Guild Wars 2

Of the Tabletop, and other, lesser varieties.

Moderators: SecondTalon, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Izawwlgood » Sat Sep 29, 2012 1:05 pm UTC

Lucrece wrote:Look to a build with crippling dissipation trait from the domination traitline

An utterly fantastic trait that doesn't appear to apply when I shatter or replace my clones. Only when they are killed by the enemy. Scepter spam doesn't seem to apply a debuff on clone replacement.

I respecced a bit to use debillitating dissipation and it has the same issue. Side question; the trait Malicious Sorcery grants +50 malice when wielding a scepter, but the scepter main attack doesn't debuff. Does the +50 apply when you've swapped to a secondary weapon set, or do you only get the +50 when you have the scepter out?

Lucrece wrote:If you can coordinate with teammates, the mesmer's Warden Feedback trait on the inspiration line gives you reflection on your focus ability

I was wondering how this works; does that mean Temporal Curtain also reflects? The Warden's ability is to apply a reflect, so I'm not sure why this trait is terribly useful?
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Lucrece » Sat Sep 29, 2012 1:43 pm UTC

There are a lot of bugs wi the traits right now, but I've seen it work with the scepter WHEN it works. Make sure to report, as clone death includes replacement. The more people that report the bugs, the faster we get fixes.

As for Feedback, yes, it gives temporal curtain reflection. So you got 20% off cooldowns on the wonderful warden and Temporal Curtain+Into The Void, on top of the shortest cooldown reflection line in the game. No other skill will give you projectile reflection on that length of duration and short a cooldown, in addition to timing near its end a mass interrupt magnet pull. That magnet pull is so crutch for surviving those pesky mobs that want to kick your teeth in.

P.S. only when wielding the set. Malice is a terrible stat anyways since condition damage is among the worst stats in the game -- the damage scaling of +condition damage is extremely low, so stacking it is often inefficient compared to just going for power, precision, and condition duration.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Izawwlgood » Sat Sep 29, 2012 1:59 pm UTC

I noticed that condition damage for each condition is only like 5-20% of the 'condition damage' stat? Or maybe it was the malice stat. So lame. Does power apply to condition damage?

Feedback is my new favorite Utility skill, since it acts as an Ethereal combo field that will also proc on enemy reflection. Heh. Reflect AND confuse when YOU shoot?

I assume the magnetic pull is considered an interrupt? There are a bunch of great trait procs at interrupt.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Lucrece » Sat Sep 29, 2012 11:28 pm UTC

Feedback is a really underrated skill, especially in PvE. Reflection in general is immensely useful in many parts of the game.

The magnet pull is considered an interrupt, yes. Any ability that stops another from going off is treated as an interrupt by the game. I'm less keen on traiting for interrupts, though, since the uptime of interrupts isn't that high to justify the traits imo.

Power does not affect condition damage, but it affects the direct damage part of many abilities that apply conditions. Power scaling just dwarfs Malice, unfortunately. The reason why conditions haven't fallen behind due to slower scaling is thanks to the game's power plateus, meaning that the skills stay close to their base damage at the current max values, and conditions are still strong enough to stay relevant, if not outright powerful despite lack of scaling. But, for stat investment, other stats simply give way more bang for their buck than Malice.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Izawwlgood » Mon Oct 01, 2012 4:25 am UTC

The traits that causes things to happen when illusions are killed seems really buggy. They sometimes procs with illusion replacement, sometimes doesn't, and certainly don't proc with shattering.

Condition heavy staff builds are hilarious with 3 Clones and Illusionary Elasticity. Bounce ALL the purple spheres!
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Lucrece » Mon Oct 01, 2012 5:50 pm UTC

Illusionary Elasticity is stupidly strong on staff and greatsword. With a shatter vulnerability build featuring sword/sword and greatsword, I can maintain solo stacks of about 15-20 vulnerability by myself, in addition to the might stacks from mirrored blade. It's really fun and useful for dungeons, especially during Time Warp, where bosses will melt.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Izawwlgood » Mon Oct 01, 2012 8:21 pm UTC

Yeah, with elasticity I opted for staff/greatsword, as I was thinking that mirror blade and Winds of Chaos both have group benefits as well. Truthfully though, I'm starting to dislike how rapidly I generate and shatter Illusions, given that Phantasms are on a pretty slow RoF.

They really need to fix Phantasm behavior to increase their attack or ability activation rates. It sucks so much to summon a phantasm, watch it for 8-10s, and then realize you have to shatter it before it's done anything.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Lucrece » Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:05 pm UTC

For PVP reasons phantasms outside illusionary mage won't see a buff, since with phantasmal haste, fury, and the relevant damage traits, the iswordsman is critting for almost 7k damage and similarly so for the iwarlock.

Normally I summon a phantasm, have him fire his volley, and then shatter. With the relevant cooldown traits in illusions and traits in dueling or chaos or inspiration you get the weapon proficiency traits which reduce weaponskills even more, so phantasms can be resummoned fairly quickly.

They still need to work on phantasm ai, though. It is often that which is at fault for erratic rate of fire.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Izawwlgood » Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:54 am UTC

See, this is precisely why I wish more stats were available for the game. While I dig that the games not about DPS crunching, I'd love to know at the end of a stretch of time how people ranked in terms of 'most buffs applied' or 'most conditions applied' or 'most interrupts' or total damage etc.

The tooltips on Phantasms is way off; my iWarlock says it does ~51 damage compared to the iBerserker which says it does about 300, but yeah, I often see the warlock hitting for ~600-700 damage (I'm currently lvl 45). It would be nice to know how these different abilities compare.

Of course, I can't imagine the nightmare that would be tracking 'total heals' or 'total damage' given any sort of level discrepancy and buffs/debuffs.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

Zcorp
Posts: 1255
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 3:14 am UTC

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Zcorp » Tue Oct 02, 2012 8:01 am UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:I noticed that condition damage for each condition is only like 5-20% of the 'condition damage' stat? Or maybe it was the malice stat. So lame. Does power apply to condition damage?

Bleed DPS per stack | 2.5 + Level/2 + Condition Damage/20
Poison DPS | Level + CD/10
Burn DPS | 4.1 * Level + CD/4
Confusion DP Instance | 25 + Level/2 + CD/13.33

Retaliation is the only thing that scales with Power. Which seems to be, at lvl 80, ~180 + Power/13.

See, this is precisely why I wish more stats were available for the game.

Yeah the lack of transparency, terrible and inaccurate tooltips as well as frequency of bugs makes it nearly impossible for someone who hasn't spent time tracking all of this down to know what their skills actually do.

