249 replies to this topic

[El Duderino]

Specialz, on 19 February 2013 - 05:49 AM, said:

Subjective opinion is subjective. There is no factual way to prove it is better all you will get is people that like guild wars 1 supposedly deep combat system with tinted glasses syndrome talk about how awesome, it was 7 years ago. Then you have people who enjoy a more active and less boring combat system.

Personally, any game where you press a melee skill and the character auto follows isn't really fun.

So everything is subjective provided you think GW2 is better instead if looking at everything through tinted glasses syndrome? Ya, good one.

There is a reason that 99% the PvP player base of GW1 has left GW2 for LoL or other games. The combat system is one major reason.

I really thing that you are giving too much credit to auto-following being an automatic determination for whether something is a success or failure.

[Lordkrall]

99%? Where does that number even come from? Until you actually post evidence (which you funnily enough keep shouting about whenever someone disagrees with you or say something positive about GW2) we should all assume those numbers are simply something you pulled out of thin air.

Edited by unraveled, 19 February 2013 - 08:38 PM.
Altered wording slightly.

[raspberry jam]

El Duderino, on 19 February 2013 - 12:32 PM, said:

I really thing that you are giving too much credit to auto-following being an automatic determination for whether something is a success or failure.

I love auto-following, it frees up so much control space, allowing the game to contain so much more. Instead I have a game where you need to keep one or two keys pressed (or ready to be pressed) at all times, preventing those fingers to be elsewhere, doing other things.

Quarterstepping (moving your character within the swing time of your weapon) was a skill in GW1. In GW2 it's nothing. That isn't about to auto-following, but connected to it.

[Gli]

raspberry jam, on 19 February 2013 - 08:36 AM, said:

That's what the hype said, but I actually find myself looking at the UI more than I did in GW1.

Would you care to elaborate on that? I honestly can't imagine how that's possible, with hardly any UI based combat feedback at all in GW2.

[El Duderino]

Here is some starting evidence:

Lordkrall, on 19 February 2013 - 12:34 PM, said:

99%? Where does that number even come from? Until you actually post evidence (which you funnily enough keep shouting about whenever someone disagrees with you or say something positive about GW2) we should all assume those numbers are simply something you pulled out of your ass.

Here is my evidence: I knew a lot of PvP players in GW1 and they don't get on GW2. Know one of the best sites for GW PvP talk? I doubt it because you obviously weren't a part of it or you would know that teamqutter.com was a massive hub for GW1 PvP. The overriding majority of people there have left GW2 for good.

Sure, it may not be 99%, but it is a hell of a lot of people.

I thought it was pretty common knowledge that most PvP players denounced GW2 fairly quickly. Apparently you didn't get the memo.

raspberry jam, on 19 February 2013 - 12:44 PM, said:

I love auto-following, it frees up so much control space, allowing the game to contain so much more. Instead I have a game where you need to keep one or two keys pressed (or ready to be pressed) at all times, preventing those fingers to be elsewhere, doing other things.

Quarterstepping (moving your character within the swing time of your weapon) was a skill in GW1. In GW2 it's nothing. That isn't about to auto-following, but connected to it.

Not to mention that with characters that actually took up space (you can't run through them) meant that you couldn't auto follow all the time because you would get stuck. Which is why kiting was more effective, in fact I would say GW1 kiting > GW2 dodging. And it's not even close.

Edited by unraveled, 19 February 2013 - 08:39 PM.
Removed quote of deleted content.

[Lordkrall]

El Duderino, on 19 February 2013 - 12:50 PM, said:

Here is some starting evidence:


Here is my evidence: I knew a lot of PvP players in GW1 and they don't get on GW2. Know one of the best sites for GW PvP talk? I doubt it because you obviously weren't a part of it or you would know that teamqutter.com was a massive hub for GW1 PvP. The overriding majority of people there have left GW2 for good.

Sure, it may not be 99%, but it is a hell of a lot of people.

I thought it was pretty common knowledge that most PvP players denounced GW2 fairly quickly. Apparently you two didn't get the memo.

Funnily enough almost everyone that I played with in GW1 that were into PvP are playing and liking PvP in GW2 aswell.
But then again, that is just as little "evidence" as your post. Even though you will most likely shout about how our "evidence" don't prove anything while your does

[El Duderino]

Lordkrall, on 19 February 2013 - 12:53 PM, said:

Funnily enough almost everyone that I played with in GW1 that were into PvP are playing and liking PvP in GW2 aswell.
But then again, that is just as little "evidence" as your post. Even though you will most likely shout about how our "evidence" don't prove anything while your does

Can we get back on topic. Clearly you don't know anyone that played competitive PvP in GW1. Wen I can get on a computer later Ill post numerous threads about GW2's failed PvP. In the meantime, feel free to check out teamqutter.com. I suspect you won't because you don't believe that it is a legitimate site for GW PvP which would be the first sign you don't have any pulse on the GW2 vs GW1 PvP scene. Lets also keep inked that WvW is not PvP.

