691 replies to this topic

[UssjTrunks]

Radiea, on 06 July 2012 - 07:29 PM, said:

Randomness does not add to dynamic gameplay. On the contrary, it is less dynamic, as random skills are unable to serve creative purposes. Besides - even if this were true - another mechanic that is not random can provide for the same depth that randomness would theoretically give, without the drawback of increasing the effect of luck on the game.

Yeah, you're right. I was thinking the topic was dealing with all RNG like crit% and whatnot.

Radiea, on 06 July 2012 - 07:29 PM, said:

In competitive PvP, you can potentially win or lose because of a luck-based roll. This affects other people, and is completely against the spirit of skillful competition.

That's really only true of Elixir X. Could they seriously not come up with a unique elite for the engineer? This looks more like a placeholder skill than anything. All of the other elixirs are inconsequential for the opposing player, they're more of a detriment to the engineer. Likewise, the thief's steal is a totally useless mechanic that isn't going to be deciding any battles.

There is a reason why engineer and thief are considered the two most broken classes in the game. RNG gives them no advantage whatsoever. These skills should definitely be fixed, but it isn't like they're OP or anything right now (except for Elixir X). In fact, I'd argue that they're UP because of the RNG.

Edited by UssjTrunks, 06 July 2012 - 10:59 PM.

[rukh]

RNG is a crutch for bad games that cannot achieve an high enough level of dynamicism with their core game mechanics.  This is justified in PvE where monster AI and scripted encounters can only do so much, and in casual PvP where players are not sophisticated enough to think many steps ahead and play mind games with their opponent.  But it has no place in competitive PvP.

[mrbig]

UssjTrunks, on 06 July 2012 - 10:51 PM, said:

In fact, I'd argue that they're UP because of the RNG.

I would add up the ranger.

This proff is severely hindered by the randomness about pets using their abilities.

Anet should accept that stuff like this simply can't work, and should give full control to rangers about their pets.

[blakdoxa]

mrbig, on 06 July 2012 - 11:51 PM, said:

I would add up the ranger.

This proff is severely hindered by the randomness about pets using their abilities.

Anet should accept that stuff like this simply can't work, and should give full control to rangers about their pets.

If would be better to give pets one auto attack skill and a player activated skill.
That way people will always know that the pets will only do one and only one thing.
They really don't want us to worry about micro-managing.

[mrbig]

blakdoxa, on 07 July 2012 - 02:18 AM, said:

If would be better to give pets one auto attack skill and a player activated skill.
That way people will always know that the pets will only do one and only one thing.
They really don't want us to worry about micro-managing.

But that would severely reduce the complexity about pets. They are already lackluster, meaning that devs should ADD something to them instead of TAKING FROM them.

I would reduce their skills to 3 instead of 4 and make them all commandable.

In these cases caring about "lulz players don't want to micromanage" is only a silly approach reducing the skill ceiling of that class, and i really don't think ranger players want it.

Anet should really start to think more seriously about their own game, otherwise the ( justified) waterfall of tears and whines will only be too overwhelming to be handled.

Now that e-sports teams are sounding with their voices, they just can't leave crap stuff to crap.

It's time to move on.

[eviator]

My two cents.

Some are in favor of removing as much randomness as possible from sPvP and tPvP. I think doing so for sPvP is out of the question, because you're going to get teamed up with other players randomly anyway, and teammate skill level is the overarching luck factor by far there. In terms of the "fun" factor, sPvP is where it's at, and many find the randomness (three lucky crits in a row, rolling the dice with elixir effects, etc.) fun. I even think the existing random mechanics are just fine for tPvP, because though tPvP is supposed to be much more skill based than sPvP, it's still somewhat casual and more about cool in-game items and bragging rights. One match in a hundred decided by luck is not all that critical in tPvP.