This has to be one of the least polished large releases I've ever seen, their 'when its ready' moto must of lost out to finances. Really unfortunate, was really looking forward to this game.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Izawwlgood » Thu Oct 11, 2012 1:51 am UTC

Zcorp wrote:This has to be one of the least polished large releases I've ever seen, their 'when its ready' moto must of lost out to finances. Really unfortunate, was really looking forward to this game.

I really disagree with this assessment. I know there are parts of the game that feel incomplete, and some bugs that prevent you from wrapping up some of the top tier stuff, but nothing I've really gotten to in four classes and approximately 50% of the map completion feels remotely unpolished.

I'm absolutely in love with everything about my mesmer. The play style, the options available to me, the vibe. It took me a little bit of pondering before it clicked, but I also really like how in any given map area, everyone is the same level. This means that if I bounce Mirror Blade, which applies stacks of might to allies it hits, hitting allies or hitting myself mostly amounts to the same thing.

This game does a fantastic job of making a party into a cohesive solid. An elementalist can heal by dropping stacks of regen or by using water spells that directly heal, but that's no more or less beneficial than a guardian using the shield cone attack that puts an Aegis (or Protection? Can't recall) on every ally it hits, and no more or less beneficial than my mesmer putting a refreshing Aegis on the group with Chaos Storm. This game is fucking awesome.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Lucrece » Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:43 pm UTC

Have you done Weyandt's Revenge in Lion's Arch? It was so fucking amazing, feeling like I was in Orlando (FL)'s Island of Adventures theme park. No other MMO offers environmental puzzles and atmospheric dialogue like this MMO does. No MMO has running conversations and world object interactions that make the world feel as alive and filled with lore and mystery as this MMO does. They have a LOT of goodies for explorers.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

User avatar
Menacing Spike
Posts: 2982
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:25 pm UTC
Location: Fighting the Zombie.

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Menacing Spike » Fri Nov 16, 2012 8:11 pm UTC

Anyone got spare free trial invites for a filthy beggar?

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5402
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby mosc » Tue Nov 27, 2012 10:35 pm UTC

Did we get one with our purchase? If so I haven't used mine yet. I couldn't get into GW2. It's just a shitty ripoff MMO at it's core and so little of GW1 remains that the contrast makes it even more off putting. I'm done with MMO's. They just have repetitive and kiddy pool shallow gameplay. The entire genre is designed around being addictive, not entertaining.
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Izawwlgood » Tue Nov 27, 2012 11:24 pm UTC

Which is funny that you didn't like GW2 then, given how storyline driven it is and how minimal the grind and end game is.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
yurell
Posts: 2924
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:19 am UTC
Location: Australia!

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby yurell » Tue Nov 27, 2012 11:59 pm UTC

mosc wrote:The entire genre is designed around being addictive, not entertaining.


You don't find it entertaining, therefore it mustn't be designed for entertainment?
cemper93 wrote:Dude, I just presented an elaborate multiple fraction in Comic Sans. Who are you to question me?


Pronouns: Feminine pronouns please!

User avatar
Kag
Posts: 1214
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:56 am UTC

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Kag » Wed Nov 28, 2012 12:18 am UTC

mosc wrote:The entire genre is designed around being addictive, not entertaining.


That's a great way to not make any money when you don't have a subscription model.
The Great Hippo wrote:I am starting to regret having used 'goat-fucker' in this context.

Zcorp
Posts: 1255
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 3:14 am UTC

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Zcorp » Wed Nov 28, 2012 6:20 am UTC

mosc wrote: I couldn't get into GW2. It's just a shitty ripoff MMO at it's core and so little of GW1 remains that the contrast makes it even more off putting. I'm done with MMO's. They just have repetitive and kiddy pool shallow gameplay.

It really is unfortunate, there are so few games coming out now a days that I look forward to and this was one of them. Their designers botched every single one of their pvp goals. Not clue why they still have jobs really. When you read their descriptions of what they wanted combo fields to be and then look at what they implemented you can't do anything but scratch your head in wonder. Then they had the goal of making Retaliation short duration and more meaningful damage return and it ends up being possible to keep it up constantly and the damage per hit is significant but greatly misses the mark of their goal.

These are just two example of them failing to implement what they say they are going to, and the changes they have made since release suggest they don't have any understanding of their game flow problems.

This game was such a massive disappointment.

User avatar
Xenomortis
Not actually a special flower.
Posts: 1448
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 8:47 am UTC

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Xenomortis » Wed Nov 28, 2012 6:51 pm UTC

It's much easier to understand why GW2 is a shitty PvP game if you believe ArenaNet never intended it to be a PvP game.
ArenaNet made a good PvP game once, but they didn't know how to support it. They also quickly realised that the PvE aspect of that game was a lot more popular and here we are today.


Kag wrote:
mosc wrote:The entire genre is designed around being addictive, not entertaining.


That's a great way to not make any money when you don't have a subscription model.

It is when you have an in-game store.

Zcorp wrote:Their designers botched every single one of their pvp goals. Not clue why they still have jobs really.

ANet have a long history of this, extending right back to the start of Guild Wars 1.


Guild Wars 1 was an ambitious game. It was unlike anything else at the time.
Guild Wars 2 is not ambitious. It is safe, it has Dragons and pretty girls with jiggle physics. It is pretty and overall, well presented. It doesn't do anything new.

GW1 was orders of magnitude more interesting, more deep, than GW2. It's the better game. But it did not lend itself to PvE, a direction the developers tried to push it in so very hard. It's also dead, or so close as to make no difference.
Image

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Izawwlgood » Wed Nov 28, 2012 6:59 pm UTC

I... can only kind of scratch my head in befuddlement at how off the mark you guys are. Have you PvP'd at all in this game, or payed attention to combo fields? GW1 is order of magnitudes LESS involved and interesting than GW2.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
Amnesiasoft
Posts: 2573
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 4:28 am UTC
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Amnesiasoft » Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:20 pm UTC

Xenomortis wrote:GW1 was orders of magnitude more interesting, more deep, than GW2. It's the better game. But it did not lend itself to PvE, a direction the developers tried to push it in so very hard. It's also dead, or so close as to make no difference.

Uh... what. The Guild Wars 1 PvE was a lot better than Guild Wars 2's (I mean, seriously, who thought The Huntsman fight in Honor of the Waves story mode was a good idea?). I'd say Guild Wars 2's PvP was four thousand times better than the first game's, but four thousand times zero is still zero.

