134 replies to this topic

[Saren]

I wasn't sure if other's felt the same way I did on the topic of limited skills. Mind you, when I say skills, I am referring to your skills on the left side of the interface or more commonly - your weapon skills. I researched the topic a little more online and found that it wasn't just me that thought there was just too few skills.

Instead of digging through thousands of posts here, I thought I would write a new post. I'm sure there is already something like this out there.

Coming from Guild Wars 1, I was expecting a some-what similar approach to the skill listing. Unfortunately, I was wrong. I feel disappointed to find I only have five skills for each different weapon(s) I use. I always enjoyed being able to change my "build" up once in a while and try something new. This is just not the case in GW2 anymore leaving me feeling almost bored of the same thing.

Am I alone on Guru about this topic?

[Afyael]

No I feel the same way but they prefer it like this for balance reasons. Most of the tweaking and different playstyles come from changing your traits...

I'm disappointed but I've learned to enjoy the game for what it is, it's still fun to play.

[Flaming_Foxx]

They've done it this way for a lot of reasons.
Personally I would prefer it if they combined the systems a little bit. As in - Had your first 5 skills limited by your weapon, but had a pool of a few skills per weapon for you to pick, instead of just being assigned.

But yeah, it removes a lot of frustration from the game. In GW1 it had gotten to the point where if you weren't running a meta build nobody wanted you in their party. This way the system is much easier for people to navigate and people can just jump into the action.

[Valkaire]

I'm not really disappointed. In GW1, out of the hundred of skills I only used maybe 20-30 at most for different builds. Unless you wanted to be underwhelming for your class (in PvP especially) you only had the option of a few of the best skills, 50-60 of the other skills or more were just left to collect dust most of the time. In GW2 I've always found there to be a fairly large variety of builds... maybe it's just because I play an elementalist and messing with my gear/traits/weapon/attunements means I can have a wide variety of builds from support to glass cannon or condition damage and there are different builds that people use even within those three set ups.

Edited by Valkaire, 29 October 2012 - 05:27 AM.

[Saren]

Perhaps you're right about the balancing.

Most of my time is PvEing as well and I typically stick with one type of weapon so for me personally, the grind is incredibly boring and tedious. GW2's release date was not that long ago so maybe they'll add more along the way. One can only hope...

As for you, Fox, I agree. A little diversity and customization would have been very nice. I did feel there was a lot of "useless" skills back in GW1.

Yes, out of all the classes, I think Elementalist does have the greatest diversity in skills with the difference in attunements and such. I played fairly religiously back in GW1 so I did find myself using a wide range of different skills. I played Mesmer as a main and switched between interruptions, hexes, conditions, or just a basic DPS build. I wish GW2 offered a bit more in this field for all classes.

[Afyael]

I think alot of the build variation came from having a secondary class and being able to choose from their skills. That obviously wouldn't work in this game, but is definitely something that I miss as well.

[Doki20]

Saren, on 29 October 2012 - 05:14 AM, said:

...
Coming from Guild Wars 1, I was expecting a some-what similar approach to the skill listing. Unfortunately, I was wrong. I feel disappointed to find I only have five skills for each different weapon(s) I use. I always enjoyed being able to change my "build" up once in a while and try something new. This is just not the case in GW2 anymore leaving me feeling almost bored of the same thing.

Am I alone on Guru about this topic?

If you really come from GW1, then you would have noticed that quite a lot of skills are just duplicates, and those which are not are 50%+ are subpar compared to a few one. They chose this method so they don't have to waste time on making tons of skills, from which most are wont even be used by players because of numbers, and can instead make a few, balanced ones which everyone uses.

[SevereEpicz]

I kinda agree kinda disagree, yeah it does get boring but the more skills you have the more useless or similar they become. I think that you should be like 10 skills for each weapon but you can only use 5, swappable like the utility skills. And you get them by doing things like completing special skill challeges or something like that. I want more choice, but not too much.

[Saren]

Having the two profession system definitely played a large role in the number of skills you were given though admittedly, I rarely used the secondary profession skills unles it was some sort of energy management. There was still probably (rough guess) 80+ skills for each profession.

