Mjölner

Quote

We'll most likely be fighting a villain similar to this:



With Rox and Braham pairing up and most likely dueling the "final hybrid menace" like this:



Braham will most likely die in battle like this:



And Rox will most likely be enraged and fight the hybrid menace like this:



The player most likely jumps in at this time of the battle, fatally wounds, and knocks back the hybrid menace down a hole like this:



And the living story will most likely end like this:

Arquenya, on 02 December 2012 - 12:55 PM, said:

Oh please. The shoulder pads of WoW armours probably weigh more than an ENTIRE Blood Legion heavy armour set. If the dinky stick figure humans in GW2 wore them, they'd be crawling on the ground because they wouldnt have the strength to stand up straight.

Now I know what you all think: We love to watch humans crawl around on the ground. But for Dwaynas sake dont humiliate them by wearing WoW armour.

Good, maybe once they run out of ideas for different shirts, they'll get to making more real armor.
Fingers crossed.

Jrambo88, on 13 March 2013 - 04:26 AM, said:

draxynnic, on 13 March 2013 - 10:54 PM, said:

I kept my minorities anonymous on purpose. I believe that instead of focussing on how their own ethnicity/sexuality/religion/other minority, people should focus on general tolerance and appreciating diversity. We should not find happiness in not being the target of hateful slurs, but in working towards a world in which such things are diminished towards everyone.

But, back to the subject, what solutions are there for the Cantha problem?

Focus on Elona instead (because neither Africa nor the Middle East give a damn, and it would still be better then the treatment they get from other media).

Modify Cantha, perhaps focus on the Kurzicks and Luxons. It's a shame that we have to water down such a great setting but the "Asian" parts can be hidden in a "Forbidden City". Perhaps they decided fortification would be the better solution. This would allow us access to the Tengu and some other elements.

Start a campaign to "save Cantha", it could work but at the cost of trampling over Asian sensitivities. And I doubt it if it will work, they represent a large part of their consumer base and money.

Any other solutions?

Icon sure looks like double chop to me

Kook gives good advice. As simple as some professions seem, when you dig into the Traits, Utilities, and actually play them, even the "simple" Warrior has some nice depth to it, if you're inclined that way.

I would look at the Elementalist or Mesmer. Attunements are worth exploring, and the Mesmer is very, very versatile, and it's utilities can serve many purposes in any situation.

That said, even with a Mesmer you'll be doing A-B-C most fights, because it requires set up and mobility. The value of A, B, and C is up to you, though, even if the formula is the same. That goes for all.

chefwaffle, on 26 March 2013 - 04:09 PM, said:

once again.... for good measure.  RANGER means one who RANGES not one you attacks from RANGE.  Just because it doesn't fit your archetype of what it should be doesn't mean it doesn't perfectly fit mine.  Most PRG rangers are based off stryder (aragorn from LOTR imo) who was great with a bow and ended up with....wait for it.... a great-sword.

NuclearDonut, on 07 March 2013 - 04:25 PM, said:

The fact that I gave an example of something does not mean that example is the only instance of the problem. It was simply the first that came to mind. The importance of inflection in voice acting (or conversation for that matter) cannot be overstated.

From the article, "Seinfeld knew the importance of inflection"

Quote

Remember the Seinfeld episode in which Kramer landed a small part in a Woody Allen movie and had one line to say? He agonized over where to put the inflection in the line: "These pretzels are making me thirsty."

Let's look at the statement: "These pretzels are making me thirsty."

Try saying it a loud and each time place emphasis on a different word. You should discover that each time you say it you are actually delivering an entirely different communication.

"These pretzels are making me thirsty."
This infers that other pretzels might not have the same effect.

"These pretzels are making me thirsty."
The pretzels are causing the thirst whereas peanuts might not..

"These pretzels are making me thirsty."
I wasn't thirsty until I ate these pretzels.

"These pretzels are making me thirsty."
Who cares about you? I'm thirsty.

"These pretzels are making me thirsty."
What a shock. Eating salted pretzels made him thirsty.

If I'm being unreasonable by preferring good voice acting (and writing) in a game (especially one that made a big deal about how great the personal story was pre-launch)then I suppose I am unreasonable. I play games to be entertained, and Trahearne didn't entertain me, all his presence does is prevent me from taking my personal story on my alts past the battle for Claw Island.

A bad voice actor can take dialog that looks perfectly fine on paper and turn it into something else entirely. Having said that, though, a lot of his dialog doesn't even look good on paper. Much of his dialog makes him seem completely full of himself, when, had it been worded better or delivered properly, it could have made him a much more sympathetic character. As it is, he has all the personality of a text to speech program.



