bug that stopped siege from being in the game being more fun, not about the strength of ACs. And it definitely is not more fun when it’s a complete zergfest to take anything since the only way to stop a zerg at that point is with your own equal zerg, and that only zergs can beat down the gates in any remotely decent amount of time.
This is inaccurate. It is possible to stop zergs without having a zerg that is just as big or bigger. It is even possible to do that without siege. Interesting fact: Some people find that kind of defending fun.
This bug forces people into defending like that. Before that everything was too easy with one of those arrowcarts and you would kitten yourself if you did not use it. Now that is no longer an option and people have to use the brilliant combat system in the game.
While I think bugs should be fixed, I hope this shows people that there are other ways to defend towers or keeps. (and that the best way is a combination of a tiny bit of siege and some players with very big testicles) Maybe Anet can finally start fixing the Arrowcarts then.
Did you actually play while the bug was in effect?
Barely anyone even bothered defending because you couldn’t stop the zerg rushes.
The reason ACs are so important is that they are the only thing that can really be used against zergs at a gate without getting yourself killed. The walls are coated in aoe, the cannons are coated in aoe AND die quickly, the oil is coated and barely worth using even if you can stay near it. The only things other than ACs you can use are firing aoes at the gate from behind it, which suffers from the aoe cap, an extremely limited range that it can affect, and an almost complete lack of visual information to work with, or charging out through the door, which requires a zerg of comparable size to the enemy’s to accomplish anything.
Without siege the only thing doors are even good for is stalling for long enough for a counterzerg to hopefully show up.
Have mesmers use/chain Moa Morph > burst him down
Use a lot of CC, like guardian weapon skills.
Place stealth traps in front of each gate.
Stealth traps? Apparently no one wanted to use them. The idea was floated in the chat but no one bothered to buy any.
Isn’t that your problem then? ANet has literally given you something to help in a situation and your server refused to use it. I have no pity for you guys despite agreeing that it should tap more than tap to contest a wp.
Going into stealth costs nothing. Traps cost 15 badges (and do hold some value). In the time it’d take to kill the thief, for him to respawn, and hike it back from the WP to his intended target, the WP he’s contesting will not have dropped its swords.
Yeah…
… Which is why you then bunker down, drop some ranger traps, send out some scouts, and murder every rabbit that comes within 100 yards of your keep.
And then watch as you still can’t actually stop them from reaching the gate, you can only maybe stop them from getting away afterwards. Which they are unlikely to care about. And then they’ll be back by the time the swords run out again.
WvW is better without ACs and trebs. Bring back rams, cats and ballista.
Lol, so no siege counter to rams? That sounds smart XD. People who can’t handle AC’s are people unwilling to adapt, and they are those who are incapable of presenting even remote intelligence to place siege.
Unwilling to adapt? I’m not sure what kind of experience you have in WvW,
But last week I was in a situation where my team had 50 people, and the enemy server also had 50 people. They were camped inside a tier 2 Briar tower, their gate and walls down, they would not come out into open field to fight us, and when they did they would get wiped. Their strategy was to have 10 arrow carts inside the tower and hold a choke point going up the stairs. Charging inside was attempted and ended in suicide.
We then spent another 30 minutes using trebs, specifically aiming for and killing their arrow carts on top of the walls. However while doing this, they put the walls back up, and we had to get the walls back down, and then they would continue to build more carts as people with supply could sneak in 1 by 1. After a full hour of assaulting this tower, and when most of the carts were cleared (not for the first time) we had to get the wall down again, this time we charged and they still had a couple of arrow carts. The battle was very close as the numbers were even and they still had a couple of arrow carts, my team almost wiped in the lords room, but managed to rally and regain full health to down many of the opposition players, we capped it…just, after a lot of effort.
There was a lot more that happened, but I can tell you, for the 50 people that had to wait for the siege shots this entire time, it was a boring experience for them and it was not very fun. We were held by an inferior team that had equal numbers, terrain advantage, repairable walls/gates and easily built arrow carts.
Tell me, what would you have done in that situation? How would you have ‘adapted’? Do you find the above scenario fun?
So an even numbers where they have a fortification, choke point, and siege. They SHOULD have a huge advantage over you.
Now, as for adapting: Stop letting people with supply inside. Go take something else while they’re occupied. Like, say, the camp they’re running supply from.
Obviously the effort it took to beat them down was excessive, and a single tower isn’t worth all of that effort. Take something easier instead of mindlessly beating your face into the wall.Anyone on any class with half a brain can sprint upto a tower and pop and invuln to get inside. Also you do know you can jump map grab supply from lowlands/overlook/valley and tele back (they had no camps and this was their last tower on map)
Your logic is not at all tactical there, yes lets jump off a map with a 50 man group inside briar, I wonder what they’ll do when we stop sieging that tower, oh right build trebs for bay or rush bay with golems / rams.
The point isn’t the tactics involved in sieging the point is the arrow carts being overpowered and unable to push them until all the arrow carts are down which means trebbing, in effect you are spending an hour+ of players time just standing around defending trebs because 10 people on a 1 mashing 2.4k death machine.
So what’s the point of taking the tower then? If your worry is that they’ll go rampage around doing something else then it doesn’t matter if you wipe them at the tower or not. They could do that with or without the tower. Your job is keeping them occupied so that they don’t do that, which actually means that them being holed up in the tower is a success since they aren’t breaking stuff everywhere else.
And you still seem to be running into the problem that they are better prepared.
With even numbers, prepared defenders SHOULD be far more difficult to attack.
Another suggestion I thought of: portal bomb, getting in with help from a Shadow Refuge from a thief so stealth lasts long enough.
Also, this thread is about the bug that stopped siege from being in the game being more fun, not about the strength of ACs. And it definitely is not more fun when it’s a complete zergfest to take anything since the only way to stop a zerg at that point is with your own equal zerg, and that only zergs can beat down the gates in any remotely decent amount of time.
WvW is better without ACs and trebs. Bring back rams, cats and ballista.