[raspberry jam]

Gli, on 19 February 2013 - 12:45 PM, said:

Would you care to elaborate on that? I honestly can't imagine how that's possible, with hardly any UI based combat feedback at all in GW2.

I think of red circles on the ground as part of the UI. When people say watching the game, I think of things like watching positioning, watching for spells (as in watching characters that wave their arms or such, and the local spell animation, not the red circles).

El Duderino, on 19 February 2013 - 12:53 PM, said:

Not to mention that with characters that actually took up space (you can't run through them) meant that you couldn't auto follow all the time because you would get stuck. Which is why kiting was more effective, in fact I would say GW1 kiting > GW2 dodging. And it's not even close.

This is so true, body blocking had so many tactical elements to it. Not just kiting either, you could also use it for very local area control/snaring (e.g. pinning a guy against a wall to make him die from Savannah Heat lol).

Edited by raspberry jam, 19 February 2013 - 01:05 PM.

[El Duderino]

raspberry jam, on 19 February 2013 - 01:01 PM, said:

I think of red circles on the ground as part of the UI. When people say watching the game, I think of things like watching positioning, watching for spells (as in watching characters that wave their arms or such, and the local spell animation, not the red circles).

This is so true, body blocking had so many tactical elements to it. Not just kiting either, you could also use it for very local area control/snaring (I remember pinning a guy against a wall to make him die from Savannah Heat lol).

Body blocking flag runners in HA and GvG as well as the ghost hero in HA were integral parts of the gameplay. Why they changed that is really mystery.

I think people who played GW1 PvP competitively understand the nuances of GW1s combat system much more because PvP did require much more skill than PvE.

Even weapon swapping was better.

I mean I had my high energy set and low energy set as a monk. And a couple others. I used all 4 slots in every match. There was good reasons for weapon swapping that gave an advantage over teams that didnt. It wasn't just a cheap mechanic added by ANet like it is in GW2.

Edited by El Duderino, 19 February 2013 - 01:09 PM.

[Illein]

Can only give side-line commentary really as I haven't played GW 1 so I can't speak on much of what the OP broached.

But for what it's worth, I think Guild Wars 2 was absolutely a step into the right direction in terms of more active combat than the usual MMORPG formula entailed.

As a melee player (for the most part) I love the fact that I have to pay attention to not only red circles but very much so to enemy animations in almost every fight if I want to take as little damage as I can, prevent it entirely or simply want to have as much "uptime" of my damage as possible.

I agree with others though that it's definitely not the final step for MMORPG Combat. Body blocking SHOULD be part of something that fancies itself "complete" (though I am not 100% sure why people think no body blocking makes kiting obsolete, as those two things seem entirely unconnected to me). As well as more active targetting and more controlled parrying etc. etc. should definitely be in it.

I guess there's much that is missing, but then there's a lot that's there already. I am not sure if my "dream" combat system would be completely free of UI because I quite frankly wouldn't know how to translate things as boons and conditions into actual gameplay without the UI (sure, hobbling while crippled, bleeding while having a bleeding debuff applied etc. could be done - but if a lot of those effects are on one target, it probably will start to look very ridiculous).

Things like that are very tedious to "implement" post-launch though, so I have no real high hopes that Guild Wars 2 might have the perfect combat system (subjectively for me) within its life-cycle but who knows, something eventually will and I hope it'll come with the whole package outside of the combat as well

And just for reference sake, would someone post a video of a gw1 fight that actually showcases a modicum of coordination/movement/skill? Because I am sure it is me, but if I look on youtube for some footage - I only see stuff that might rival the combat system of "The Settlers" in how people are standing right on top of each other mouse-clicking through their skills. I am sure there's something more sophisticated out there that escapes me.

[Dirame]

El Duderino, on 19 February 2013 - 01:07 PM, said:

Body blocking flag runners in HA and GvG as well as the ghost hero in HA were integral parts of the gameplay. Why they changed that is really mystery.

I think people who played GW1 PvP competitively understand the nuances of GW1s combat system much more because PvP did require much more skill than PvE.

Even weapon swapping was better.

