172 replies to this topic

[Trei]

Gannadene, on 23 June 2012 - 01:16 AM, said:

My main concern is that a single armor piece will cost 100 tokens, and you only get 1 token drop per boss, or something similarly insane.
Oh, but hey! You can use gems to buy tokens! Better rush to our cash shop! Hurr durr! That's my primary concern.

"Or something similarly insane?" basically means you have no bloody idea, do you?
Where did you see the confirmation that the armor pieces will on average cost 100 tokens, and we only get 1 token drop per boss?

Your primary concern has no precedent, no objective reason to base any assumptions on.
Show me such a token in the cash shop.

You know what Yoda said about Fear... ?
Are you familiar with the term fear-mongering?

Quote

I'll explain. You know how ANet said there's no healing class, and that any class can heal? Obviously it's the Guardian and the Elementalist a little, but ignore that for a second. My Warrior can heal, sure. But to do that I'd need to be at least level 40 and have spent 3 to 4.5 gold to unlock the grandmaster trait that makes my shouts heal. Because that's the ONLY way you can heal nearby players. So if a group is looking for people who CAN switch to that role once their cooldowns hit, my Warrior is out of luck, because you can't make that kind of build. Of course in this case that trait is in the defensive attribute, meaning to get it you'd need to be exclusively a tank. Which we know is a stupid thing to do to your attributes in PvE because that mechanic doesn't really work and ranged combat is king. But I digress. Point being, just wait until you're about level 40-60. Otherwise, you'll be limited to some really terrible builds.

Your initial assumption is already flawed, bolded.

Healing in GW2 is not a role. It is but a small part of the role many acknowledge as Support.
Why would you want to lift this particular small subset out, turn it into a role and subsequently complain you can't do it until X levels?

Can you fill the role of Support from the start?

[Gannadene]

Trei, on 23 June 2012 - 01:56 AM, said:

"Or something similarly insane?" basically means you have no bloody idea, do you?
Where did you see the confirmation that the armor pieces will on average cost 100 tokens, and we only get 1 token drop per boss?

Your primary concern has no precedent, no objective reason to base any assumptions on.
Show me such a token in the cash shop.

You know what Yoda said about Fear... ?
Are you familiar with the term fear-mongering?


Your initial assumption is already flawed, bolded.

Healing in GW2 is not a role. It is but a small part of the role many acknowledge as Support.
Why would you want to lift this particular small subset out, turn it into a role and subsequently complain you can't do it until X levels?

Can you fill the role of Support from the start?

1) Hyperbole. I'm concerned about ANet's hard on for turning things into micropayments and "encouraging" purchases with intense grinds. It's not that way now. I have no faith in them not to leave well enough alone.

2) No, you can't play support with a Warrior at level 35. Your only support options are banners (which do next to nothing on their own) and shouts, which again, do next to nothing. Knockbacks also do not work on bosses, and of course cannot push enemies off edges. Warriors are just DPS machines. They can't really do much else without heavily investing in traits they won't have at level 35. The Warrior is probably the most extreme case, because obviously it's the damage class, and it doesn't get very many utility options.

In my case, after trying to create a support build in AC, I eventually accepted I couldn't help my teammates in any meaningful way other than using "Shake it Off!" and just went full out ranged damage with a bow and rifle, switching between both as cooldowns necessitated. A lot of this is also tied to how statistically worthless things like Might have proven to be over using skills that are pure utility. If I was level 60, I may have been able to help out more than that, since I could have purposed myself to do something more.

If I had a choice between a Warrior and a Guardian before I headed in, I'm probably going to go with the Guardian, since honestly in a dungeon, the damage is cute, but the gameplay becomes more about surviving the encounters long term. ANet's promise that my class can fill other roles effectively in short spans of time, on the fly, is not true at all.

[Trei]

Gannadene, on 23 June 2012 - 02:34 AM, said:

2) No, you can't play support with a Warrior at level 35. Your only support options are banners (which do next to nothing on their own) and shouts, which again, do next to nothing. Knockbacks also do not work on bosses, and of course cannot push enemies off edges. Warriors are just DPS machines. They can't really do much else without heavily investing in traits they won't have at level 35. The Warrior is probably the most extreme case, because obviously it's the damage class, and it doesn't get very many utility options.