Lol, so no siege counter to rams? That sounds smart XD. People who can’t handle AC’s are people unwilling to adapt, and they are those who are incapable of presenting even remote intelligence to place siege.
Unwilling to adapt? I’m not sure what kind of experience you have in WvW,
But last week I was in a situation where my team had 50 people, and the enemy server also had 50 people. They were camped inside a tier 2 Briar tower, their gate and walls down, they would not come out into open field to fight us, and when they did they would get wiped. Their strategy was to have 10 arrow carts inside the tower and hold a choke point going up the stairs. Charging inside was attempted and ended in suicide.
We then spent another 30 minutes using trebs, specifically aiming for and killing their arrow carts on top of the walls. However while doing this, they put the walls back up, and we had to get the walls back down, and then they would continue to build more carts as people with supply could sneak in 1 by 1. After a full hour of assaulting this tower, and when most of the carts were cleared (not for the first time) we had to get the wall down again, this time we charged and they still had a couple of arrow carts. The battle was very close as the numbers were even and they still had a couple of arrow carts, my team almost wiped in the lords room, but managed to rally and regain full health to down many of the opposition players, we capped it…just, after a lot of effort.
There was a lot more that happened, but I can tell you, for the 50 people that had to wait for the siege shots this entire time, it was a boring experience for them and it was not very fun. We were held by an inferior team that had equal numbers, terrain advantage, repairable walls/gates and easily built arrow carts.
Tell me, what would you have done in that situation? How would you have ‘adapted’? Do you find the above scenario fun?
So an even numbers where they have a fortification, choke point, and siege. They SHOULD have a huge advantage over you.
Now, as for adapting: Stop letting people with supply inside. Go take something else while they’re occupied. Like, say, the camp they’re running supply from.
Obviously the effort it took to beat them down was excessive, and a single tower isn’t worth all of that effort. Take something easier instead of mindlessly beating your face into the wall.
No matter how much you test something there will always be issues that won’t turn up on test-servers.
I have played quite a few games with PTRs and they still get rather big issues with patches.
The environment on a test-server is never identical with a live-server, so no matter how much money you spend on test-servers there will always be issues.
“This won’t fix every single problem so KITTEN IT we’re not gonna do it at all.”
Oil single handedly stalls a group from siegeing a gate for a good minute or two. How is that in anyway useless…?
Just because you aren’t wracking up kills from it =/= serves no purpose.
Yeah, the oil itself is useful simply by its presence.
That doesn’t mean Oil Mastery will be at all useful.
No one builds anything on the gate while the oil is up, so points in making the oil better are a waste.
Vitality fairs better in the short term, helping you stay alive after a lot of quick damage, but does little to keep you alive in the long term since you still have to heal the same amount of damage.
Toughness helps more long term since its damage reduction effectively makes your healing better, though obviously it’s worthless against conditions.
They would have to do something to the animation for whirl though, I have quite a humorous image in my head of my ranger running around flailing her arms like a spaz.
Roll an Asura Warrior and use Triple Chop while moving past your target.
I disliked Trahearne intensely when I played my first couple of human characters and even my first Sylvari.
Then I made my Sylvari ranger and I don’t know if it was because of my personal story (I met him almost immediately after I came out of the dream.)But he grew on me in a big way with that character- she sees him as a trusted friend who has been with her and faced challenges with her since she awoke- she shares a part of her very scary wyld hunt with him and they can help each other fulfill their destinies- hers to slay Zaitan and his to cleanse Orr.
I just finished the mission where you go into Orr in the Pale Tree’s vision and it makes perfect sense.
I guess you have to be a Sylvari to appreciate him.
Well, really, that’s a lot of the problem there. His involvement makes sense if you’re one race, but everyone else he appears from thin air and immediately takes over, making his already insufferable traits even worse.
I have another problem, when i try to use the combo big ol’ bomb (or supply create) + smoke for stealth me if the bomb hit someone the stealth triggers before the damage then i’m “revealed”,
and this happens only with big ol’ bomb.
That’s true of every blast finisher. Or at least all Engineer ones and Cluster Bomb on Thief (the 2 most easily tested classes since they have smoke fields).
There is no “detriment” to the group. You are arguing that potential benefits of the useful stats are ignored in favor of less useful ones.
It’s the same argument that MPAA is using about “losing” potential profits due to file sharing. Think about that for a while.
I’m not saying that MF design couldn’t be improved. I am saying that there is nothing wrong in using MF as it is in the game, as long as it is there.
So your defense of MF is to compare it to piracy.
Wow. Just…. wow. How is that in any way a defense of it?
For roughly the same price, they could have gotten inarguably better stats. Instead, they took the inarguably worse one and then joined a group using it. That’s a detriment. On purpose.
As aforementioned, it’s the game’s problem that people have to choose between stats or possibly better drops. So you really have to blame ANet for all that stuff (I know you already did). AntiGw is not at fault for the way ANet designed it. The reason I loathe using MF gear EVEN solo (I have a a full exotic set with Wayfarer’s Trinkets for my Guardian, the whole nine yards, that I rarely use) is because I don’t like what it does to my builds (which is a valid point for all concerned.)
The only pro for MF gear is theoretically better drops, but unfortunately, barring celestial stats to an extent, there will always be tons of stat loss (though I honestly don’t care whether others use it if they can live with that-I have never used it on Dungeons, but I don’t consider myself “selfless” or “morally superior” JUST BECAUSE I have never used it in such places.) Even if the stat lost was a secondary stat (imagine Explorer’s with Power as primary and Precision/MF as Secondary), it would inevitable still be too much stat loss for my taste, and I am sure many others-I do not envy ANet trying to fix that because so many people already have Ascended gear with the stats, etc., so eliminating it altogether is probably something they can’t really consider (unless they offer some sort of compensation, but there’s way too many accounts to “fix” in this way.)
It’s not only the devs fault for people using selfish mechanics. It’s their fault it’s in the game at all, but it’s still the players’ fault for using it (selfishly, obviously solo it’s fine, if still unlikely to be a good choice).
