Class struggle to bring new players into the game(PvE) — Guild Wars 2 Forums
Home Professions

Class struggle to bring new players into the game(PvE)

Lily.1935Lily.1935 Member ✭✭✭✭

This is something that I've talked about before in other posts but I'd like to make a more solid discussion about the 9 professions and how it can be a struggle for new players to get into guild wars due to the expected roles being absent on those classes. Although i don't entirely blame Arena net for this, as the player base did act in an unpredictable way with HoT when arena net started to try and standardize things for the game so Tank and Healers could be a real thing in the game rather than different forms of support DPS and DPS. But the issues of Arena net's system as it is now it makes this problem rather difficult to solve.

New players when they enter into Guild wars 2 are going to have specific expectations from the classes that are presented without ever looking at this skills. Just looking at what they are and how they're described. For instance, Guardian has probably the biggest disconnect for new players and what it actually does and what its role is. What new players expect is a Tank that supports allies and possibly heals to a minor extent. And the way the game mechanics are set up the Guardian is just not really a good tank. They can play the healer/support role fine but they're primarily a DPS, and one of the best at that. I've heard storied of players joining the game to try out a Warrior or guardian to be a tank only to find out that Mesmer was the tank in almost all content which quickly turned them off. Although a novel concept for sure, because the game has such a drastic disconnect from genre expectations this is more likely to turn new players away than to keep them playing.

Human psychology is weird. Humans both want something different but not so different that it breaks with conventions that they would otherwise expect. And we're all like that in some way. It would be nice if most humans could just take on a new experience and just slip into it and be delighted with its uniqueness. And there are definitely people who can do that, but its absolutely not something you should rely on. Its nice if you have that strange option like a mesmer tank, but you should still have those other options, such as Guardian and Warrior tanks, be just as good at that job if not better.

This issue is a bit more complex than all the issues I'm going to bring up but the suggested solution I have would be to change the Aggro system from a "Who has the biggest toughness" to a threat system where all skill either generate threat or reduce your threat so the player with the highest threat level takes aggro. And to keep toughness viable have bosses and specific enemies aggroed on the threatened Ally deal greatly increased damage so toughness gear becomes a necessity. This way if you want to run a support like a chronomancer you could have their supportive skills generate very little threat making it very difficult for them to tank over something else.

Other issues we see are builds that are just not great in pve that have no right not to be at least viable. Minion Master Necromancer and Turret engineer both come to mind as these builds are extremely popular with new players but once they get into more difficult content they quickly find that these builds are not good and they have to abandon what it was they want to play. The Turrent engineer specifically being really bad is what got my boyfriend to quit the game because that's what he really wanted to play.

Even more issues is the difficulty of some classes in comparison to others that probably should be. Take Elementalist for example. Elementalist should probably have an extremely simple high damage build on their core spec, something that doesn't require too much if any attunment swapping. Yet that isn't viable and the builds that are viable are some of the most knowledge intensive in the game, requiring massive memorization of the class.

The last issue I see is the high number of junk utility skills. There are a lot of utility skills, weapon skills, elite skills that just go unused in PvE. Although some have use in other game modes in some cases they don't get used there either. Engineer I feel is notorious for this as if you're running them there are few utility you really want to take that you couldn't get better utility from elsewhere such as your toolbelt skills on more useful skills or even elite spec skills. Gadgets and turrets have been the target for a lot of these issues as they often struggle to keep up with Kits. Kits too have these issues where in order for the engineer to get the best use from their kits they need to effectively swap out of those kits after using 1 or 2 skills. Which leads to more new player confusion.

I'm not saying every aspect of the professions need to be new player friendly. More I'm saying that what new players are expected to learn and understand in the long run without having viable standard options as well as simpler options has soured the experience of far too many players I've attempted to get into the game.

