I havent dismissed the answers you’ve already given. They have involved disadvantages to the melee players not the rangers which I have pointed out repeatedly. You just keep conveniently ignoring that. So you still havent actually given me a valid answer.
And to this quote: “I’m not trying to give range no disadvantages and here’s why…”. You actually are. I havent seen a response where the the disadvantages still remain. Because the main disadvantage is currently the buff sharing. Without that the risk vs reward is completely warped. I really dont know how you dont understand that.
I cant argue with people who dont understand the meta. Its too mentally frustrating to explain everything in detail.
Ill just point out the main disadvantages you mentioned are disadvantages to the melee players not the rangers. Which is once again a case of rewarding players for screwing over their teammates. Why do you want to encourage that?
I honestly hate this argument “oh you don’t understand the meta bleh”. It’s stupid.
It basically boils down your argument to “it goes against my super-733tz strategy so it’s a bad idea” or it pits anything I say vs the reward/greed of players which is not a point I feel like explaining from.
I’ll just say this: you probably think those on the forums that oppose the ‘meta’ are bad players, carebear, or strive to be special snowflakes. Probably true in the general sense, but don’t try to make yourself seem special because you practiced a kitten encounter a few times so you can speed run it. I’ve done it too, in this game and others. You’re not special and drawing a line in the sand so you can place yourself on some high-ground to defend a ‘meta’ (rather preposterous considering metas are subject to change) is only drawing yourself into a corner when things get updated.
That said, I’ll point out, again, that you’ve dismissed the point I made. I addressed your point multiple times: to me, the idea isn’t supposed to reward selfish play or encourage ‘screwing over players’ but to aid everyone on the team in supporting each other.
I can already tell you’re not going to be pleased with that answer, and that’s because it’s the same answer. Once you quit dismissing other people’s answers and respond to them, you might get them to give more answers.
And THAT being said, beyond what you and others in this thread have mentioned, I see a couple of other flaws in the idea thanks to looking at the suggestion from others’ perspectives. But I haven’t the will to mention them because it feels pointless as discussion here feels forced as it is. I already feel I’m typing dissertations here JUST to get people to bother talking about the subject.
You can think what you want. But people are beyond stubborn on forums. And will refuse to admit they are wrong. Id happily keep going if either of you had a basic grasp of what im talking about. But it seems id have to explain so much that its not worth the effort. So ill just move on and give a basic summary of the original point and a simple question.
The trade off currently is that range is safer so it does less damage (mostly because of buff sharing). If you make buffs work no matter the range. Then that trade off is gone. Classes with very high damage ranged weapons will be able to get max damage with complete safety while also screwing over their teammates.
What justification is there for a change like that?
I cant argue with people who dont understand the meta. Its too mentally frustrating to explain everything in detail.
Ill just point out the main disadvantages you mentioned are disadvantages to the melee players not the rangers. Which is once again a case of rewarding players for screwing over their teammates. Why do you want to encourage that?
I wasnt expecting any info in this thread. I saw this thread as a way to make our communication concerns heard. Also to make them understand we dont need to know exactly whats coming. Just hints and general areas/directions they are focusing on. And for Gaile to try and get the higher ups to be a bit more transparent. It seems like she is doing so. Whether its a success or not remains to be seen. But im fairly happy with the outcome of this thread. Thanks Gaile.
Best result would obviously be a nice blog post some time soon with a few tidbits of whats coming.
Its a reasonable question. What disadvantages are there once your suggestion is implemented? Also how about answering the second question? Thats a valid concern which you seem to be overlooking.
Because all i can see as a result. Ranging gets to have near best if not the best damage while being completely safe. Remaining players have increased risk as they have the boss focusing on less players. The aggro is shared by melees and ignores the rangers. Melees have less players to ress people in the danger zone.
You are basically asking to encourage selfish play. Please explain to me how I am wrong. Because i honestly cant understand how you think its a fair idea. And by the looks of it everyone else agrees with me. This is not a loaded question. I am genuinely curious to your thought process. Because to me its completely baffling.
Seems you misunderstand. The meta would change to having lbow ranger (rapid fire is op now) and staff eles at max range with the rest of the party in melee. So yes my points are completely valid.
Are you actually going to answer my questions by the way? Because until you do you havent actually given a valid reason for such a change.
There isn’t a question that you have asked that I haven’t addressed. If you expect me to answer loaded questions the same way I respond to reasonable questions then please just stop posting here.