My problems with Trahearne  have nothing to do with his being  a "literary aspect that needs to be in the story so it can stay consistent". I am perfectly happy letting someone else lead the pact, and in fact don't believe I should be as high in the leadership chain as I am considering the amount of experience leading others my character has =P If anything, I might have preferred to act on behalf of my order within the Pact. I do have a problem with that literary aspect being a dislikable character who is thrust on us with very little lead up, and replacing order mentors who I actually liked. Hell, I wouldn't even mind if he was simply written as a dislikable character, the problem is that he is intended to be charismatic, a scholar that overcomes his self doubt to command respect, but comes off flat and annoying due to poor writing and terrible voice acting.

I also dislike the fact that this "literary aspect" is totally disjointed from the rest of the story, but that has nothing to do with the character itself. A huge theme running through all the aspects of the story in GW2 is, "How do we get various individuals/factions/races to come together for the common good?" The answer in the Pacts case is to apparently give one person a divine destiny to lead, which is a blatant Deus ex machina, and typical of lazy writing. Is that really needed to add consistency to the story? I don't think so, but whatever floats your boat.

"You'll never succeed alone. I will accompany you." Sure, because the squad of Vigil soldiers wasn't enough, we needed a bookworm Mary Sue that's useless in combat to protect us.

"This won't end well!" Relax, Mary Sue, we'll be fine.

NuclearDonut, on 05 March 2013 - 08:55 PM, said:

Trahearne, Oh Trahearne,
It is you I spurn
And I hope you burn
Upon you I would not pee.

Hey this is fun
Look what I've done
Victory won
In my locality

Choices were made
Decisions grave
Did it my way
This story about me

Then look who's this
With spindly stick wrists
Who almosts lisps
Up alongside me?

First he follows
Through plains and hollows
Then a vision throws
Emphasis off me!

The weird plant chick
moves like a dick
and puts that prick
In charge for eternity.

The rest is a coda
I fetch him his soda
Fresca, not cola
And his bitch I must be.

The Pact sayeth
He can maketh
Me smuggle meth
This is his story.

The plot goes bare
I walk everywhere
He's not even there
For Zhaitan's expiry.

Arenanet, who
wrote a Mary Sue
does laugh at you
and counts money.

There is no arc
or any real spark
Creepy eyes so dark
No hero's journey

What I'm to do?
He can go to
Hell and screw you
That's enough for me.

But all the same
It's but a lame
Part of the game
There's more to see.

You say "Good Act!"
Like it's a fact
and I overreact
but I must be

Contrary and
take up the stand
your head's in sand
Wake up buddy

The little green twat
is a vile rat
Better than that
This stupid poem be!

Trahearne, Oh Trahearne,
It is you I spurn
And I hope you burn
Upon you I would not pee.

As for how to solve the "paradox", it's not hard at all.  If the story is about Trahearne doing things to accomplish this end, then just tell that story.

1.  Give Trahearne a character arc.  They gave Tybalt a great character arc with far less resources invested.

2.  Make Trahearne likeable or sympathetic and not a Mary Sue.

3.  Make the plot in such a way that the biggest middle finger we can give the dragon is to ensure Trahearne wins.

Use the Hero's Journey where Trahearne is the hero, easiest story in the world, already written for you.  Make the PC be the Hans Solo to Trahearne's Skywalker.  It wouldn't solve all the problems but it'd be easily done and so much better.

Honestly, both sides have their bonuses:

Warrior - Warrior hammer actually has *THE* highest damage-per-hit out of any of the warrior weapons.  Yes, even higher than greatsword or axe.  In PvE, Earthshaker (F1) is great for stunning a mass of creatures, Backbreaker (5) is great for temporarily disabling a nasty targets(Stonetouches from Twilight Arbor come to mind), and Staggering Blow (4) is excellent for separating packs of enemies (use in the middle) or ticking Defiance stacks.  Fierce Blow (2) is the highest damage one-hit skill you have that also cleaves and causes Weakness as a bonus.  Finally Hammer shock (3) is a nice conal cripple which when traited, can also cause 1 sec of immobilize.  Niiice.  Add to that, Hammer's trait gives a +25% damage boost to hitting stunned targets.  Earthshaker > Frenzy can lead to some impressive burst damage for those 2 seconds that the enemy is stopped too.