In my case, after trying to create a support build in AC, I eventually accepted I couldn't help my teammates in any meaningful way other than using "Shake it Off!" and just went full out ranged damage with a bow and rifle, switching between both as cooldowns necessitated. A lot of this is also tied to how statistically worthless things like Might have proven to be over using skills that are pure utility. If I was level 60, I may have been able to help out more than that, since I could have purposed myself to do something more.

If I had a choice between a Warrior and a Guardian before I headed in, I'm probably going to go with the Guardian, since honestly in a dungeon, the damage is cute, but the gameplay becomes more about surviving the encounters long term. ANet's promise that my class can fill other roles effectively in short spans of time, on the fly, is not true at all.

All in all, it sounds more like a preference issue rather than any lack of options in the profession itself.

You just simply prefer the way Guardians can support their allies, over what Warriors can bring to the table.
Because I don't see shouts and banners as "doing next to nothing".

Anet never promised you can turn into a support Guardian, on the fly, when you are playing a Warrior.

Edited by Trei, 23 June 2012 - 02:54 AM.

[dawnq]

Gannadene, on 23 June 2012 - 02:34 AM, said:

1) Hyperbole. I'm concerned about ANet's hard on for turning things into micropayments and "encouraging" purchases with intense grinds. It's not that way now. I have no faith in them not to leave well enough alone.

2) No, you can't play support with a Warrior at level 35. Your only support options are banners (which do next to nothing on their own) and shouts, which again, do next to nothing. Knockbacks also do not work on bosses, and of course cannot push enemies off edges. Warriors are just DPS machines. They can't really do much else without heavily investing in traits they won't have at level 35. The Warrior is probably the most extreme case, because obviously it's the damage class, and it doesn't get very many utility options.

In my case, after trying to create a support build in AC, I eventually accepted I couldn't help my teammates in any meaningful way other than using "Shake it Off!" and just went full out ranged damage with a bow and rifle, switching between both as cooldowns necessitated. A lot of this is also tied to how statistically worthless things like Might have proven to be over using skills that are pure utility. If I was level 60, I may have been able to help out more than that, since I could have purposed myself to do something more.

If I had a choice between a Warrior and a Guardian before I headed in, I'm probably going to go with the Guardian, since honestly in a dungeon, the damage is cute, but the gameplay becomes more about surviving the encounters long term. ANet's promise that my class can fill other roles effectively in short spans of time, on the fly, is not true at all.

I see you didnt actually do the catacombs or you would know that

1. Bosses are immune to KB but not to the stun effect of it.

What you mean to say is that  "you" or whoever the warrior you are talking about"probably" sucked because he pigeon holed self.

Might sucks? Really?

Excuse me whilst I roll the mounds part with my ele brethren  quite easily because the wars hit
1.http://wiki.guildwar.....eat_Justice!"
And I hit
1.http://wiki.guildwar...iki/Battle_Roar

Edited by dawnq, 23 June 2012 - 05:41 AM.

[Rhydian]

Hmm topic is more interesting than I thought, if it hasn't already this seriously needs to be brought up in the next beta weekend forum.
Maybe it can't be avoided, people trying to force requirements where none are required in the first place.

Trei, on 23 June 2012 - 02:52 AM, said:

All in all, it sounds more like a preference issue rather than any lack of options in the profession itself.

You just simply prefer the way Guardians can support their allies, over what Warriors can bring to the table.
Because I don't see shouts and banners as "doing next to nothing".

Anet never promised you can turn into a support Guardian, on the fly, when you are playing a Warrior.

I think some people may need to still feel like they have a paladin tank, sort of like a security blanket from WOW.

Edited by Rhydian, 23 June 2012 - 05:58 AM.

[keli]

Trei, on 23 June 2012 - 12:21 AM, said:

Do I need to show my main's 189 tokens?

Yes you should, you are not that vital to the team as you think you are, there are plenty of other people out there, so dumping you for a wrong reason still benefits us.

[Trei]

keli, on 23 June 2012 - 07:17 AM, said:

Yes you should, you are not that vital to the team as you think you are, there are plenty of other people out there, so dumping you for a wrong reason still benefits us.

Perfect example of "everybody thinks they are experienced".

Remind me to always LFG with my most geared toon then switch to my alt on another account only after I get a group, how silly of me!