You said yourself that range does less damage than melee. Why would longbow ranger be the new meta then? As I pointed out, there are things that a longbow ranger wouldn’t have access to or be able to do for their team. For example, no guardian symbols or mesmer null field effects. Also they wouldn’t provide warhorn 5, or healing spring for the team (assuming they stay at 1000+ range).
Neither you or Leo have posted answers to the following questions.
Why should ranging have no disadvantages? And to be more specific. Why should it have no disadvantages in effectiveness when its the far safer option? Why should you be rewarded for causing problems for teammates who are meleeing?
I did not say that melee is better than range. Most melee weapons do have advantage of damage as Ena said. However the highest damage build in the game is staff ele. And the recent changes to ranger longbow made it incredibly powerful for burst. However the auto attack is designed for max range. With your suggestion both its 8 second cooldown burst and max range auto dmg become a pretty op combo.
Seems you misunderstand. The meta would change to having lbow ranger (rapid fire is op now) and staff eles at max range with the rest of the party in melee. So yes my points are completely valid.
Are you actually going to answer my questions by the way? Because until you do you havent actually given a valid reason for such a change.
Pretty much covered everything. Im in favour of ignoring ramp up time and implementing the first 3 suggestions personally. But maybe rebalancing some skills and weapons to reduce ramp up in PvE. I would imagine this would be a PvP/PvE split.
Im sure people will mention that it doesnt solve the issue in open world. However I dont think thats possible to solve in any realistic manner. Balancing zergs is futile. The best solution is just to make sure future open world stuff keeps encouraging the splitting of zergs. Then condition builds would be fine even in open world once some of these suggestions are implemented.
I also don’t see any change to ramp-up time affecting PvP in a way that doesn’t completely tip the scales to condi or nothing. Condi builds always seemed to be (at least philosophically) pressure builds and ramp up time, in my mind lends itself to that.
In my mind, open world speccing is an odd strength that is rarely touted for GW2. Most everyone understands and accepts their dungeon/wvwvw/pvp builds for what they require, but open world boss zerg builds are yet another point of build diversity people can build around. While some people hate gear grinds, I’m personally fond of making a set for boss zergs, dungeons, wvwvw, etc. etc. Adds to the longevity and variety of the character and the game.
The only disadvantage i see is not being able to revive each other. But thats a disadvantage to the melee players. The ones ranging should be perfectly safe. So it might be a disadvantage to the group as a whole if the melee players fail. But its an advantage for the rangers.
Oh yeah and someone else mentioned the issues of the target making unnecessary movements because of ranged aggro. That can be a disadvantage as well.
Thats another example of a disadvantage to the melee players for running with rangers. Not a disadvantage to the rangers….
So again why should ranging have no disadvantages? And to be more specific. Why should it have no disadvantages in effectiveness when its the far safer option?
Read Enaretos’ post.
Errr I did. The only disadvantage i can make out that you are referring to is reviving which I have already countered. Can you maybe answer my questions instead of avoiding the issue?
And if you are referring to damage coefficients. Longbow ranger and staff ele are both 1200 range and superior damage. Longbow is only weak currently because if you are close the auto attack is weak. With this boon sharing suggestion it would be broken.
The only disadvantage i see is not being able to revive each other. But thats a disadvantage to the melee players. The ones ranging should be perfectly safe. So it might be a disadvantage to the group as a whole if the melee players fail. But its an advantage for the rangers.
Oh yeah and someone else mentioned the issues of the target making unnecessary movements because of ranged aggro. That can be a disadvantage as well.
Thats another example of a disadvantage to the melee players for running with rangers. Not a disadvantage to the rangers…. So basically you want to reward the safe rangers for causing problems for the melee players. Am I correct?
So again why should ranging have no disadvantages? And to be more specific. Why should it have no disadvantages in effectiveness when its the far safer option?
Pretty much covered everything. Im in favour of ignoring ramp up time and implementing the first 3 suggestions personally. But maybe rebalancing some skills and weapons to reduce ramp up in PvE. I would imagine this would be a PvP/PvE split.
Im sure people will mention that it doesnt solve the issue in open world. However I dont think thats possible to solve in any realistic manner. Balancing zergs is futile. The best solution is just to make sure future open world stuff keeps encouraging the splitting of zergs. Then condition builds would be fine even in open world once some of these suggestions are implemented.
The silence is decidedly not a distraction effort. As Mike O’Brien said, "We’ve set a clear policy in the past year: “We don’t talk speculatively about future development. We don’t want to string you along. Creating fun is an uncertain business: sometimes things work out and sometimes they don’t; sometimes we go back to the drawing board over and over before we get something right. If we make optimistic promises and then can’t deliver on them, everyone suffers. So when we attend a trade show or give an interview, we’re there to talk about what we’re getting ready to ship, not to speculate on what we might ship someday.”
