Guild Wars 2

Yes, there are some topics who have to be discussed. It somehow feels like designing a new game, so much things could be polished. Like underwatercombat, which is left behind for a long time now.
But at the end ANet has to read all the stuff and ANet has do decide what should be done and what not. We should keep that in mind if we’re posting suggestions.

brazilianbrkfst.8614:

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

Nice idea but no shout would be able to knock your enemies back. That’s quite unrealistic.

So is shouting at your friends and making them not be able to be knocked down and take less damage, but you don’t see Guardians complaining.

Better than shouting at arrows so the get reflected

Jelzouki.4128:

Razor.6392:

Oh gosh please. I wish there was a way to filter out the least skilled players from posting on this specific forum section.

You’re basically saying that a 180ish seconds cooldown ELITE skill shouldn’t kill you if you have 2 people currently attacking you? I don’t even play mesmer and I infact hate them, but that’s just nonsense. Not to mention that most good mesmers run cloak on pvp.

No I’m not “basically” saying that. I AM saying that a skill that leaves you 100% defenceless for a number of seconds is overpowered (see the suggestions I made). I don’t think you know what “good” mesmers run considering you don’t play mesmer? Please refrain from trying to start an argument on here with me, I don’t have time to argue with the ignorance of people who can’t give a reasonable response.

If you really came here to trash talk, and think I am a “least skilled player” I would be happy to duel you in pvp, my username is Jelzouki.

This skill is suited for PvP. It’s useless in PvE, it even makes the most mobs stronger. If you ban this skill from PvP it will become useless. Deal with it. -1

Best armor, which turns every fight into an instant win.

MesmeForever.3612:

I’m a little confused, but from what I gather, we’re…

1. Deciding on a format for
2. Concisely letting Anet know what changes we’d like to see implemented when we
3. Discuss Ranger balance tomorrow

…though Anet has not directly confirmed or denied #3 (which I understand, just being clear). Is that right?

Or is it this case that…

1. We’ve been deciding on a concise format so that
2. We will post CDI topics in the decided format in this thread in preparation for when
3. We discuss whichever ones Anet decides upon tomorrow, which Anet will reveal…when it’s ready? (sorry, I had to)

Just the 1. one in particular. Some examples how to use the format we discussing and some things we want to see in the CDI discussion from the dev side.

Orpheal.8263:

Walls of Text aren’t bad, as long they are clearly formatted, good readable through this and make use of spoilers to blend out text passages of maybe other topics to visually reduce the size of the posting, so that the reader can stay focused on what interests him/her and those things, that saren’t of your personal interest, stay just unopened under their spoiler.

However – I made a few minutes ago just a test for myself with a suggestion concerning the thief to see, if I can put really all of my thoughts together in 150 words and I surprisingly were able to put that off , when I could have gone far more into details xD

Chris actually liked my idea of putting the detailed version of your suggestion behind spoilers.
That’s the way I gonna post my stuff.

Also, 1 wall of text might be enjoyable to read, but if this wall of text grows faster than you can read, I don’t think it would help that much.
Personally, I wont read 100 posts, which each one of the contaning 500+ words.

Orpheal.8263:

• Raise Shortbow Range back to 1200 and raise therefore Longbow Range to 1500.

I wont say I’m against this, actually I’m not. But the ranger can trait his longbow to shot further, which has to be increased also. Would we end up having 1800 range minimum? Might be too much.

RyuDragnier.9476:

For the changes on the pet shouts, Guard will give protect to allies within the circle, knockback enemies who try to go into it and block projectiles. Search and Rescue will do as it does now while giving regen and curing a condition on the person the pet is trying to rez. Protect Me will make you invulnerable for 4 seconds, but in return you are unable to attack during that time. Sic’Em…maybe giving more power to the F1 ability to use it as a burst.

Nice idea but no shout would be able to knock your enemies back. That’s quite unrealistic.

Orpheal.8263:

I doubt hard, that anything like what Chris proposed will be heard by the most people, once the official CDI Thread is tommorrow or friday there…

I myself have too many things up my mind, to be hold back by a nonsensical 150 word limit. Classes are a extreme complex topic, you can’t talk about them and make poroposals on just 150 words… Unneccessary World Limiots lead only into way more unneccessary circumventions of the limit.