I mean I had my high energy set and low energy set as a monk. And a couple others. I used all 4 slots in every match. There was good reasons for weapon swapping that gave an advantage over teams that didnt. It wasn't just a cheap mechanic added by ANet like it is in GW2.

If you think weapon swapping is a cheap mechanic in GW2, then your opinion just got downgraded to "must be talking out of it's arse". I loved seeing people use weapon swapping in GW1 and it just made sense that Anet would adapt that and make that part of the gameplay in GW2. Saying it's a cheap mechanic disrespects GW1 and the people who did it so effectively in GW1 because it is very obvious the GW2 mechanic was developed due to them.

[Jentari]

I see many people saying the dodge is the all in powerful ability that makes combat great.  Well for your info you can just normally move out of the way of a vast majority of attacks without even using the dodge and still not be hit.  While the dodge does add something different it isn't the great world saving ability that some make it out to be.

[El Duderino]

Dirame, on 19 February 2013 - 01:26 PM, said:

If you think weapon swapping is a cheap mechanic in GW2, then your opinion just got downgraded to "must be talking out of it's arse". I loved seeing people use weapon swapping in GW1 and it just made sense that Anet would adapt that and make that part of the gameplay in GW2. Saying it's a cheap mechanic disrespects GW1 and the people who did it so effectively in GW1 because it is very obvious the GW2 mechanic was developed due to them.

Um, did you play GW1 at all? The weapon swapping in GW1 is nothing like GW2 and vise versa.

GW1 weapon swapping was all about skill and taking advantage of situations.

GW2 weapon swapping is nothing more than 5 new skills to spam. They are nothing alike in any way shape or form.

Edited by Feathermoore, 19 February 2013 - 02:44 PM.
removed flamebait

[Briar]

Dirame, on 19 February 2013 - 01:26 PM, said:

If you think weapon swapping is a cheap mechanic in GW2, then your opinion just got downgraded to "must be talking out of it's arse". I loved seeing people use weapon swapping in GW1 and it just made sense that Anet would adapt that and make that part of the gameplay in GW2. Saying it's a cheap mechanic disrespects GW1 and the people who did it so effectively in GW1 because it is very obvious the GW2 mechanic was developed due to them.

I am also of the opinion that weapon swapping is a cheap mechanic in GW2. In GW1 weapon swapping was a counter move to your situation or your enemy's actions for example using a low energy set for "energy hiding" when a mesmer is e-denying you.

In GW2 the mechanic is cheapened in that >80% of the time weapon swapping is just something you do to give you another row of cooldowns to blow "For max DPS lols"

The only time weapon swapping is as meaningful as GW1 is if you are playing a thief IE see initiative


Now what they could/should have done is instead of putting a cool-down on weapon swapping itself weapon swapping should have always been available; but the process of swapping prevents you from using skills for three seconds as you ready your new weapon. That way it would actually be a strategic choice that may actually lower your DPS if you use it like an idiot

[Dirame]

El Duderino, on 19 February 2013 - 01:34 PM, said:

Um, did you play GW1 at all? The weapon swapping in GW1 is nothing like GW2 and vise versa.

GW1 weapon swapping was all about skill and taking advantage of situations.

GW2 weapon swapping is nothing more than 5 new skills to spam. They are nothing alike in any way shape or form.

Also reported for flame bait. Thanks for your lack of any real input.

Did you play GW2? Because GW2 weapon swapping is also all about taking advantage of situations. Actually NO let me rephrase that, GW1 weapon swapping is all about creating situations or swapping depending on the situation; assassins with daggers and hammer, hammer knockdown into falling lotus or falling spider (off-hand attack) into horns of the ox into falling lotus (or falling spider) into twisting fangs. Same with GW2, Sword/Mace and Hammer KD high damage spec, start with mace off-hand KD to expose stun breakers or stability, switch to hammer if you see no response,start KD chain till player = dead.

If you think it's just skill spamming then you sir, fail at GW2.

Edited by Dirame, 19 February 2013 - 01:59 PM.

[El Duderino]

Dirame, on 19 February 2013 - 01:53 PM, said:

If you think it's just skill spamming then you sir, fail at GW2.

I don't think anyone can fail at GW2. I think that is part of the problem. Everything is dumbed down so much to make it "enjoyable" by everyone and "accessible" to everyone that it is incredibly easy.

Edited by unraveled, 19 February 2013 - 08:41 PM.
No need to mention that.

[Dirame]

El Duderino, on 19 February 2013 - 01:59 PM, said:

I don't think anyone can fail at GW2. I think that is part of the problem. Everything is dumbed down so much to make it "enjoyable" by everyone and "accessible" to everyone that it is incredibly easy.

