HoT Pre-Purchase Questions and Feedback [merged]
in Guild Wars 2: Heart of Thorns
Posted by: hazenvirus.8154
You’re never going to hit 60 fps in zergs with high settings at 1920×1080 or higher with that cpu. I7-5930k @ 4.4ghz and gtx 980 on 2560×1440 and the best I do in big zergs is 30-45 fps. This is with low player count, no FXAA, and native sampling. Everything else is maxed and I am running in borderless window. Maybe at lower resolutions I could manage 60fps… but I bet it would still tank during intense battles (lots of effects).
Thats not what we want either, its the idea that there has to be something annoying enough to not take part in it and just choose what you want to play.
Except you can already do that. At this point zerker saves minutes over other gear choices and in most pugs those zerker players are probably not playing optimally to begin with, if they ever make content annoying enough to not take zerker then it should be because it is difficult, but not impossible to effectivley evade that attacks with active defenses. If there is a ever a dungeon that requires you to have x vitality and y of toughness then the game has failed in its original design intent. And you will see lfg like. Zerker and must have x vitality and y toughness or kick.
There is no gear that is not viable, only people that want defensive gear to perform to the same level as pure damage gear in a game built around using active defense. That is something that shouldn’t happen. I never post for zerker in my dungeons, but I do expect communication and knowledge of your class, I run dungeons every day with no stat requirements and as long as people communicate the runs are just as successful if not more so than a lot of zerker parties I have joined in the past.
I usually post for 80s, but in the past I have had groups of knowledgeable players that were minimum dungeon level go faster than some zerker groups I’ve joined. Stats only matter for speed, good zerker groups save minutes and they should, but you can play in anything you want and not be far behind or even come out ahead of the a average zerker pug.
(edited by hazenvirus.8154)
It’s a common mistake.
Not a need of different gears to “complete”, but a need of different gears to “fastest-ly complete”.Exemple !
First boss is normal, promoting zerk gear.
Second boss have a mechanism where someone with high survivability can activate mechanism to fasten the fight.
Third boss have a special weaknesses against conditions
Fourth boss steal healing from players, for a tactical fight
Fifth boss release regular radiation waves, making Regeneration, Protection, and Retaliation very useful.
Lol, I am just imagining the new LFG posts. Must have zerker, sinister, nomad, apothecary. Link gear or kick.
I think some of the ascended crafting mats like dragonite ore could benefit from simply reducing the crafting amounts and amounts in game. What if we reduce the amount of dragonite ore generated by a factor of 10. Suddenly it only takes 10 to craft and you don’t get as much from its current sources. Then simply reduce everyone’s current quantities by a factor of 10 and round up. Surely no one has reason to complain if someone gets a little more ore during the switch. So now we get 10x less dragonite ore than normal, crafting is the same relative to the new amount and we have 10x more space in the bank relative to the new norm for ore. I might still throw it out after a couple laps in SW or a Open World Boss rotation but I won’t have 4 stacks, hopefully just one.
Conditions are there for damaging too.
Also, it’s not a question of “life became damage”.
It’s more a way to let people promote defense over offense without making the game easier/boring.Imagine a dungeon where you can choose to activate a damaging cloud to surround the area. Zerk would die too fast of the acidest level, but defensive build could resist it and use it to bring foes down.
Zerk group => toxic rank I
=> kill all of the foes by themselves with few damages from the sparse cloudMix group => toxic rank II
=> kill the foes with the help of the toxic cloud while taking care of their lifeSoldier/Healer group => toxic rank III
=> let the acid cloud kill most of the foes with some help while dealing with surviving to it and the foes.
I mentioned conditions, husks.
Based on what you are saying you want to require a certain amount of defensive stat to survive in the poison cloud… This changes nothing though. Players shift to taking just enough defense to survive and then kill everything as fast as possible. This approach also makes some gear combinations useless because you cannot survive without X and Y defense stats. You have just created less diversity, and the new meta is max damage with just enough of X and Y to survive. It is also more complicated than zerker being best for damage and will probably alienate more players than the “zerker meta” ever did. Your defensive gear is fine and so is zerker gear.
Making content that requires a certain amount of a passive defensive stat changes nothing, but reduces the amount of viable stat combinations. Adding agony effects to normal dungeons and open world would have the same effect without reducing diversity and I doubt people want to have to do fractals to get enough Agony resist just to do open world or dungeon content, just like we don’t want to have to change our gear stats all the time for content.
Tbh the real equal thing ( not balanced, equal) would be a scaling based on team statistics.
So the more power the team has (power*crit*feroctiy for each char added together) the more HP the boss has, and the more defense the team has the stronger the attacks of the boss.In the end you get an encounter that is equally long for every setup and then the gear choice of each of the members doesn’t matter anymore. On the paper it should be a nice idea but :
-there is no more progression for anyone, no easier setup to learn and no harder setup to perform. The results are binary, either you go through the dungeon or you fail but once it is cleared it will be always the same
-if the skill level is a bit to high to begin, casual players won’t spend time in dungeon more than twice because it is too hard (remember the game launch!)