People need to make examples to describe better and easier things, especially when its related to Skills, Traits and other Class Mechanics about which we WILL definetely talk here significantly, because I absolutely think, that the Ranger is among the Thief the class, which needs a complete redesign in regard of their Skills, Traits and especially class specific mechanics.

That’s why we have the CDI Format Proposal. Constitute your concerns and give some helpfull suggestions related to the format. If everyone starts to post walls of text we wont get any attention.

It would be nice if the initial post in the ranger CDI could sum up the thoughts the devs had when they designed the ranger so we can base our suggestions on those thoughts.
Personally I don’t want to change the overall classdesign but improve those bits who aren’t performing that well right now.
Anyhow, it would be extreme helpfull if you, the devs, could outline the efforts you are about to do to fix the pets. There are a lot of suggestions from simply removing the pet up to switching the control of the pet to the client side, which would be a lot of coding to be done.

insanemaniac.2456:

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

insanemaniac.2456:

are detailed, exact, comprehensive suggestions what the devs are looking to get out of the CDI? i cant imagine yall need us to tell you more than “xxxx sucks because of ____” with maybe some kind of general suggestion for direction.

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

I’ve counted the words of my suggestion regarding ranger shouts. It’s 643 words long. And that’s the suggestion alone! 200 words wont be enough. :’(

perhaps you need to cut back on detail. like dont propose any numbers. distill your ideas.

This is my suggestion I’m reffering to.
I don’t think I could cut something, atleast not that much to get below 200 words.

here:

shouts in general dont do enough.

- search and rescue has great functionality, but i often end up sacrificing my pet and utility cd to aoes without getting a rez
- guard and protect me are blatantly underpowered and need reworks
- sic em is situational, but using it as a preventative measure is weak and allowing it to be a countermeasure would give it a much nicer niche
- RaO and HaO have effects similar to what id expect from a shout, but they dont have a traitable classification

this is only 90 words. you have room to add more and youve explained how shouts are bad and a little of what youd like to see from a rework. making tons of suggestions for added functionality isnt necessary and clutters up your point.

Thanks for summing my thoughts up quite nicely.
I might use this for an outline but still consider to post my whole suggestion behind a spoiler.

Would be nice if you could release the new CDI’s a little bit earlier tomorrow. It’s 1am here now.

firelightx.3980:

Okay, suddenly I really like the idea of replacing pets with preperations as the class mechanic. Just an F1 through 4 that affects our weapon skills in some way, by providing secondary effects. Perhaps one of those preparations can be the pet, itself. And when the pet it out, replace it with the pet’s usable skill.

F1 – Ingite Arrows (like Flame Legion Stalker can)
F2 – Poisoned Arrows
F3 – Sharpening Stone Arrows
F4 – Bilinding Arrows
Each effect holds for 5 shots or 5 seconds. Would be cool but I doubt it would happen.

Swagg.9236:

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

You are not fleshing out GW2. Guild Wars 2 is already fleshed out since 1 year and a half. While not everything is perfect, it works (somehow).

“Somehow working” isn’t exactly stellar. That’s why I’m here.

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

You on the other hand want to change the whole gameplay. You are fleshing out your own game

GW2 is the square peg that ANet is trying to fit into the circle slot. GW2 is a strange, unique game that doesn’t necessarily play like a traditional MMO. Despite this, ANet has chosen to introduce mechanics into GW2 that clearly belong in a more traditional MMO with things like dedicated healers; or just ignore some obvious boundary rules when it comes to designing combat without a dedicated healer/damage-mitigation class present.

I’m here to help shave the edges off of the square peg.

From your perspective it’s a square peg. For me, it’s a rather fun game to play, which needs polish but no overhaul. You are fleshing out a whole new game based on your opinion that this game is unbalanced from scratch while I do think this game is basically in a good state.

Fext.3614:

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

I do not want to get punished for my pet beeing killed. Also, if I’m downed, why the heck should my pet get punished? It’s not like our pet could kill an enemy to get us back up or even heal us (downed skill 3).
That’s a stupid idea.