TLDR:

  • Redo the Aggro system so
  • Make Fan favorite builds viable
  • Offer more viable simple builds across more professions and especially core professions
  • Rework many of the Underused or unused skills.
<13

Comments

  • Lily.1935Lily.1935 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @ASP.8093 said:
    "The mesmer is the tank" thing is, like, pretty specific to raid comps.

    You look at SPvP and you've got Guardians providing team buffs and pressure on point. You look at WvW and you've got Guardians in the main defensive role and Warriors anchoring pushes with the Spellbreaker bubble and CC. These are "tanky," front-liner-y roles. And in most of the solo and open-world PvE content, if you pick Guard or Warrior you're going to be doing just fine engaging monsters toe-to-toe, with sizable melee damage and decent self-sustain. I don't think there's any kind of major thematic bait-and-switch with these professions.

    There is. And the thread is specific to PvE. As it says in the title. The issues do show up in content like Raids and Fractals to a lesser extent.

  • Taril.8619Taril.8619 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Lily.1935 said:
    I've heard storied of players joining the game to try out a Warrior or guardian to be a tank only to find out that Mesmer was the tank in almost all content which quickly turned them off.

    Warrior can play as a Tank. Since they have access to Block on shield and they don't have to do DPS to be useful due to bannerbotting.

    Also, "People try out a tank" lel

    Tanks are the least popular role in MMO's, by a LOT. So much so that Tank populations bottleneck group matching in basically every MMO (The exception is FFXIV these days because Shadowbringers expansion absolutely murdered Healers and made them the most boring classes in the history of video games)

    @Lily.1935 said:
    Its nice if you have that strange option like a mesmer tank, but you should still have those other options, such as Guardian and Warrior tanks, be just as good at that job if not better.

    Warriors are okay tanks. As are Renegades and Druids and Guardians.

    Mesmer is only the best tank in optimized raid set ups (Mostly, it can differ from boss to boss) but doesn't invalidate other tank builds.

    @Lily.1935 said:
    And to keep toughness viable

    Implying that Toughness is at all viable or even used in PvE.

    Even in Raids where the Toughness = aggro mechanic exists, it is not used beyond 1 piece of gear with Toughness on to put the Tank above the 1000 base toughness (1150 with Soulbeast) that everyone else is using.

    @Lily.1935 said:
    Other issues we see are builds that are just not great in pve that have no right not to be at least viable. Minion Master Necromancer and Turret engineer both come to mind as these builds are extremely popular with new players but once they get into more difficult content they quickly find that these builds are not good and they have to abandon what it was they want to play. The Turrent engineer specifically being really bad is what got my boyfriend to quit the game because that's what he really wanted to play.

    One of the issues with MM Necro and Turret Engie is that they promote a mostly passive playstyle. Being not to dissimilar to the AFK bots you see about the place.

    There has been a general theme with ANets balancing where they keep passive damage builds down so that more engaging builds are used instead (This is likely one reason for Reaper's low damage potential, due to a significant portion of it coming from auto attacks in Shroud which is a very passive source of damage and can be exacerbated through Signets of Suffering + Signet of Undeath for AFK Reaper to just auto attack in Shroud forever...)

    As such, in order to make these build viable, there would have to be more onus on actively using these things, which in turn can also remove part of the appeal of them in the first place. As well as dealing with the possibility of things like Engie Tank or Healer or Scourge Support being dominant because they can get damage from stat independent turrets/minions.

    Also, it requires ANet to stop globally nerfing things because they're broken in PvP...

    @Lily.1935 said:
    Even more issues is the difficulty of some classes in comparison to others that probably should be. Take Elementalist for example. Elementalist should probably have an extremely simple high damage build on their core spec, something that doesn't require too much if any attunment swapping.

    But Core Elementalist is literally based around attunement swapping. That's it's entire thing. Saying they should have a viable core build that doesn't require attunement swapping is like saying Mesmer should have a viable build that doesn't require illusions or Necro should have a viable build that doesn't use Shroud.

    Meanwhile Tempest exists to provide a lower skill floor build, by the nature of how its Overload mechanic reduces the amount of attunement swapping necessary.