User avatar
Aaeriele
Posts: 2127
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 3:30 am UTC
Location: San Francisco, CA

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Aaeriele » Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:30 pm UTC

Amnesiasoft wrote:I'd say Guild Wars 2's PvP was four thousand times better than the first game's, but four thousand times zero is still zero.


Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.....

What PvP did you do in GW1, that you would describe it as "zero"?
Vaniver wrote:Harvard is a hedge fund that runs the most prestigious dating agency in the world, and incidentally employs famous scientists to do research.

afuzzyduck wrote:ITS MEANT TO BE FLUTTERSHY BUT I JUST SEE AAERIELE! CURSE YOU FORA!

User avatar
Xenomortis
Not actually a special flower.
Posts: 1448
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 8:47 am UTC

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Xenomortis » Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:32 pm UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:I... can only kind of scratch my head in befuddlement at how off the mark you guys are. Have you PvP'd at all in this game, or payed attention to combo fields? GW1 is order of magnitudes LESS involved and interesting than GW2.


Have you played Guild Wars 1?
Have you seen Monks fake out casts against the threat of interrupts from Mesmers or Rangers so they can get the seconds required to cast Aegis?
Have you seen certain victories go awry due to a single decision?
Do you know what Frenzy is?

Or if you've only done the PvE:
Do you know why Mark of Pain is the most powerful Necromancer skill in the game?

GW1's GvG was far from flawless; it had its faults.
Similarly, the basic mechanics of GW2 certainly have potential, I just think ANet don't know how to exploit that.

Amnesiasoft wrote:Uh... what. The Guild Wars 1 PvE was a lot better than Guild Wars 2's (I mean, seriously, who thought The Huntsman fight in Honor of the Waves story mode was a good idea?). I'd say Guild Wars 2's PvP was four thousand times better than the first game's, but four thousand times zero is still zero.


I made no comment on GW2's PvE and certainly did not compare it to GW1's.

P.S.
Random Arenas does not count as PvP.
Image

User avatar
Amnesiasoft
Posts: 2573
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 4:28 am UTC
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Amnesiasoft » Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:36 pm UTC

Aaeriele wrote:What PvP did you do in GW1, that you would describe it as "zero"?

Let's see, I did Alliance Battles, Random Arenas, Codex Arenas, Hero Battles, Jade Quarry, and Fort Aspenwood. I didn't do Guild vs Guild, Heroes' Ascent, or Team Arena. My experience with the other PvP modes doesn't give me any hope that they would have been any fun to play either. So yeah, all my experience with Guild Wars 1 PvP is that it was irredeemably awful.

User avatar
Aaeriele
Posts: 2127
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 3:30 am UTC
Location: San Francisco, CA

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Aaeriele » Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:41 pm UTC

Amnesiasoft wrote:
Aaeriele wrote:What PvP did you do in GW1, that you would describe it as "zero"?

Let's see, I did Alliance Battles, Random Arenas, Codex Arenas, Hero Battles, Jade Quarry, and Fort Aspenwood. I didn't do Guild vs Guild, Heroes' Ascent, or Team Arena. My experience with the other PvP modes doesn't give me any hope that they would have been any fun to play either. So yeah, all my experience with Guild Wars 1 PvP is that it was irredeemably awful.


Okay, so you did basically none of the PvP modes that people who say GW1 PvP was good are actually referring to. There's your problem.

Guild Wars 1 was designed around GvG, and to a lesser extent HA/TA. They were, in fact, extremely fun to play and extremely deep in terms of the tactics and strategy involved, both at a player and team level.

Guild Wars 1 was a team PvP game. It was made for organized teams competing together; the individual/random-matched PvP modes were an aside, not the main affair.
Last edited by Aaeriele on Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:42 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Vaniver wrote:Harvard is a hedge fund that runs the most prestigious dating agency in the world, and incidentally employs famous scientists to do research.

afuzzyduck wrote:ITS MEANT TO BE FLUTTERSHY BUT I JUST SEE AAERIELE! CURSE YOU FORA!

User avatar
Xenomortis
Not actually a special flower.
Posts: 1448
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 8:47 am UTC

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Xenomortis » Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:42 pm UTC

So you (as implicitly predicted) played with random shitters in terrible formats?
Yeah, that's going to leave a bad taste.

GW1's greatest failure was ineffectively transferring players from PvE, or those random formats, into GvG; the PvP mode the game was actually built around.
GvG was very difficult to get into, for several reasons, and it only got harder as the game aged.
Image

User avatar
Kag
Posts: 1214
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:56 am UTC

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Kag » Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:48 pm UTC

That there are a bunch of terrible formats is not particularly to GW1's credit as a game.

That said, organized PvP is definitely cool and fun.
The Great Hippo wrote:I am starting to regret having used 'goat-fucker' in this context.

User avatar
Aaeriele
Posts: 2127
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 3:30 am UTC
Location: San Francisco, CA

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Aaeriele » Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:54 pm UTC

Kag wrote:That there are a bunch of terrible formats is not particularly to GW1's credit as a game.

I personally think Xeno is exaggerating. There are people who enjoyed those formats; I know a lot of people who had fun with Alliance Battles for example. Heck, I had fun with them from time to time.

The point is that those formats weren't what GW1 was designed around; they were added on as extras. Judging the game's PvP off of them would be unfair to the actual core design - sort of like it would be unfair to judge Call of Duty off of its knives-and-pistols-only mode.
Last edited by Aaeriele on Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:58 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Vaniver wrote:Harvard is a hedge fund that runs the most prestigious dating agency in the world, and incidentally employs famous scientists to do research.

afuzzyduck wrote:ITS MEANT TO BE FLUTTERSHY BUT I JUST SEE AAERIELE! CURSE YOU FORA!

User avatar
Amnesiasoft
Posts: 2573
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 4:28 am UTC
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Amnesiasoft » Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:57 pm UTC

Aaeriele wrote:Guild Wars 1 was a team PvP game. It was made for organized teams competing together; the individual/random-matched PvP modes were an aside, not the main affair.

So... all the fun PvP requires the extremely not-fun task of finding 7 other people that I can play with on a relatively consistent schedule? No thanks.

User avatar
Aaeriele
Posts: 2127
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 3:30 am UTC
Location: San Francisco, CA

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Aaeriele » Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:59 pm UTC

Amnesiasoft wrote:
Aaeriele wrote:Guild Wars 1 was a team PvP game. It was made for organized teams competing together; the individual/random-matched PvP modes were an aside, not the main affair.

So... all the fun PvP requires the extremely not-fun task of finding 7 other people that I can play with on a relatively consistent schedule? No thanks.