-hardcore players won’t be able to improve their playstyle and time completion so they will leave the dungeon areas (and maybe the game) sooner than laterSo in the end I wouldn’t wish too much for a new paradigm. Just wait for HoT and see : the not-downscaled content will be harder than AC and select those who are good enough to play with Meta builds and zerker gear.
I mean I’ve seen so many people playing Meta “because it is meta” and don’t understand any SW bosses (and open world content is easier by far than dungeons!) and die constantly without improving over time and only blame “AOE on red” to explain their bad performance.
So basically we don’t need gear with stats anymore with this approach. ANet might as well just remove stats from gear and balance them internally.
Exactly which means the problem isnt berserker. Its the difficulty level. Fractal bosses at scale 50 are much better balanced for 5 man groups.
Not exactly. It’s more because mastered zerk build is faster than mastered soldier build.
To break the “one build type” meta, it need mobs, boss, events, world boss where some statistics provide a faster way to complete the goal (kill the boss for example).
If we could find a way on PvE content to make conditions, vitality, or compassion accelerating the fight instead of slowing it down and by making theses mechanics shift to promote a different value each time, we would “break the zerk meta”.
- Turrets killing the boss that players can heal/protect to make them kill the boss (or during events)
- A trigger that make players inflict their HP amount as damages to the boss
- Promoting the Retaliation buff
No gear set can do better damage or be equal to zerk except against husks, and objects (teq,kitten,…), asking for soldier gear to out perform zerk in damage makes no sense. It should always be able to provide the best damage compared to other gear types because it sacrifices all defensive stats…. If all the new fights based damage on HP then everyone would stack as much HP as possible with a specific combination of damage stats and that would be the new meta.
Defensive stats shouldn’t reward you with more damage, they are there to help you survive. If you can survive without the passive cushion then run zerker, but if you want to play a tank you shouldn’t expect to do as much damage as zerker, you should expect to have some more sustainability.
Having different mechanics in a fight for dealing damage to a boss like protecting a turret is fine and it exists in some fights like Claw of Jormag with the golems, but zerker should still be dealing the most damage to the mobs you are protecting it from, unless they take the husk route, but in that case zerker still outperforms other power builds.
Example:
Nerf Zerk Gear – Everyone will freak out saying “you’re penalizing good players and rewarding bad players”. When the reality is that you are balancing the game so that everyone has more worth and contribution to a party. “But this game doesn’t have a Trinity so go back to Gw1.” It’s true we don’t have a Trinity, but the fact remains that some people like being the support character – which they can’t have in this game – and if they try to support a Zerk player who isn’t very good – well, there just isn’t enough fast reaction healing/support that can be offered. In any case there is always a typically selfish rebuttal catering to the ideals of the offended party.
You can’t nerf zerk, if you made zerk worse than a different gear type it would be the new meta. You can focus on support too, by bringing utilities and talents that support your group and still doing damage. On my guardian I will run full damage gs/sw/focus, and bring the minimum support skills required, but if my pug is struggling I switch to hammer and more support utilities. I still deal okay damage with this build, but my group is much more survivable. That is all in zerk gear, the stats shouldn’t make your role, except for your damage type (Direct/condi/hybrid).
If you want to build a pure support character though you can, banner regen war, altruistuc guardian, healing ele are all examples. What you want is to make something that is rightly inferior at killing things worse or equal to the way you play. Playing support is not optimal and shouldn’t deal more damage than someone in zerker, but you can still play that way and complete all the content. Just make a All welcome dungeon group and do your thing. LFG zerkers hurt no one, you only hurt yourself by being unwilling to start a group doing what you like.
Zerker isn’t a problem and killing things fast isn’t a problem. Anet could certainly make dungeons more challenging and then for many pick up groups alternative styles could become more desireable, but it shouldn’t be made so difficult that it is impossible to complete in all zerker, there should never be an arbitrary amount of toughness and or vitality to survive an encounter. Gameplay is built around dodging and other acrive defenses. This game was not meant to be played passively with a dependence on passive defenses to carry one to victory. They can be helpful, but shouldn’t be required if we truly want all types of gear to be viable. Right now everything works and trying to eliminate zerker is a step backwards in diversity. I’ll take active gameplay over passive defenses being so strong they are required to facetank otherwise unsurvivable attacks.l or strings of attacks that not enough active defense exist to survive.
Based on your agruments you are even more guilty of being selfish than zerk players, in the current system zerk works along with every other stat combo, yet you wish to eliminate damage based builds in favor of passive stats.
(edited by hazenvirus.8154)
Pint glasses and coasters please. And some 3′×2′ logo posters.