Once we start talking about real-world money and real-world titles, that's where the question of randomness really matters. In that case, I would want the competitors to decide, not random anonymous people on the Internet the vast majority of whom could never be that good, or even the devs. Such competitions should take place outside of sPvP and tPvP and should almost certainly have completely different rulesets and dynamics from that of the casual community. This correlates directly with other genres, such as FPSes. What is lacking in the competitive GW2 community (and the MMO genre in general), as far as I've seen, is someone with notoriety prepared to do the hard work of defining what is needed to turn games like GW2 into a competitive game. All I've seen are a bunch of people with various ideas of how it should be, but nobody is taking any initiative. Is that what you're hoping to do here OP? Because if so, I very much hope you succeed. I've tried to start something here, but I have no notoriety, nor can I compete at that level: http://www.guildwars...competitive-pvp

Edited by eviator, 07 July 2012 - 03:29 AM.

[blakdoxa]

eviator, on 07 July 2012 - 02:52 AM, said:

My two cents.

Some are in favor of removing as much randomness as possible from sPvP and tPvP. I think doing so for sPvP is out of the question, because you're going to get teamed up with other players randomly anyway, and teammate skill level is the overarching luck factor by far there. In terms of the "fun" factor, sPvP is where it's at, and many find the randomness (three lucky crits in a row, rolling the dice with elixir effects, etc.) fun. I even think the existing random mechanics are just fine for tPvP, because though tPvP is supposed to be much more skill based than sPvP, it's still somewhat casual and more about cool in-game items and bragging rights. One match in a hundred decided by luck is not all that critical in tPvP.

Once we start talking about real-world money and real-world titles, that's where the question of randomness really matters. In that case, I would want the competitors to decide, not random anonymous people on the Internet the vast majority of whom could never be that good, or even the devs. Such competitions should take place outside of sPvP and tPvP and should almost certainly have completely different rulesets and dynamics from that of the casual community. This correlates directly with other genres, such as FPSes. What is lacking in the competitive GW2 community (and the MMO genre in general), as far as I've seen, is someone with notoriety prepared to do the hard work of defining what is needed to turn games like GW2 into a competitive game. All I've seen are a bunch of people with various ideas of how it should be, but nobody is taking any initiative. Is that what you're hoping to do here OP? Because if so, I very much hope you succeed.

Actually I'd find it acceptable if there was another game mode that had these restrictions abet leaving the rest of the game as is.

mrbig, on 07 July 2012 - 02:44 AM, said:

But that would severely reduce the complexity about pets. They are already lackluster, meaning that devs should ADD something to them instead of TAKING FROM them.

I would reduce their skills to 3 instead of 4 and make them all commandable.

In these cases caring about "lulz players don't want to micromanage" is only a silly approach reducing the skill ceiling of that class, and i really don't think ranger players want it.

Anet should really start to think more seriously about their own game, otherwise the ( justified) waterfall of tears and whines will only be too overwhelming to be handled.

Now that e-sports teams are sounding with their voices, they just can't leave crap stuff to crap.

It's time to move on.

It surely would be easier to plan out how to use your pet with two skills compared to having to press 3 or 4 more keys. (complexity)
Work AI to attack any hostile target, give them a powerful basic attack and two command skills (F1 and F2). F3 and F4 are still your pet stance and pet swap.
Having the current pet have there skills commanded would add 3 more keys for a total of 7 need to control a pet. That is ridiculous considering they would have to be F keys an potentially overlap with functions already on other F keys.

Anyways, a whole bunch of complexity isn't always necessary to make things work.

In regards to the bolded, yes there are legitimate issues. Anet will do the best they can to filter what are important issues that need to be handled. With certain care too, as among those "waterfall of tears and whines" are also changes that aren't good at all. And I'm talking about changes that look good and have "worked" but in turn cause a cascading wave of changes that eventually ends up hurting GW2 in the long run.

Only problem is that we won't know till it's been tested in GW2 and by then the damage will be done.

[Radiea]

UssjTrunks, on 06 July 2012 - 10:51 PM, said:

That's really only true of Elixir X. Could they seriously not come up with a unique elite for the engineer? This looks more like a placeholder skill than anything. All of the other elixirs are inconsequential for the opposing player, they're more of a detriment to the engineer. Likewise, the thief's steal is a totally useless mechanic that isn't going to be deciding any battles.