Okay, but that's you not wanting to participate in it; not a lack of depth. Just because the game's PvP isn't solo PvP doesn't mean it doesn't have PvP. There's a reason the game was called Guild Wars and not Warrior Wars.

(Also there were plenty of pickup GvG/HA/TA groups. Sure, there was still some effort required to find one of them, but it's not like you had to get a consistent schedule going to participate.)
Last edited by Aaeriele on Wed Nov 28, 2012 9:01 pm UTC, edited 2 times in total.
Vaniver wrote:Harvard is a hedge fund that runs the most prestigious dating agency in the world, and incidentally employs famous scientists to do research.

afuzzyduck wrote:ITS MEANT TO BE FLUTTERSHY BUT I JUST SEE AAERIELE! CURSE YOU FORA!

User avatar
Kag
Posts: 1214
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:56 am UTC

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Kag » Wed Nov 28, 2012 9:00 pm UTC

Well, it is called Guild Wars.
The Great Hippo wrote:I am starting to regret having used 'goat-fucker' in this context.

User avatar
Jesse
Vocal Terrorist
Posts: 8635
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 6:33 pm UTC
Location: Basingstoke, England.
Contact:

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Jesse » Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:22 pm UTC

It'd be like bitching that DotA 2 sucks because I can't solo and get a good team every game. Some games are built around the team interplay, and only get really good when you have a consistent group to play with.

User avatar
Gelsamel
Lame and emo
Posts: 8237
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 10:49 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Gelsamel » Sat Apr 06, 2013 4:31 pm UTC

This game was cheap for a while so I bought it. It has a lot of problems, but has been decent fun so far and does some good things.

Fake Difficulty:
Spoiler:
Holy shit this game is big on the fake difficulty. Dungeons are buggy as hell, which adds to it fake difficulty. But then there are bosses which are just complete jokes, you can afk while killing them. Then the next boss will super spam party wiping AoEs without any tells whatsoever and you'll basically be throwing yourself at a brick wall until you finally beat it (especially if you're not a downscaled 80 with awesome gear).

In fact, the absolute lack of tells in dungeons in general is ridiculous. Try Exploratory AC, for example. Spiderqueen lays down AoEs with no tell that put the dot on you instantly and the ring only shows up once the AoE has already been cast (ie. it does not show future AoE spots, it shows active AoE spots). Meaning if it is cast on you, there is absolutely nothing you can do to avoid it, and it takes a 1/3 to a 1/2 of your HP (depending on your hp).

In other instances you'll be walking along and then suddenly there are spikes stabbing through you (does 70% of your hp). But other times it'll be telegraphed with the AoE ring... so it's basically luck whether the game decides to show you the death inducing spike trap or not. Even when you do see the ring, the dungeons are designed so that often you HAVE to go over them, and rolling only works some of the time (either glitches or lag often allows you to be skewered regardless).

Some story missions are absolute jokes, then suddenly you're fighting against waves of 20+ undead, all of which 2 hit you... and your NPC allies who you're supposed to be protecting (in the story) get KO'd instantly and you're left to fight them by yourself, dying over and over, despite being downscaled overleveled.

The balance in this game is just so far out of whack, it's ridiculous.


Platforming:
Spoiler:
And then there is the platforming, what the fuck is wrong with the developers? Do they really think it's a good idea to put platforming in an MMO engine? These type of games are renowned for absolutely terrible platforming. Shitty controls, glitchy collision with the environment, restricted camera angles, etc... Obviously the best spot to put platforming, right?

Hell, in response to criticism one of the jumping puzzle designers said this:

Joshua Foreman wrote:That's fair criticism. I am very aware that MMO's are NOT the best platform (pun intended) for jumping challenges. Physics and camera simply can't be as tight as they can be on a dedicated platform game engine. So our JPs do push the limits where payoff and inherent weakness of the platform are pushing against each other. That's why we didn't make any JPs part of any critical path and only a small part of our content. Thanks for the feedback.


So basically, they know that MMOs are fucking stupid games to put platforming in (that answers my question, I guess)... but they do it anyway. In the same conversation, the developer says that he only expects 5% of the player base to even be able to complete some of the puzzles he makes. Oh, but it's optional content (with awesome rewards that'll put you far ahead of anyone else if you're able to consistantly finish the puzzles) so it's somehow okay that they're designing their game so shittily?


Level progression:
Spoiler:
After level 30 I'm hardly improving my character. I've unlocked all the major advances and it's all just tiny little things from here on... so why is the level cap 80 again? Given that the level cap in GW the first was 20 and you get major additions changes all the way through... I thought they would've done something similar. Instead it's just 50 levels of boring grind with nothing except 'being at endgame' to look forward to. Hell, even before 30 it only takes a level or two to unlock ALL your weapon skills, at which point you've got 50% of what your end level 80 build is going to be anyway. Those never change or get specialised, traits hardly change them.

Generally, the only point of forcing players through the leveling process is to train them to not be shit at the game by the time they max out... so given that we have all major mechanical aspects of our class down by 30... why are we forced into such a huge boring grind of levels?


Visibility
Spoiler:
In general the game has huge visibility problems. Buffs that are really important, like Aegis and Retaliation, while obvious if you're standing still, staring at your character, are pretty difficult to recognise in the heat of battle. The difference between various AoEs with differing effects is often minimal. There are a lot of silhouette and hilighting problems as far as UX considerations go. I'm not sure how they thought a lot of the spell designs were acceptable from a visibility standpoint.


Greatswords:
Spoiler:
Someone, somewhere, told Anet that it is the best idea ever that greatswords be thrown. What the actual fuck. Seriously, every greatsword moveset has a move where you throw the greatsword (either the actual physical greatsword, or some ethereal copy of it). Someone has a throwing-greatsword fetish, someone high up who gets their say in everything. While I could possibly forgive there being a move where a character throws a magical image of the greatsword... the fact that every single moveset has a 'throw the greatsword' move is absolutely unforgivable. It is seriously ridiculous beyond belief.





Now, away from design issues. These are just my personal feelings:
Spoiler:
I found it extremely difficult finding a class that I actually liked. Everyone had things I liked and things I dislike. I really wanted to play a melee class with a spear... but apparently, like every other modern game, spears aren't a thing. Oh wait they are a thing in GW2, but only underwater... wat. Ok, so maybe I can't go around spearing things, despite spears being the best weapon ever and also the most populous historical weapon, fine... I'll go 2h swords then.