No, it’s not a stupid idea.
The pet becomes your extension (as it should be) so letting it die shall hurt you… a lot. A true beastmaster must be one with his pet and shall keep the pet alive though the whole fight. When the pet dies it must be a significant loss, something you want to avoid.

No, I don’t want to play beastmaster, I want to play archer. My pet dies in AoE’s in splitseconds and I get punished for that?
Also, no other class gets punished for using their skills incorrectly other than having cd.
If this would be implemented I would want my money back because that’s not for what I’ve paid for.

Sol.4310:

Question Allie, there seems to be bit of Confussion between the Ranger’s on where we should be posting the CDI for the Ranger Balance Idea’s.

I think would be best if new clean topic was started and the Title along the lines "Ranger CDI Balance.

Currently I’m seeing posts allover the place and players saying not to post here and there.

It has not even started!
They will launch a new thread tomottow.

insanemaniac.2456:

are detailed, exact, comprehensive suggestions what the devs are looking to get out of the CDI? i cant imagine yall need us to tell you more than “xxxx sucks because of ____” with maybe some kind of general suggestion for direction.

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

I’ve counted the words of my suggestion regarding ranger shouts. It’s 643 words long. And that’s the suggestion alone! 200 words wont be enough. :’(

perhaps you need to cut back on detail. like dont propose any numbers. distill your ideas.

This is my suggestion I’m reffering to.
I don’t think I could cut something, atleast not that much to get below 200 words.

I’ve counted the words of my suggestion regarding ranger shouts. It’s 643 words long. And that’s the suggestion alone! 200 words wont be enough. :’(

A solution would be, if we are allowed to use spoilers.
Give a general outline for everybody to read and hide the detailed stuff behind spoilers.

Estriella Faerie.4029:

150 words is way too low to express all you’re talking about. Your first post, which contains almost nothing, is already at 129 words.
It’s impossible to express and give arguments about a problem, and then propose a solution, with such a short post.

That are exactly my concerns too

Chrispy.5641:

150-200 words…..Darn,..no more walls of text….
…..Actually, I’m totally okay with that!

I can remember you where one of these guys posting walls of text.

Does this format apply to all CDI’s?
In my opionion it wont really fit to the ranger CDI for example.
If I look at the proposals that have been delivered so far, most of them can’t be displayed within a 150 word count.

Fenrir.6183:

Yeah, it’s 9pm here.
Also, i said “then today” but maybe you can’t read more than 5 words…

It’s 9pm for me too, but still just 11am for them. Unlikely that they will start within the next hour.

Swagg.9236:

Chrispy.5641:

In every thread before this, people accused Swagg of being a warrior lover. Now reading this thread, people are finally realizing its not the case. Its kind of funny….

It’s just that everyone reads their own profession’s changes and ignores the rest of them. The whole game needs changes, and most people cry and wail without even grasping the full context of the baseline rules that go into fleshing out a game like Guild Wars 2.

You are not fleshing out GW2. Guild Wars 2 is already fleshed out since 1 year and a half. While not everything is perfect, it works (somehow). You on the other hand want to change the whole gameplay. You are fleshing out your own game, but please, let the devs do their job and you can give some suggestions or feedback.

Fext.3614:

Sort pets into 3 main groups, tanks, healers and dps.

Generic: if a pet is killed, ranger takes considerable damage and stun. The pet suffers from the same effect when ranger is downed. OTOH every healing ranger performs affect the pet as well by default. Pet can be also healed by aoe or targeted heals of other team members.

I do not want to get punished for my pet beeing killed. Also, if I’m downed, why the heck should my pet get punished? It’s not like our pet could kill an enemy to get us back up or even heal us (downed skill 3).
That’s a stupid idea.

Fenrir.6183:

Supposed to be created monday…then today and still not up.

Read:

CDI collaboration got delayed guys and got moved on wednesday.

It’s soon to be 11am in Seattle so be patient.

Fenrir.6183:

thefantasticg.3984:

Not mostly, it is completely from the mob AI as stated already in another CDI thread. It’s just be slightly modified.

I repeat: the Ranger will not get better until the pet situation is fixed.

What i meant is…it can’t be fixed. It’s a game engine issue and it would require a lot of work…much more than they can do since it could cause major bugs to the rest of the game. I haven’t seen the code of course but i’m pretty sure it’s much more difficult than most people believe it would be.