We are not “afraid” to lay out a roadmap. Quoting Mike again, “The intention of the CDI threads is to talk with you about the roadmap.” If you’re not participating, you’re missing out on a means of sharing your feedback and a method that we may use to give information, when the time is right.
In general, with nearly anything, there are ebbs and flows in communication. If we’re in an ebb right now, you can count on there being a flow in the future. That’s just logical.
The problem i have with these points is as follows.
Im already being strung along. Because this games core system is great, I have so much time invested and I dont want to stop. But at the moment I dont have anything to do in game. So im being strung along waiting for an announcement of new fractals, new weapons, new skills etc. I just want a very general idea of what things are coming our way. Obviously leave out the things that you cannot be certain of. And you dont even have to give a expected release date. Just tell us what things you are working on.
The CDI threads are definitely useful. The problem is they also string us along. So far weve had a fractal and a raid CDI. I understand it may be a while before we see the results of either of those. But at the same time im getting false hope that we will actually recieve those things. You have changed your Living Story release method. We no longer have event and adhoc patches between LS releases. So when is the next fractal update? Or is it not coming anymore? Im pretty concerned about that since the release schedule changes. I was expecting one fractal update per season but I dont know what to think anymore.
This ties into the previous point. The problem is how long till we see that flow. And are we definitely going to see a flow from that topic. Personally I got the impression from the CDI that raids might not happen. Or if they did happen they would appear over 2 years later. I dont want to be strung along for another 2 years with nothing fresh to do or no info until “Hey surprise! Raids are coming next week”. Living Story only provides a days worth of content each week. But its boring because the flavour of the game hasnt changed/grown (no new skills and weapons for classes).
This game is slightly different though. We want to know what direction the game is going in so we know if its worth sticking around. Some of us have been playing since release so as much as we enjoy the game for what it is. Its become boring now. Most people dont play the same game for 2 years unless there is new stuff they can be excited about.
All im seeing in this thread is everyone completely misunderstanding the OP’s point. He does have a valid one. These recent bosses have very anti clone mechanics.
The teragriff was also very anti necro aswell. Scepter and axe are terrible for dealing with the adds because no cleave, shorter range and require targetting (tab target always goes to champ). Dagger only slightly better. Staff the same. The lack of mobility on the necro meant even with a ranged weapon its difficult to keep in range of the boss when its leaping around. And then to top it off in challenge mode even with double energy sigils you dont have enough dodges to avoid all the pulses from the aoe. You are forced to tank in DS. But then because you cant get close to the boss you tend to lack lifeforce some of the time which can make it very close. Also lack of stability etc for the tentacles. It was frustrating, really frustrating.
Ps. I dont need advice on how to do it on a necro. Ive already done it.
Anyway i had a weird bug on it the other day. I was trying to do all 3 achieves in 1 go. But i wiped because i didnt take enough aoe for the mini teras. After that it had infinitely spawning mini teras for the whole fight (the wave before you start didnt despawn and they kept respawning when killed). Which made it impossible. Had to restart the instance.
Yeah, the melee bosses while using active damage avoidance, relying on team play and coordination of CC and support is really good actually. Thanks for agreeing with me.
I feel like your sarcasm detection abilities need to be discussed and considered. But one thing I do know is you are quite verbose so we can settle that issue right now.
Not sure how you walked into that.
Your post wasn’t sarcasm. It was sounded exactly on point with the others, and fit in with the headless chicken meta crew. If you want it to be effective, you should go over the top with your hyperbole.
I need to remember that both simile and subtly are lost one this community.
Its difficult to identify sarcasm from text. It was however blatantly obvious from hybrids post. Yours looked like a genuine dig at the meta.
Id only recommend necro if you dont care at all about being efficient or useful. Its the bottom tier class in PvE. So if you ever decide you want to speed run or join a proper dungeon guild. Or you just feel like helping the group a lot more. You will probably regret playing the necro.
That said it is pretty fun to play. Its a class i generally only do solo stuff with because i like to contribute as much as possible to the group. And necro doesnt do that but its still got a nice feel when playing.
Im sure others can go into more detail. But if you are looking for a class which is good in all gametypes and will probably remain like that forever then I would suggest ele. They’ve been top in PvE and WvW since the beginning. And in PvP they’ve had multiple phases of being a top tier class.
Also ele is a pretty fun class to play. Easy to start and learn. Hard to master.