I didn't want to go straight warrior and even if I did want to go warrior, the adrenaline idea puts me off it. Guardian has this focus on fire damage that is something you HAVE to spec into if you're going a melee DPS build, no thanks. Lightning would've been tolerable but fire? I hate fire... and elements in general. Ranger HAS to use a pet, no thanks. Thief can't use two handed weapons. Elementalist... I hate elemental magic, no two handed. Necromancers, no two handed. Mesmer, doesn't use two handed greatsword as a melee weapon (in fact, the auto attack looks downright stupid and awkward). Engineer, no melee weapons.

Honestly, with all that variation it was impressive that they managed to force so many aspects I disliked into the classes. In the end the Mesmer and the Engineer were the classes I disliked the least. After hours of playing through all the classes over and over I finally went with Sword/Pistol+Staff Mesmer and it's been alright so far. Level 50 after a few days of playing.

I like that I don't have to accept quests, that is an awesome improvement... but the 'quests' themselves are the same old same old. The story missions are 'better' than the standard way of going about quests, in the sense that it is kind of like going through a singleplayer RPG story. At least I don't feel like skipping all the story straight away. But... without the writing budget that a singleplayer offline RPG would get... the storylines are kinda shit. The bad parts are the recycled excuses (or nonexcuses) used to allow your character to choose various things, like which solution to use, or which person to recruit or whatever. The worse parts are the utter lack of storyline choices, both initially (Sister, Parents or Circus, no human has any other background!) and during the quests (Why is the choice to spare this bad guy made for me? What if my character wants to kill them?). The worst part is just the overall weak, cliche and extremely shallow storyline. But I guess at least I'm not skipping quest text as much?

By the way... what actually happened to my sister? I have not seen her again and there was almost no reference to it ever again (there is one line you say to the frog when explaining your feats, but that is ultimately a single flag they have to use to change a single string). Seems like my background choice basically didn't matter. I'll be super pissed if she doesn't show up later to help me.

PvP seems like it might be fun, though I've not tried sPvP yet... and WvW is mostly numbers (plus a bit of strategy) and my server never has the numbers (still it can be enjoyable). I'm hoping it is fun otherwise leveling this character might just be a waste of fucking time.

All in all, I'm actually surprised I have as many criticisms as I do. I mean TERA is a freakin' kMMO that came out of nowhere and yet in the end (despite being way too grindy) it is extremely well designed and smooth, fluid, with little to no bugs or balance or progression issues. All the design had great silhouettes and contrast. Every fight was completely fair, there was little to no fake difficulty. Soloing BAMs was "real" (as opposed to "fake") difficult and if you died you knew what you did wrong and could practice to fix it. So, going into a game that is the sequel to an MMO that was already established as being successful I wasn't expecting so many glaring design issues.




As a complete aside (talk about MMO concepts in general):
Spoiler:
At some point during gameplay I got a potion that turned me into a slime, it was the best thing ever. Why are all the races in every (AAA) MMO just reskinned humans who have a culture that is focused on a specific subset of our real life culture? I mean... I know why... because it's the lazy, easy way to get people to easily relate to and understand the culture and the characters... and every lazy fantasy writer does it. But where is my AAA MMO where I can play as a SLIME who can only communicate by moving the things digesting inside it's body around (maybe it could make a smiley face! :D)? Why can't I play a harpy whose culture is completely foreign to ours and heavily ingrained with their environment and biological requirements? Why can't I play a ghost? Or a bird? I mean literally a bird, not a bird-man or anything like that.

I want to play an MMO where the races are actually interesting and unique and different.
"Give up here?"
- > No
"Do you accept defeat?"
- > No
"Do you think games are silly little things?"
- > No
"Is it all pointless?"
- > No
"Do you admit there is no meaning to this world?"
- > No

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Izawwlgood » Sat Apr 06, 2013 5:01 pm UTC

Gelsamel wrote:Fake Difficulty:

Yeah, this has always bothered me about the game. Especially considering much of dungeon completion is based on glitch exploitation, and mobs are horrendously scaled to any given character.

Gelsamel wrote:Platforming:

I've never found these to be remotely interesting or fun, but some people fucking love them, and my sense is they're mostly included and developed now to satisfy a contingent of players who dig them. One of the thrusts of GW2 is that 'doing everything' is the way to play the game, and part of the reason jumping puzzles got tossed in was because of the derision the devs of GW1 got for not allowing characters to jump.

Gelsamel wrote:Level progression:

Now this I totally disagree with you on; the difference stops being in unlocking new abilities to place in your action bars, and starts being in trait selection for build development. The traits can radically change your play style and what weapons you select. Some weapons appear useless or too niche until select traits that synergize with them well. While yes, you aren't grinding to 80 to unlock "Zomgnukeboomomega", that last trait point may let you select another trait that turns your 'pretty awesome' build into "zomgnukeboomomega".

Gelsamel wrote:Visibility

Can you elaborate? Combo fields look pretty different, and the icons for buffs/debuffs are obvious enough that you can quickly decide if now is a good time to pop a group cleanse or hold off.

Gelsamel wrote:Greatswords:

Think of it in terms of weapon ability diversity. If melee weapons solely had melee range capabilities, they'd be more seriously limited. As it is, melee weapons tend to have shorter range capabilities, so this is fine. And also, not all classes utilize weapons in the same way; Mesmers handle greatswords very differently than Guardians do.

Gelsamel wrote:I really wanted to play a melee class with a spear

This is your first problem; thematically it may be fun to look a given way, but weapon sets should be selected for their abilities, not their appearance.

Gelsamel wrote:Guardian has this focus on fire damage that is something you HAVE to spec into if you're going a melee DPS build, no thanks.

This is not true. Condition builds for guardians are one of many dps builds you can do.

Gelsamel wrote:Ranger HAS to use a pet, no thanks.

Virtually every game I've ever played with a Ranger/Hunter class also has pets, so...?

Gelsamel wrote:By the way... what actually happened to my sister?

I assume you mean that you selected something about your sister in character creation? She's part of the quest line later on, I believe. The choices you make in character creation determine what mix of storyline quests you get.

Gelsamel wrote:I want to play an MMO where the races are actually interesting and unique and different.

The racial conflict in GW is actually pretty interesting and well written. Just sayin'.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
Menacing Spike
Posts: 2982
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:25 pm UTC
Location: Fighting the Zombie.

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Menacing Spike » Sat Apr 06, 2013 10:21 pm UTC

Gelsamel wrote:I want to play an MMO where the races are actually interesting and unique and different.


If only this was real.