I don't know what thief's steal gives, but.

If an Engineer uses Elixir H while fleeing and the skill I rely on for swiftness is on cooldown, would he not have a 33% chance of getting away by diceroll?

If I am against a Warrior with 2 melee sets and I Toss Elixir U and i get Wall of Reflection instead of Smoke Screen or Veil of Invisibility...welp I guess I need to use another spell or I'm boned because Wall of Reflection doesn't reflect Eviscerate, eh?

EDIT: To people saying "this game isn't for you" - this is the same calibre of response as "go back to WoW if you don't like it" from SWToR and, indeed, GW2 fans. It's at best a poor excuse of a response and irrelevant; at worst, downright insulting.

Edited by Radiea, 07 July 2012 - 04:28 AM.

[Arngrim Einheri]

But the thing with steal on the Thief is that you are always stealing something good. What I did is adapt my gameplay based on what I stole, for example if I steal the "throw feathers" item which grants me stealth I reserve it for later when I need an extra stealth skill, or if I steal the egg which heals me a little and replenishes 12 ini iirc, I use it right after unleashing a combo so I can continue dealing more damage.

Radiea, on 07 July 2012 - 03:55 AM, said:

If I am against a Warrior with 2 melee sets and I Toss Elixir U and i get Wall of Reflection instead of Smoke Screen or Veil of Invisibility...welp I guess I need to use another spell or I'm boned because Wall of Reflection doesn't reflect Eviscerate, eh?

I don't know which combos can you make as engi but can you combo (I mean yourself) WoR to make something useful against a melee war? If not, then the engi random skills need reworking.

[Radiea]

Arngrim Einheri, on 07 July 2012 - 09:28 AM, said:

But the thing with steal on the Thief is that you are always stealing something good. What I did is adapt my gameplay based on what I stole, for example if I steal the "throw feathers" item which grants me stealth I reserve it for later when I need an extra stealth skill, or if I steal the egg which heals me a little and replenishes 12 ini iirc, I use it right after unleashing a combo so I can continue dealing more damage.

What if you're chasing down someone? Stealth isn't useful there, while getting all your initiative back is much better.

Arngrim Einheri, on 07 July 2012 - 09:28 AM, said:

I don't know which combos can you make as engi but can you combo (I mean yourself) WoR to make something useful against a melee war? If not, then the engi random skills need reworking.

You need a Blast or Leap for granting retaliation to nearby allies, and Projectile or Whirl to remove conditions.

Neither of them are nearly as direct (seeing as retaliation isn't nearly as powerful) a counter than the other two, but if you must:

The Big Ole Bomb (regular bombs need not apply apparently according to wiki), mines, turret detonations, rocket boots, supply crate elite (they are Blast) and Jump Shot (Leap) provide retaliation. The pistol and rifle 1 skills are 20% to be a projectile; personal battering ram, throw wrench and shield are projectiles, which removes conditions from allies near the attacked player (presumably you too, since it's a melee war). No whirl finishers.

Edited by Radiea, 07 July 2012 - 10:12 AM.

[Engel Jorgenson]

To the OP, my short answer is NO!

[Arngrim Einheri]

mrbig, on 06 July 2012 - 02:57 PM, said:

And please don't try to argue back, because i'm right and you're wrong, and i have no real intention to continue this discussion.

Well mrbig, first of all, don't be so Sheldon Cooper.

mrbig, on 06 July 2012 - 02:57 PM, said:

Oh my, you're so wrong.

Especially with the thief.

First of all, i would say that i'm not against RNG, but the point is that your logic is mathematically flawed.

It doesn't matter how big the stealable items pool is, the only thing able to stabilize the chance of getting X item from a guardian is to increase THE AMOUNT OF REPETITIONS.

Since Steal is on a 45 secs CD, while the repetitions needed to have a stable 33 % chance to obtain X item ( among X-Y-Z items, so 3 items) would be over 90 , ( around it, by following binomial distribution , but i'm too lazy to find out the real outcome) Steal is totally unreliable.