    @Lily.1935 said:
    The last issue I see is the high number of junk utility skills.

    This is because instead of improving the plethora of useless core utility skills, they'd rather just churn out a new E-Spec with new utility skills and call it a day.

    @Lily.1935 said:
    Kits too have these issues where in order for the engineer to get the best use from their kits they need to effectively swap out of those kits after using 1 or 2 skills. Which leads to more new player confusion.

    Well, using kits like this is min/maxing. Which new players need not be concerned with until they're more familiar with the game.

    It's the same for all classes where weapon swapping is a thing that is done to optimize yet would not be directly obvious to new players (Especially some of the optimized set ups like Axe/ + /Axe Warrior that swaps on CD for trait/sigil bonuses for swapping but doesn't change weapons)

    Using kits as replacement weapons works fine for new players and is actually not too bad for open world content (There's meme-y Flamethrower Scrapper builds for a reason. As well as Bomb Kit being a great way to level up as Engie due to Fire Bomb + Smoke Bomb to farm packs of enemies) same as with the plethora of kitless builds that people run in open world content that do just fine (I'm a fan of the Static Discharge meme build personally, that works by proccing the Static Discharge + Kinetic Battery traits as often as possible with Rifle Turret, Personal Battering Ram and Rocket Boots due to their low CD toolbelt skills - 6.75s, 10.25s and 12.75s respectively)

    Cat: Meow.

  • Kodama.6453Kodama.6453 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I think not everything can get tied to problems with the design of the classes.

    This game is designed that all classes can fill all roles. Elite specs are a tool to improve this, since core classes failed at some of these roles. A thief, for example, was not really able to play a tank build. That changed with the introduction of daredevil, it is an uncommon tank archetype by making the daredevil avoid damage with enhanced dodges instead o facetanking everything, but it is still a tank fantasy for the thief.

    Guardian still lacks this tank spec, they just received a support elite spec (firebrand) and a dps elite spec (dragonhunter) so far. But I think more gaps will get filled with the next set of elite specs, giving guardians the option to play a full fledged tank.

    The bigger problem for me is that the tank archetype in general is not really desired in the game. In PvE, just raids are really in need of a dedicated tank and mostly ust one in a team of 10 people. And even these tanks are expected to provide as much dps as possible while trying to stay alive.
    There are options for tanks, like daredevil, scrapper, spellbreaker... But people try to maximize their damage and chrono is simply the best at tanking while also dealing alot of damage, hence why you don't really see the other specs used in their intended role and they keep migrating to other playstyle (spellbreaker and daredevil to dps, scrapper to heal support).

    So you would actually have to make changes to PvE encounters that bringing tanks is encouraged.
    I agree with your statement that underused utility skills should be made viable, tho. As a main engineer, I feel this. Gadgets and turrets are some of the worst utility skills in the game right now. Thematically, I would love to use them and I do from time to time in open world (since you can basically use everything there), but I wish they would improve these skills to find actual niches in the game.

  • @Taril.8619 said:
    There has been a general theme with ANets balancing where they keep passive damage builds down so that more engaging builds are used instead (This is likely one reason for Reaper's low damage potential, due to a significant portion of it coming from auto attacks in Shroud which is a very passive source of damage and can be exacerbated through Signets of Suffering + Signet of Undeath for AFK Reaper to just auto attack in Shroud forever...)

    Well, that's untrue! It's not a general theme at all. I mean, why are Axe/Axe Berserkers able to do so much DPS then? Or Daredevils ... or D/D Deadeyes, Soulbeasts (condi or power), Firebrands/Dragonhunters, etc. etc. I mean, all of these have incredibly passive rotations (some even ridiculously passive: only hitting F1 like crazy, or only pressing 5 every now and then between all the auto-attacks), and doing a lot of DPS with it (far more than a passive Reaper at least) AND be more useful to a group.
    So, you might think there's a general theme, but ANet has never said or stated such a thing, and evidence shows the opposite!