So when you read LFGS “zerker exp only” it translates into “I want as much gold as possible on my limited play time, don’t join if you are going to slow me down.”
My solution: Along with the 24 hour time range/gate that is already in place, create a 30 minute time range where you can only earn 1 dungeon path reward and make the dungeon reward 5g.
What this does is it makes it so speed does not equal more reward.So you rather want to reward "Hurr Durr, I’m going to join a “Zerker only” party with my nomads gear to troll them" -people?
Actually yes. I interpret anet’s design philsophy as one where they want to promote players to be friendly and not toxic. If we remove speed = more reward from deungeons, i believe there will be less zerker only elitism in lfgs.
Or instead of trying to join parties that have and ask for a different playstyle, you could be part of the solution and post “Path X All welcome” I see this a lot an I bet these groups probably don’t care what you run. Homogenized rewards seems like a poor idea. People would speed run a dungeon and start another and sit at the end until the timer ended then kill the boss for and ez 5g. Then do it again or farm else where while you facerolled to victory over the course of an hour in nomads.
Nothing quite so elaborate is needed. All that needs to be done is for enemies to
A. Hit more frequently and have higher total dps, so you can’t use active defenses to avoid most of all damage (though still require active defenses to avoid a large part of it depending on profession)
B. Put party wide relatively unavoidable pressure damage, so some amount of party support and healing is necesary.
C. Not rally downed players on death. Rally on kill in pve has always been bad design and should be a pvp thing, it lets players go all out knowing they’ll rally anyway if they burst something down.
Edit: Also more enemies need cleave attacks to corner stacking dies horribly.
I generally agree with everything but C. With consistent pressure damage, it will be harder to sit in the fire to res an ally, and downed players will die faster. Removing the rally on kill mechanic kind of kills all of the play involved with downstate.
I don’t think making an encounter unsurvivable without X stat is good design unless it is a built in mechanic outside of the current system. See agony. If you had an encounter that required a ratio of X base health and Y healing, then the same people running optimal zerker builds would post must have X vitality and Y healing power and they would run the optimal setup required. What have you accomplished? You’ve created gear sets that are completely non viable. In the current system in a group environment everything is viable. Making a full zerker build or builds with similar passive defenses unviable in any encounter is a step backwards from what we have, if you can’t handle people bursting something down then I recommend you take aim at encounter mechanics that don’t make the potential viable builds any less than they currently are, which is everything.
I love how the NPE seems to cause more issues than it solves.
I’m more about the pretty than maintaining 60 fps. Tyria is quite beautiful.
Yeah, also don’t worry about the fps drops in zergs for open world events. Everyone is getting them. Even people with really good hardware see a substantial fps drop.
All the waypoints are designed with running in mind. Mounts would add further clutter to a game that already struggles with the amount of game objects and performance. We even have to hide minis for open world fights (game auto hides them). If we got a 64 bit client and or the latest direct x maybe the performance hit of having mounts wouldn’t be so horrifying. Even a mastery for a specific zone is the only place I could see them, but that seems like a waste of time since a mount is usually just a faster version of running and speed is the only benefit, that is hardly unique to the game like a glider is for 3 dimensional movement.
Well, i can’t remember the exact quote, but I do remember them discussing that they were adjusting stats outside of gear. The trait changes will be one big area, not sure if they are doing it in others. But overall, we will be getting less stats from passive boosts, so while the gear may not be tinkered with, the stats we get from them will be much more critical.
i.e. – if your used to getting a certain level of toughness and vitality from passive boosts, you will no longer have those, and if you want the extra Vit and Tough, you will need to get those stats from your gear…so to get those stats back, you would need to most likely sub out either your runes, or a few pieces of zerk gear to get those defensive stats.
This will also probably make some combat situations a bit tougher, as your used to having those passive stats back you up, and they will be gone now. not sure if they will counter-balance that stat loss through gear or the new skill system, but based on the direction of their conversations, this was one area where they were going go even the builds a bit.
On the the other hand if a damage build went into a former healing/vit/toughness trait line they will get more damage stats and kill stuff even faster than before.
The only way the current meta will end is if Anet decided active gameplay shouldn’t be rewarded and changes AI to punish players who can dodge and actively avoid damage. If that happens we can all switch to loading up on passive defense and facetanking damage as we faceroll to victory. I’ll take the “zerker meta” over passive and unskilled gameplay any day.
This would probably be fine for gw2. What are you upgrading from though?
With gw2 it is often the cpu bottlenecking improved performance.
Where is promised challenging HOT content?
in Guild Wars 2: Heart of Thorns
Posted by: hazenvirus.8154
Triple Trouble and Tequatl is also still challenging to many players.
It’s challenging to below-average players.