Didn’t someone do this months ago?
Regardless, kudos.
The stat is selfish. I suggest you come to terms with that.
I suggest you be more open-minded to the idea that people can disagree with your statement, and still have a valid opinion. Your “facts” don’t match with my own (that you have no right to determine whether someone is selfish or not based on their gear choices that ANet “tempted” them to use-since it’s “evil” and all of that.)
Your opinion is the one above, and it is valid to yourself, but not to me. It is not an universal fact, but your personal conviction (don’t feel bad for not having your opinion validated as “the facts”-if it’s valid to you, it’s valid to you, and that’s fine, even if I can’t agree with it for my own valid reasons.)
ANet admitted that it’s a problem, not that players are being selfish in using the flawed system they themselves designed. What Geotherma said is exactly right-blame ANet-not possibly innocent players-for indirectly starting this whole debate and endless-cycle threads in the first place.
You are making it too much about who’s right or wrong, (winning senseless arguments and stuff) so I won’t debate. I derive no satisfaction from “winning” arguments, as I know what I believe in, and proving others “wrong” holds zero value to me (the reason I continue to state my opinion is in order to defend the rights of those who are being placed in one unfair category-“selfish”-not to prove how “wrong” you are.)
It’s not true to me that it fits the definition of the word “selfish” exactly, it’s true of the english language. It is a stat that benefits the user to the detriment of their group. Which is selfish. There is no opinion to be had about that, it simply is.
There is no opinion that 2+2=4, because it is defined as such. The “opinion” that 2+2=5 is wrong.
Argue for choice and whatnot all you want, though then I will ask you the question AntiGw has refused to answer of why a mechanic that encourages people to screw their group should be in a game, but don’t argue against the reality of the situation that it is selfish.
Star. You don’t have to be a selfish person to take selfish actions.
And actually yes, numerically it is selfish. It benefits only the individual in return for harming the group.
And I shall quote it to you AGAIN since you still clearly don’t understand what selfish means.self·ish [sel-fish]
adjective
1. devoted to or caring only for oneself; concerned primarily with one’s own interests, benefits, welfare, etc., regardless of others.Stop arguing against inarguable facts.
Also, having additional reasons why something is bad doesn’t invalidate other reasons for that. Yes, MF is bad because of those reasons you listed. It’s also bad because it is, in fact, selfish.
Vitality only helps you, a little extra HP really does nothing for mobs who hit for 20k.
Tough is entirely selfish because you are living longer than others, why not share bro?
Power, only benefits you because if others are tanky and staying alive you are just dpsing in easy mode while they use skill to stay alive.
Arguments can be made for any stat that it is selfish, and yet when that MF wearer sells the Berserker gear that dropped on broker and you buy it, doesn’t seem so selfish then? Or when MF wearers get tons of t5/t6 mats and you can make your legendarys and other things, are you thanking the coft path 1 guys or the MF guys in orr?In fact, I’d say unless you are spamming your heal type group skills on guardian, and of course playing a guardian, your are being selfish. How dare you play thief and just dps while others use circles, and barriers, and interrupts. Interesting stuff.
Keep calling people selfish for using a stat that devs put in game, and missing the mark. Your pinning the donkey on the tail, why not pin the tail on the donkey? If you are going to go about generalizing and stereotyping every MF wearer as bad people who are out to get you like some wrong turn movie, at least direct your e-rage at the people who implemented the MF, not those using it. Might as well blame people who use candy corn, how dare you buy stuff that helps no one and gives you enjoyment.
This thread is so full of elitism and irony, why anyone continues the arguments is beyond me. But hey, what do I care, I just salvaged orr drops for 34 ectos and sold to the highest buyer. Boy I hope that guy hates MF wearers.
I have been over this so kitten many times.
Vitality and Toughness help keep people alive. People who are alive are doing useful things, unlike people who are downed or dead, who not only are terrible at doing anything of use, but require someone else to stop doing useful things to get them back up. Not only do Vitality and Toughness assist in keeping people from going down, they also make it easier to get downed players back up. Therefore, they are both potentially of value to the team.
And higher damage means enemies die faster. Dead enemies is the goal. Faster dead enemies means you get it done more quickly, and also dead enemies are not of danger any more, so dead enemies protects the group.
MF does literally nothing of value for anyone in the group except the user.
And yes, when someone’s selling the stuff that’s still them being selfish. They aren’t doing it for the benefit of the people they’re selling it to, they’re doing it to GET MONEY.
Using the “the devs put it in the game” excuse is terrible, by the way. First of all, a dev has already SAID that they think it’s bad how it is now, which honestly is more in favor of it being selfish than not. Secondly, if the devs put a button in that, say, removed money from a teammate’s wallet and gave it to you, would it somehow not be selfish any more for someone to steal with this? Just because it’s in the game doesn’t stop it from being selfish.
The stat is selfish. I suggest you come to terms with that.
Star. You don’t have to be a selfish person to take selfish actions.
And actually yes, numerically it is selfish. It benefits only the individual in return for harming the group.
And I shall quote it to you AGAIN since you still clearly don’t understand what selfish means.
self·ish [sel-fish]
adjective
1. devoted to or caring only for oneself; concerned primarily with one’s own interests, benefits, welfare, etc., regardless of others.
Stop arguing against inarguable facts.
Also, having additional reasons why something is bad doesn’t invalidate other reasons for that. Yes, MF is bad because of those reasons you listed. It’s also bad because it is, in fact, selfish.
Gw1 logging screen was and it’s the most beautiful log screen ever maded. Always changed whit next exp pack.
Also the gw2 old log screen was amazing, I don’t know why they changed.Was this a beta character select screen you’re referencing? I’ve played from day 1 of live and the current character select screen is the only one I’ve ever experienced.
Can you describe this old GW2 character select screen? Or are you actually referring to the pre-game launch “Login/Patching” Launcher? Even still, was it a beta Launcher? As I’ve also only ever had the current Launcher since day 1 of live.