As for Doki, there were some duplicate skills. However, there were not that many.

Some skills back in GW1 did seem to become rather similar. I think the 80+ or so skills for each profession was perhaps too many. Reducing that number to a third or so would be more feasable. I can only cross my fingers and hope for some implemented skills for the future.

[omar316]

Sorry, but I have to agree with the OP. I am pretty sure, most of the responses here were directed from old time GW1 players.

Yet the WoW style has a vast range of system.

I personally feel Warhammer's system was perfect. They had tactics, abilities and Morales.

Tactics to choose from, are like traits, and you can set several, up to 8 sets of different tactics.

They gave you a whole range of abilities up to 30 if I'm not wrong. They all can be used at all times, though there were some limitations, like, you can't use Shield specific abilities with out a shield.

Morales were something of a mix of Elite and Burst skills, meaning you needed to build a certain level of "Adrenaline" before it was available, and there were 4 stages of it. Morales were pretty epic and there were class specific morales as well as general morales.

Every class had a mechanic, and each mechanic worked well to complement every abilities the class had.

[Valkaire]

They're going to be adding more weapon types in the future (great axe has been confirmed) so hopefully you can find a niche when more variety comes out. As for GW1... when I was playing PvP (monk) I had two-three builds that I could choose from: healing, protection or smiting. Smiting wasn't in demand most often (unless I was really bored in FA) so I'd normally go healing which gave me a choice of like... 10-12 skills. Even in PvE I just ran a Mo/Rt spirit spammer with a few mesmers, some N/Rt healers, a support rt and an discord spiker. I never had to change that team build unless I was doing a mission/dungeon/vanquish that had an abnormally high amount of conditions/hexes. So basically, out of the hundreds of skills available to me in GW1 I only ever really used 80-90 skills at a time (full team of 8 heroes) because I never needed to. I don't really feel any difference from that compared to GW2 as I can still switch between 10 weapon skills at a whim but that's probably because my playstyle... I didn't switch my build unless it was absolutely necessary (fire ele to water vs destroyers) and I could pretty much do everything with that one build/teambuild.

  Even in WoW, as a dps you only used a rotation of like 4 attack skills with maybe 3-4 cool down skills. There are a TON of skills in WoW that people don't really use. That might increase to like 10 available skills that are used for each profession in arenas/bgs out of 20-30 skills.

  When you have that many extra skills it becomes wasted space and a nightmare to balance so I'm absolutely fine with how it's set up here. I feel like having 5 skills per weapon and 3-4 weapons available (if not more) to each class is a good middle ground as each weapon generally has a different feel than another (some are more team/support oriented, some dps, some defensive, some based on conditions etc.).

Edited by Valkaire, 29 October 2012 - 06:22 AM.

[Saren]

I never did play Warhammer nor did I really play much of WoW so I can't really say much about those. By what you're telling me, the morale skills seem to be something similar to "elite skills" back in GW1 days. The adrenaline system existed within GW1 as well but only on the physical classes respectively (Warrior, Dervish, and Paragon). 30 abilities (I assume these are skills for GW2?) is a decent number of skills per class. We have about 15-20 skills or so for all the different weapon types per class in GW2 it seems. Maybe with the implemented weapons like Valkaire says could make things a bit more interesting.

And yes, I typically only used about 80-90 skills as well (every profession combined) but like I said before, I always had fun experimenting with new builds and trying something completely new. It was fun to use skills that hardly anyone used to try and make it more useful. One time when I tried a sword and shield melee build on my Mesmer using Illusionary Weaponry with Warrior secondary. It was pretty fun!

[Princess Fatora]

Weird thing is, I actually use more skills and abilities than I did in GW1. Simply because the abilities here are more useful and have far less useless bloat.

In GW1, it was meta build or bust. Quite different here. This seems to be quite a better system indeed. Most GW1 skills were just weaker versions of better skills that did pretty much the same thing.

[Saren]

I guess we will all differ in that sense. I can't complain about the skills that we have. Just more and different ones.

There were some skills that were weaker versions of better skills but there was a huge number of skills that were unique to themselves. A lot of them being less useful than others of course. Not to steer away from the main topic; it seems like most people would like to see a bit more diversity in the skills. I am looking forward to future updates on this.