Guardian - Guardian Hammer feels like it's a lot of utility.  The 1-chain's third hit (Symbol), has a RIDICULOUS cast time but causes impressive damage if you can get it to land.  More to the point, Hammer 2 is a spammable blast finisher and closer.  Hammer 3 is a ranged line-immobilize which has its uses.  Hammer 4 is probably the most hilarious single target blowout to use in the game, but is much more useful in PvP than PvE since PvE mobs are immune to cliffs.  In PvE it serves similar purpose to Warrior's Hammer 5 to knock pesky targets out of the picture temporarily.  That said it combos well with Hammer 5, which creates a short lived zone that can separate, block, or trap targets inside.  If you hammer 4 something into a Hammer 5 circle, you get extra disable, WHILE keeping them close by.

In any case, for damage output, Warrior hammer wins out.  They run about even in Crowd Control, Warrior possibly winning it by a hair, and in Utility, Guardian wins hands down given the ability to grant Protection, Create persistent walls, and Blast finish every 5 seconds (or less!)

IMO it really depends on your taste.

My only level 80 is a ranger. I don't pay much attention to my pet (swap it out if it's health gets low, occasionally trigger the F2 attack--but that usually doesn't actually take effect so, meh) and I seem to be doing fine. I leveled mostly with shortbow/longbow, though now I'm running with shortbow/axe and torch. The traps are the only useful utilities, I don't think I've used anything else since level 25 or so. I believe a dev has acknowledged that and it's being worked on, but who knows how long. Hopefully at some point they'll at least fix the main hand sword rooting issue so I can try a power build with longbow/sword (and some offhand, not sure what yet).

I was away from these boards for quite some time, however this thread begs for some more input, so here it goes:

1) "Trait Points are for hitting desired traits, not for stat numbers"

It all comes down to opportunity cost in a given scenario.

Builds are not fixed in place, rather they should be viewed as a baseline strategy for particular encounter.

I'm not trying to argue here, I merely bring some points that might've been overlooked or not properly emphasised, either in opening post or it's following replies.

To give some examples:

A) DPS builds, and crit-DPS builds in particular, are far more stat-reliant than utility, control, support or in-between variants of these concepts - for this reason alone, great attention should be paid to major & minor trait benefits, at the opportunity cost of picking other major & minor traits AND the passive stat bonuses they provide (this is true for all builds, even more so for DPS builds, however - and while equipment customisation gives powerful tools to patch "statistical holes" in the build and make taking certain traits worthwhile, it's because the total "sum" of what X traits and Y total stats bring to the table still outweights the alternatives, rather than because passive stat bonuses from trait lines are to be completely discarded)

B) you can't re-allocate trait points inside fractals (e.g. convert 25 strength 25 arms 20 discipline to 20 strength 30 arms 20 discipline), therefore going for a more generalist trait point allocation that gives benefits in most encounters in the given scenario (while still allowing for swapping major traits before said encounters) might be a better idea; on the flip side, the possibility of X encounter impossible or unreasonably risky without Z traits/utilities and Y equipment might beg for a seemingly overall inferior choice, if it guarantees dungeon completion within your static/PUG group (difficulty of measuring risk properly is another matter here), therefore becoming the actual optimal solution catered to your group composition and encounter

C) elaborating on previous point a bit, there is generally no harm done from carrying different armour/trinket sets and all weapons, as well as designing a build towards swapping key major traits before particular encounters in an instance, as opposed to viewing a build in static fashion - build is dynamic and heavily reliant on the user, as well as remaining group members, the only "static" part of it is how much you limit yourself with the alternative major traits you can pick AND inventory items you can swap to (this even goes as far as making use of "special" equipment such as spy kits, and then measuring how much leeway your build has got in terms of maximising overall effectiveness)

2) "I agree with most of what you said but 20/25/0/10/15 is the highest Warrior DPS build atm" and similar statements

Same story as before.

A few points:

A) depends on particular scenario, encounters within that scenario and group composition - generally speaking, regardless of whether you run axe or GS, 20/25/0/10/15 will be better for "static DPS" only if sufficient number of unique boons are stacked, preferably with 100% uptime

B) similarly, gimping yourself by limiting access to game-changing traits such as "mobile strikes" (20 discipline) for GS, "leg specialist" (10 tactics) for GS/axe/rifle or any other alternatives might severely handicap your group's ability to maintain highest effective DPS (dynamic DPS) in a given encounter in X scenario, as well as lock you up to a very static and conservative trait point distribution, giving very little or no viable alternatives for major trait points swapping to adapt better to remaining encounters within the specified scenario

C) a little bit of my terminology: "static DPS" counts for attacking a monster 100% of the time, it's up to personal preference whether you assume there is a full 25 might stick and 120 seconds fury uptime on you already, or whether it builds up over time and might or might not rival a less boon-oriented build in terms of raw damage over X time; "dynamic/effective DPS" counts for the actual damage you can deal, while getting away with it - this term is most objective if it's results-oriented (e.g. comparing dungeon completion times in team setting, as opposed to trying to add up team DPS in a fictional, artificial testing scenario or diving purely for your personal DPS, not caring for group's total effectiveness)

D) the objective here should not be maximising individual DPS under X conditions, maximising group/team's DPS under X conditions, but reaching best possible completion time of a dungeon in group/team setting (time efficiency) OR best "(reward - cost)/time" ratio (cost efficiency) - alternatively, you can strike for a compromise between these two

---

Now a bit of conventional wisdom accumulated over the years of playing games overall, MMORPGs in particular and GW2 as of late:

1) in a PUG setting, people generally should gravitate towards self-sufficient builds with good self-sustain (self-healing, damage mitigation & on-demand control skills, 1st priority), good group sustain not reliant on precise positioning, voice communication and training (passive party support & static force multipliers, 2nd priority), best possible damage having accounted for the other two priorities (3rd priority)

Why?

Biggest weakness of PUG is it's random nature, making communication and group synergy difficult. Completing the instance with highest possible success rate, followed by completing it in reasonable time while reducing stress, tension and reliance on precise manouvers greatly increases PUG's success.

Why PUGs can be extremely frustrating experience?

Most people fend for themselves, prioritising self-sustain and damage, without regard for the group. This backfires in various ways, but usually - the group overall will be weaker, eliminating weakest chains first, and then striking back at the most selfish, self-reliant group members, which no longer have a buddy to support them and neutralise critical opponents.

Similarly, PUGs are reliant on natural leaders if they are avaiable, and cruel taskmasters if natural leader is not present - since latter is the case most often, most optimal builds and group strategies will be culled in favour of popular (not necessarily best in a competent team, but for instance easy to use & understand, with instant & measurable benefits) and tested strategies, often on a "copy-paste or kick" basis, where the only form of group communication is following strict gear, trait and strategy guidelines specified by the ringleader, group cohesion reliant on fear & intimidation (picking a black sheep to throw insults at as soon as possible to keep other members in check; measuring performance by ineffectual but easy to understand metrics such as "how many times you died" or "you didn't dodge", regardless of their actual relevance; threatening to kick on the basis of undermining taskmaster's authority, even if criticism was well deserved).

The following nuissance is further confounded by people reliant on PUGs to access end-game content, conducting themselves in social interactions & designing their builds in a "job portfolio" fashion, trying to appear as law-obeying, conforming member of society, that has no opinion and follows orders to the letter. What this leads to, is mediocrity:

- "only constructive criticism allowed" mentality, which means not saying things that will get you kicked regardless of their merit (group feedback is severely handicapped because of it, making the group even more static, unable to adapt, easy prey for ragequits if a sufficiently elaborate encounter shows up - that can't be pre-built for or pre-learned, but requires on-demand team communication and flexibility)
- builds designed around meeting arbitrary performance metrics such as primitive "DPS/heal/damage taken/attacks dodged" checks to avoid group scrutinity and kicks; in a guild/pre-made group setting the only objective metric would be completion time or "(reward-cost)/time" ratio instead, as these are objective but can be reliably tracked only over lengthy periods of time (similarly, the potential for misuse of tools and addons is narrowed down in pre-made group setting - they help players to improve, but aren't the absolute metric of team's performance)

2) individual doesn't matter in pre-made group setting, because he is already accepted for what he is, has no particular pressure to show off, and can instead focus on maximising group's efficiency without feeling bad for it

3) individual is the only thing that matters in a PUG group, short of successfully completing an instance - the conflict between these two distorts game meta and player perceptions of what is or isn't good, works or doesn't work

4) GW2 is not free from pressure towards selfish solutions - even the loot distribution in instanced content is based around tagging monsters, and for this to happen you need to hit a monster, and take sufficient part of it's hit points (long-term implications: inability to root out selfish mentality completely even in a pre-made group setting; erring more on the side of "(reward-cost)/time" ratio rather than completion time even if it's against group's best interests; prioritising weapons that are good for tagging over weapons best for the job).

Another example of this is design of dungeon bosses - rarely if ever hard CC (stun, knockdown) has any use due to stacks of defiant, required group coordination outweights any perceived benefits. There is a fine line to be walked here, between requiring CC as means of completion and making CC completely unnecessary or detrimental; so far GW2 is on the latter side of this spectrum, and fails to achieve competitive balance between control, support and dps builds, in turn relegating support towards increasing group's dps almost exclusively, and control towards gimped if potentially unintended strategies (spam of feedback and wall of reflection to completely neuter ranged mobs, as opposed to providing alternative cost stemming from another viable strategy).

5) build & damage calculators, DPS checks, even in-house statistical tools used by developers - are exactly what they are, just tools. They can help in discovering new builds or optimising existing ones, but most often are used by uneducated peers of the community in wrong manner. Wrong assumptions lead to wrong results. Lack of education leads to bad conclusions and assumptions alike. Finally, artificial testing environment is no rival to conventional wisdom and direct game experience of actually using a build; even then, for most intents and purposes our experiences are subjective, whereas tools used fail to account for the context.

In your pursuit of knowledge, don't fall for a trap of optimising your build for your testing environment or popular opinion (collective perception of the majority), as opposed to actual in-game results. I noticed many of you to be manipulated by numbers themselves or to use unproven (experimental) calculations to prove your goal; let me tell you something, you proved nothing but your desperation. Calculator is a tool, means to an end, not end in itself, and definitely not proof of your build's superiority (unless you all agree on the same calculations to be correct, and on the same testing environment to be used for testing, and then only draw conclusions as to effectiveness in that sterile environment, under specified conditions - in which case you theorycraft for the sake of it, or improving your testing methods as opposed to testing a build's actual validity in gaming environment).

So far I haven't seen a simulation tool so elaborate to account for movement, dodging, feinting, strategising and group dynamics. In fact, people struggle even now to produce a convincing DPS sheet for skill rotation, which would realistically account for input delay on a static target. Until that happens, you don't even have a scientific (and statistically measurable) testing environment to account for build's validity, without playing the game itself. You have no material for scientific hypothesis, even less so for a theory. Burden of proof lies on you, my fellow theorycrafters (yes, I do that too).

Next time you log to game, watch how you play. How you move, how you communicate, how you coordinate attacks. Your build is just a small part of your input-based strategy (backup armour sets & weapons, swapping major traits & utilities/elite), and just a small fraction of your output-based strategy (what you actually do with the tools given - moving, dodging, attacking etc., and to what end, what result). THIS (overly simplified) is your build. In fact, it's almost impossible to distinguish from the environment itself, including it's user (you, the player). Above is further confounded by group dynamics (how your team reacts), and environment dynamics (how mobs react to what you do). Notice a pattern? Your tools are not just incomplete and based on assumptions, they're for the most part static, and restricted by very limiting conditions for the test to be even remotely comparable to results from past and future tests.

6) Humans are not machines, we are not numbers and cannot be accounted for. In fact, we're even difficult to simulate. The folly of statistics and testing methodology doesn't lead to knowledge, if results themselves are treated as knowledge itself. Knowledge is experience, nothing else.

As for players themselves - everyone has his own pain threshold and innate abilities, both for thinking and mouse/keyboard input. Many of you might think that the only purpose of "optimising" a build is to make it best for either fastest completion time or the best reward ratio, assuming top-tier player skills of the user, unrestricted & 100% efficient communication and virtually no pain threshold or physical limitations disallowing the player from excelling at or even executing the build. Unfortunately, it's not - because even build's success has a cost.

Previous point elaborated on this already, but summarising, a build is essentially a strategy. And like all good strategies, good builds require planning, to make sure they are employed in right conditions by the right people. Hence, a real build should include:

- technical description (traits, primary equipment, inventory swap equipment, utilities & elite, variants)
- the environment it's competitive at, as well as it's specifics (labelling build as "tPvP bunker" is simply not enough - at the very least specify preferred team composition, preferred opponents/maps/circumstances and video feedback of build in action)
- advantages and caveats in it's environment, current meta
- what skills are required to utilise the build, including information on keybinds and gaming equipment, among others (is it a high-level strategy? pre-made, professional pre-made or "Joe the Average" build?)

Anything less than that I'm afraid, is just a declaration of your preferences, of what you use. Unfortunately for the reader, it conveys very little relevant information, just a bunch of data to be eventually transformed into information through factual game experience.

Elaborating on the cost itself, executing a build requires sacrifice. Time, money, skills to be picked up, physical and mental tiredness, perhaps even injury or life/health hazard (my flatmate got a carpal tunnel for his love of twitch-action FPS games). Similarly, the reward itself isn't limited to just in-game results, but can include improved RL skills (such as communication, stress management), mental benefits (better concentration, abstract thinking, better self-esteem) and the like. For this reason alone, when you design a build, ask yourself the following questions:

- who is it addressed for
- what skills are required
- what it's good for, what it's not good for, how do you maximise it's effectiveness in it's competitive area, how do you deal with critical drawbacks in unexpected situations
- how it works in a high-level strategy of it's environment, how it fits with the current meta
- in what ways build is biased by it's user, what are it's best counters (actual game experience) and what are it's best complementing factors (what team composition, what builds, why)

In essence, you have to convey your actual "know-how" into useful information. Not data, information.

7) ultimate build optimisation - optimising for risk

This point is last, because it's easiest to understand having read at least two previous points. If you know what build is good for, in what environment, employing what strategy and who is it addressed to - it is time to measure the risk of failure and potential setbacks, expected return value i.e. reward (from experience - highest return and it's circumstances, average return and description of average runs/matches/battles; theoretically highest outcome), and distinguish that risk from uncertainty.

Ideally, a build for average Joe's would maximise the fun & learning factor, provide easy entry and modest learning curve, all the while getting the job done. Secondary but not required attributes would include easier time for other members (positive synergetic effect in a team of Joes each supporting each other to their best ability), as PUGs inevitably break if they take too long to complete, require too much communication to get job done or face critical setbacks. For obvious reasons, build shouldn't require highly customised keybinds and dedicated gaming peripherals to function optimally. It's a bonus but not requirement if build provided "further reading" at the bottom, in case Joe gets bored and wants a more complicated toy to play with, becoming a better player in return.

A good real-life example of this build is sonic boon, it combines the comfort of on-demand healing & condition stripping from rune of the soldier/healing shouts with great popularity of greatswords among warrior players, and while definitely not the pinnacle of warrior's performance in this game, it gets the job done with the path of least resistance. The very reason it's popular despite it's many forum-dwelling antagonists is because the author clearly identified an audience, designed a build for it and presented information in professional fashion. If you want to make builds, start doing them properly - excel sheets prove nothing, they should be only used to help you design a build. The very moment you pop a DPS sheet to prove your credibility, is the very moment you lose it.

A bad real-life example of how to design and market a build is 9 boon knight, it pulls up excel sheet to prove it's superiority, yet actual game practice might nail down the problem to personal preferences rather than objectively superior build, strategy or technique. The author designed a build (like his many others) which he particularly excels at, yet gets defensive about it when his build's effectiveness in hands of other players is put to question. One problem among many to consider, is what is this build's ability to stay on the target, and what is it's damage in actual encounters. Does the boon burst create enough opportunity to justify build's other drawbacks? Is it's prolonged DPS actually higher than more conservative DPS builds? Does it have a competitive edge recognised by the meta, or does it argue player preferences?

Answer to above problem won't be found through forum arguments or excel sheets popping numbers, but actual in-game evaluation. Even then, it might still boil down to player preferences. Whatever you do, discard "static DPS" comparisons. You can't mathetically prove or disprove a statement of superiority, when it comes to builds in this game. Doing anything else, would be a misuse of the tools you were given, for all the wrong reasons.

MCBiohazard, on 21 January 2013 - 07:17 AM, said:

Yes, western cultures are often mixed up. Just look at every fantasy viking ever existing, that's just a very bland scandinavia mix. And I'm pretty sure every scandinavian is quick to tell you the difference between his and the other countries culture.
Then there is the typical anglo-franco-party mix, that's pretty much just the british isles and france with some fantasy races mixed in.
Or look at the Kurzick, they are germans mixed with slavic and asian influences. Do I, as a german, mind that? No, why would I. It's a fantasy world and they are allowed to take influences from where ever they want and mix them together. These are not actual representations of anyone. That's why the asian community crying over it just shows you two things.

1. Asians, especially the chinese don't like to be depicted in any way that could be seen as bad. Just watch Red Dawn if you don't believe me, the villians were supposed to be chinese, but they had to swap them with North Koreans in post-production, so they could market the film in China. Did europeans ever complain that they are the villians in about 50% of all hollywood action movies? Yes a little, but they didn't threaten to not show the films, because it's not that much of an issue.
The asian community however disliked Cantha, because it had the slums of Kaineng, therefore, all westerners think that "all asian cities are huge slums". They totally overlooked the beauty of Shing-Jea, or the farming area just south of Kaineng. They only focused on the negative, which Tyria and Elona also had (landscapes destroyed by war and hostile deserts respectively).
2. Asians still don't like each other very much. They aren't completely over WW2 yet and the economic power struggle between Japan, China and South Korea certainly doesn't help. They don't like to see their culture being blended together with the others, because they don't like them very much (on average, of course their are people who embrace the others culture, but I wouldn't say it's the norm). I wouldn't call it racism, but it's certainly some form of distrust and disrespect. Again look at Europe, we were the same a century ago, even worse to be honest, but we got over that after 2 horrible wars. We learned the hard way that we have to work together to make a better future. That's why the EU is a freaking great idea, maybe one of the best in recent history, even though people tend to give it very little credit, because the EU made mistakes. The good sides outweigh the bad sides though. Just look how good France and Germany cooperate, 100 years earlier their favorite pastime, was going to war on each other. East asia lacks this sense of unity.

And to clarify, not all asians behave or think like this, however the majority are, atleast in the asian GW community, otherwise this wouldn't be a problem.

Greetings fellow Clone Machines,


I've posted this on the official forums but I'm aware some of the community goes here in stead so I figured I'd post it here as well.

I've been rocking a Mantra Power and Heal build for a while now, testing it out mostly in WvW and Dungeons. I've gotten A LOT of questions regarding the build as not many mesmers use mantras. So I hope this guide will show you how it works and demonstrate my build.

Here is a more accurate gameplay footage, I tried to find people in WvW but people seemed to really like to zerg yesterday! So I decided to do some late night sPvP, As the video progresses I start to get into the groove of things a bit more. 10 matches in total versus Guardians, Warriors, Necro, Mesmer. I hope to get more videos against some more professions when I can.

Gameplay:

VS Thieves & Ranger:



VS Warriors/Guardians/Necro/Mesmer:



Older video:



Heal = 0:36
Burst = 0:25 & 0:40

The Build:

http://www.guildhead...z7kIp70V7owX70m

Alternative:

http://www.gw2build.....0.30.20.0.20.0

30/20/0/20/0

Domination:

For this build to be useful it's important to take the 3x mantra trait. I know that you can get more heals out faster using Mantra of Pain with 2 mantras but you end up debilitating yourself by losing out on that extra heal/damage burst/condition removal/daze.

Crippling Dissipation is a bit of a personal preference but because clones get killed so often it makes for a great extra way to control the enemy during a fight. The other one to use would be Mental Torment.

Dueling:

I would suggest starting off with Protected Mantras until you are used to casting them, Afterwards I would suggest going for Blade training instead.

Inspiration:

Medic's Feedback is great if you intend on running with zergs (Or in dungeons). If you prefer skirmishing or sPvP I would suggested Mender's Purity.

Gear:

I went for Power, Prec, Crit gear. Before you shout 'Glass Cannon' I make up for the lack of toughness/vitality by using Power, Crit, Vit Rings and Jewels. I'm also using the 'Guild Caretaker Backpack of the Berserker' for a bit of extra healing power.

If you mostly do WvW I would recommend using Superior runes of the Centaur (Unless you like being VERY slow) Otherwise I would also recommend using Superior runes of the Wurm for the vitality.

You already have a fair amount of vitality from the 20 points in vitality so it adds up to a nice amount. In case you are wondering why Vitality and not Toughness. Vitality is better against condition damage and burst damage. Where as toughness is better for direct damage.

You should be able to mitigate direct damage fairly well using the sword, cripples, stuns, dazes, blink, knock back and even if you use mantra of resolve over mantra of distraction this will run out quickly when up against certain professions (Necro) and because you can't evade conditions on you, Vitality is better for mitigating this.

Sigils I use are Superior Sigil of Nullification on Gsword, Superior Sigil of Frailty and Superior Sigil of Paralyzation on Sword/Pistol.

Swiftness:

One thing to note on using the centaur runes with mantra of recovery, It gives you VERY reliable swiftness. You get 10 seconds of swiftness with 5 second downtime period in between. It will proc swiftness when you finish casting a mantra as well as when you use the readied mantra (So that is 4x swiftness). I demonstrate this here:



Healing:

Whenever I finish casting a mantra I heal myself and those around me for up to 2.8k (roughly). This is especially effective when stacked up as everyone is within range and not moving around (Think Lupicus Phase 1 or face rubbing a gate in WvW). Keep in mind that the range is about 400/600ish? So it's always better to be near someone you intend to heal when possible.

It is also of great use if you see an ally with low health to quickly run up or blink to them (while casting mantra of pain) and give them a quick top up. You can essentially decide whether to spam mantra of pain for a while to help heal the people around you (which also does damage) or you can use the heals more interspersed and instead focus on weapon skills. This is why I love this build, You can swap between damage and support in a heartbeat.

Here is a video demonstrating how mantra healing can be useful when attacking a gate while being attacked by arrow carts:




Combat Explanation:

Step 1: Always prepare your mantras well before a fight, Even if you have '2' in stead of '3' readied, use them and prepare again when possible.

Step 2: Start a fight with Phantasmal Berserker to cripple the enemy and as you run closer into melee range of the enemy use Mirror Blade to put on Vulnerability + Might to yourself (If you happen to get close enough by that point).

Step 3: Swap to Sword/Pistol and use Magic Bullet to give yourself a quick moment to summon 'Phantasmal Duellist' while making your way around the enemy.

Step 4: As your enemy gets out of stun use Illusionary Leap on them to get close and immobilize them.

Step 5: At this point you should have the Berserker, Duellist and Illusionary Leap clone up. So use Blurred Frenzy, Mind Wrack and Mantra of Pain at the same time. This will do some significant damage to your opponent.

Step 6: Dodge back and swap back to Greatsword and quickly re-apply Phantasmal Berserker, While using any remaining Mantra of Pain.

Step 7: Use this respite in the fight to cast Mantra of Pain again (This will heal as well).. Rinse and repeat.

Of course fights vary significantly but I found the above method is a great 'base' method to work from.  

I also find you end up having to press a lot of buttons at the same time which I sometimes struggle with (being female, got small hands) so I do sometimes click on abilities I can't reach at the time as I'm using other abilities already.

When using mantra of distraction I would advice saving this for when you really need it (You're getting low in health and/or you need to re-cast mantras). Or when you can see a big attack coming from the enemy.

If you find yourself getting into a tight spot (For example you have no mantras remaining and no heals).

Use this moment to blink away from your enemy, pop timewarp, cast your Mantra of Recovery (and mantra of distraction or pain if you can) as this will heal you up quite a bit. Then use the remaining quickness to use your greatsword + mantra of pain. Hopefully at this point finishing off your enemy.

Conclusion:

I hope this guide is of help, I just really wanted to share my experiences with my mantra build and gameplay. It takes some getting used to using mantras but because less enemies expect it (if at all) you have the upper hand using them. I does require a high skill level and profession understanding.

You can quite easily swap things around in a mantra build to your own preference. I feel there is a lot of potential hybrids to the build, I'd just say try it out :3

Feel free to mail/whisper me questions if you have any IGN: Lilyfay (Or as a reply to this thread)

Best of luck,

Lilyfay

Xenomortis, on 24 September 2012 - 05:29 PM, said:

That's not saying much. That's like saying that death by asphyxiation is better than death via iron maiden.

They're both examples of really, really, really, really bad writing.

---

And by that I mean that he had no real entrance, he was just sort of... there. Okay, fine. He's the head of the pact. He's there. But who wants him there? Do you? Do you? Do you really? Ask yourself whom you'd prefer, whether you'd prefer him, or someone else? How much better would it have been if Trahearne was replaced by the respective racial hero that you'd gotten to know over the personal storyline?

So...

"Hey Eir, I know you! I'm perfectly okay taking orders from you. I know you're awesome!"

Or...

"Hey borg-like sylvari guy. I... see no reason why I should trust you. But I'll do it anyway."

I mean, sure, the second IS valid. But is it fun? We play games like these to be entertained. And I wasn't entertained by Trahearne. Frankly, he's one of the most annoyingly dull characters I've ever had the misfortune of coming across. I've known more lively accountants. He's just... there. He's not even a person, he's a plot conveyance. That's it. He's a name. He's just a name. Trahearne. But who is Trahearne, really? He's just this robot in plant's clothing.

He's completely flavourless, and the presentation... it just has no soul. You can't enjoy him. I could enjoy Rytlock as my charr, or Eir as my norn, but Trehearne? Trehearne? And even you sylvari types, if you had to choose between the wonderful Caithe or that bleeding mendicant Trehearne, who would you choose? It's just such a contrivance, and so sloppy.

And why? To save on time writing? To save on voice-acting costs? (Because they sure didn't pay a lot for Trahearne's voice-acting, that's for sure!)

We could have had Eir, or Rytlock, or Logan, or Caithe, or Zojja. We could have. That we didn't feels like a con. I mean, the whole thing feels like bringing Destiny's Edge back together. So why not have them back together, and leading the Pact as a council of five? Why not? Give me one good reason. One. This is just bad writing at its worst.

You could have been there, talking with your racial hero, as part of the Council of Five of the Pact.

But no.

We get Trahearne.

Trahearne.

Whom I can't even barely remember one line of dialogue from.