I would say it isn’t even that players are below average, when it is really about fighting the map system to get all the people who want to do it and enough experienced leaders to spend time managing said people. The challenge is in organization and the mechanics can be taught to anyone if they are willing to learn.
Yes, for multitasking and games with better mutithreading support, I agree and I would definitely get more cores. My workstation is overkill for gw2, but is invaluable for the ability to multitask demanding programs. When I get to work from home the day I go back to my company provided machine makes me want to cry.
If the primary concern is gw2 and web browsing though, a pentium is fine.
I don’t consider a modular supply no reason, but I see what you are getting at. It would be interesting to see some benchmarks on the pentium at 4.5 ghz vs the i3. Maybe gw2 is less bound to a single thread than I am thinking.
There’s personal style and then there’s throwing away $100 on completely unnecessary stuff. Your build didn’t even have an SSD, though, and fitting it in would add to the price quite a bit. For what your setup was costing, though, proper allocation of money would easily allow someone to fit an SSD into the budget.
Guess, I linked the wrong build. Original one had an SSD. Oh well. I also don’t find paying a little extra for a modular supply to be a bad choice and I’ve never had a corsair brand psu go bad on me. If you want to go dirt cheap you could use a cardboard box for a case too…
Where do you find that gw2 likes 3 cores, for playing gw2 I’d rather have a higher clock speed than an extra core, but maybe there is more info on that?
(edited by hazenvirus.8154)
You forgot to include the CPU cooler in the build and saved him maybe $15-20 after that.
It’s a locked CPU, he doesn’t need an aftermarket cooler.
All you’ve gotten him instead is a more expensive quad core that won’t help much with gw2 considering most of its performance is bound up in a single thread, at that point being able to OC the core it is running on brings a greater performance increase than two extra cores, imo.
It’s a slightly more powerful per core CPU, and GW2 likes having 3 cores. The i5 is the better choice all day long. I also got him a significantly more powerful GPU and I saved a great deal of money by not throwing it away on a grossly overpriced 450W PSU.
In any case, your build was ok, but if you’re getting a 750ti+G3258 it should only be in the $400 or less range these days (Or you should just get a 270x+G3258 but that’s another discussion). Your choices inflated the price of the build far above what it really should have been ($140 750ti? Really?).
If the retailers partpicker is grabbing prices from are overpriced then just sub is what you would pay for a 750ti. Problem solved, also I would much rather have a SDD as it makes a huge difference in load times. Some of the other stuff is a little superfluous, but I made the build with a little personal style, hence the case being more costly, and imo easier to customize.
I don’t see how a desktop would give a worse experience, I’ve always played on a desktop and I couldn’t imagine having to play on a laptop.
Because he has a decent laptop and he’s looking to build a desktop without a graphics card.
You can build a desktop PC for under $700 that will crush gw2. Here is an example micro-atx build. The processor is known for being easy to overclock, which will allow you to achieve 4.0 to 4.5 ghz without too much effort, the GTX 750 TI can easily handle the graphics of this game, and with an SSD to reduce load times you’ll have everything you need to run gw2 at high settings for the foreseeable future.
That H55i is a waste of money, go for a 212 Evo instead. That power supply is way too expensive for that build and that GPU is hella overpriced. 0/10 would not recommend that build in the slightest, you’re not getting nearly as much as you can for your money.
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/4mLR8d
That’s a much better way to spend your $550.
I don’t understand why anyone would not want a real graphics card if they are going to be gaming. I understand APU or integrated graphics get the job done but its not ever going to be as good as a real gfx card.
Because he’s trying to save money. Any computer he’s going to build without a GPU is going to be inferior to his laptop, so it’s pretty much just a waste of money and he’s better off getting peripherals for his laptop since he’s worried about breaking it.
You forgot to include the CPU cooler in the build and saved him maybe $15-20 after that. All you’ve gotten him instead is a more expensive quad core that won’t help much with gw2 considering most of its performance is bound up in a single thread, at that point being able to OC the core it is running on brings a greater performance increase than two extra cores, imo.
Just a FYI. It’s against forum rules to name and shame, which is having that picture with the name of the char that sent it not blocked out.
God forbid the bot account trying to steal all our accounts is shamed into not stealing all our accounts… oh wait.
The glory of the current system is that the small man group, can take a supply camp, and actually make a difference to the enemy.
You can actually Siege a castle, stopping/draining their supply, to deny them from getting upgrades.
With the new proposed mechanic, you can’t do anything.
I agree with you about that, but if the server you want to choke out is far enough behind the system I proposed gives them a better chance of defending. If they are doing well then you might still be able to choke them out before they can upgrade.
Like testpig said, you have no hope of attacking if you’re undermanned against another server. We play games to achieve objectives: having the ability to take an enemy’s keep – particularly your strongest enemy’s keep – is paramount to the appeal of WvW. There’s actually nothing gained from your system which ignores the strategic importance of supply. Any system that ignores a supply layer will always benefit the stronger servers since there is impossible to strategically wrest control of territory from them. Numbers will always win.