[Lordkrall]

The main problem with the GW1 system however was that you more or less needed to use a very specific build in order to do things. That means there were about 8-16 skills "available" to each combination.

While in GW2 we actually use more or less ALL skills and are still efficient.
Plus the fact that it will be much easier to balance.

[Ritualist]

I wish GW2 functioned the way D3 does with its Elective mode. Players get a pre-set build by default (to prevent completely shitty builds), but by selecting one of the options, they can switch around skills on demand. Give each class some 5 or so builds-worth of skills (which would mean around 25 weapon skills to choose from) and then allow us to switch those skills around IF we choose to do so.
Also, remove skills being tied to weapons and allow us to change the location of the skills on our bar.

[Evans]

GW2 system is far better than GW1.
First of all, it's foolproof! Yes, even the biggest fools can pull of a decent game because they HAVE to use the skills of the weapons and these do provide synergy. Of course, it takes practice and experience in terms of timing, movement and placement to get the most out of the skills. On top of that many traits offer secondary benefits to certain weapons or skills. This needs to be taken into account when you decide how many choices you have, because in GW1 these would be 'different' skills which do more of the same.

I see people complaining about variety all the time and it baffles me. I liked to switch up my skills in GW1 from time to time and the only thing that accomplished was slower gameplay, mockery and being locked out of endgame content.

Edited by Evans, 29 October 2012 - 07:54 AM.

[kathlyyoun]

I'm disappointed but I've learned to enjoy the game for what it is, it's still fun to play

[Saren]

For Evans - for me specifically, it's not always about the pace of the gameplay or even end-game content for that matter, I just simply like the diversity. I really do get bored of the same skills all the time. What Protoss said is a good notion. Having the ability to change them if you want is great. It allows players to experiment a little bit further. When you add too many skills, yes, it will become repetitive, but if done right, GW2 could allow more skills that are completely unique.

[Evans]

I see, but imho you do have that option.

With the exception of the elementalist and engineer (and those have other ways to have diversity) you can change up between a lot of your weapons. You do have those options.
No one is forcing you to use a GS on a warrior all the time for example. You could use a hammer, or a sword and shield, or two swords, or whatever! And the beauty of it is that no set will be vastly inferior. Of course, some builds will always be better, but unlike GW1 you can't bring along something utterly useless. Every weapon you choose is balanced for a purpose, and will always be usable.

You have a choice in your heal, you have a choice in your support skils and your elite as well. If you want diversity, use a charrzooka in stead of rage signet for example. It won't make you noticeably worse, but it gives you flavour.

It just seems to me that the amount of diversity in GW1 is being exaggerated. There were a lot of skills yes, but in the end very very few were usable and gave synergy. On top of that you had to go back to town every time you wanted something new.
In this game you can do that on the spot. Just swap in some new weapons or skills and you're golden. Playing a hammer is far different from a greatsword. Daggers and staves are nothing alike.

Or is it that you like the look of your character wielding that greatsword, but you don't like the skills attached to it? In that case I can understand that, but I have to say that it makes sense for skills to be tied to weapons. After all, a ranger in GW1 couldn't use bow skill while having a sword equiped either right?

(Sorry for using specific examples but it makes it easier for me to explain my thoughts )

Edited by Evans, 29 October 2012 - 09:46 AM.

[Ritualist]

Evans, on 29 October 2012 - 09:45 AM, said:

It just seems to me that the amount of diversity in GW1 is being exaggerated. There were a lot of skills yes, but in the end very very few were usable and gave synergy.

If by "usable" you mean "top of the line", then yes, the selection of skills was very low.
If by "usable" you mean "being able to win PvE", then no, the amount of options that fit this description in GW1 is staggering.

[Elr3d]

What I like in GW2 over GW1 (I played my fair share of hours, but more as a casual I must say) is the fact that you can make pretty much everything efficient with the right trait/stat/weapon set combination.

I mean, for example I (almost) never saw anything else than Fire Elementalist in GW1... Now in GW2 I'm just like "well, I'd love to play *this* and *that*", spend a few hours testing/tweaking things with traits and end up with something that works.