Requiring 4 to kick runs into the opposite problem, 2 people joining and being able to troll all they want with no ability to remove them.
3 would be better. It’s harder to get 3 people on board than it is to get the 2 needed for either extreme.
Because nerfs can be improvements.
Unless you mean buffing when you say improvements, in which case, only buffing and not nerfing leads to ridiculous power creep, which causes balance between professions to become even more tenuous, and trivializes PvE content even further, which would require buffs to PvE enemies and blah blah blah. In order to reduce the effectiveness of one thing you need to buff everything else.
Or, instead of that, you nerf the one thing that’s better than everything else.
This is about balance theory, not thief specifically, don’t get your kittens in a bunch, thief forums. Even though bunches of kittens are awesome.
Since we don’t have a weapon swap, is a melee weapon really something we should have? Especially since we have a melee kit that’s pretty awesome.
Well, really, you could say the same thing about Elementalist and daggers.
2. Keeping that in mind – the person that joins the group now has a stat that’s only 20% as effective as it was, so the person is getting punished for group play, meaning that all we see here is a new kind of segregation in community.
We’ve already been over this a million times in the other thread. EVERY stat is diluted in a group, except Healing/Boon Duration when used in AoE. A group gets proportionally less out of a person, say, maximizing their damage than that person would get alone, because compared to the damage of the whole group, the difference is much smaller than it is compared to their own non-maximized damage.
So long as MF replaces stats that the group benefits from, averaging it makes it function the same as everything else.
And before you start on about your suggestion to move it off of combat stat replacement, I know it’s there. It’s also a significantly more difficult change than averaging, which must be taken into account.including an infusion slot is easier than you think. Recalculating averages of every party every certain amount of time, having in mind that equipment breaks and people switch gear sets is more taxing than you think.
The only thing that doesn’t work properly in group play in dungeons is conditions. Your health and toughness doesn’t get divided if you run with people without it and because all dungeon bosses have a lot of health every berserker can max their personal damage no problem.
A berserker absolutely can maximize their personal damage no problem. However, since enemies are scaled for 5 people, and the group is five people, the difference between that berserker’s damage and his non-maxed damage is far larger than the impact his maximization has on the party.
Simple numbers example: Group of 5, all deal 50 dps. Total dps = 250. One person maximizes their dps, upping it to 60. Total dps = 260. (260-250)/250 = 1/25 = 4%. (60-50)/50 = 1/5 = 20%. This person raised their personal damage by 20%, but compared to the group as a whole it improved it by 4%. This is a fifth of the effect, because it is an AVERAGE.
Everyone’s efforts are diluted except AoE heals/buffs (and conditions, but that’s because it hits the ceiling because it is broken). Averaging MF would do the same.
Also, I’m also guilty of not quite reading the OP, I thought he was going for complete average again instead of weighting it. This is also a good idea. The most important part, however, is that it’s better than what it currently is, as would be straight averaging.
(edited by gimmethegepgun.1284)
Your definition of MF is wrong, ruining that question once again.
It’s not a mechanic that encourages people to contribute less to get more. It’s a mechanic that allows you to gain better loot as soon as you are happy with your other stats.
Those people wouldn’t be “better” in something else, because for them, the stats they already have are more than enough. It’s their decision, and it doesn’t make them selfish, inefficient, cowards, or anything else elitists like to call them.
Yes, actually, they ARE better in something else. Adding 2 positive numbers makes a number larger than either. This is known as math.
MF is, no matter how you look at it, the inferior option in combat. The reason being, it replaces a stat that DOES do something in combat with something that does literally nothing in combat. And, no matter how you look at it, it offers nothing to anyone in the group but the user, while every other stat helps the group.
And my question isn’t even specific to MF. Why should there be a mechanic in ANY game that encourages people to put themselves before their party?
Because, like it or not, that’s what you’re defending.This will not continue unless you answer the question, as I am done going in circles with someone who refuses to acknowledge that their choice affects other people, and does so in a negative way.
It’s not an inferior option in anything, because it replaces optional stats. It doesn’t replace mandatory stats that you need to survive or do plenty of damage.
Your entire argument is based on the wrong assumption that everyone MUST use the optional stats at all times in every party.
If anyone replaced mandatory stats with MF, you could say that it encourages people to put themselves before their party. But the stats it replaces are optional, like most things in this game.
>Refuses to acknowledge being factually incorrect.
>Refuses to answer question.
2. Keeping that in mind – the person that joins the group now has a stat that’s only 20% as effective as it was, so the person is getting punished for group play, meaning that all we see here is a new kind of segregation in community.
We’ve already been over this a million times in the other thread. EVERY stat is diluted in a group, except Healing/Boon Duration when used in AoE. A group gets proportionally less out of a person, say, maximizing their damage than that person would get alone, because compared to the damage of the whole group, the difference is much smaller than it is compared to their own non-maximized damage.
So long as MF replaces stats that the group benefits from, averaging it makes it function the same as everything else.
And before you start on about your suggestion to move it off of combat stat replacement, I know it’s there. It’s also a significantly more difficult change than averaging, which must be taken into account.
You and a few other people here have said that MF users aren’t beneficial. That includes calling them leechers and cowards.
Your question is fallacious, because it’s based on an incorrect assumption (mf -> screwes people).
No, I say that the MF gear is not beneficial. They would be better in something else, and unlike every other stat combination there’s no arguing that they are less effective, since it’s not replacing useful stats with other useful stats.
And as has been proven many times over in the thread, MF is a hindrance to a party, thus it screws the party.
So I will ask again, in slightly less loaded terms: Why should there be a mechanic that encourages people to contribute less to get more?Your definition of MF is wrong, ruining that question once again.
It’s not a mechanic that encourages people to contribute less to get more. It’s a mechanic that allows you to gain better loot as soon as you are happy with your other stats.
Those people wouldn’t be “better” in something else, because for them, the stats they already have are more than enough. It’s their decision, and it doesn’t make them selfish, inefficient, cowards, or anything else elitists like to call them.