The system I proposed certainly improves upon the current proposed Anet system that is just a timer and can give servers with low map presence (towers/keeps) an advantage and chance to get back onto a map. I will reiterate again that the system can be tweaked to eliminate this advantage of needing only time to upgrade a keep at any given percentage of total map towers. So we could allow for the timer only for the first keep and then each keep after than would require supply dolyaks to upgrade, or it could be after two, or three or any amount of keeps. Please read my post again because I outlined a strategy for the exact thing you are opposed to, it also doesn’t ignore supply. I just don’t mention it because I assume supply will be used for defense. Even if keeps slowly generate supply you can still choke them if dolyaks delivered bonus supply.
The glory of the current system is that the small man group, can take a supply camp, and actually make a difference to the enemy.
You can actually Siege a castle, stopping/draining their supply, to deny them from getting upgrades.
With the new proposed mechanic, you can’t do anything.
I agree with you about that, but if the server you want to choke out is far enough behind the system I proposed gives them a better chance of defending. If they are doing well then you might still be able to choke them out before they can upgrade.
The game mechanic your proposing doesn’t solve for the overall problem of making dolyaks and supply camps useless in the bigger picture. the small scale combat that those objectives provide for the player(of lesser populated servers) is a major benefit to choking a keep out of it’s resources.
Did they say how repairs would work? I was under the impression that you still need supply for repairing walls and the gate. Even if the keep generates its own supply I assume a prolonged siege would drain it eventually. Although it could take longer.
It may make dolyaks less important for servers that are further behind, but if you read about the cutoff point it basically becomes the system you proposed when a server has gained a certain number of keeps/towers. The system I am proposing is to help out servers that have trouble getting established or are falling behind. If servers are fairly equal in the number of towers and keeps then they have then the difference should be almost negligible. Remember that cutoff point for free timed upgrading could be adjusted up or down as needed. It could even occur at ~30% which would only be two towers/keeps.
(edited by hazenvirus.8154)
I like the idea, but I see how this could become too overpowering for servers which already dominate, as many are pointing out. What if the upgrade time was based on the number of keeps you hold. Perhaps and inverse of the ratio of owned Towers/Keeps per map.
There are 3 keeps and 4 towers on a borderland map. If a side owns 0 towers they have a 100% improved upgrade speed at the time of capturing their first tower. Now they have 1 tower out of 7 total. This is about 14% of the available towers, so they now have a 86% improved speed upgrade on the second tower they capture. If the ratio was distributed Red – 2, Blue – 2, Green – 3. Then Red 2/7 = 71% speed, Blue 71% Speed, Red 57% Speed. If a server owned over a certain percentage, maybe 50% 4/7 towers/keeps or 70% 5/7 towers/keeps their timer would stop and they would have to upgrade by escorting dolyak caravans to the keep. This would cause servers which were dominating overnight more trouble since they couldn’t just cap everything and move on to get a full upgrade overnight, since a small group could kill dolyaks and force them to defend to get a full upgrade. Obviously the numbers could be tweaked or the ratios even made cross borderland/EB to promote more balanced matches. The new system it a great start, but it could be improved.
This could help to balance matches better and allow servers which normally can’t gain a foothold some advantages. Basically the more you hold the more difficult it becomes to upgrade new keeps, but if you have nothing you can get established quickly and into the competition. This would also help servers that are behind to come back quickly with their initial keeps upgrading much quicker until they catch up in total towers/keeps.
(edited by hazenvirus.8154)
If toughness did more damage than zerker we’d have the toughness meta and everyone who complained about zerker would still complain. There will always be an ideal build and not running it will mean you don’t have the potential to complete content as quickly. Anything you want to run in this game can work, PvE can be completed naked with any build. The only way the current meta will end is if Anet decided active gameplay shouldn’t be rewarded and changes AI to punish players who can dodge and actively avoid damage. If that happens we can all switch to loading up on passive defense and facetanking damage as we faceroll to victory. I’ll take the “zerker meta” over passive and unskilled gameplay any day.
Everyone sort of overlooked the OPs primary point of an inexpensive desktop system with the talk of SSDs and “decent” GPU. “Decent” GPU isn’t an option here.
Okay, if you can swing a GT 740 with GDDR5 memory with a Haswell Pentium G dual core that would be the sweet spot. Even a GT 730 with GDDR5 memory will crush the integrated Intel GPU.
However if you can’t and will never add a discrete video card, I would lean toward the A10-7850K. It will crush the i3 in gaming. The question I can’t answer is whether the lower performing cores of the A10 will bind GW2 as much as the sub par GPU would on an i3.