User avatar
Gelsamel
Lame and emo
Posts: 8237
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 10:49 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Gelsamel » Sun Apr 07, 2013 12:49 am UTC

Now this I totally disagree with you on; the difference stops being in unlocking new abilities to place in your action bars, and starts being in trait selection for build development. The traits can radically change your play style and what weapons you select. Some weapons appear useless or too niche until select traits that synergize with them well. While yes, you aren't grinding to 80 to unlock "Zomgnukeboomomega", that last trait point may let you select another trait that turns your 'pretty awesome' build into "zomgnukeboomomega".


I get that I'm still getting traits. It's just it's a lot less to look forward to. I think you should be unlocking MORE as you level up, not less. Virtually every other MMO I know of does this. You don't suddenly stop getting new skills... instead you start getting talents, or you start getting glyphs. In GW2 you have a lot to look forward to, until you hit 30. At 30, you stop gaining the most significant (in a visual, mechanical, and visceral experience sense) changes... but it's not like you get something else to replace it. You were getting traits before too...

Can you elaborate? Combo fields look pretty different, and the icons for buffs/debuffs are obvious enough that you can quickly decide if now is a good time to pop a group cleanse or hold off.


Spoiler:
Have a look at something like WoW. When a mage is doing an Arcane Explosion, it's really really obvious, not only is the graphic extremely unique, it's silhouette stands out, and it is contrasted colorwise. It also has a distinct sound, one I can still remember today despite quitting years and years ago. There is no way you'd mistake it, even at a glance, for any of the other arcane spells, and especially not any non-arcane spell.

Yet in the heat of battle can you really tell the difference between Chaos Storm and Null Field? I mean yeah, they absolutely look different, if you're sitting there watching it. But their silhouettes are exactly the same, the animations aren't immediately, at-a-glance, obviously differentiable. The sound is so undistinct, dispite playing a Mesmer hardcore for the last few days I can't even remember what they sound like. I think they're kind of rumbly or something?

If a Mage comes up behind me and AE's, I hear the sound and I see the tiniest bit of the spell clip into my screen and hit me? I know instantly what spell that is, even in the hectic heat of battle where I'm concentrating on 10 other things. In GW2 if the same thing happened with a mesmer putting down Chaos Storm... hell, in the instant the AoE goes down I might not even be able to tell it's a mesmer. The sound isn't distinctive and the only obvious thing about the silhouette is that it's a circle on the ground (like every other AoE ever). Now sure, the second after it goes down I might see debuffs, or the electricity bouncing around might finally make it into my taxed brain and I'll realise it is a Chaos Storm... but that is a second too long.

Think of the silhouettes and visibility of both the characters and abilities and enemies in LoL and compare that to the visibility issues in HoN (you can barely tell characters apart, spells are a mess of visibility issues). Part of it is the different in art style, but part of it is just poor visual design. That is the comparison I'm making between WoW and GW here.


Think of it in terms of weapon ability diversity. If melee weapons solely had melee range capabilities, they'd be more seriously limited. As it is, melee weapons tend to have shorter range capabilities, so this is fine. And also, not all classes utilize weapons in the same way; Mesmers handle greatswords very differently than Guardians do.


I understand the logic for putting a ranged option there... but why THROWING? Throwing a greatsword is the most stupid idea I've ever heard. My objection isn't against ability diversity, it's against the aesthetics and sense of the matter.

This is your first problem; thematically it may be fun to look a given way, but weapon sets should be selected for their abilities, not their appearance.

It's not a 'problem', I play characters I like and am interested in. I don't play characters, builds, weapons, etc, solely on whether they provide the best stuff for my character. It's not that I don't min/max, I just min/max within what I want to play, whether that be class or weapon.

This is not true. Condition builds for guardians are one of many dps builds you can do.

But you have to be doing all this fire damage from F1 (and not using it is certainly stupid, simply choosing to do less dps?) and the best utilities for melee DPS are the fire ones. You might not have to spec into condition damage, but you are really putting yourself at a disadvantage if you don't get fire utilities or burning traits.

Virtually every game I've ever played with a Ranger/Hunter class also has pets, so...?

I'm not questioning design here, I'm just pointing out why I don't want to play the class. There are games where the pet class can spec away from pets and into pure range or into pure melee. Or they could choose to spec into entirely pet. But the Ranger's attacks and Fskills in GW2 are linked to the pet, so you can't just get rid of the pet or ignore it. Thats why I don't want to play the class.

I assume you mean that you selected something about your sister in character creation? She's part of the quest line later on, I believe. The choices you make in character creation determine what mix of storyline quests you get.

Yes, I've already saved my sister. I've finished that storyline... I'm just wondering what happened to her because there has been absolutely no follow up.

The racial conflict in GW is actually pretty interesting and well written. Just sayin'.

If by 'well written' you mean believable, then sure. But it's pretty lazy, like most fantasy writing, so thats forgivable... but lets hold fantasy writers to a higher standard. At least that way we can hope they improve.
"Give up here?"
- > No
"Do you accept defeat?"
- > No
"Do you think games are silly little things?"
- > No
"Is it all pointless?"
- > No
"Do you admit there is no meaning to this world?"
- > No

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Izawwlgood » Sun Apr 07, 2013 2:18 am UTC

Re: Traits:
I just don't really see what's that different between getting new abilities at 85/90 like in WoW, and getting an ability at lvl 5 in GW2, and being able to select two traits at 80 that maximize the awesomeness of that ability. I agree that elite abilities are kind of silly, and some classes just treat them as 'well, every 2m I can do this thing that does a bit of extra damage', which is a shame, but I don't think the system is silly or broken or bad in any way, I think it's a refreshing change from the 'your class is useless until some arbitrary point where you get an ability that lets you be awesome'.

The feeling of growing into your character is far more organic.

Gelsamel wrote:Yet in the heat of battle can you really tell the difference between Chaos Storm and Null Field?

Yeah, good enough point, that in the heat of battle, if an ally drops a Null field and a Chaos Storm side by side, you may have a hard time telling the difference. Incidentally, the difference is that Null field forms a bubble, Chaos Storm forms a ring, but I agree, there are abilities that may be different to differentiate, and ultimately, despite most PvP or PvE situations not really requiring this, this kind of transparency is important in terms of allowing players to make decisions.

Interrupts are less important in this game than WoW, but Confusion builds are very potent in PvP, and ultimately, because of the ubiquity of buffs/debuffs, identifying the specific move or AoE being dropped is less important than identifying what buffs/debuffs are on a target or on your groupmates. Which is by no means suggesting it is perfect or as streamlined as it should be.

Gelsamel wrote:Throwing a greatsword is the most stupid idea I've ever heard.