Every pet is using the mob AI engine. Someone has to implement a better AI and another one has to redirect the links. Done.
A little bit more challenging would be, if you want to switch the petAi to the clientside but it’s not impossible and it would greatly improve the effectiveness of the pet.

Kaiyanwan.8521:

GW2 went down from 81 mio in Q4 2012 to 23.1 mio in Q4 2013.

Yeah, that could happen if you release a game in Q4 2012. There wont be so much people left to buy the game after one year.

Well ANet has said, that you can play your class the way you want. The only class who is matching this statement is the warrior. However in my estimation, if you would raise all classes to the level of the warrior, all classes would become some sort of powerhouse, which would turn PvP into onehit kill battles, which obviously wouldn’t be funny. It would be way easier to tone the warrior down a bit instead of buffing all other classes.

thefantasticg.3984:

That’s what is going to happen… which is why I suggested renaming this thread…

True dat. I bet we will hit the first 100 posts within the first hour and minimum 5 will be from me.

Sol.4310:

Carighan.6758:

I have just one request, even though I know that for the forum population – which seems extremely specialized compared to the general playerbase ingame – this is going to be highly unpopular:

Please don’t base balancing decisions on sPvP.

It is a much too specialized and “quirky” game mode. It doesn’t reflect the kind of combat which comes up in both WvW and PvE, it lacks anti-structure combat, it lacks logistics, it has it’s own set of items and rules. It’s not at all a representative game mode, and should be last-priority (IMO) behind PvE, smallscale (dungeon) PvE, WvW combat and WvW material warfare (no specific order between those).

I understand that it often seems on the forums that sPvP is the game mode or something. But ingame it really doesn’t feel like many players actually play sPvP. And it worries me that this playerbase seems to “camp the forums”, so to say, making the forum opinion seems drastically different from what is experienced ingame when talking to players.

Please don’t base balance in such a vocal minority.

What you just said is like someone whom only does SPvP coming to the forums and saying the same thing but changing where you put PvE and WvW with SPvP and TPvP.

Also you should take the time to read some of the idea’s us SPvP players are putting forward, if you look closely they greatly increase viability of Rangers in both PvE and WvW. Allot of us Ranger’s whom play SPvP have spent allot of time in both WvW and PvE. Speaking from personal exp, I’ve done more WvW then I have SPvP………

Edit: Also you rarely ever see the balance dev’s taking any idea’s or input from the player base and using them. Only input I’ve seen them take are things like make Spirit’s viable. Pet’s do to much damage. Normally they look at what people think and come up with there own ideas.

Fact is, that the shortbow recieved some PvP related nerfs which makes him to a really pitiful dps weapon in PvE.

thefantasticg.3984:

Can we just rename this thread to be the CDI thread?

Or we just all gonna copy paste this thread into the new CDI.

Greatsword

The Greatsword has an acceptable damageoutput and kitingability. However, it could still use some tweaks to get on the same level damagewise as the sword is currently .
So here are my suggestions:

Greatsword #1-3:
Should hit 5 instead of 3 targets at the same time. I mean, wtf, it’s a Greatsword.
Greatsword #3:
It was suggested in an earlier CDI thread that the evade from GS #1 should be moved to GS #3. However, there are different opinions about this:
Pros:

• On-demand evade
• Autoattack chain could be quickened to increase the damageoutput

Cons:

• GS #3 already serves as closeup/getaway. You had to decide if you want to use Swoop either to evade or to stick to/flee from your target.

Greatsword #4
Should be tweaked, so your character will block until either the skill expires after 3 seconds or you activate the skill a second time after you blocked an attack to knock the enemy back. No more autoknockback, which could root you unintentionally while performing the animation.

Paulie.6215:

THIS IS THE WRONG THREAD. STOP POSTING IDEAS HERE.

BUMP!!!!!!!!!!!

Fenrir.6183:

drazhen.9307:

You should re-read what I suggest – by giving up on gs evade on #1, you’re getting evades on both #3 and #4(counter-attack is more of a self-stun when it happens right now). Also, you still get the same duration on block, I think you didnt really read/understand and stopped at what you dislike, see the full picture.