  • Sobx.1758Sobx.1758 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 26, 2020

    @Lily.1935 said:
    This is something that I've talked about before in other posts but I'd like to make a more solid discussion about the 9 professions and how it can be a struggle for new players to get into guild wars due to the expected roles being absent on those classes. Although i don't entirely blame Arena net for this, as the player base did act in an unpredictable way with HoT when arena net started to try and standardize things for the game so Tank and Healers could be a real thing in the game rather than different forms of support DPS and DPS. But the issues of Arena net's system as it is now it makes this problem rather difficult to solve.

    While making claims like this, we should remember that one of the things gw2 was based on was the lack of existence of "holy trinity". At this point it's just trying to blame the game for being it's own thing instead of copying other games.
    And no, I don't really mind the "holy trinity", but it seems to be way more limiting for the player than the alternative. From what I've seen people ALREADY have troubles with accepting that they're not bound to a single character and usually want "their class" to be able to do everything on the same level as others, I doubt assigning roles to classes would fix anything or add any value.

    Human psychology is weird. Humans both want something different but not so different that it breaks with conventions that they would otherwise expect. And we're all like that in some way. It would be nice if most humans could just take on a new experience and just slip into it and be delighted with its uniqueness. And there are definitely people who can do that, but its absolutely not something you should rely on. Its nice if you have that strange option like a mesmer tank, but you should still have those other options, such as Guardian and Warrior tanks, be just as good at that job if not better.

    I like "A", you like "B". While making a game, you absolutely shouldn't rely on "B". Mainly, because I said so.

    This issue is a bit more complex than all the issues I'm going to bring up but the suggested solution I have would be to change the Aggro system from a "Who has the biggest toughness" to a threat system where all skill either generate threat or reduce your threat so the player with the highest threat level takes aggro. And to keep toughness viable have bosses and specific enemies aggroed on the threatened Ally deal greatly increased damage so toughness gear becomes a necessity. This way if you want to run a support like a chronomancer you could have their supportive skills generate very little threat making it very difficult for them to tank over something else.

    But why? If you want to run support, then don't build toughness -or just have less than the tank. What exactly would be the point of this change?

    Other issues we see are builds that are just not great in pve that have no right not to be at least viable. Minion Master Necromancer and Turret engineer both come to mind as these builds are extremely popular with new players but once they get into more difficult content they quickly find that these builds are not good and they have to abandon what it was they want to play. The Turrent engineer specifically being really bad is what got my boyfriend to quit the game because that's what he really wanted to play.

    Minion/turret builds pretty much "play themselves". They often seem to be problematic, because they either become broken/unfair (passive gameplay combined with high efficiency) or remain almost unusable for endgame pve/pvp content. Which is also why I think they better fit single player games than mmorpgs. Or, well, they might just be good for introcutory safe semi-passive playstyle for new players until they actually understand the game and its mechanics, like they seem to be in gw2.
    btw it seems to me you've decided to share your opinions masked behind "new players want/expect/prefer" statements. Pretty sure you have no valid data to make these claims, so why hide your preferences behind them?

    Even more issues is the difficulty of some classes in comparison to others that probably should be. Take Elementalist for example. Elementalist should probably have an extremely simple high damage build on their core spec, something that doesn't require too much if any attunment swapping. Yet that isn't viable and the builds that are viable are some of the most knowledge intensive in the game, requiring massive memorization of the class.

    Actually I'm not sure what to think about it, because this is a bit too vague. What is a "high damage build" in the context of this post? If you think it should be anywhere near the top dps despite throwing away a mechanic the class is built around then I have to disagree. If you mean it should be able to open world pve without swapping attunments, then... it already can and that's probably what most "new players" care about.