There is still those overused build (backstab thief, pistol-whip thief, GS warrior and all) but you can (almost) always succeed to build efficiently from any idea you have in any class. Like, "oh yeah I'm Thief and I want to do something stupidly absurd, like support". Now I run a very bulky Sword/Dagger Thief relying on stealth regen/stealthing allies to regen, heal via Shadow Refuge and specialized in WvWvW solo/small party roaming. I end up beating most Thieves I come across that plays most overused build (D/D glass cannon are my favorite foes, they die quickly while barely scratching me most time).

I mean, in GW2 you can start from anything such as "hey, Warrior with double sword would be classy" and get *something* viable at the end. I never felt that in my 800 hours of GW1 play.

Edited by Elr3d, 29 October 2012 - 10:21 AM.

[Generic Fantasy Name]

I much prefer the GW2 skill system to GW1's, but if Anet could find a way to implement additional skills for each weapon without ruining what balance they currently have I'd be 100% behind that effort. And I mean additional skills in the sense of how utility skills work right now: your weapon has 5 (or 3, or 2...) slots to fill, and you choose from a pool of available skills for it. They'd probably want to separate "autoattack" skills for the first slot from the rest just to make sure some poor new player didn't only equip abilities with 30s cooldowns.

[Evans]

Protoss, on 29 October 2012 - 10:05 AM, said:

If by "usable" you mean "top of the line", then yes, the selection of skills was very low.
If by "usable" you mean "being able to win PvE", then no, the amount of options that fit this description in GW1 is staggering.

This is very true for people who are into the game and have built some skill. However, I personally know of quite a few people who stopped playing the game because it was too hard for them. That's L2P issues, but they drove people away anyway. The skill confusion was a big issue there and there are a whole lot of useless skills in GW1 (be it effect or simply the energy cost or recharge) that can ruin your skillset and lead to death.

This might mean GW2 is less diverse for a smaller part of people who could get around skill inefficiency, but it's a whole lot better for the really casual players. Not everyone could win at GW1 without doing anything. If you hadn't unlocked everything and your heroes were terrible, then the game was a problem for you. And there were a lot of people in that situation.

I suppose in the end it's a matter of being able to draw more people in. But I seriously don't think it's so bad it should push veterans away. I for one am for example not pining for more skills on greatswords where I swing left for one skill and right for another because it's flavour.

Edited by Evans, 29 October 2012 - 10:44 AM.

[omar316]

Protoss, on 29 October 2012 - 07:52 AM, said:

I wish GW2 functioned the way D3 does with its Elective mode. Players get a pre-set build by default (to prevent completely shitty builds), but by selecting one of the options, they can switch around skills on demand. Give each class some 5 or so builds-worth of skills (which would mean around 25 weapon skills to choose from) and then allow us to switch those skills around IF we choose to do so.
Also, remove skills being tied to weapons and allow us to change the location of the skills on our bar.

I loathe the D3 system. But I guess it does have it's merits. But moving skills around the slots is gold.

Evans, on 29 October 2012 - 10:43 AM, said:

This is very true for people who are into the game and have built some skill. However, I personally know of quite a few people who stopped playing the game because it was too hard for them. That's L2P issues, but they drove people away anyway. The skill confusion was a big issue there and there are a whole lot of useless skills in GW1 (be it effect or simply the energy cost or recharge) that can ruin your skillset and lead to death.

This might mean GW2 is less diverse for a smaller part of people who could get around skill inefficiency, but it's a whole lot better for the really casual players. Not everyone could win at GW1 without doing anything. If you hadn't unlocked everything and your heroes were terrible, then the game was a problem for you. And there were a lot of people in that situation.

I suppose in the end it's a matter of being able to draw more people in. But I seriously don't think it's so bad it should push veterans away. I for one am for example not pining for more skills on greatswords where I swing left for one skill and right for another because it's flavour.

It happens in all games. Unfortunately.In my opinion they should have a thought of a better design and give both types of players a common middle ground.

Just because there is limited skills does not mean there is little customisation currently, but what we do have now is inadequate in the long term.