Yes, actually, they ARE better in something else. Adding 2 positive numbers makes a number larger than either. This is known as math.
MF is, no matter how you look at it, the inferior option in combat. The reason being, it replaces a stat that DOES do something in combat with something that does literally nothing in combat. And, no matter how you look at it, it offers nothing to anyone in the group but the user, while every other stat helps the group.
And my question isn’t even specific to MF. Why should there be a mechanic in ANY game that encourages people to put themselves before their party?
Because, like it or not, that’s what you’re defending.
This will not continue unless you answer the question, as I am done going in circles with someone who refuses to acknowledge that their choice affects other people, and does so in a negative way.
Yes, I’ve done lots of testing with it, and it never seems to work during spvp, but recently I have gotten both of them to work on npcs in heart of the mists, thought i wish the range was mention in the skill because it seems like I’m having to stand right on top of them to get the fear on down to work.
Yeah. It’s tiny, and surprising, but it does make a sort of sense. If the range was say, 600 like unholy feast, it would probably be too huge since it would punish everyone in the fight rather than just the person who CC’d or downed you.
Granted, it doesn’t necessarily hit those people if they apply the trigger from range. But you’d have to make the range like… 900-1200 to guarantee that, at which point it’s just ludicrously big.
If it works on the sparring NPCs in the mists, it should work in actual matches. I don’t know of any bugs/skills that change between those two areas.
They could have made the fear affect a nearby area AND the enemy that downed you.
I would say just put a buff icon on the person indicating how much MF they have when you are in a party with them, and be done with the whole thing.
That doesn’t really fix anything though, it just invites more bullying and elitism.
And opens the door to gear inspection, because “if we can see this one thing, why not xyz?” And gear inspection is bad (at least when it’s not easily, readily changeable like PvP in GW1, where PvP characters could change their gear whenever they wanted as long as they weren’t in a game).
You have no business judging my “statistical capability”, because it’s not your kittening business. I’m there, I’m helping, how much doesn’t matter.
Of course it matters. As I said earlier. Content is based on five players, not four, so each player is intended to bring 1/5th of the battle strength to the fight, your contributions are not “bonus,” they are either meeting that standard, or falling short. If a player is using full MF gear, then he is forcing each of the other players to bring even more to the team than their fair share, in return for zero benefit to them.
Content is not based on five players with perfect exotic/ascended gear. It’s based on imperfectly geared players with bad ping and slow reflexes.
Anything you do in a party is a benefit to the party. Just because someone doesn’t want to use the gear YOU are trying to force down their throat doesn’t mean they aren’t meeting whatever stupid standard that only exists in an elitist’s head.
No one’s saying MF users aren’t beneficial. They’re saying they’re less so, of their own choosing, for selfish reasons.
And please answer my question: Why should a mechanic that encourages people to screw their teammates over be in a game?
You and a few other people here have said that MF users aren’t beneficial. That includes calling them leechers and cowards.
Your question is fallacious, because it’s based on an incorrect assumption (mf -> screwes people).
No, I say that the MF gear is not beneficial. They would be better in something else, and unlike every other stat combination there’s no arguing that they are less effective, since it’s not replacing useful stats with other useful stats.
And as has been proven many times over in the thread, MF is a hindrance to a party, thus it screws the party.
So I will ask again, in slightly less loaded terms: Why should there be a mechanic that encourages people to contribute less to get more?
You have no business judging my “statistical capability”, because it’s not your kittening business. I’m there, I’m helping, how much doesn’t matter.
Of course it matters. As I said earlier. Content is based on five players, not four, so each player is intended to bring 1/5th of the battle strength to the fight, your contributions are not “bonus,” they are either meeting that standard, or falling short. If a player is using full MF gear, then he is forcing each of the other players to bring even more to the team than their fair share, in return for zero benefit to them.
Content is not based on five players with perfect exotic/ascended gear. It’s based on imperfectly geared players with bad ping and slow reflexes.
Anything you do in a party is a benefit to the party. Just because someone doesn’t want to use the gear YOU are trying to force down their throat doesn’t mean they aren’t meeting whatever stupid standard that only exists in an elitist’s head.
No one’s saying MF users aren’t beneficial. They’re saying they’re less so, of their own choosing, for selfish reasons.
And please answer my question: Why should a mechanic that encourages people to screw their teammates over be in a game?
You don’t understand the difference. Being slowed down is not the problem. It’s the reason for being slowed down.
They are slowing the group down entirely for selfish reasons.
So the better representation of the qualification is thus: I don’t want to group with MF users because they slow us down on purpose.
And if you take issue with that then I must assume that you have no problem with true leechers, those who do nothing in order to mooch off of the rewards. Because they are slowing you down by doing nothing, and they are doing it on purpose.But how do I know, without the slightest bit of doubt, that they are doing it on purpose to slow me down and therefore deserve to be labelled? There is no way to know that unless you are sitting in that person’s head, especially in an internet game where you cannot see and interact with that person face to face. Just keep the labels out of your arguments. Labels that describe others game choices are a poor way to promote a discussion. I resent for example the term “noob”. “We failed that dungeon run because that noob did not do such and such”. We were all “noobs” at one time just as we all have our own selfish wants and desires.
So with your above example on leechers I would simply tell that person, “sorry your game play style slows me down, I cannot accept you in my group and I wish to get through this dungeon quickly” versus “You cannot come with me on this dungeon run because you are a leecher and slow me down on purpose”.
They aren’t doing it to slow you down (well, griefers do exist, but that’s a different matter). They are doing it for their own benefit, without regard to, or in spite of, the consequences it has on the rest of the party. If they are using MF gear in a group, then obviously they don’t care that it hurts everyone else in the party. They’re doing it because it helps themselves and they don’t care that it slows you down, or don’t care enough to actually change it.
Which is selfishness.
Thus, the reason I don’t want them in the group is BECAUSE they are being selfish.
Also, on an unrelated matter, not everyone was a “noob”. Everyone was a “newb”.