You don't know the outcome. Steal doesn't give any advantage due to unreliability.

Being able to use steal effectively is another story: the smart player will always use it to its advantage, but Steal, mathematically,  doesn't put you in a sure and advantageous situation.

And the same is about Elixir X and elixir U.

Yeah, we all know you are good at math, and all that statistical explanation is very good and all that. But the thing is that he is partially right and not completely wrong.
He said that once you know what can you steal from someone and memorize the stolen items, you are at an advantage. But I wouldn't say so much and I will say you are not at disadvantage anymore, because as long as you don't know what can you steal from your target you are doomed. I think you are at a little advantage AFTER you have stolen something, because in that moment the enemy is completely clueless about what have you taken from him. Well, and I would even say that many times they don't even realize they have been stolen.

Besides some professions only give you offensive or CC skills (like warrior or ele or guardian) so that is another thing to take into consideration.
I know what items I can steal from you and I know all of 'em are oriented to an offensive style of game. I tehn, know that steal in this case is only going to help me deal you more damage. If I'm fighting with you and after some time I realize I can't beat you for whatever reason (build, skill, "gear") I know what I have to do is to flee or seek help because I know stealing you is not going to help me getting out.

[Tarranoth]

The real problem with elixir X is that the 3 elites do complete different things (plague for conditions, tornado for control and brute seems lackluster). I think the best thing would be to make the differences between the effects a little less big, to make them achieve the same thing. Elixir H ( the healing skill) gives either protection, regeneration, or swiftness. These effects are all defensive so when you need to get out of a bad situation, they will help you in different ways but they will all attempt the same goal, making you take less damage. The different outcomes of elixir X are simply way too big.

[Trei]

What if the elixirs grant the random abilities in the same way Steal does?
As in, once they are activated, you would first get whatever default effect each does (ie: H does a default heal).

Then, the button turns into a randomized ability; if you get tornado, then you'll see a tornado icon there, waiting for whenever you deem fit to use it, up to a certain duration whereupon it would wear off and turn back into the elixir icon.

[mrbig]

Arngrim Einheri, on 07 July 2012 - 10:20 AM, said:

Well mrbig, first of all, don't be so Sheldon Cooper.

Lol, i can't help it , really

Arngrim Einheri, on 07 July 2012 - 10:20 AM, said:

Yeah, we all know you are good at math, and all that statistical explanation is very good and all that. But the thing is that he is partially right and not completely wrong.
He said that once you know what can you steal from someone and memorize the stolen items, you are at an advantage. But I wouldn't say so much and I will say you are not at disadvantage anymore, because as long as you don't know what can you steal from your target you are doomed. I think you are at a little advantage AFTER you have stolen something, because in that moment the enemy is completely clueless about what have you taken from him. Well, and I would even say that many times they don't even realize they have been stolen.

Besides some professions only give you offensive or CC skills (like warrior or ele or guardian) so that is another thing to take into consideration.
I know what items I can steal from you and I know all of 'em are oriented to an offensive style of game. I tehn, know that steal in this case is only going to help me deal you more damage. If I'm fighting with you and after some time I realize I can't beat you for whatever reason (build, skill, "gear") I know what I have to do is to flee or seek help because I know stealing you is not going to help me getting out.

The point is that this is not the point of the discussion

You say that if you know Steal outcomes you're at advantage, but it's not like this.

Being at advantage and being able to react to the item you obtain are 2 totally different things.

You're not at advantage, since statistically there's no fixed chance to obtain X items when stealing from a war ( and i obtained the seed item, the one planting the f*ing useless tree, even from a warrior), and this is very true even if they really intend to reduce the pool to 2 items per profession: this means that you always have to react to what you obtain.

And this is fine indeed. But not mathematically.

To a skilled player there's no difference from obtaining a thing or another by stealing, because he always knows what he obtains, so there's no difference if the stealable items pool is composed by 2 or 8 items.

Since steal repetitions are too few to obtain statistical relevance, their "proposed" change to reduce stealable items makes no sense: steal needs to be redesigned in order to be used often (and being useful for both ranged and melee thieves, but this is another story, not for this thread).