Even if GW2 has been made accessible that doesn't mean it doesn't have depth. Maybe not the depth that GW1 had but it definitely has depth.

Edited by unraveled, 19 February 2013 - 08:42 PM.
Removed reference to deleted content.

[Silent The Legend]

Well, I know many people (And I am myself one of them) who hate GW2's combat. To be correct, I would enjoy GW2 IF the combat was strategical in any way.

*Removal of monks and healers, which led to one and flawed way of playing PvP(Capture the point), as well as unorganized and split up battles(1vs1, 2vs2. Also, PvE and WvW is a complete mess, but thats another story) which led to
*Removal of proper roles of professions(Dps, control, heal) replaced with new roles that are completely umbalanced and/or dont work(You go dps or you go tank or you go nothing, support does not even exist, control is non-existent in the sense that it is included in Dps builds) which led to
*Removal of skills with a proper soul(We can even say soul, because who doesnt remember Diversion in GW1? While in GW2 I completely forgot it even existed) which means
*Removal of interrupts, CCs and conditions that are meaningful on the battlefield which, with the previous point, means
*Removal of build customization, build wars and consequent varied team builds with meta-shifts and stuff, which leads to
*Boring, stale and unstrategical combat. Couple it with the
*Removal of energy replaced by dodging, which provides a sense of action but in reality destroys the tactical sense of skills.
And you have one the most dumbed down experiences ever.

Edited by unraveled, 19 February 2013 - 08:44 PM.
Removed personal attack.

[El Duderino]

Dirame, on 19 February 2013 - 02:02 PM, said:

Even if GW2 has been made accessible that doesn't mean it doesn't have depth. Maybe not the depth that GW1 had but it definitely has depth.

All I was saying is that the weapon swapping seems dumbed down from GW1.

First there are two spots for two different weapons.

In GW1 I often used three spots for the same weapon, two examples:

Axe Warrior:

Adrenaline gaining axe to gain adrenaline.
Vampiric Axe to do constant DPS.
20/20 Axe for spiking targets hoping for a 20% roll.

Prot Monk:

Low energy set to hide energy from e-deny mesmers
20% prot staff for longer enchantments such as aegis
Sword and shield for health and damage reduction (multiple shields for all kinds of damage)
High energy set

So, I hope you can see that in my case having two different weapons to switch to dont do nearly te same kind of things that my weapon swaps did in GW1. I feel, I think rightfully so, that they took a good mechanic and dumbed it down for the masses to make it easier.

While we may agree to disagree, I think My point is not invalid or dumb.

Edited by unraveled, 19 February 2013 - 08:44 PM.
Removed reference to deleted content.

[Dirame]

Silent The Legend, on 19 February 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

Well, I know many people (And I am myself one of them) who hate GW2's combat. To be correct, I would enjoy GW2 IF the combat was strategical in any way.

*Removal of monks and healers, which led to one and flawed way of playing PvP(Capture the point), as well as unorganized and split up battles(1vs1, 2vs2. Also, PvE and WvW is a complete mess, but thats another story) which led to
*Removal of proper roles of professions(Dps, control, heal) replaced with new roles that are completely umbalanced and/or dont work(You go dps or you go tank or you go nothing, support does not even exist, control is non-existent in the sense that it is included in Dps builds) which led to
*Removal of skills with a proper soul(We can even say soul, because who doesnt remember Diversion in GW1? While in GW2 I completely forgot it even existed) which means
*Removal of interrupts, CCs and conditions that are meaningful on the battlefield which, with the previous point, means
*Removal of build customization, build wars and consequent varied team builds with meta-shifts and stuff, which leads to
*Boring, stale and unstrategical combat. Couple it with the
*Removal of energy replaced by dodging, which provides a sense of action but in reality destroys the tactical sense of skills.
And you have one the most dumbed down experiences ever.

I heard that the reason why current PvP players are leaving the game is because of;

1; Lack of Custom Arenas
2; Lack of Shout-casting tools
3; Not enough game modes (this could be solved by adding #1 in this list)

In the list, none of the reason include combat being bad or generic or lacking build customization. The only class that can really complain about lack of build variation is the Ranger.

Edited by unraveled, 19 February 2013 - 08:46 PM.
Removed reference to deleted content.

[Ritualist]

Dirame, on 19 February 2013 - 02:16 PM, said:

I heard that the reason why PvP players are leaving the game is because of .... In the list, none of the reason include combat being bad or generic or lacking build customization.

