Jump to content

  • Curse Sites


Member Since 30 Jul 2012
Offline Last Active Dec 13 2012 07:40 AM

#1746996 The actual "release date" of Guild Wars 2 is August 25th, and August...

Posted Linfang on 16 August 2012 - 06:42 PM

My release date is August 24th at 9pm PST -click- 9:01pm -click- 9:02 PM -click-

#1732017 tPvP gets their own color

Posted Miteshu on 14 August 2012 - 04:57 PM

I agree that hot-join's team color should stay as red and blue. It make it easier who is the enemy  and who is the friendly when everyone is a PuG.

However, in tournament PvP, I'll like to see people with other color schemes than red and blue. For the observer like me, it'll be easier to know who is this team and who is that team when watching a thousand youtube videos on tPvP.
  • Only the party leader finalize the color schemes for their team(Team can discusses with each other what color scheme they should use.)
  • Basic options starts from red, blue, green, yellow, etc. and then when you click those option, it opens a bigger menu to select more similar colors.
  • All these tPvP teams will be required to have two different color scheme that are not similar to each other. It'll be defined from the basic color options.
  • If two teams have similar color schemes, one of them or both of them will change their from their primary color to their secondary color.
  • Some colors may be banned for being too camouflaging,
  • This gets implemented when observer modes comes out for viewer's pleasure.

#1722667 Warrior sPvP/PvE Weapon Poll

Posted Haptic on 13 August 2012 - 03:12 AM

View PostNuclearDonut, on 13 August 2012 - 03:07 AM, said:

You get to be especially hipster with the Warrior because of all the weapon choices.

I won't be happy until they add lens-less glasses to the gem store.

#1719447 Stress Test Tomorrow, Sunday, August 12!

Posted Majic on 12 August 2012 - 05:58 PM

Just two minutes to go.

Stay on target. Stayyyy on tarrrget....

#1681412 Could the release of Guild Wars 2 be the last straw for World of Warcraft? |...

Posted Aethgar on 05 August 2012 - 03:54 PM

I played WoW for seven years. I raided, I PvPed competitively, I roleplayed. And debate subscription fees as you like, debate the viability of a company's choices, but the primary issues I saw with WoW, which led me finally to unsubscribe after being a steady and long term customer was an increasingly obvious sense that the people in charge cared very little about the experience of their playerbase.

The ultimate case in point is the character models. I mean, the storyline was always flawed, and its flaws only got worse as time went on. They fired the one guy who wanted to promote storytelling and who became the mod of the Story Forum, so they admittedly don't seem to care overly much about the game's storyline, or consistency within it. Rule of cool and all that.

But the character models for me became the examplar and the proverbial straw. Blizzard earns 60$ per expansion. 15$ per month. 25$ or more for character recustomization features. With the Shattering before Cataclysm came out, there was a golden opprtunity to show their old loyal customers like me that they cared about the one thing we'd asked for since BC came out: updated classic models.

In Burning crusade, set against the Draenei and Blood Elves, the harelipped human men, the unblinking troll girls, and the horrible eye searing dwarves and orcs were pitiful. With Wrath, the general complaint was that our new mounts and the mobs we were fighting had more polygons than our poor 2004-era characters.

They updated the druid animal forms in Wrath, and the eager hope was that since the classic world was being updated in Cata, finally we'd see some totally unnecessary(financially) but terribly needed update being done on those old models to bring them in line with the goblins and worgen to be. It would have been a bone to old players who'd sunk so much money and time into the game. And it didn't happen.

The worgen and goblin animations and models are in every possible way superior to the classic models, and from my friends who still play WoW, evidently that isn't changing in MoP either, despite much hope. It's just a small thing. A cosmetic thing. But it's not something that would earn them money to bleed from their players, so they don't do it. And for that reason and others which all came down to how much I was paying, and how unimportant my concerns and those of so many players were to the company, I did the only thing left after years of lobbying, reasoning and politely asking on the forums for the change we've all wanted: I stopped giving them money.

I never looked back. And right now, playing Aion (freeeeee) while I wait for GW2 to release, I don't regret the years I spent in WoW. I do regret the money I wasted, certainly, and how WoW so tightly cocooned me into dismissing other frankly better games. But honestly, I won't ever sub to a game again and pay monthly. I learned my lesson. If I hand you 15$ every month, I want to see a return on my money. I don't want to suffer through obvious contempt and marginalization by you when your income depends on my steady cash flow. If I have a legitimate concern as a player for a product I pay for, I want the company I pay to at least recognize it if sufficient other players share my concern, and seek to address it in a timely manner. Every other type of business operates on that basis. For example, my mobile company forgot to remove my international charge for texting once I got home after being in W.Africa. Two months later, my husband pointed this out on my bill. I called them, the representative was deeply apologetic, and retroactively credited me for the overcharge. EVERY other business depends on maintaining the loyalty of their customers, and addressing their concerns. The logic is absolutely clear cut: if I give you money regularly, I am paying for a service I can question and ask for improvements on.