    The last issue I see is the high number of junk utility skills. There are a lot of utility skills, weapon skills, elite skills that just go unused in PvE. Although some have use in other game modes in some cases they don't get used there either. Engineer I feel is notorious for this as if you're running them there are few utility you really want to take that you couldn't get better utility from elsewhere such as your toolbelt skills on more useful skills or even elite spec skills. Gadgets and turrets have been the target for a lot of these issues as they often struggle to keep up with Kits. Kits too have these issues where in order for the engineer to get the best use from their kits they need to effectively swap out of those kits after using 1 or 2 skills. Which leads to more new player confusion.

    Many unusable skills and traits (even moreso in pvp/wvw) are a problem that serves against the concept of freedom of builds, true.

  • Taril.8619Taril.8619 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Taril.8619 said:
    There has been a general theme with ANets balancing where they keep passive damage builds down so that more engaging builds are used instead (This is likely one reason for Reaper's low damage potential, due to a significant portion of it coming from auto attacks in Shroud which is a very passive source of damage and can be exacerbated through Signets of Suffering + Signet of Undeath for AFK Reaper to just auto attack in Shroud forever...)

    Well, that's untrue! It's not a general theme at all. I mean, why are Axe/Axe Berserkers able to do so much DPS then? Or Daredevils ... or D/D Deadeyes, Soulbeasts (condi or power), Firebrands/Dragonhunters, etc. etc. I mean, all of these have incredibly passive rotations (some even ridiculously passive: only hitting F1 like crazy, or only pressing 5 every now and then between all the auto-attacks), and doing a lot of DPS with it (far more than a passive Reaper at least) AND be more useful to a group.
    So, you might think there's a general theme, but ANet has never said or stated such a thing, and evidence shows the opposite!

    They have to press buttons and therefore are not passive.

    Passive means not doing anything.

    Passive does not mean "Simple". The aforementioned classes have simple rotations, but they all have to actively press buttons.

    Cat: Meow.

  • Josiah.2967Josiah.2967 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 26, 2020

    As someone that generally plays tank in other MMOs. Switching to DPS was a nice change of pase. Without 5 man content requiring a tank, there is not enough content in general engage me to tank in this game.

    Funny story...I initially rolled a Guardian to be a tank. I was extremely disappointed...

    I am more concerned with LFG feature other MMOs have where you can que into a dungeon\fractal\raid with a random group. When the que finds everyone, you port in. I think making instances PVE content as easy and accessible as possible is the way to go. I was more disappointed with the lack of group dungeons while leveling the first time than anything else.

  • Kodama.6453Kodama.6453 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Taril.8619 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Taril.8619 said:
    There has been a general theme with ANets balancing where they keep passive damage builds down so that more engaging builds are used instead (This is likely one reason for Reaper's low damage potential, due to a significant portion of it coming from auto attacks in Shroud which is a very passive source of damage and can be exacerbated through Signets of Suffering + Signet of Undeath for AFK Reaper to just auto attack in Shroud forever...)

    Well, that's untrue! It's not a general theme at all. I mean, why are Axe/Axe Berserkers able to do so much DPS then? Or Daredevils ... or D/D Deadeyes, Soulbeasts (condi or power), Firebrands/Dragonhunters, etc. etc. I mean, all of these have incredibly passive rotations (some even ridiculously passive: only hitting F1 like crazy, or only pressing 5 every now and then between all the auto-attacks), and doing a lot of DPS with it (far more than a passive Reaper at least) AND be more useful to a group.
    So, you might think there's a general theme, but ANet has never said or stated such a thing, and evidence shows the opposite!

    They have to press buttons and therefore are not passive.

    Passive means not doing anything.

    Passive does not mean "Simple". The aforementioned classes have simple rotations, but they all have to actively press buttons.

    If you see it like this, then minionmancers and turreteers have never been passive, too. If you just placed your turrets and didn't press any buttons afterwards then you were doing something wrong and definitely didn't get a viable playstyle out of that, even at turreteer's prime in PvP.