I’d say we presented some good options with high performance to price ratios. A 1 TB HDD is $50 and if you don’t need a lot of media space you can get a 180-240 GB SSD that will run circles around the HDD for ~$50 more. My example build is $613 which is cheap if you think about the performance that can be squeezed out of overclocking that CPU.
if u go desktop route, u still need i5 quad cores and ssd hardrive.
What? No you don’t. A desktop with a G3258 and a decent GPU will run this game fine. An SSD would be nice, but it’s hardly necessary.
Exact CPU I listed in my example build. You can’t go wrong with it, and it is considered gold to overclockers. You don’t need more than 2 cores for gw2. I have an i7-5930k (6 cores) and the extra cores make a little to no difference for one client.
Don’t waste your money on some crappy desktop, it’s just going to give you a worse game experience. If you are actually worried about your laptop’s keyboard (which you shouldn’t be), buy a quality mechanical keyboard and call it a day.
If you’re willing to drop the money on a whole new (albeit bad) computer for GW2, you should be able to buy a Ducky or Code keyboard, or maybe a Logitech G710.
I don’t see how a desktop would give a worse experience, I’ve always played on a desktop and I couldn’t imagine having to play on a laptop.
You can build a desktop PC for under $700 that will crush gw2. Here is an example micro-atx build. The processor is known for being easy to overclock, which will allow you to achieve 4.0 to 4.5 ghz without too much effort, the GTX 750 TI can easily handle the graphics of this game, and with an SSD to reduce load times you’ll have everything you need to run gw2 at high settings for the foreseeable future.
Except dragons are not inherently evil. They are smart and clever, but it is also in their nature to contain magic and restore balance to the world. I believe they are considered more of a force of nature than a true evil. It might be a noble cause to defend the innocent from a dragon, but to hunt a creature of the natural world to extinction isn’t exactly justice. When a wild animal does something like kill a person they are not doing it because they are evil they are doing it because that is their nature and they are just trying to survive. Killing the dragons might be the best known approach to saving the lives of the races of Tyria, but I wouldn’t call it justice as much as it is a necessary evil when a wild animal threatens the Tyrian population.
Once the dragons are gone, if the Guardian profession as a group decided there is great justice in killing the “evil” bears of Tyria, because bears are the greatest threat and protecting the innocent from them is a Guardians calling then I guess we will get the Bear Hunter specialization.
(edited by hazenvirus.8154)
I don’t play for rewards. I play for fun. (And I mainly play WvW).
I dislike when people smugly claim they play for fun not x (a trend which is becoming increasingly common). What is fun is subjective, the fun comes from the rewards , the work invested into getting them or the challenges overcome for a significant amount of people.
It is clear to see from the many MMO’s out there that rewards are a significant amount of the fun for many players, that and making their account better than another players (rarity , prestige , getting the items no one else has etc.). Essentially showing off is a major source of fun/goals for players of MMO’s , while it may not be your motivator it is other peoples.
@OP
While there has been some veteran content it’s coming rather slow hopefully HOT will improve on it. If I had to take your statement I would instead say that the content lacks depth in some cases.while I can’t really define depth I’d put it like this, there are very few pieces of content in this game where you can invest 100 hours into and then feel you are 100 hours ahead of any new player attempting the content.
You know some people enjoy perfecting their combat style or derive fun from skillfully defeating an opponent. Saying that people want a reward beyond the satisfaction of feeling they played skillfully, enjoying the company of their friends, or having a victory over an opponent is foolish. There are plenty of people that feel this way or games like Counter-Strike wouldn’t exist. The game type may be different, but the point is that there is no true reward for playing many FPS. Although rewards and leveling has made its way to many FPS games, there is still high demand for primarily skill based games such as Counter-Strike. Assuming that there are only people playing this game who seek tangible rewards for their fun is ignorant. There is plenty of fun to be had and people enjoying their time without any tangible rewards in sight.
Even if someone ends up getting a reward from the content they participated in, that doesn’t mean they needed it to enjoy the activity.
(edited by hazenvirus.8154)
And he called me cheese
11/10 Would report that guard >:3
Last time I saw a hammer ele in WvW coming after my Warrior I think I one shotted it with a whirlwind before it could even hit me. I had to step back and check the combat log before I finished the ele just to see how squishy that ele had to be. I felt bad for the ele, only thing hammer is good for is PvE and leveling. Except in pve without a strong group using their support skills well you will die fast and you lose the utility of of a dagger build and have to be in true melee range. The build only shined in organized groups imo, using it in a lot of pugs would mean the ele is constantly on their back, but that was okay because of the risk/reward.
guns arent that old yet in the world of tyria. bows are.
also it is a fantasy game, deal with it. or go play CoD lol
Well I’m done feeding the trolls.
You want proper physics in a fantasy game? I can only suggest you look elsewhere for that one, as it’s the equivalent of asking for spell casting in Call of Duty, and is irrelevant unless you are a game designer (and can give the developers programming tips, rather than outrageous suggestions like “make magic more realistic”).