I'm not posting this to piss on WoW, but to note how they lost a very loyal longterm customer and someone who was a Blizzard fangirl once. Had I not had to pay every month, I might have stayed longer and hoped. But the adage 'vote with your wallet' kept coming to my mind when it became more and more obvious how little overall interest Blizzard has in maintaining longtime customers, and how much more they want to simply attract new customers. I don't see GW2 as a 'WoW-killer'. Blizzard's doing that just fine on its own if they can so expertly alienate someone like me. If GW2 hadn't come along, I probably wouldn't play any MMO. I went without from my unsub last November til I got into the April stress test, and I only got Aion last week to distract myself from the imminent GW2 release. GW2 presents a new model to disillusioned people like me, and I think as Blizzard continues to alienate old loyal customers, rather than unsub and glower only to eventually resub for lack of an alternative, they will see another game which doesn't bleed them every month for shoddy graphics and tired boring very very stale quests.

I would like to say that I hope GW2 prods Blizzard's fat arse into gear to caring about their customers, but I do not at all think anything will improve in WoW. That's a tired cash cow which I truthfully do not think they intend to sink money into radically improving ever. They'll implement the better ideas they see in GW2 into Titan and put their eggs in that basket.

#1660510 Ranger or Warrior?

Posted Spatzimaus on 31 July 2012 - 11:45 PM

View PostUzurk, on 31 July 2012 - 10:22 PM, said:

I did find that a bear did not die as often as my cat or wolf. I was not able to track down a spider, so I have no experience with those, and the fact they have a ranged attack intrigues me.

There are Jungle Spiders in the Sylvari and Asura starting areas, and Forest Spiders in the Human starting zone.  All spider attacks have a range of 900, so that's plenty to stay out of AoEs and such.  Devourers are also good for that, and also have range of 900; basically, spiders are condition-heavy (especially Immobilize) and create Poison fields that you can combo through, so they're great if you're using a bow, while devourers are more raw damage with the occasional chance of poisoning.  Depending on your build and playstyle, these might be really good options for you.


I guess the issue I was running into, was during big boss DE's, all of my pets would either be alive, or get one shot randomly by the boss, but I have a feeling that if I went with dual spiders some of that would change?

Boss fights are always going to be tough; unless you go all-out on Pet-boosting traits and such, you're going to have a hard time with any melee pet since they'll be vulnerable to AoEs.  That being said, you still have a couple other options beyond high-HP pets like bears if you want to stick with melee.  Obviously, going with ranged pets is useful, but consider a White or Blue Moa; tell it to "guard" instead of attack (F3), and it'll just stand there buffing and healing your party while you plink away with a bow; the Red Moa's F2 screech is more offensive in nature, but you can still use that by waiting until a lull in the AoEs to activate that effect.  (Moas are great for wall defense in WvWvW, obviously.)  Or I've become a fan of the Fern Dog; it's a canine, meaning good DPS and mediocre HP, and like all canines it has a knockdown and a cripple, but its F2 "howl" skill gives Regeneration to all nearby allies, on a pretty fast cooldown (25s by default); fantastic in boss fights, since if the pet's getting wounded too much it can howl (F2) then back off (F3) until it's fully healed, at which point you send it back in.  As long as you have enough defense to keep that dog alive in bursts, it's a good option.

Note: while Devourers and Spiders are the only purely ranged land creatures, Jellyfish are a semi-ranged attacker underwater.  Their "slash" attack has a range of 400, and their Healing Cloud (AoE heal) and Dark Water (AoE blind) have a range of 900.  Their F2 "whirl" attacks are pure melee, though, with a range of only 150.  And Drakes, while mostly melee on their normal skills, all have longer ranges on their "breath" attacks, ranging from 250 to 900.

#1647106 Pure ranged play in competitive PvP - viable or not?

Posted Ayestes on 28 July 2012 - 03:39 PM

I'd argue that both weapons perform better with direct damage, and both of them have very capable condition damage.   I view them as both being hybridized damage weapons while being slightly better with direct damage.  Sure the Rifle bleeds well, and the Longbow burns well, but the direct damage components on the weapons are pretty high.  Given that the Rifle's Kill Shot and Volley lacks bleed components (even though Volley is okay with it via Precision and 5 attacks), and that the Longbow's auto attack and Arcing Arrow provide no burning effects (although they work great with the combo field) I'm more inclined to think these weapons are successful in a direct damage build then a pure condition damage one.  Ideally, it's a condition damage and power combination, but that has tradeoffs as well.

I agree though, that a double ranged combination isn't really that good in sPvP.  The reason being though, is not because the weapons require a different attribute spread.  It's that melee is naturally more effective.  If you can't leverage your ranged advantage in the first place, then ranged is no longer ideal.  You can fight on a control point for a pretty long time while keeping an opponent at range, but that can't last forever and sometimes you just have to duke it out melee style or run.  This is especially true if you don't have the utilities or cooldowns up to keep them at range in the first place.  Running is less then ideal if you want to keep the control point from being taken.  That's why I think you need a melee weapon swap.  

That's also why I advocate fighting a ranged opponent in melee, and a melee opponent in ranged.  Melee is naturally more effective in this game, but if you can't touch your target then you have a problem.  Personally I see the Longbow and Rifle as being great swaps, but I do think you always need a melee weapon.  At least, in sPvP anyway (assuming you want to work well with point control) and specifically concerning the Warrior.

As an aside, I think melee vs. ranged damage is one the reasons people often view the Warrior as overpowered. They compare the direct damage of our melee sets to their ranged options, and see the noticeable difference in damage dealing capability.  They go straight to "it's overpowered!" rather then seeing it as a melee and ranged difference.