[Evans]

omar316, on 29 October 2012 - 11:14 AM, said:

It happens in all games. Unfortunately.In my opinion they should have a thought of a better design and give both types of players a common middle ground.

Just because there is limited skills does not mean there is little customisation currently, but what we do have now is inadequate in the long term.

I do agree, and I'm perfectly happy to see more weapons introduced so we get more variety. I just firmly believe skills should remain stuck on the weapon type for the first 5 slots.

In the end it's just my opinion, I can perfectly understand people think otherwise. I just believe that the game is receiving a lot of negative comments which sometimes seem somewhat exaggerated to me

[Ritualist]

Evans, on 29 October 2012 - 10:43 AM, said:

snip

Aye, both systems have flaws. That's why a compromise would have been fantastic. Clearly we should have less skills that we did in GW1, but it's an absolute shame that we got ONLY this much skills.
Once again, that's what I love about D3 - you have a few basic skills, which you can then manipulate with runes. You have the basic skill that is strong enough that you should be able to win the game with it alone and then you have runes, which give the skill some flavour. Quite nice example of a system with limited options, but still much more interesting than GW2's.

[EphraimGlass]

Protoss, on 29 October 2012 - 10:05 AM, said:

If by "usable" you mean "top of the line", then yes, the selection of skills was very low.
If by "usable" you mean "being able to win PvE", then no, the amount of options that fit this description in GW1 is staggering.

I've argued with other players over this point before.  For a very long time, the GW1 community had become jaded.  "Being able to win PvE" wasn't even an accomplishment worth mentioning.  Even end-game calibre content was held in contempt.  There were no hearty slaps on the back and congratulations for a player who completed Underworld for the first time.  "Oh, it took you four hours?  n00b.  I bet you were running an elementalist with Flare."

I happened to enjoy the diversity of skills that were available because they gave the game replay value and the sense that I was exploring uncharted territory.  (No, I didn't really think that I was the only player ever to walk down those paths, but since I was intentionally avoiding the meta builds that "everybody else" was playing, it felt that way.)

The supposed lack of viability of most of the skills wasn't really ANet's fault.  As Protoss said, for PvE, if you didn't mind the content taking a bit longer, there were countless builds.  The players became inflexible and mean-spirited, though.  It was an echo chamber insisting that only some builds were viable and ruthlessly ignoring players who didn't conform.

It hasn't happened yet in GW2 but it could.  For all this talk about every weapon set having viable options, as the game matures, I'm sure that the community will begin to form a consensus about which weapon sets are optimal for which classes.  At that point, we can either make the same mistakes that we made in GW1 or we can learn from them and resolve to be less cynical toward other players.  (ie:  When a random responds to your dungeon invitation and he doesn't have all-exotic armour or he's not running your preferred build, don't just kick the poor bloke off the team.)

[RabidusIncendia]

I've thought about it and honestly it's not so bad as I thought, since they'll be adding more weapons in the future.

The real problem is so many weapons are simply not viable in PvP or PvE

[Amorphous83]

Different strokes for different folks. While I do miss options in a way, as others have said the GW1 system resulted in a handful of super builds that were required to do anything with other players, and a few more but still handful that were viable for certain areas of the game. So you were pretty limited anyway, but with the illusion of choice. This wasn't as big a problem if you were soloing PVE, but even then in some cases. Hell even a couple of classes I really loved were completely left out of 2 because they had no real purpose to serve in 2 with the new system.

GW2 is the way it is on purpose, it wasn't a flaw or missed mark, or a mistake... and I see the reasoning behind doing it. So personally I can see both sides. They've already said more will come as far as weapons (as someone already pointed out, greataxe and surely others) and who knows what they'll change over time.The game has been live a few months, a sizable amount of which has been utterly wasted with holiday crap. (Holidays are fine but when there are bugs and other issues, it should have taken a back seat or even a year off franky). Next summer the skill bar may well be different at least in the sense of a few more skills to pick per weapon. Guild Wars 1 changed a LOT from the day of release through several patches, expansions, and is a whole different animal today than it was on day 1 or even month 3 or 4.