[Crom_The_Pale]

I think people are overlooking the fact that EVERY profesion can fill just about EVERY role in a party.  Each profesion has skills that can allow them to 'tank' or 'front-line' in battle.  Each profesion has both long ranged and short/melee damage skills.  Each profesion has a means of granting boons or removing conditions from the party.  Each profesion can perform some crowd control.

While some profesions do certain things better then others ultimately it is dependent upon the skill of the player.  A skilled Necro can front-line just as well as a Warrior or Guardian.

That being said what people will likely look for, rather then a certain profession, will be players that know their profession inside and out!
How do you demonstrate this?
Weapon sets?
Your actual level?
PvP titles?

[Apollo Giant]

People who are willing to teach others are infinitely more helpful to themselves (identifying mechanics, solving problems other classes may have, etc. rather than following a script makes you more familiar with the game), the players they are teaching, and to the longevity of the game. Yes people will be "elitists," but groups will be formed anyway. Still though, you can't hold a fear of failure and an unwillingness to help out others against them. These are called character flaws. Once we are in the game, we will be in much better moods I think.

[Dawbles]

I doubt this'll happen, if only because in GW2 player skill actually matters, so experience with the dungeon itself loses a bit of importance, since that used to be the only factor to determine whether someone is accepted into the party.

[Teste]

Other than the hyperbole one can expect from topics like this, it has a small modicum of a point. As I have stated ages ago, some GW1 players will try to find something in GW2 they can call the "new ectos", and try to use it as a currency. Some WoW players will try to find a group composition that reminds them of the holy trinity. In the end, you can take GW1 out of GW1 players and WoW out of WoW players, but you cannot forcefuly put brains into  them.

There's a very easy way to deal with this issue. Simply:

• Make tokens untradeable.
  
• Make the armor pieces acquired with the tokens untradeable.

Problem solved.

(And if someone didn't understand: those two measures would make it effectively redundant to farm the dungeons. People would have no incentive to do them over and over again other than to get a full armor set for themselves. Therefore, demanding people to have a full armor set or enough token for a full armor set would be completely mindless - those who already have a full armor set already got everything they could get from that dungeon, and therefore are not going to play there over and over unless they have fun doing so. It's a way to prevent the dungeons from being farming grounds, and thus avoid all the scamming, elitism and stupidity that comes from having hordes of farmers in a single place.)

[Ritualist]

Teste, on 24 June 2012 - 12:44 PM, said:

And if someone didn't understand: those two measures would make it effectively redundant to farm the dungeons. People would have no incentive to do them over and over again other than to get a full armor set for themselves. Therefore, demanding people to have a full armor set or enough token for a full armor set would be completely mindless - those who already have a full armor set already got everything they could get from that dungeon, and therefore are not going to play there over and over unless they have fun doing so. It's a way to prevent the dungeons from being farming grounds, and thus avoid all the scamming, elitism and stupidity that comes from having hordes of farmers in a single place.

Hopefully we'll then get heroes in the expansion.

[Trei]

Teste, on 24 June 2012 - 12:44 PM, said:

There's a very easy way to deal with this issue. Simply:

• Make tokens untradeable.
  
• Make the armor pieces acquired with the tokens untradeable.

Problem solved.

Assuming those two item types are the only things of worth in the entire dungeon, and there are absolutely no other materialistic reasons for one who has gotten every armor piece to ever want to run the dungeon.

But yeah, the idea sounds good.

Edited by Trei, 24 June 2012 - 03:57 PM.

[Xiondar]

Question: How many tokens are given for one Dungeon run? I would really not like running something 200 times for an item xD.

[OleManWinter]

Trei, on 23 June 2012 - 01:56 AM, said:

Are you familiar with the term fear-mongering?

I don't think you are.  One can explore the possibility of, and prepare oneself for, possible negative situations without mongering of any type.

I quickly grabbed this definition:
is the use of fear to influence the opinions and actions of others towards some specific end. The feared object or subject is sometimes exaggerated, and the pattern of fear mongering is usually one of repetition, in order to continuously reinforce the intended effects of this tactic, sometimes in the form of a vicious circle

Not exactly the same thing as simply voicing a concern is it?

Are you familiar with the term melodrama?