Randomness should reward you: this is not the case for Steal, since at best you're obtaining something worthy of that high CD ( 45 secs is huge), at worst you're obtaining total crap, and often you're obtaining something which doesn't scale with your attributes ( condition items on a power built thief, or high damage items on a condition built thief and stuff) so that 50 % of the time, the item you get is not as useful as it should.

People can be "fine" with steal as much as they want, but they're wrong: steal is a product of a horribly lazy design choice, and should be changed asap, otherwise stuff like Team Paradigm interview saying that the thief is a completely worthless class will arouse surprise no more.

This is of course also valid for enge elixirs.

[Ivarr_Ironfist]

Randomness is a necessity of interesting game-play. The game would hardly be very interesting to play if everyone walked around hitting the same on every swing. Without randomness MMOs would be too predictable and boring.

The real question is how much randomness is acceptable. As long as the better player/s can win a match the vast majority of the time, the level of randomness is fine.

[A Wyatt Mann]

Ivarr_Ironfist, on 07 July 2012 - 04:41 PM, said:

Randomness is a necessity of interesting game-play. The game would hardly be very interesting to play if everyone walked around hitting the same on every swing. Without randomness MMOs would be too predictable and boring.

The real question is how much randomness is acceptable. As long as the better player/s can win a match the vast majority of the time, the level of randomness is fine.

The answer is, crits, procs and predictable randomness should be in the game. You can know that you're going to get several crits, and several procs, of a specific condition or effect.

What isn't fine, is reactive randomness. Randomness, that involves a list. So, in a situation where you are a thief, or an engineer, and you really need to steal something that does an interrupt, or if you really need protection from elixir H, and you DON'T get it, then your loss is down to luck. Alternatively, your win could also be down to luck.

No amount of skill, will ever make getting the wrong steal, or the wrong elixir, the equal of the right steal and the right elixir. Its that simple. You cant make it so that swiftness will be useful to you, when immobilized, and are getting hit by a DD warrior. You need protection from that. So, as an engineer, if I don't get protection from Elixir H, then I would be at a disadvantage. And this is a problem for all cases such as elixirs and steal. There is never a case where 2-3 options are equally viable, as each situation has different needs. In one case, you might need protection, in another, swiftness. But if you can't predict when you will get either, then you will be at a loss, and your success and failure won't be based on skill but on luck.

I'm fine with RNG in general though to be honest, but I do think that as it exists, it is mutually exclusive with competitive PvP. So either, Arenanet need to stop pretending to be competitive PvP game, or they need to remove the excessive reactive RNG.

Edited by A Wyatt Mann, 07 July 2012 - 04:54 PM.

[Radiea]

Ivarr_Ironfist, on 07 July 2012 - 04:41 PM, said:

Randomness is a necessity of interesting game-play. The game would hardly be very interesting to play if everyone walked around hitting the same on every swing. Without randomness MMOs would be too predictable and boring.

This has been corrected so many times I don't even know where to begin.

Take fighting games, or any RTS. I am not familiar with FPSes, but acquaintences insist they are, too. They are deterministic, and very interesting, because they are so difficult to solve. Or even board games like Go. Chess, all varieties.

Edited by Radiea, 07 July 2012 - 06:09 PM.

[coglin]

A Wyatt Mann, on 07 July 2012 - 04:53 PM, said:

The answer is, crits, procs and predictable randomness should be in the game. You can know that you're going to get several crits, and several procs, of a specific condition or effect.

What isn't fine, is reactive randomness. Randomness, that involves a list. So, in a situation where you are a thief, or an engineer, and you really need to steal something that does an interrupt, or if you really need protection from elixir H, and you DON'T get it, then your loss is down to luck. Alternatively, your win could also be down to luck.

