Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Help

EphraimGlass

Member Since 09 Jul 2012
Offline Last Active Apr 13 2015 04:35 AM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Revenant Worries; GW2 Worries: The Good and the Bad

21 February 2015 - 03:38 AM

View PostArkham Creed, on 21 February 2015 - 12:03 AM, said:

I still feel like there is a lot of work to be done on the base classes. Ideally I think the base classes should be positioned as "jacks of all trades" who act as general hybrid classes and can play in many roles, and multiple roles at once. Conversely the specializations are just that; specialized versions of each class with a narrower focus, but greater synergy among skills and traits.

I hope that this is the implementation that prevails. Particularly, I hope that they introduce enough specializations that all of the reasonable ways to play each profession get one sooner rather than later. I have a couple of generalists on my roster (engineer and elementalist, maybe guardian) that will probably stay "base". It would be exciting if I could get options to trick out some of my characters, though. I'll admit that I'm not crazy about this one-specialization-per-profession business that they're launching with. Without enough directions for each profession, I'm afraid that the specializations will turn into the one efficient way to play a profession resulting, as you suggested, in the abandonment of the base classes.

In Topic: I’ve been playing GW2 wrong, and loving it.

16 February 2015 - 01:17 PM

View PostI post stuff, on 16 February 2015 - 11:44 AM, said:

People like you are the reason why I pug with a Cleric Guard.

Why do you say this like it's a bad thing? Being able to soak and heal a little bit to increase a suboptimal team's survivability is a good thing. This thread is a microcosm of the game at large. There are people who care about efficiency, people who care about choice, people who care about reconciling the two, etc.

I've encountered plenty of groups that explicitly state that they're not looking for any build in particular. Are runs with them slower or more difficult? Perhaps. On the other hand, people time dodges incorrectly, aren't familiar with a particular boss's pattern, or play while tipsy. Whether they're playing a meta-optimal build or not, players of "average skill" will introduce their own inefficiencies.

Playing some flavours of non-meta build can be in recognition of that fact. To wit: I have a thief in assassin gear but I'm not quick enough to use it to its utmost and I end up on the floor much more often than I'd like. My guardian in soldier gear has lower DPS on paper, I'm sure, but I can play him effectively.

In Topic: Statistically irrevenant

12 February 2015 - 07:00 PM

I don't know yet what gear I'll end up getting on my Revenant. I've proven pretty poor at determining what play style will appeal to me until I've tried it. I agree with your reasoning, though. I have full celestial on my engineer for just that reason. I switch between pistols, bombs, and elixir gun constantly. Leaving aside what "works best", I pick what seems best for the skills and weapons that I most enjoy playing with. That does mean Berserker on a couple of them but it also means Rampager on my Necromancer, Carrion on my Mesmer, Cleric/Apothecary on my Guardian, and Knight/Valkyrie on my Ranger.

In Topic: Colin: we will never raise the level cap or tiers of gear

08 February 2015 - 04:15 PM

View PostEl Duderino, on 08 February 2015 - 12:31 AM, said:

Having been playing a ton in Hearthstone lately, and as a former Magic player; I have to say that this is the way games should be made. Look at all the competitive games out there (which is something that GW1 once was and GW2 has at least wanted to be). They make the game interesting not by having a gear grind or vertical progression, but by adding cards/skills/etc. and changing those things so that the meta is affected in a progressive manner. Basically, it becomes dynamic over time, and not static. That is what a good game, even an MMO, should strive for. You don't need artificial stat progression, if the progression can come from acquiring more and unique skills that change the way you play new and old content. While GW1 struggled with this as they added different classes, it is something that can be done and is done in other games well. There's no reason why GW2 couldn't follow this same path.

It's not the best comparison, in my opinion. A big part of how they keep the metagame in Magic: The Gathering evolving is by the Standard rotation. That means removing things as well as adding new ones. The metagame of Vintage usually evolves slowly - or at least in periodic bursts spread far apart. (For those unfamiliar with M:TG's system, "Standard" involves only cards from the past two years while "Vintage" involves all of the cards ever printed.)

For GW2 to employ a similar system would require them to remove skills or traits periodically for force players to create new builds. Adding new things without removing old ones invariably leads to power creep. They wouldn't even need to deliberately make the new toys stronger. Even if only one of them were stronger than an existing comparable skill, trait, weapon, etc. then it would become the new standard tool for that purpose.

Furthermore, MMO's don't have the same gameplay structures that let collectible card games work the way they do. In a M:TG draft, you might take a bad card just because you need more creatures or because it fills a niche. In GW2, there's rarely any reason to equip a bad trait.

Unless you could find a way around those limitations, then suggesting that a MMO could evolve just by continuously adding new toys is misguided. I still think that new toys are a good idea but I don't think they'll do quite as much as you think to shake up the metagame.

In Topic: The Revenant

30 January 2015 - 06:36 PM

He'll be a norn. There are ten combinations of sex and race. Male norn and female human are the only two that I don't have so it has to be one of those.