Lol, that is terrible logic (could be trolling?). The whole of the game, weapons, and combat are rooted in reality to begin with
I was unaware shooting lasers out of a greatsword was rooted in reality
Or anything an elementalist can do
Or necromancer
etc
Clearly not everything is, but the core mechanics like running jumping and swinging a weapon are, did you know if you could project a laser a certain way it could even behave like the mesmer greatsword?
Read the logic, even if there are fantasy elements you probably wouldn’t be okay with a bow shooting backwards or swords damaging their owners when it swings. The point is that guild wars 2 has some realistic elements even if it is a fantasy game, and that isn’t a bad thing nor is adding more realistic elements especially if it can also improve a weapon that is consider a poor choice at the same time.
(edited by hazenvirus.8154)
Something that bugged me is the slowness of the gun weapons in this game in comparison to bows.
….
This would give guns proper mechanics and give them a better “feel” compared to bows.
The physics is ‘proper’ for Tyria, even if it’s improper for Earth. Even aside from the obvious, there are plenty of examples that clue you into the difference:
- You toss Dragon’s Tooth and it doesn’t hurt friends, burns foes, but doesn’t burn wood objects nearby.
- You use a scythe to gather from a single plant and might end up with garlic, cloves, tarragon, or vanilla. That same plant yields a different set of herbs (or spices) in other regions.
- A fall from great height usually doesn’t kill you.
As long as the game is self-consistent, I don’t think it has any obligation to match Earth physics, chemistry, or biology. Or at least, I can still enjoy it just fine; I hope you’ll be able to as well.
Considering we are also considering the balance of pistol/rifle, which goes beyond physics, it isn’t unresonable to think that increasing the velocity could improve these weapons, while rifle might be powerful for engineer it is largely unused for serious play by warriors. I can’t say by how much it would help, but dismissing the argument because you think the current physics are okay or using examples of other unrealistic physics is a poor argument. Look at my bow example above, just because it isn’t “supposed to be realistic” doesn’t me it shouldn’t or couldn’t be changed.
You want proper physics in a fantasy game? I can only suggest you look elsewhere for that one, as it’s the equivalent of asking for spell casting in Call of Duty, and is irrelevant unless you are a game designer (and can give the developers programming tips, rather than outrageous suggestions like “make magic more realistic”).
Lol, that is terrible logic (could be trolling?). The whole of the game, weapons, and combat are rooted in reality to begin with and you are saying increasing velocity isn’t a valid request when they did it for Ranger longbow (which kind of kills your programming argument). Also I can use your argument to justify just about anything in game. [Begin Sarcasm] Bug happens where bows now shoot backwards only, NOT A BUG this isn’t reality and if you want projectile weapons to fire the correct direction you should go play CoD because this is a fantasy where bows fire backwards and you expect the anet devs to be able to make a bow fire forwards. Unless you can give them tips to help them program it to fire the correct direction, rather than outrageous suggestions like a bow fireing forwards, lol what were you thinking… a bow that fires forwards [/End Sarcasm]
We have two mounts and the reception has been positive, so I’d love to see more!
Those don’t go faster than a regular player, if the mounts you want were cosmetic only and didn’t boost movement speed then maybe I’d be open to the idea. Mounts don’t fit with these small maps and the current player speed, plus we’d have a load screen after a min or two of crossing each map by mount.
WPs also serve as a gold sink, so maybe the mounts should have a cost per use similar to a salvage-o-matic. (If they were faster than players)
(edited by hazenvirus.8154)
Right now the game has to hide mini pets so performance isn’t impacted too badly. Imagine how bad it would be with mounts in a large zerg.
The game was designed around not having mounts, if the zones were not instanced and bigger maybe it would make sense.
Games with mounts have actual distances that would take more than the couple mins it takes to run across a large zone in GW2.
The only mount that we should get is a mini pet squire that clops two coconuts together as we run and adds player animations as if we are pretending to ride a horse.
Legendary weapons will no longer be legendary
in Guild Wars 2: Heart of Thorns
Posted by: hazenvirus.8154
If the new lengendarys are like most of the old ones, I’m still not interested in them: a disco ball on a stick, a party gun, a bow that shoots unicorns etc. Most of this are joke shop items at best more suited to April 1st.
Yeah, they’re cute (almost sickeningly so, in some cases!), but they should just have been sold as skins in the store; not touted as legendaries.
In fact, personally, if I were ANet I would just produce a few more really pretty weapon skins for the store (most of the ones ATM are pretty underwhelming, TBH), that can also be crafted (for people who have far more time than they do RL money) and be done with it.
Game isn’t supposed to be a gear grind, after all, so stick with that premise.