If I remember correctly, a number of (GW1) PvP players didn't even bother with GW2 (or at least not with GW2 PvP) because of how shallow the combat was. There was just nothing there that would intrigue them to the level of even trying out the game and as folks later confirmed, those initial impression weren't false.
So there was really nothing to leave behind. It looked bad from the start.

[Dirame]

El Duderino, on 19 February 2013 - 02:10 PM, said:

All I was saying is that the weapon swapping seems dumbed down from GW1.

First there are two spots for two different weapons.

In GW1 I often used three spots for the same weapon, two examples:

Axe Warrior:

Adrenaline gaining axe to gain adrenaline.
Vampiric Axe to do constant DPS.
20/20 Axe for spiking targets hoping for a 20% roll.

Prot Monk:

Low energy set to hide energy from e-deny mesmers
20% prot staff for longer enchantments such as aegis
Sword and shield for health and damage reduction (multiple shields for all kinds of damage)
High energy set

So, I hope you can see that in my case having two different weapons to switch to dont do nearly te same kind of things that my weapon swaps did in GW1. I feel, I think rightfully so, that they took a good mechanic and dumbed it down for the masses to make it easier.

While we may agree to disagree, I think My point is not invalid or dumb.

I agree, your point isn't invalid or dumb. And I believe you already understand that I was trying to point out that GW2 also has some depth. Just to give an example, only this morning was I aware that if I combine a certain rune set and a particular Sigil I could swap weapons on the engineer and get an instant refill of my endurance bar. So I could sit down and just make a build about dodging on the engineer if I wanted to.

Ritualist, on 19 February 2013 - 02:24 PM, said:

If I remember correctly, a number of (GW1) PvP players didn't even bother with GW2 (or at least not with GW2 PvP) because of how shallow the combat was. There was just nothing there that would intrigue them to the level of even trying out the game and as folks later confirmed, those initial impression weren't false.
So there was really nothing to leave behind. It looked bad from the start.

I just rephrased my post. I meant CURRENT pvp players. GW1 players are people I like to put in a different category.

Edited by unraveled, 19 February 2013 - 08:47 PM.
Amended quote.

[El Duderino]

Dirame, on 19 February 2013 - 02:16 PM, said:

In the list, none of the reason include combat being bad or generic or lacking build customization. The only class that can really complain about lack of build variation is the Ranger.

Mesmer would be my first choice. Mesmers very rarely did damage in PvP in GW1. They were the ultimate utility class. Good mesmers were some of the best players in the game.

[Ritualist]

Dirame, on 19 February 2013 - 02:26 PM, said:

I just rephrased my post. I meant CURRENT pvp players. GW1 players are people I like to put in a different category.

But that doesn't change the problem. It just means that the current PvP players don't seem to mind the shallow combat, rather than the combat not being shallow.

[johnnybravo15]

GW2 combat is just more noob friendly.

[Dirame]

Ritualist, on 19 February 2013 - 02:32 PM, said:

But that doesn't change the problem. It just means that the current PvP players don't seem to mind the shallow combat, rather than the combat not being shallow.

Accessible.... Shallow... I believe those are different things, right?

Edited by Dirame, 19 February 2013 - 02:45 PM.

[Dirame]

El Duderino, on 19 February 2013 - 02:30 PM, said:

Mesmer would be my first choice. Mesmers very rarely did damage in PvP in GW1. They were the ultimate utility class. Good mesmers were some of the best players in the game.

Are you saying that the mesmers are close the Rangers when it comes to lacking build variation?

[El Duderino]

Dirame, on 19 February 2013 - 02:56 PM, said:

Are you saying that the mesmers are close the Rangers when it comes to lacking build variation?

I think we may be talking about two diferent things. Nevermind my post.

[rukia]

Absolutely yes, a HUGE step backwards with the complete removal of healers and big pool of abilities. Let's face it, we all spam the same few buttons while not even thinking, and we'll never need to change our builds. The constant 1hit instagibs on bosses is a slap in my face, dunno about you but it's the laziest combat design I've ever seen. So goddamn boring it makes me drool at the screen.

[Lordkrall]

rukia, on 19 February 2013 - 03:12 PM, said:

Absolutely yes, a HUGE step backwards with the complete removal of healers and big pool of abilities. Let's face it, we all spam the same few buttons while not even thinking, and we'll never need to change our builds. The constant 1hit instagibs on bosses is a slap in my face, dunno about you but it's the laziest combat design I've ever seen. So goddamn boring it makes me drool at the screen.

And we really had to think when doing more or less anything outside of high-end PvP in GW1 right?
It is not like people used gimmick builds and simply pressed skills when they got off cd and clearing more or less everything that way.
Oh, wait... that is EXACTLY how it was in GW1.