Newbs are new players, inexperienced with the content, and obviously everyone was at some time. Noobs are players who play at similar levels to newbs except that they don’t have the excuse of being new. They are poor not because of inexperience but because they won’t get better.
(edited by gimmethegepgun.1284)
Except when someone else decides to use worse stats for their own benefit, they are deciding how much loot everyone ELSE gets and in what timeframe as well. They are deciding to make everyone else get less loot for their time, and are ENCOURAGED by the game to do so as it is in their own benefit.
So answer me this: why should there be a mechanic that ENCOURAGES people to screw their party for their own benefit?
You keep making the same stupid assumption that MF is screwing a party.
It doesn’t screw anything. Get off your high horse.
People clear dungeons just fine with or without mf. There’s no reason to make a big deal out of it. Nobody is supposed to always use stats that always benefit the party.
Except, mathematically, it is screwing the party. If you fail to understand that a number plus another positive number is a greater number then there’s no hope for you at all.
So no one is supposed to use stats that always benefit the party, when every single trait point, every single selectable trait, every single piece of gear (even MF, though it has less) has stats that benefit the party. For some reason I find that hard to believe.
Even if MF doesn’t screw a party over, my question remains. Why should a mechanic exist that encourages people to screw their party for their own benefit?
Also—maybe we’ll get some Legendary love in the form of a hammer that looks like a giant spanner, complete with some cool effects. Imagine if you will, the Doomspanner. When you swing it it leaves a tracer of smoke and electricity, and in your footsteps appear tiny piles of gears and junk.
I think this is deserving of its own suggestion thread.
I will reiterate my main point once more. Nobody has the right in this game to label people as selfish and greedy because you believe your play style and choices are better then theirs.
If you state simply “I do not want to group with people that wear magic find gear in a dungeon” and leave it as such then there is no problem. Stacking a “because they are selfish and greedy” qualifier at the end of that statement is nothing more then adding a label to promote your style of game play and putting others below you which adds nothing except to make you look shallow and unacceptable of the choices that others may make.
If you wish to qualify why you will not run with someone wearing magic find then place the onus on yourself by stating “because they slow me down” and do not place a label on others by stating “they are selfish and greedy”.
Understand where I am coming from?
You don’t understand the difference. Being slowed down is not the problem. It’s the reason for being slowed down.
They are slowing the group down entirely for selfish reasons.
So the better representation of the qualification is thus: I don’t want to group with MF users because they slow us down on purpose.
And if you take issue with that then I must assume that you have no problem with true leechers, those who do nothing in order to mooch off of the rewards. Because they are slowing you down by doing nothing, and they are doing it on purpose.
When you invite me to your party, you invite ME, not my gear. You accept my contribution to the party, whatever I decide to bring. You accept that me being there is going to help, regardless of my gear.
You have no business judging my “statistical capability”, because it’s not your kittening business. I’m there, I’m helping, how much doesn’t matter.
You may run your groups differently, but that doesn’t make your approach desirable to the entire GW2 playerbase. Again, people like loot, and as long as mobs drop dead sometime this century, it’s all good.
Yes, people like loot. You know what one person slowing everyone down for their own loot does? It makes everyone else take longer to get their loot. Since peoples’ time is limited, this then means that since it takes longer to get their loot, they get less loot in the limited time they have. In effect, this person is decreasing the loot everyone else gets so that they can personally get more.
Thanks for being so understanding.Stop assuming that everyone values his time the same as you do. Taking longer to get loot has never been an issue in parties I normally play with.
As soon as you realize that, you might want to end your crusade of saving everyone’s precious time.
That wasn’t even about the time, it was about the loot, which you yourself stated people like.
People have a limit to the amount of time they can play. The amount of loot acquired is based on how many things can be killed or how many dungeons can be completed in that time. When these things take longer, it reduces the number of things that can be killed or dungeons can be completed, which reduces loot.
Which, as you stated, people like.
So, what this means is that the one MF user is costing their allies loot in order to get more for themselves.
We are in agreement that people like loot right?
So, one person costing multiple people loot so they themselves get more loot. One person’s happiness (when people get things they like they become happy, right?) at the cost of four others’.The bottom line of any of the arguments is, one person making themselves worse negatively affects their groupmates. Normally, most people would avoid doing that as they feel people deserve better, so they will try to do well. Except the mechanic as it stands REWARDS people for intentionally doing worse. This mechanic is in a social game, where grouping together is supposed to encourage cooperative play. But the mechanic rewards people for saying “kitten you” to their teammates and looking out for themselves.
And you are defending this terrible mechanic.
People can decide for themselves how much loot they want to acquire and in what time frame. You don’t cost them anything they aren’t willing to sacrifice or lose.
The important thing is, it’s their choice, not yours. You have no business deciding how much loot they are “losing” because of MF, it’s not your business to decide what “doing worse” is in their situation, and it’s not your business to decide how fast they should be doing whatever they like to do.
Except when someone else decides to use worse stats for their own benefit, they are deciding how much loot everyone ELSE gets and in what timeframe as well. They are deciding to make everyone else get less loot for their time, and are ENCOURAGED by the game to do so as it is in their own benefit.
So answer me this: why should there be a mechanic that ENCOURAGES people to screw their party for their own benefit?
When you invite me to your party, you invite ME, not my gear. You accept my contribution to the party, whatever I decide to bring. You accept that me being there is going to help, regardless of my gear.
You have no business judging my “statistical capability”, because it’s not your kittening business. I’m there, I’m helping, how much doesn’t matter.
You may run your groups differently, but that doesn’t make your approach desirable to the entire GW2 playerbase. Again, people like loot, and as long as mobs drop dead sometime this century, it’s all good.
Yes, people like loot. You know what one person slowing everyone down for their own loot does? It makes everyone else take longer to get their loot. Since peoples’ time is limited, this then means that since it takes longer to get their loot, they get less loot in the limited time they have. In effect, this person is decreasing the loot everyone else gets so that they can personally get more.