Your right not a gear grind but a skin grind the differance is you have to do the former not the later
Ugh, well I guess…
Except, when you make most of the endgame about looks progression, you risk making people feel obliged to do that grind, to get the skins, even if they don’t want to.
So, although it is marginally better than a conventional gear grind, as it is not absolutely needed for further progression, it’s still potentially not so very different (or not really different enough).
No, there is an objective difference between grinding for stats and grinding for cosmetics. If you try to run the Arah dungeon in level 60 greens or join a fractal 50 group without AR, you will be obliterated or kicked from the party. If you try to run those dungeons with the appropriate stat gear looking like a hot mess, people might snicker at you or you might feel like a clown but you’ll do just fine. The difference is that a stats gear grind is required for you to enjoy certain content in the game, while cosmetics is optional regardless of your “feelings” of being pressured.
Also, I respect your desire for more options in the gem store and I suppose more options for everyone won’t ever be a bad thing. However, I feel like the more they do to make a clear and separate distinction between where skins come from, the better. I understand not all players are this way, but some players feel a greater sense of satisfaction obtaining skins through specific gameplay requirements. As many people have demonstrated with their “legendaries are meaningless because [even theoretically] anyone can swipe a credit card for gems for gold for a legendary” protest. So what I’m saying is, sure, add more gem store skins, but make them exclusive to the gem store (giving people the ever-present option of converting gold to gems of course). And also add more skins that are exclusive to gameplay, for the rest of us.
I’ve got bad news…
Did you know people buy and sell accounts too, how do we prove you didn’t buy that account with all the gen 2 legendaries?
I support this change, give us our necks back anet!
Seems like this could cause issues for mesmers in PvP.
If forcing players to fight the UI is a class mechanic then I guess it is okay.
I hate to be the downer on this one, and I agree with Walls and Neutral creatures, but the Ranger pet taking damage priority over the Ranger is a mechanic of the class.
I don’t think ranger pets were designed to cause targetting issues, that is a side effect of the way the targeting system functions. Just like against minion necros who depend on the terrible targetting system to help win fights. It would be a nice feature to make a separate command that only iterates through players.
Really though you should be fighting the player not the UI.
Just fix the styrofoam block the character head sits on without the helmet and I’ll call it perfect.
But if the Juggernaut be announced as a ranged weapon shouldn’t it have some new effects ?! as a rainbow for stuffs or unicorns for bows.
Hopefully Anet will add some “mixed” weaps or will add some new effects.
Hammer was announced as ranged, Juggernaut is a skin. They will likely add effects for the animations befitting of the legendary.
Eternity/Twilight/Sunrise are used as a ranged weapon by mesmers and have repesctive effects to their melee versions, and I think we will get the same in Juggernauts case.
Will current precursors get cheaper on TP?
in Guild Wars 2: Heart of Thorns
Posted by: hazenvirus.8154
Trough introduction of this ‘legendary journey’ tasks etc. ? I can almost afford Dusk right now, but I’m not sure if it will be a waste to spend 1000G at this moment.
Why would you want to create a 1st gen “legendary” when they are not truly legendary in any meaning or translation of the word ?!
From the moment precursor crafting was announced, I stopped trying for the 1st gens, instead I’m hoarding all materials, doing world completion (again) and making as much gold as I possibly can while HoT is in development.
The new gen legendaries will be truly legendary (at least I hope so) < if this is true, 1st gen precursors will plummet, cause you know supply and demand baby, if no one wants them the price drops that is inevitable.
off course if the new gens look like crap, well the price of 1st gen precursors will soar like never before (I hope this doesn’t happen)
I hate almost everything about the current gen legendaries, specially how tied they are to the freaking RNG ! that cheapens them so much, many players have been playing for years now, without ever seeing a precursor. meanwhile some newb for lack of a better word buys the game today and RNG-sus gives him a precursor tomorrow.
That right there is just WRONG on so many levels.
That and the fact you can just CC your way to a 1st gen legendary is what makes them not legendary at all in my book.Legendaries should be about a legendary journey with an epic story, not about who can farm the longest or who can amass the most gold or who is blessed by a [censored] system like RNG.
If they are anything like Mawdrey or Lumi skins then it won’t be as epic as you think and it will be all about grinding and waiting for time gates. And in that case whoever can farm the longest will still win because the rest of the mats will be available on the TP. If you take all the parts of current legendary weapons and tack on Mawdrey as the precursor then the non TP mats are probably the easiest part. In the end it will be just like 1st gen and everyone will have them. If you don’t enjoy the legendary for itself then you will always be disappointed in this game because the design is for them to be obtainable by anyone.
Anet hasn’t given us any information on this so I wouldn’t believe what you hear without hearing or reading it from Anet themselves
I think they will be staying away from Eternity style legendary weapons. Eternity originally wasn’t even done when the game released and it took a long time to add extra effects. I’d rather them put more time into the other legendaries than make three slightly different legendaries.