No amount of skill, will ever make getting the wrong steal, or the wrong elixir, the equal of the right steal and the right elixir. Its that simple. You cant make it so that swiftness will be useful to you, when immobilized, and are getting hit by a DD warrior. You need protection from that. So, as an engineer, if I don't get protection from Elixir H, then I would be at a disadvantage. And this is a problem for all cases such as elixirs and steal. There is never a case where 2-3 options are equally viable, as each situation has different needs. In one case, you might need protection, in another, swiftness. But if you can't predict when you will get either, then you will be at a loss, and your success and failure won't be based on skill but on luck.

I'm fine with RNG in general though to be honest, but I do think that as it exists, it is mutually exclusive with competitive PvP. So either, Arenanet need to stop pretending to be competitive PvP game, or they need to remove the excessive reactive RNG.

It  truely amazing how your post all pretend that elixirs have guaranteed effects. You talk as if the entire elixir is random. Elixirs have a tool belt - slot combination with a guaranteed effect that is on par with other class utilities, with the benefit of added AoE effects and a random ADDITIONAL benefit.

If you do not have enough skill to manage the guaranteed benefit, I don't know what to tell you. but quit pretending the ADDITIONAL benefit that is partially random is the elixir. They have a base guaranteed effect.

Its truely entertaining that you cherry pick, and deem one aspect of randomness just fine, and another as bad

[A Wyatt Mann]

coglin, on 07 July 2012 - 08:05 PM, said:

It  truely amazing how your post all pretend that elixirs have guaranteed effects. You talk as if the entire elixir is random. Elixirs have a tool belt - slot combination with a guaranteed effect that is on par with other class utilities, with the benefit of added AoE effects and a random ADDITIONAL benefit.

If you do not have enough skill to manage the guaranteed benefit, I don't know what to tell you. but quit pretending the ADDITIONAL benefit that is partially random is the elixir. They have a base guaranteed effect.

Its truely entertaining that you cherry pick, and deem one aspect of randomness just fine, and another as bad

Having one stable component, does not mean that there is no RNG...

And you still haven't found this magical quote that you keep insisting exists. I'll wait. You have no evidence that arenanet considers the toolbelt and the utility as one skill.

[coglin]

A Wyatt Mann, on 07 July 2012 - 08:18 PM, said:

Having one stable component, does not mean that there is no RNG...

And you still haven't found this magical quote that you keep insisting exists. I'll wait. You have no evidence that arena net considers the toolbelt and the utility as one skill.

So? The base abilities are not RNG......The base function of the elixir is its defined use, the partially random additional benefits are just that, additional benefits. In the same manner that crits are based on a percentage of randomization, as an addition to the base damage of a build. So are the additional benefits of elixirs side effect like benefits to the elixir.......If you depend on the secondary effect instead of the primary effect, Its not the class, elixirs, or the mechanics, its the player who is showing enough bad judgement to depend their game on a secondary benefit, over the primary effect of the utility.

[A Wyatt Mann]

coglin, on 07 July 2012 - 08:27 PM, said:

So? The base abilities are not RNG......The base function of the elixir is its defined use, the partially random additional benefits are just that, additional benefits. In the same manner that crits are based on a percentage of randomization, as an addition to the base damage of a build. So are the additional benefits of elixirs side effect like benefits to the elixir.......If you depend on the secondary effect instead of the primary effect, Its not the class, elixirs, or the mechanics, its the player who is showing enough bad judgement to depend their game on a secondary benefit, over the primary effect of the utility.

Not true at all.

As has been said many times.

Elixir U, and Elixir H prove that notion wrong.

Elixir U, has no added benefit when compared to the other quickness buffs.

Elixir H has the same heal as other 30s heals, and a random RNG bonus. But that bonus, is consistent, insofar as the others have a stable thing. Warriors have healing surge= extra adrenaline.

[coglin]

LMAO if you really think elixir H has no base benefit, you just have no business being here. For goodness sake, its on of our 3 heals. As well, you may want to abandon this straw man pattern you have of comparing engineers to warriors as a basis for every argument you make.

[A Wyatt Mann]

coglin, on 07 July 2012 - 08:46 PM, said:

LMAO if you really think elixir H has no base benefit, you just have no business being here. For goodness sake, its on of our 3 heals. As well, you may want to abandon this straw man pattern you have of comparing engineers to warriors as a basis for every argument you make.