Spamming #1 for random evades is not what I consider a good design, however 2 evades on demand would be very welcome, and I feel it is the direction the game have to go for every mode, less random, spammy and passive stuff, dont you agree?

(I edited my post to mention your opinion about GS#1)

Switch to sword if you want “on demand” evade. GS is one of the best ranger weapons right now…

Sword evade isn’t on-demand for most times simply because either the autoattack chain or the clunky animation on Serpent’s Strike hinders you to evade properly.

Elrey.5472:

They are in Orr, and since Lion’s Arch people didn’t think they would be attacked again, they didn’t bothered in asking for help. So if they come, i guess they’d come late.

Wouldn’t be epic LAME if they ask for help now, the pact comes from orr, a dragon appears in Lion’s arch and the pact kill it same way as they killed zhaitan? xD i would be LOL’ING for a year.

Actually, they’re still in Orr because they’re still fighting Zhaitan. Short reminder: The open world PvE takes place just before we kill Zhaitan in Arah story mode.
Tricky little time paradoxon there.

jcbroe.4329:

Aegael.6938:

jcbroe.4329:

For the pets, I see that people are citing examples which all are examples of either:

• reliability
• damage output
• survivability

Truthfully, for the purposes of balance, a pet AI can’t have an equal output of these three things combined, because in PvP and WvW, it would make the pet an autopilot damage option which could be much too powerful.

Then I’d like it if we could pick what we wanted when we were choosing from a pet. Right now it’s really rare to have any of those.

I’m in total agreement. I think the ideal system would be to allow ranger to choose whether their pets function as heavy damage dealers and then range to as far as zero damage boon tanks or damage/aggro soakers.

Don’t we have them already? Thinking of bears vs. cats/birds. They’re just not very successful until now in what they do.

Stogzlol.4795:

Dave Pare.2069:

PART 3

WEAPONS: there are 2 weapons that really need to be looked at and improved, Longbow and Greatsword, these are my suggestions:

LONGBOW:
*1 (Long range shot): adding a few more damages at max range (1000+) would be nice (10-20%?) or maybe the Cripple condi. on a successful hit.

I seriously hope you’re joking. Cripple on auto attack is an absurd idea.

Oh I could name you a few weapons who are already absurd in your estimation.
So I see no problem there.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

Dos.7052:

please support chinese font input in eu/us clients ( both simplified and traditional), since there is no “asian servers” , there are many players from taiwan, Hongkong and mainland of china even Chinese students aboard play at eu/us server, but gw2 dosen’t support chinese input (both simplified and traditional) quite well.

it is not a difficult issue, please support chinese language input so more player will benefit from the change.

thank you very much.

American is the official language of GW2.

There is no language called American. lol.

LarzoSk.5412:

Hello! There is too much post so sorry if someone mentioned this before me.

[…]

The old shouts could remain the same but i think they are more commands than shouts.
They could be in new group with new traits.

Some new trap what remove boons/conditions will be nice.
I just want every class in organised WvW groups not only heavy + some eles and necros + veilbot(mesmer).

I’ve made some suggstions to shouts myself (see here), but I do like yours too. They would give the ranger some offensive buff potential (beside passive or pet reliant buffs).

Wetpaw.3487:

Clearly a few baddies got tossed off some cliffs sparta like by some LB Ranger =) . By no means lets blame the hammer Guard, mes GS, etc..

and amusing how some players ( like above) are under the assumption we (Ranger) care if we’re in your groups….the reward/end result is the same.

Point Blank Shot is fine, l2p.

This, unbeaten in ignorance.
How often can you kick an enemy off a cliff? (Hint: 0 times in PvE) and how often does you just kick the enemy around unintentionally?
The knockback offer some advantages but also lots of disadvantages. I do like the root suggestion tho.

Since this post is about 8 pages long, there must be a ton of bad gankers out there…

Rym.1469:

Julie Yann.5379:

Aggrostemma.1703:

Do you autokick every profession what has access to knockback?

If those other professions had the same % of aweful skill spammers I would but that isn’t the case. Out of all the pug groups that I have run with, LB rangers are the worst for spamming all their CD, I don’t waste time trying to educate them anymore.