Most ranged greatsword abilities involve, as you said, creation of a magic greatsword that flies off. If the aesthetic of tossing a greatsword bugs you, sure, I guess it must be annoying that it's in the game; I don't think it's any better or worse than bows/guns that have no ammo associated with them, or shields that have virtually solely offensive utility.

Gelsamel wrote:It's not a 'problem', I play characters I like and am interested in. I don't play characters, builds, weapons, etc, solely on whether they provide the best stuff for my character. It's not that I don't min/max, I just min/max within what I want to play, whether that be class or weapon.

Respectfully, I believe this is a problem. This is like saying 'I want to be an offensive priest, but I don't like shadow, so I'm going to spec discipline/holy and run as rDPS'. GW2 is not designed to let you say 'I'm a Guardian, and I love the way sword and board looks, but I don't want any support abilities'. In WoW, the way you look and the weapons you choose are just skins; a mace with +100 spellpower and a sword with +100 spell power are identical. You should realize the same cannot be said for GW2; if you care more about how your character looks holding a weapon than what that weapon does, this game isn't for you.

Gelsamel wrote:But you have to be doing all this fire damage from F1 (and not using it is certainly stupid, simply choosing to do less dps?) and the best utilities for melee DPS are the fire ones. You might not have to spec into condition damage, but you are really putting yourself at a disadvantage if you don't get fire utilities or burning traits.

Seriously, this is untrue. There are reasons to keep the passive functionality of Virtue of Justice up at all times, especially given that there's a trait to cause the effect every 4th instead of every 5th hit, another that makes the attack an AoE, and I *think* there's another that makes it so allies also have the effect.
Seriously, there are multiple dps heavy builds for the guardian that do not rely on condition damage. Buuuuuuuuuut; remember, not using a range of your abilities is stupid; even the most dps centric build will still have support functionality, and should be doing so. It's a very WoW-centric way of approaching the game to say 'My dps build is totes maximized for burning damage'.

You know, truthfully, given that you stated you want to 'play your character the way you want to play your character', it seems this game is way more up your ally than WoW; if you find yourself dodging and rolling a bunch, there are traits that cause effects on rolls, if you find yourself really digging a scepter, you can focus on scepter traits. There's such a wildly greater range of viable builds in this game than anything WoW ever presented, especially now, given WoWs three choice at each level milestone getup.

Gelsamel wrote:'m not questioning design here, I'm just pointing out why I don't want to play the class. There are games where the pet class can spec away from pets and into pure range or into pure melee. Or they could choose to spec into entirely pet. But the Ranger's attacks and Fskills in GW2 are linked to the pet, so you can't just get rid of the pet or ignore it. Thats why I don't want to play the class.

Well, A ) I've never seen a pet class that lets you drop the pet entirely, and B ) there are absolutely traits that increase your efficacy over the pets. As with all pet classes, there's a spectrum between 'do more effects from the pet' and 'do more effects from the PC'. Same shtick here. I also dislike pet classes by in large.

I want to point out Necromancers though; they have pet capabilities, and they can also totally ignore the pets. My sense is the pets are kind of underwhelming though.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
Gelsamel
Lame and emo
Posts: 8237
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 10:49 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Gelsamel » Sun Apr 07, 2013 2:55 am UTC

I don't think it's like saying I want an offensive priest... that is a playstyle, not an aesthetic. It's like saying I want to play a priest who uses light spells. I'm fine with whatever mechanics come after that. In that case I'd be healing/supporting if I have to go Shadow to be offensive. I'm not saying I want to be an offensive guardian, yet going sword/shield with tanky utilities. I'm saying I want to use spears because I really like spears, and I'll take whatever mechanics come with that in the game. I'm not asking for one thing and complaining that it doesn't fit with what I want... I'm asking for one thing and complaining that it doesn't exist.

The guardian sword has a ranged ability where you're shooting off light lasers by slashing. That is cool. Why is it that the greatsword uses the aesthetic of shooting off greatswords in EVERY case? This isn't a huge issue, it just bothers me because it is so stupid. Oh hey, I got a greatsword in my hand... better throw it.

As for the fire spec, like you say if you don't want to use Active F1 you really have to spec into the every 4th hit thing + the +10% damage on burning targets... and not getting the burn+teleport utility is a huge gimp if you're running GS/Hammer (especially with those traits). And if you don't spec to make F1 good as a passive, then it's really stupid to not activate it, since the passive it horrible compared to the use (especially with the might on use trait).

In WoW, at least when I played, the pet was kind of just an extra bit of DPS. If you went pure marksman you could bow it up without much regard to what your pet is, does, or whether it's alive or not. I even played a low level PvP hunter for a while that was pure marksman and didn't use a pet. You would still be dropping your DPS ever so slightly, but it was still viable to ignore it. Of course they couldn't do melee very well.

As for building, I can't talk about the new features WoW have... but when I played there was a lot more customisability. If I was a warrior I could use whatever two handed weapon I want. With GW2, the skills are much more heavily tied to weapons, so if I like a weapon but dislike an ability... well too bad. With my hypothetical WoW warrior, I could at least choose to go Fury if I didn't like Arms, but in GW2 there is no way for me to substitute abilities that interest me more into the weapon, because I'm stuck with them from level 1. In GW2 if I want to use a hammer, then my playstyle is already set and I can't really do much to change it.

For my mesmer I'm playing, since I want to play sword/pistol my abilities are already set... fine. But that informs my trait and utility choice in such a way that there isn't really much of a choice in what I get. I mean given the damage from the duelists and from my blurred frenzy I pretty much HAVE to spec into the sword traits and the illusion fury/damage traits.
"Give up here?"
- > No
"Do you accept defeat?"
- > No
"Do you think games are silly little things?"
- > No
"Is it all pointless?"
- > No
"Do you admit there is no meaning to this world?"
- > No

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Izawwlgood » Sun Apr 07, 2013 3:46 am UTC

Gelsamel wrote:It's like saying I want to play a priest who uses light spells.

Offensively. The point I'm making is that your position is saying "I like the asthetic of spears and want to use them, but I don't want to only reside in water", which is reasonable, but it is the wrong way to look at the game. In WoW, if you like priests, and want to do rDPS, you are speccing shadow. Don't like the aesthetic of shadow or shooting purple lasers? Tough shit. You have *zero* viable options to be a solid rDPS priest unless you go Shadow. GW2 does this better; like swords and shields? There are multiple builds around that. Coupled with the fact that all classes aside from Eles and Engis have a swap function, there is strikingly more variety to what you can 'do' with these weapons. Ultimately, the aesthetic is cool, of course, because who doesn't love those sweet ass weapons, but you should be picking weapons based on the skills that come with them.