It has a base benefit, but so do all others.

The way it is is:

Elixir H= Base Benefit+ RNG
Everyone else= Base Benefit+ Consistent bonus

Its not just warriors dude. Its every other heal. The engineer is the odd one out. I'm using the warrior because its a simple example that everyone can understand.

Edited by A Wyatt Mann, 07 July 2012 - 08:48 PM.

[coglin]

A Wyatt Mann, on 07 July 2012 - 08:48 PM, said:

Elixir H= Base Benefit+ RNG
Everyone else= Base Benefit+ Consistent bonus

Umm no.....most heals on other classes have no added bonus at all........

[A Wyatt Mann]

coglin, on 07 July 2012 - 08:51 PM, said:

Umm no.....most heals on other classes have no added bonus at all........

Uhm, find me one that doesn't.
Warrior
Mending= Healing+ 2 conditions
Healing Surge= Healing+ adrenaline
Healing Signet= Healing+ Passive healing

Guardian
Healing Breeze= Healing+ Heals other allies as well.
Shelter= Healing+ Blocks while healing
Signet of Resolve= Healing+ Removes conditions from self every 10s

...

You want me to go on?

And the engineers elixir H is, you guessed it.

Healing+RNG.

The RNG is not a 'bonus' its just like every other heal that follows the formula of heal+added effect or change.

Edited by A Wyatt Mann, 07 July 2012 - 08:56 PM.

[Hep]

http://wiki.guildwar..._healing_skills

Honestly, I want to hear how MOST (read: > 50%) of those abilities don't have an added effect besides the base heal.

[coglin]

A Wyatt Mann, on 07 July 2012 - 08:55 PM, said:

Uhm, find me one that doesn't.

Okay

http://wiki.guildwar...iki/Heal_as_One
http://wiki.guildwar...i/Troll_Unguent
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Mirror
http://wiki.guildwar...ki/Power_Return
http://wiki.guildwar.../Taste_of_Death
http://wiki.guildwar...rayer_to_Dwayna

Hep, on 07 July 2012 - 08:58 PM, said:

Honestly, I want to hear how MOST (read: > 50%) of those abilities don't have an added effect besides the base heal.

Yeah yeah yeah, I know, I pulled a Wyatt Mann and ridiculously over exaggerated.

Edited by coglin, 07 July 2012 - 09:04 PM.

[A Wyatt Mann]

coglin, on 07 July 2012 - 09:03 PM, said:

Okay

http://wiki.guildwar...iki/Heal_as_One
http://wiki.guildwar...i/Troll_Unguent
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Mirror
http://wiki.guildwar...ki/Power_Return
http://wiki.guildwar.../Taste_of_Death
http://wiki.guildwar...rayer_to_Dwayna

Yeah yeah yeah, I know, I pulled a Wyatt Mann and ridiculously over exaggerated.

Mirror has the benefit of reflecting.
Power return is a mantra, which is not a standard heal.
Neither is troll unguent. It heals in a different manner from normal.

The only one, is heal as one.

I don't count racials. As this topic is about competative PvP.

So, youre argument that Elixir H has no RNG, is because 'heal as one' has no added benefit?

Well that is a pretty flimsy argument.

[coglin]

A Wyatt Mann, on 07 July 2012 - 09:07 PM, said:

Power return is a mantra, which is not a standard heal.
Neither is troll unguent. It heals in a different manner from normal.
.
I don't count racials. As this topic is about competative PvP.

So, youre argument that Elixir H has no RNG, is because 'heal as one' has no added benefit?

Well that is a pretty flimsy argument.

Right. Cause elixir H is a standard heal among all classes right?........Wow what a joke.....you think you can exempt other heals for random reasons and have a serious discussion?

They go in the heal utility slot. You can manipulate the facts and back peddle all you like. Those are heals...And you want to point figures about flimsy arguments?

Edited by coglin, 07 July 2012 - 09:13 PM.