Thanks for being so understanding.Stop assuming that everyone values his time the same as you do. Taking longer to get loot has never been an issue in parties I normally play with.
As soon as you realize that, you might want to end your crusade of saving everyone’s precious time.
That wasn’t even about the time, it was about the loot, which you yourself stated people like.
People have a limit to the amount of time they can play. The amount of loot acquired is based on how many things can be killed or how many dungeons can be completed in that time. When these things take longer, it reduces the number of things that can be killed or dungeons can be completed, which reduces loot.
Which, as you stated, people like.
So, what this means is that the one MF user is costing their allies loot in order to get more for themselves.
We are in agreement that people like loot right?
So, one person costing multiple people loot so they themselves get more loot. One person’s happiness (when people get things they like they become happy, right?) at the cost of four others’.
The bottom line of any of the arguments is, one person making themselves worse negatively affects their groupmates. Normally, most people would avoid doing that as they feel people deserve better, so they will try to do well. Except the mechanic as it stands REWARDS people for intentionally doing worse. This mechanic is in a social game, where grouping together is supposed to encourage cooperative play. But the mechanic rewards people for saying “kitten you” to their teammates and looking out for themselves.
And you are defending this terrible mechanic.
define offensive potential in your own words please
Statistical capability for outputting damage. For instance, Explorer’s compared to Berserker’s, Explorer’s is identical except that its power is lower (less damage) and it doesn’t give crit damage (less damage). Compared to Berserker’s your offensive potential is worse, and it is not traded off for anything else that could conceivably be of use in a fight (like, say, Soldier’s armor trades a lot of damage potential for survivability, and alive players are more useful than dead ones). A person in Explorer’s would be objectively more capable in combat if they took Berserker’s or Rampager’s (even with no damaging conditions at all, since Rampager’s also has better Power) (I leave out mention of Knight’s because due to aggro mechanics higher Toughness may be a penalty in some cases). A person in Traveler’s gear would be objectively better with Rampager’s (more damage output) or Carrion (more survivability). A person in Wayfarer’s would be objectively better in Soldier’s (more damage). The reason these are all better is because they are the exact same thing, except that they have a combat stat instead of a non-combat stat.
When you invite me to your party, you invite ME, not my gear. You accept my contribution to the party, whatever I decide to bring. You accept that me being there is going to help, regardless of my gear.
You have no business judging my “statistical capability”, because it’s not your kittening business. I’m there, I’m helping, how much doesn’t matter.
You may run your groups differently, but that doesn’t make your approach desirable to the entire GW2 playerbase. Again, people like loot, and as long as mobs drop dead sometime this century, it’s all good.
Yes, people like loot. You know what one person slowing everyone down for their own loot does? It makes everyone else take longer to get their loot. Since peoples’ time is limited, this then means that since it takes longer to get their loot, they get less loot in the limited time they have. In effect, this person is decreasing the loot everyone else gets so that they can personally get more.
Thanks for being so understanding.
Your concept that because there is no ‘trinity’ everybody is for themselves is ridiculous. It’s contradicted not only by just about every design aspect in the game, but by a developer in this thread admitting this is not what they wanted or meant to happen.
I think discussions on a social contract and such are pretty much blather, because nothings going to change unless there is a change or removal of Magic Find that makes it so you do not sacrifice any other stats to get it. However, I don’t think you should counteract blather with even sillier nonsense. Not a team game that’s focused on team PvP, world events, has buffs that buff allies whether you want to or not and if they are in your group or not? Please..come on…
Everyone being focused on their own interests, does not mean everyone is out only for themselves. But out of all that text you chose to pull that part out instead of anything positive. I salute your ability to completely ignore points in messages.
Everyone needs to take care of themselves in this game, AND can, and do help others. There is very few things that actually require a group, but team effort is everywhere we look. Even in things that don’t actually require a “party” exactly, we still contribute, but we do so as individuals since nothing is shared. And there is nothing wrong with that. But thank you for proving that people would rather argue silly points than gather overall information when it is presented. Typical forum agenda.
It is an MMO, and you do interact with others, but there are aspects of the game that allow you to define your play solely based off your own actions or choices. I never said there was no team, or no aspects of group work, but good job.
EVERYTHING else is shared. Why can’t you understand that?
When people do more damage their group benefits from shorter fights. Shorter fights means getting it done faster, and means lower risk since dead enemies aren’t dangerous.
When people stay alive their group benefits because downed/dead players are useless and require someone to make themselves otherwise useless for a time to rez them. Survivable characters are also more likely to successfully rez someone else without getting killed themselves.
Healing and boon duration obviously can be directly beneficial to a group if they are shared with allies, otherwise they enhance damage output or survivability of the individual, which is, again, a shared benefit.
A player with MF gets better drops for themselves only. Unlike everything else, this only affects the individual. Except the stat loss which hampers their ability to do other things DOES affect the group.And their better loots, even though they could be so incredibly small in difference, that itself is the only reason you hate them? You can’t just get through the dungeon? Is that so hard for you to do without requiring someone to wear what you want? There isn’t a discussion here, you play with people who think like you, others play with people who think like them. The only thing going on here is everyone trying to be right, which is ridiculous. All skills/ effort being equal you have no right to complain about an MF wearer in a generalized statement, if you don’t want them in your speedy group, then don’t invite them. But you are not winning any battle on the forums trying to impose your way of play as the ONLY way to play or that it is somehow better than others. Good luck with winning that.
No, I have a problem with the idea of someone intentionally harming their group for more loot, better known as leeching.
And everyone who replaces useful stats with MF is doing exactly that.
And I have every right to complain about a selfish kitten who joins a group and then exploits them by doing less to get more.
Your concept that because there is no ‘trinity’ everybody is for themselves is ridiculous. It’s contradicted not only by just about every design aspect in the game, but by a developer in this thread admitting this is not what they wanted or meant to happen.