Gelsamel wrote:As for the fire spec, like you say if you don't want to use Active F1 you really have to spec into the every 4th hit thing + the +10% damage on burning targets... and not getting the burn+teleport utility is a huge gimp if you're running GS/Hammer (especially with those traits). And if you don't spec to make F1 good as a passive, then it's really stupid to not activate it, since the passive it horrible compared to the use (especially with the might on use trait).

Why GS/Hammer specifically? Neither of those weapons apply burning, making them kind of less ideal for a Condition spec, and both of those skills have leap to target abilities which make them pretty good for not relying on the burn+tele ability.
If you don't want to spec Radiance, you simply treat Virtue of Justice as bonus damage. My Guardian is 50th now, and has 20 pts in Honor and 20 pts in Virtues. I think my heals are pretty awesome, and I use Virtue of Resolve and Courage fairly frequently, although admittedly, tend to fire all three virtues off every time Renewed Focus procs or a a big nuke is incoming or we get stuck in an AoE.

Gelsamel wrote:If I was a warrior I could use whatever two handed weapon I want.

Yes, that was my point; in WoW, what the weapons look like is irrelevant. It's just part of the design.

Gelsamel wrote:In GW2 if I want to use a hammer, then my playstyle is already set and I can't really do much to change it.

But what I'm trying to tell you is this is the wrong way of thinking about 'hammer play'. Hammer in GW2 :: Shadow Priest in WoW. It's not a 'oh I like this aesthetic' it's a gameplay decision. You shouldn't be picking Hammer because you like the way it looks and efficacy or synergies be damned, because while there are options for building good builds around a Hammer chosen simply because it looks cool, it may not be the build you want to play. The same decisions were made for you in WoW, they just weren't centered around aesthetics; a set of armor that looks fucking ridiculous might get worn because it's stats were better than a set of armor that looked badass. WoW could be played with graphics set to 'stick figures', and you should think of GW2 the same way.

Gelsamel wrote:For my mesmer I'm playing, since I want to play sword/pistol my abilities are already set... fine. But that informs my trait and utility choice in such a way that there isn't really much of a choice in what I get. I mean given the damage from the duelists and from my blurred frenzy I pretty much HAVE to spec into the sword traits and the illusion fury/damage traits.

Out of curiosity, you are aware of the weapon swap right? And more to the point, you are using the weapon swap right? Because the abilities CDs, and the synergies that go with those abilities, are most certainly built around the notion of you swapping weapons.

If you look back a page in this thread, you'll see me talking about how I really like the trait Illusionary Elasticity, and how the Staffs main attack Winds of Change bounces to so many targets, especially with 3 clones out. Greatsword is the other weapon that has a bouncing attack, which means with the two combined, you can have a lot of bouncing. It also means unless you have something else strong going on, selecting Illusionary Elasticity means you should be running with Greatsword/Staff.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
Xenomortis
Not actually a special flower.
Posts: 1448
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 8:47 am UTC

Re: Guild Wars 2

Postby Xenomortis » Mon Apr 08, 2013 11:59 am UTC

Gelsamel wrote:The guardian sword has a ranged ability where you're shooting off light lasers by slashing. That is cool. Why is it that the greatsword uses the aesthetic of shooting off greatswords in EVERY case? This isn't a huge issue, it just bothers me because it is so stupid. Oh hey, I got a greatsword in my hand... better throw it.


From memory, the only instance of a Greatsword being thrown is a Warrior skill (GS skill 4).
Would it really make sense for a Warrior to have magic blue bolts fly off his sword?
The two non-melee Guardian GS skills do no such thing; skill 2 has you whirl around firing off blue bolts in random directions, skill 5 again causes you to whirl round, firing off bolts (that may be ethereal swords, I've not looked closely at the animation) before initiating the AoE pull.

(Oh, and throwing a greatsword isn't implausible; if you can wield it as a weapon, you cab throw it. Of course one may question the practicality of such a move, but hey, magic!)

Gelsamel wrote:As for the fire spec, like you say if you don't want to use Active F1 you really have to spec into the every 4th hit thing + the +10% damage on burning targets... and not getting the burn+teleport utility is a huge gimp if you're running GS/Hammer (especially with those traits). And if you don't spec to make F1 good as a passive, then it's really stupid to not activate it, since the passive it horrible compared to the use (especially with the might on use trait).

The burning is only part of the reason you activate that Virtue. It isn't all about DPS. And if you spec hard into condition damage because "I infilct some burning", you're a fool.

Gelsamel wrote:With GW2, the skills are much more heavily tied to weapons, so if I like a weapon but dislike an ability... well too bad. With my hypothetical WoW warrior, I could at least choose to go Fury if I didn't like Arms, but in GW2 there is no way for me to substitute abilities that interest me more into the weapon, because I'm stuck with them from level 1. In GW2 if I want to use a hammer, then my playstyle is already set and I can't really do much to change it.

You're not telling the whole story.
Your weapon sets do not fully determine your character. Your weapon sets + utility skills do not fully define your character.
Your weapon sets, utility skills, traits and equipment define your character.

Gelsamel wrote:For my mesmer I'm playing, since I want to play sword/pistol my abilities are already set... fine. But that informs my trait and utility choice in such a way that there isn't really much of a choice in what I get. I mean given the damage from the duelists and from my blurred frenzy I pretty much HAVE to spec into the sword traits and the illusion fury/damage traits.

Take your blinkers off.
If I were to run an Axe on my Necro (big if), I sure as hell wouldn't spec hard into Spite (the Power line with an Axe focused Grandmaster trait), if I were to touch it at all. I don't even touch it as a hardcore condition necro (Spite is also Condition Duration). Want to guess what the standard condition necro spec has been for months?
I don't remember the exact specs I have on my Warrior or Guardian, but both make extensive use of the Greatsword and have nothing specced into their respective Power traits.


Gelsamel wrote:
The racial conflict in GW is actually pretty interesting and well written. Just sayin'.

If by 'well written' you mean believable, then sure. But it's pretty lazy, like most fantasy writing, so thats forgivable... but lets hold fantasy writers to a higher standard. At least that way we can hope they improve.


There isn't any!
There's some heavily watered down tension between Charr and the humans in Ebonhawke (the existence of which is laughable).
But, as much as I like the Charr, I don't think I can forgive ANet for the extensive retconning they put them through; it would be hard to swallow, but it's minor compared to everything else they added.
The price you pay for making a highly antagonistic, if admirable in some ways, race a playable one.
Image


Return to “Gaming”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests