XPhiler

Member Since 21 Dec 2011
Offline Last Active Mar 27 2013 03:10 PM

Find content

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Taking the R out of RPG

15 March 2013 - 11:49 AM

El Duderino, on 14 March 2013 - 04:45 PM, said:

So you agree that it wasn't any special amazing healing powers that kept them alive; it was the fact that try kept jumping out of battle vs a group that clearly wasn't targeting them to any real degree in order to recuperate health.

Had they they actually stayed in battle they would have been roflstomped.

Listen, if healing was as powerful as you think it is, it would be a viable tactic that people use. The problem is that it clearly isn't. It is much more efficient to DPS your way through all content because DPS > healing and it's not even close.

There is no way to mitigate the massive amount of DPS in this game through healing or buffs or dodging or anything. If there was, we would see it happen and the game wouldn't constantly be stuck in easy mode.

Its a combination of stuff. healing alone will not cut it in any game if you're faced with a force 3x+ as large as you are, crowd control, support alone will also not cut with such a large force. Obviously you cannot just face it head on, stand there and expect to tank it easily.

PvE is stuck in easy mode, i completely agree there, not because healing is not viable but because of Gw2 diagonal like design. For PvE to be hard you'd need to balance stuff across the best stats hence exotic / ascended armor would then be a requirement to handly the hard content and thus gear would become a content barrier. PvE difficulty is a problem no doubt and I agree with you focusing on DPS in PvE is the most efficient way to go about it because encounters are easy enough that you dont need to bother with conditions / healing etc... fights are generally over before you loose even 1/2 your health and those are the "hard fights" Ignoring those aspects though makes you play lazy because in pvp if you just focus on DPS you'll simply be less effective than players who play in a more holistic manner. That is what happened in the video. Those players didnt simply avoid the fight, they fought intelligently and they killed a lot of enemy players.

you can mitigate 100% damage just not all the time. you can also substantially reduce the damage received by even as much as over 50% of it.

In Topic: Taking the R out of RPG

14 March 2013 - 04:44 PM

Lord Nibiru, on 14 March 2013 - 04:15 PM, said:

When for 1st time I heard gw2 will not have monks I was a bit sceptic what this game will offer in terms of group playing.
There was a great discussion going on on forum, people were trying to realise why there will be no monks.
So, other people explained it's because there are healing skills for every profession and that monks are not needed.
Which other side attacked with theory that this game will have easy PvE if that's the case. Seems they were right.

Then there was information that interrupts are no longer in gw2. This made me a bit afraid of what will gw2's pvp have in terms of tactical and skillfull play. Same as removal of hexes which were removed because removal of monks (probably).

I gave chance to Anet and gw2, so I let it go. Game came, months passed and now I know that I knew from very beggining that this game offers no skillfull play.

When to dodge and when to use skills isn't the same as real skillfull play.
I learned every profession in matter of days! It's all the same thing, just in different box!

Where are things that makes this game team orianted?
No wonder we only have capture the point in this game. Anet said themselves they tried different pvp modes and that this is the best pvp mode for this game. Reason?
You can't play team fights! There is no depth, there is no coordination.
There is no "I'll interrupt that skill so it doesn't get my ally in bad situation", there is "I'll use this selfish dodge button to survive myself because my teammate cannot help me. And then I will pray that he will focus down foe that wants finish me and then res me".

I see skills in this game as: damage, dodge, heal, teleport, AI, immobilise - only good cc, "other random CC with no real threat effect".

RPG? not even close. Every profession have more or less the same skills as mentioned above.

What are you talking about, of course there are. Gw2 combat systems operates on different complexity levels. The game does have the draw back of being too easy PvE wise which is why some players decide to ignore all the complexity the combat system offers in favor of the easy way out.

Its funny how people reason. I dont know what your stance is on ascended gear but a lot of people who dont like gw2 think ascended gear is a big deal even though it offers just a 5% advantage over exotic gear. Yet those same people insist no skills outside Direct damage are useful like you're saying now.

Thats funny because conditions such as vulnerability can increase damage suffered by the target by 25% (thats 5 times the bonus offered by ascended armor and applies for every ally attacking the target).

Weakness causes 50% of attacks to turn into glancing damage

25 stacks of might provide a difference in power the same as about 3 if not 4 tiers of armor

protection reduces damage taken by 33% again about 6 times the advantage ascended over exotic does

retaliation provides an extra source of damage that working on an average amount of 500 dmg per attack is about 25% extra damage

and whats more all of these can work together.

I just dont understand it. That 5% extra stats to damage or defense provided by ascended gear over exotic gear is considered a catastrophe if not acquired but these conditions and boons that offer an advantage that are orders of magnitude greater then any 1 armor tier is repeatedly being described as stuff that is not worth bothering about.

Are you sure you people arent just seeing what you want to see?
because seriously this game is not as one dimensional as you're describing it to be.

In Topic: Taking the R out of RPG

14 March 2013 - 04:27 PM

Featherman, on 14 March 2013 - 03:50 PM, said:

Doesn't epidemic revolve around dps in an area? And if it's dps all the same, isn't stacking direct damage in an area more effective?

I agree. There was healing and damage but there was a spacial element that helped to add to the roles as well.

Depends, in a plain fight yes, direct damage is more effective but in some situations condition damage is better. Example. Because condition damage is damage over time, if I am supporting others (buffing them, healing them or crowd controlling), If I am avoiding damage, interrupting, dodging, crowd control etc.. I cannot deal damage but thats okey damage over time will still provide a source of damage while I am buying myself time.

It depends on the play style. Direct damage to me personally is a bit boring because you dont get to make a lot of tactical considerations. Condition damage on the other hand keeps things interesting.

In Topic: Taking the R out of RPG

14 March 2013 - 03:42 PM

Featherman, on 14 March 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:

Necromancers and engineers, though mostly because condition dps is borked. Thief dps is okay against bosses, but they have no cleave so they're bad against regular enemies.

See how everything revolves around dps? Such a silly way to balance professions.

I honestly dont. Necromancer and Engineer are my favorite classes, Necromancer more so. Condition dps is actually not that bad if you have a necro in your team. using the epidemic skill you can move those condition stacks from a single target to multiple targets all around. In dungeons with my necro as soon as we finish killing the first element of a mob its nice to find the other remaining mobs at 50% health all thanks to that one skill.

I think its up to the player. Things will revolve around dps if the player decides to focus on dps. As a necro, my strategy most certainly doesnt resolve around dps.

In Topic: Taking the R out of RPG

14 March 2013 - 03:24 PM

Featherman, on 14 March 2013 - 02:24 PM, said:

It's probably that way by design. I'd say it's due to developer bias. Instead of letting you truly play the class the way you wanted to, the devs allowed players to play only variations of the Warrior class they envisioned. It's obvious in their recently revised class philosophies that the devs wanted the warrior to be a close range dps/tank. The obvious downside to this philosophy is that in a dps focused game like GW2, player biases will tend towards the most efficient dps class, and therefore warriors.

Personally, my problem isn't with Warriors. They suck outside of farming. Guardians on the other hand trade off a marginal dps loss for absurd sustain and utility, and they can use everything any time they want to, so they're useful at all times regardless of build. Also stability is the worst thing to happen in any game, and they pack tons of it.

Apart from warriors which class isnt useful at all times? Still didnt play thief so maybe them I dont know but all other classes can adapt to pretty much any situation. But yes I do agree with you that guardians are also probably op in terms of dps, the tradeoff is probably not big enough like it is in the other classes.

XPhiler

Community Stats

Contact Information

User Tools

Friends

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Taking the R out of RPG

In Topic: Taking the R out of RPG

In Topic: Taking the R out of RPG

In Topic: Taking the R out of RPG

In Topic: Taking the R out of RPG