I think discussions on a social contract and such are pretty much blather, because nothings going to change unless there is a change or removal of Magic Find that makes it so you do not sacrifice any other stats to get it. However, I don’t think you should counteract blather with even sillier nonsense. Not a team game that’s focused on team PvP, world events, has buffs that buff allies whether you want to or not and if they are in your group or not? Please..come on…
Everyone being focused on their own interests, does not mean everyone is out only for themselves. But out of all that text you chose to pull that part out instead of anything positive. I salute your ability to completely ignore points in messages.
Everyone needs to take care of themselves in this game, AND can, and do help others. There is very few things that actually require a group, but team effort is everywhere we look. Even in things that don’t actually require a “party” exactly, we still contribute, but we do so as individuals since nothing is shared. And there is nothing wrong with that. But thank you for proving that people would rather argue silly points than gather overall information when it is presented. Typical forum agenda.
It is an MMO, and you do interact with others, but there are aspects of the game that allow you to define your play solely based off your own actions or choices. I never said there was no team, or no aspects of group work, but good job.
EVERYTHING else is shared. Why can’t you understand that?
When people do more damage their group benefits from shorter fights. Shorter fights means getting it done faster, and means lower risk since dead enemies aren’t dangerous.
When people stay alive their group benefits because downed/dead players are useless and require someone to make themselves otherwise useless for a time to rez them. Survivable characters are also more likely to successfully rez someone else without getting killed themselves.
Healing and boon duration obviously can be directly beneficial to a group if they are shared with allies, otherwise they enhance damage output or survivability of the individual, which is, again, a shared benefit.
A player with MF gets better drops for themselves only. Unlike everything else, this only affects the individual. Except the stat loss which hampers their ability to do other things DOES affect the group.
[Flame wall: Initiated!]
Why is it bad in group play?
This is the real issue with Magic Find and a sole reason it should not be in the game…The person using Magic Find gear contributes the least, but get’s the best reward.
Why does this make sense? A huge design flaw.
You are giving up offensive potential and wasting time. You are not only wasting your time, you are also wasting your groups. Wasting other players’ time is selfish & rude. So ArenaNet promote selfish play.
TLDR; Magic Find is bad – don’t use it.define offensive potential in your own words please
Statistical capability for outputting damage. For instance, Explorer’s compared to Berserker’s, Explorer’s is identical except that its power is lower (less damage) and it doesn’t give crit damage (less damage). Compared to Berserker’s your offensive potential is worse, and it is not traded off for anything else that could conceivably be of use in a fight (like, say, Soldier’s armor trades a lot of damage potential for survivability, and alive players are more useful than dead ones). A person in Explorer’s would be objectively more capable in combat if they took Berserker’s or Rampager’s (even with no damaging conditions at all, since Rampager’s also has better Power) (I leave out mention of Knight’s because due to aggro mechanics higher Toughness may be a penalty in some cases). A person in Traveler’s gear would be objectively better with Rampager’s (more damage output) or Carrion (more survivability). A person in Wayfarer’s would be objectively better in Soldier’s (more damage). The reason these are all better is because they are the exact same thing, except that they have a combat stat instead of a non-combat stat.
And I shall bring up the definition again since it apparently needs restating.
self·ish [sel-fish]
adjective
1. devoted to or caring only for oneself; concerned primarily with one’s own interests, benefits, welfare, etc., regardless of others.You are being needlessly rude for posting the obvious as if no one knew what selfishness means, but the fact is that the same definition applies to those who want MF users to do things their way to meet their own needs and convenience (which as I said, often exclude way more than MF users as well due to personal convictions of how GW2 is “supposed to be played.”)
I hope you notice the irony, and why blaming others about “being selfish” in this particular issue is self-defeating.
rfdarko posted about this issue (MF users vs non-MF users and the “selfish” argument), and I fully agree with that post.
We’ll never agree if you think every MF gear user is being selfish, so let’s just leave it at that. I promise I won’t judge your character based on your gear choice, even if it’s one I would never use.
I will continue to bring up the definition until people stop claiming that MF, which fits the definition perfectly, is not selfish. Which, by definition, it is.
And maybe I am being somewhat selfish in wanting them to pull their own weight instead of wasting their stats on something that only benefits them. However, do note that my side is for the benefit of the other 4 people in the group with the MF users, and not just myself.In closing, by definition it is selfish. Stop claiming it isn’t.
I have the right to state my opinion, and you are free to disagree with it; however you have no right to tell me when I should or not express myself. So stop telling me to stop “claiming” stuff I firmly believe in.
I’ll repeat-MF gear is not “selfish”, people are. Their choice of gear may or not be a selfish act, but it’s not a given that it is.
In the end, intolerance is not much better than selfishness, if you really see it as an issue of morals, which I doubt is the genuine motivation behind the “selfish” argument. IMO, most people that complain about MF gear are just disgruntled about people getting better loot than they do with lesser combat stats and/or making their Dungeon runs theoretically “slower”, more than them trying to teach “morals” to the community (plus this is something they are working on already-no need to pound on it forever, seeing as ANet does find it problematic-they didn’t acknowledge any moral issues about the stuff, though.)
In short, if you absolutely have to hate MF gear and their users, no need to use “selfishness” as a valid argument, because it isn’t-unless you are ready to accept that you are “also” being selfish-AND intolerant-for criticizing them in the first place. There are many ways it’s not an ideal design-which ANet realizes-but it’s not necessarily related to people being selfish or selfless.
You have the right to stick to an objectively wrong opinion, and I have the right to dictate the definition of the word you deny applies to a situation to you in order to demonstrate the fact that you are objectively wrong.
Maybe I am being selfish. Maybe I am being “intolerant” of their antisocial behavior, and especially the defenders of that behavior. Does that somehow make me wrong? All that demonstrates is I may be a kitten, it doesn’t say anything about whether or not I am correct.
The fact is, MF gear is selfish. Alone obviously the downsides harm no one but yourself, but grouped together the downsides harm your teammates as well, but only give you the benefits. That is the definition of selfishness. The choice to take the selfish gear over gear you feel is better suited to being useful is likewise selfish.