Dunno why you would argue over compositions for fractals. Most people run what they are most comfortable with or what they feel like playing at the time. Because any multitude of compositions achieves nearly identical times. Things slow down when people play out of their comfort zone. Obviously a very high damage party will have the potential to be much faster. But the reality is most decent groups still achieve 50min full runs with any composition.
Eles are the best class for fractals. You can stack 5 eles and you wont lack any of the required utility and you will still have good survivability and damage. However most people cant play them comfortably in some fractals.
The guide is relatively up to date. I havent bothered tweaking it to the lastest feature patch. Because that only introduced minor changes which havent effected builds or rotations.
If you want a class that will always be popular and wanted in PvE (both casual and high end) then i suggest making an ele.
Its not hard but its really boring. I get the feeling this is just another test of mechanics. Both fights were easy but really boring/annoying. Thanks to way too much movement and not enough time stationary with the teragriff and just way too much hp and not enough threat from the troll. Last episode had good mechanics but were too focused on puzzles (should of had dps phases).
It was really frustrating on my necro. I didnt have the mobility or the sustain to get close to him each time he leaped. And i couldnt use life blast because its slow and it always bugged and vanished. I guess it was something to do with the bosses hitbox while it was moving.
I was honestly surprised I managed to make it through without wiping. I downed so many times to those bs rush ticks that i was on red penalty with less than 1k hp and no lifeforce for pretty much half the fight. Adds were perfect rally bots at least. Frantically dodging tendrils, mini teras and aoes waiting for my heal to come back for half the fight was a little bit entertaining i guess. xD
As for the ‘forcing specialized roles causes exclusion’, well what if everyone can fill in any of these specialized roles?
Well the only way to avoid exclusion with that is by doing what we currently have. Which means its not tied to gear. And so the problem has been resolved by not doing anything. Like i said before its the content which doesnt compliment the system enough.
We do already provide various roles within the meta. But people see berserker and turn a blind eye to everything else thats going on. And the content isnt hard enough in most cases to over specialise. There are some exceptions, but those are mainly in fractals. Which just shows that anet really can create content that compliments the system when they actually try.
Every suggestion I’ve seen to “fix” things have been movements in the direction of greater specialization, which would only become diversity if the specializations are required. Once they’re required, there would indeed be greater exclusion, which is directly opposite what Anet attempted to achieve with the current system.
Heres the problem. You think im afraid of change because im being ignorant and stubborn (I find this quite amusing btw). Its quite the opposite. Ive thought about this topic a lot. Every single suggestion ive seen has led to me reaching the conclusion that it will not give you what you want. It will create more exclusion in the game. Or it will ruin and irritate players that are happy with the current format.
If you’re so versed with the proposition, why not counter the problems they bring up point for point? I’m not saying you’re ignorant and stubborn because you fear change, I’m saying you’re ignorant and stubborn because you refuse to discuss change. You just sound like you’re angry and fearful of change which isn’t really discussing anything, just rambling and derailing.
Im not afraid of change. Im afraid of change to the core combat system. Because currently its in a good place. There are definately some tweaks and balance issues to resolve (condition damage for example). But overall its fairly solid. The problem lies mainly in the content. Currently the game doesnt have content which properly compliments the combat system. More advanced and complex AI in encounters would be a massive improvement. It would also lead to more diversity in your average pug group.
I’m in the same boat. Not being afraid of changes to the core combat system though, but fear of stagnation. I’ve grown bored of the game several times. I healthily combat this boredom by taking (long) breaks and bouncing around ideas for additions to the game. No idea is too outrageous to discuss, it only takes time and a little interest in the subject. Do you have time? Do you have interest? Then discuss! Counter the points, don’t just deny they’d work!
Personally, I’d rather discuss things like adding new weapons and skills to the game to give players more to swing around. But guess what? People fear that too! Because balance is so tenuous that any little addition like a proliferated mainhand weapon could upset the meta in such a horrible fashion it could caused irreversible damage!
And I say, so what? You’re not doing damage by discussing hypotheticals.
I have discussed these suggestions many times before. They all follow the same general ideas. At this point i thought it was reasonable for people to work out the flaws for themselves. It seems most are incapable which i find kind of depressing. And im tired of repeating myself. And actually i have already countered the suggestions in a general sense, theres no need to counter each point when they can all be countered with the same logic. What part of “forcing specialised roles will cause exclusion” do you not understand?.
I also get bored of the game. And havent really played actively in months. But its not the combat system thats at fault for me. Its the lack of new content that suits me and the lack of new skills, weapons and traits to add flavour and shake up balance. The combat system is the reason i keep coming back. Its the best ive experienced in any game and its spoilt me. Its only fault is the lack of variety in skills and choice per class (I miss gw1 for this).