When your only PvE reliable skill on most popular weapons like Sword, Longbow or Shortbow is autoattack under 1, you understand that player behind Ranger may want to be more… Active? And press some other button. Sadly, it’s no-no, because it breaks stacking.

While he may be a bit overbearing, his point is right:
The knockback will just comes in handy if you’re solo and you don’t intent to switch weapons soon. Since PvE, or dungeons atleast, center around teamplay, the skill is just worth de-stacking defiant stacks on champs. It should be a root with a short daze, so you could still get rid of the defiant stacks but not pushing the enemy all over the place.

jcbroe.4329:

Kain Francois.4328:

Hmm… I would like to see the Ranger borrow more from the Ritualist. Afterall, it’s not like we can’t already call down lightning bolts upon our foes.

I would absolutely love to see this, especially after such amazing builds like R/Rt spirit spammer and splinter barrage. Just letting you know I agree and +1

Hell, I don’t know…
I feel like the devs had spend lots of time before release working out a concept for the ranger. While some ideas (maybe lots of them) haven’t worked out as intended, I still think that the underlaying concept is fine. Your suggestions, despite them beeing good ones, would change the whole class mechanic and turn the ranger into another class, which he wasn’t intended to be in the first place.

Rednik.3809:

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

Flash news, noone cares about your PvP assesssments.

So PvE-r talking about speed? Lol, ask devs for WP ban then.

This ignorance really blows my mind. >.>
The travelspeed may be no issue in PvP. It is indeed an issue in WvW. So if you wont contribute more than “lol WvW suxs”, I would kindly ask you to leave this thread.

phaeris.7604:

Pvp is about capping nodes and getting to your teammates as quickly as possible to make a 2v2 into a 2v3 so winning the fight.

1. If you can target an enemy, you will still be as fast as you are now.
2. Even if you can’t target someone, you wont be a sitting duck or slow as hell. I don’t think warriors would become “unplayable”.
3. If it turns out, that I’m wrong, you could still separate PvP from PvE/WvW.

Rednik.3809:

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

This tread is about the time, the warrior needs to get from A to B, not about your sense of effective combat.

Flash news – PvP IS about combat, and no one cares about speed if you are useless. Oh, with one exception – bad wvw gankers.

Flash news, noone cares about your PvP assesssments.

Julie Yann.5379:

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

Rednik.3809:

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

So,
Greatsword #5 should require a target.
Sword #2 has doubled cooldown if no enemy is targeted.
And we’re all happy.

Who is “we”? 0.5 unskilled wvw gankers?

What do you want to prove, exept your slight absence of intelligence?

Nerfing Savage leap you severely hurt any none GS builds that don’t have a crazy amount of mobility to begin with. Just leave it. The culprit here is the CD on GS 5. Make changes to GS 5 like they did to RTL and the problem will be solved.

As I’ve suggested, Savage Leap will just get hit by the long cooldown if you haven’t targeted an enemy. So, yes, you wont travel as fast around the map as you’re used to right now. Thats the mindset behind this change. But you wont be hurt in cloding up to a target.
Seriously, 8 seconds is a extreme short cooldown for a leap, 16 seconds will be still not exorbitant long. Alternatively you could just increase the cooldown to 12 seconds.
But I still consider Savage Leap as a little bit too spammy.

Julie Yann.5379:

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

Rednik.3809:

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

So,
Greatsword #5 should require a target.
Sword #2 has doubled cooldown if no enemy is targeted.
And we’re all happy.

Who is “we”? 0.5 unskilled wvw gankers?

What do you want to prove, exept your slight absence of intelligence?

Nerfing Savage leap you severely hurt any none GS builds that don’t have a crazy amount of mobility to begin with. Just leave it. The culprit here is the CD on GS 5. Make changes to GS 5 like they did to RTL and the problem will be solved.

As I’ve suggested, Savage Leap will just get hit by the long cooldown if you haven’t targeted an enemy. So, yes, you wont travel as fast around the map as you’re used to right now. Thats the mindset behind this change. But you wont be hurt in closing up to a target.
Seriously, 8 seconds is a extreme short cooldown for a leap, 16 seconds will be still not exorbitant long.