[Little Bird]

I understand the premise - if you want a speed clear, you need experienced players.
But what are noobs supposed to do? I mean how will they ever get the experience if those who came before want nothing to do with them?

Edited by Little Bird, 30 June 2012 - 03:47 AM.

[Doki20]

Little Bird, on 30 June 2012 - 03:47 AM, said:

I understand the premise - if you want a speed clear, you need experienced players.
But what are noobs supposed to do? I mean how will they ever get the experience if those who came before want nothing to do with them?

They group up with other noobs? like how the experienced people done when they first arrived? (as at release, everyone will be a noob at the game more or less.)

[OleManWinter]

It's natural for speed clear fans to want experienced players.
It's natural for newbies to be inexperienced.

But what bothers me, and seems unnatural imo, is that it's hard to find experienced players that want to run balanced teams.

[Trei]

OleManWinter, on 30 June 2012 - 03:38 AM, said:

I don't think you are.  One can explore the possibility of, and prepare oneself for, possible negative situations without mongering of any type.

I quickly grabbed this definition:
is the use of fear to influence the opinions and actions of others towards some specific end. The feared object or subject is sometimes exaggerated, and the pattern of fear mongering is usually one of repetition, in order to continuously reinforce the intended effects of this tactic, sometimes in the form of a vicious circle

Not exactly the same thing as simply voicing a concern is it?

Are you familiar with the term melodrama?

A simple change of adverbs used would likely have made it actually sound more like a concern, if it had truly been the intention.

"I am afraid it might...." "...probably..." "...could have..."

Instead of

"... that a single armor piece will cost 100 tokens, and you only get 1 token drop per boss...
Oh, but hey! You can use gems to buy tokens! Better rush to our cash shop! Hurr durr!...."

Confident words to use for things that are unsubstantiated and known to be false, don't you think?


Oh, I have chosen my words carefully... perhaps he should have done the same.
This wasn't even your fight, friend.

[Ritualist]

OleManWinter, on 30 June 2012 - 05:07 AM, said:

It's natural for speed clear fans to want experienced players.
It's natural for newbies to be inexperienced.

But what bothers me, and seems unnatural imo, is that it's hard to find experienced players that want to run balanced teams.

The problem was shitty balance.
The non-balanced stuff we so much better that it didn't even make sense to run balanced.  And that means that the people who do not (or can't, as is the case with new guys) run the latest craze, those guys simply can not play.

So unless A.Net stops balancing the game for "fun", and rather actually starts BALANCING it, we'll see the same shit.
Now, the fact that they have issues with balancing the current 12 traits per line and yet they are talking of adding additional ones, and the fact that they are looking into adding more weapons for expansions (while the current lot already isn't balanced) sounds ... interesting.

[OleManWinter]

Trei, on 30 June 2012 - 05:40 AM, said:

snip

you left out words before your quote that make all the difference.

"I'm concerned you might fall off that cliff"
vs.
"I'm concerned you will fall off that cliff"

You think that the key words are "might" and "will".  Either you're being purposefully this way (likely) or you just don't have a very good command over the English language.

But you're right, it's not my problem.  He is a "fear monger".  I'm probably a "racist".  That guy over there is a "bigot".  She her? She is an "ideologue" and "intolerant".     Do throw out any additional buzz words you can think of in case we haven't covered them all.

[Strawberry Nubcake]

Anybody else ever join a "pro" group for something and found out you were with a bunch of morons in expensive armor once you got inside?  The only way to make sure you're going with experienced people is to go with people you know.  Joining or forming a PuG and asking to see some sort of token or equipment as proof of experience is not a good way to measure success.  Was everybody with X amount of stones and obsidian armor among the best players you have grouped with in GW1?  I'm willing to bet that a lot of them made you want to put your fist through your monitor.

[RedStar]

Deviant Angel, on 30 June 2012 - 08:35 AM, said:

Anybody else ever join a "pro" group for something and found out you were with a bunch of morons in expensive armor once you got inside?

So many times...Not because I was looking only for a pro group, but because I didn't care if it was pro or not. And I know that there isn't such a thing as "pro" PuG groups...

The only real "pro" groups are Guild groups dedicated to that dungeon/zone and your only hope of getting into one is if someone left right before entering and they can't find someone to replace him.