Final question. Do you agree with me that new challenging content would be a better and more realistic solution? At this point this topic is completely pointless because we full well know that anet wont revamp their entire combat system.
Why? Thats what makes GW2 different and special. Changing that completely ruins what makes GW2’s combat unique.
Changing isn’t bad. Don’t fear change. Not that I’m pressing for change, but what the vibe I’m getting from you is anger and fear for the sake of ignorance. Why?
And what can make something different and special can also be what makes it unfair and unfun or unbalanced or flawed. Again, not that I’m advocating the notion that GW2 is unfair/unbalanced and something flawed can still have its charms. Basically what I’m saying is, things can always be made better. Ignorance and stubbornness are only speedbumps to progress.
Heres the problem. You think im afraid of change because im being ignorant and stubborn (I find this quite amusing btw). Its quite the opposite. Ive thought about this topic a lot. Every single suggestion ive seen has led to me reaching the conclusion that it will not give you what you want. It will create more exclusion in the game. Or it will ruin and irritate players that are happy with the current format.
Im not afraid of change. Im afraid of change to the core combat system. Because currently its in a good place. There are definately some tweaks and balance issues to resolve (condition damage for example). But overall its fairly solid. The problem lies mainly in the content. Currently the game doesnt have content which properly compliments the combat system. More advanced and complex AI in encounters would be a massive improvement. It would also lead to more diversity in your average pug group.
If the difficulty of the game is increased the majority of players will have a hard time running full glass. So they will adapt and switch to more balanced builds. The claim that theres no diversity will disappear. Im sure you realise that pugs will be encouraged to run specialised defensive/control/debuffer roles if the encounters become more complex and gain skills similar to the players.
So someone who specs in healing power and boons should be able to complete content at the same rate as someone who specs for power and condition damage?
Boons would have be really really really powerful.
But then those who spec for power and boons would then be the meta, wouldn’kitten Increase base damage and those really powerful boons will just multiply that.
Using an example that I’m most knowledgeable in:
In City of Heroes, the most offensively weakest archetype was the Defender who was a primarily buffer/debuffer type with a secondary function of ranged damage. Yet when it came down to defeating the high tier content, the most powerful and capable archetype for that was also the Defender.
Sure, you could have your team of Scrappers and Brutes (melee DPS) go toe to toe with the same content, survive and kill, but you could also have your team of Defenders, Corruptors (basically slightly more offensive Defenders) and Controllers (basically Defenders but with more control type skills) do the exact same content, survive and kill. It was because they could debuff the foes into kittens (stacking debuffs) ontop of buffing your team to gods (stacking buffs) and bam.
Can i ask something. How is that any different to how it is in GW2? You can use defensive and balanced builds and defeat bosses with them. Berserker isnt required. Its just faster. And it should be.
I still cannot comprehend how you think its possible to make all gear have an important use without creating forced roles which in turn results in more exclusivity.
Seriously, think about it. If we keep the current system and make sure all gear is viable to complete content then we will have some gear which is better than others for efficiency and some which is better for playing super safe. This is how it currently is. People like efficiency so they create LFG requirements to find like minded people who run the meta. The rest dont care so they dont make requirements. Id laugh if i saw a nomads only LFG. Theres no logical reason to run it but people can if they want to.
How are you going to make different gear types equal in this situation without forcing a new form of trinity? Theres no way tanky gear should kill things as fast as glassy gear. And theres no way glassy gear should have as much have as much passive defence as tanky gear. Its logically impossible. To make these things equal you have to remove gear stats completely. Which is how i believe it should of been. Its too late for that now though.
Nope its a troll. The ones which spawn all the invuln swarms which you have to kite until they change target or despawn.
My direct damage seemed pretty normal. So i dont think condi would of been much better. Although I was on necro so i definately could of saved a few minutes in my case at least.
Its basically one of those mordrem trolls but with 50 times the hp and some random long windup aoe that fills the room with exploding marks.
The first instance boss was a bit more interesting. Although I couldnt help but get annoyed that it was completely immune to CC and it kept leaping around the room. You couldnt even range it consistantly because of how large the room was.
There never should of been gear stats in PvE. It should be entirely through traits, runes and sigils. But its too late for that now. You just have to live with it.
The end boss for the new episode… Puts the meat shields in Hotw to shame. I was bored out of my mind as soon as realised how little mechanics that boss had and how little threat they caused.
Thats the thing. Pretty much noone goes back after they start gravitating towards the meta. Many people are too stubborn to even give it a chance. Which is kind of sad because they might actually enjoy it.