  • Taril.8619Taril.8619 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Taril.8619 said:

    @Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

    @Taril.8619 said:
    There has been a general theme with ANets balancing where they keep passive damage builds down so that more engaging builds are used instead (This is likely one reason for Reaper's low damage potential, due to a significant portion of it coming from auto attacks in Shroud which is a very passive source of damage and can be exacerbated through Signets of Suffering + Signet of Undeath for AFK Reaper to just auto attack in Shroud forever...)

    Well, that's untrue! It's not a general theme at all. I mean, why are Axe/Axe Berserkers able to do so much DPS then? Or Daredevils ... or D/D Deadeyes, Soulbeasts (condi or power), Firebrands/Dragonhunters, etc. etc. I mean, all of these have incredibly passive rotations (some even ridiculously passive: only hitting F1 like crazy, or only pressing 5 every now and then between all the auto-attacks), and doing a lot of DPS with it (far more than a passive Reaper at least) AND be more useful to a group.
    So, you might think there's a general theme, but ANet has never said or stated such a thing, and evidence shows the opposite!

    They have to press buttons and therefore are not passive.

    Passive means not doing anything.

    Passive does not mean "Simple". The aforementioned classes have simple rotations, but they all have to actively press buttons.

    If you see it like this, then minionmancers and turreteers have never been passive, too. If you just placed your turrets and didn't press any buttons afterwards then you were doing something wrong and definitely didn't get a viable playstyle out of that, even at turreteer's prime in PvP.

    Well, turrets are pretty passive, given that all you really do is put them down. Maybe you pick them up again to put them down again for their overcharge later but that's about it.

    With minions, you have Flesh Golem and Shadow Fiend where you use their active but the majority of minions output is from their auto attacks.

    In any event, these CAN be played passively (I mean, this is literally the basis of the AFK-botting strategy) and thus they have been limited in their power (In addition to other reasons) hence their lack of "Viable playstyle" because it seems that ANet doesn't want strategies that play themselves to be viable and ergo, we have trash minions, turrets and animal companions (As well as no longer having perma-Phantasms) as well as limited viability of auto attack focused builds (Such as Sword Thief)

    The closest we have to viable passive builds are things like Reaper where a lot of damage comes from Shroud auto attacks (But still requires building of Life Force as well as utilization of other skills such as Wells and Shroud skill 4 to achieve a reasonable DPS) and Revenant who relies a lot on activating a legend's upkeep skill and auto attacking until out of energy (Though, other skills are used to make sure to get below 10 energy by the time legend swap comes off cooldown to be able to swap and proc Charged Mists as well as you know, actually needing to swap legends and reactivate upkeep skills)

    Cat: Meow.

  • Kodama.6453Kodama.6453 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Taril.8619 said:

    Well, turrets are pretty passive, given that all you really do is put them down. Maybe you pick them up again to put them down again for their overcharge later but that's about it.

    With minions, you have Flesh Golem and Shadow Fiend where you use their active but the majority of minions output is from their auto attacks.

    In any event, these CAN be played passively (I mean, this is literally the basis of the AFK-botting strategy) and thus they have been limited in their power (In addition to other reasons) hence their lack of "Viable playstyle" because it seems that ANet doesn't want strategies that play themselves to be viable and ergo, we have trash minions, turrets and animal companions (As well as no longer having perma-Phantasms) as well as limited viability of auto attack focused builds (Such as Sword Thief)

    The closest we have to viable passive builds are things like Reaper where a lot of damage comes from Shroud auto attacks (But still requires building of Life Force as well as utilization of other skills such as Wells and Shroud skill 4 to achieve a reasonable DPS) and Revenant who relies a lot on activating a legend's upkeep skill and auto attacking until out of energy (Though, other skills are used to make sure to get below 10 energy by the time legend swap comes off cooldown to be able to swap and proc Charged Mists as well as you know, actually needing to swap legends and reactivate upkeep skills)

    Keep in mind that turrets not always worked like that.
    In the past, the overcharge abilities have been abilities which you activated yourself, not automatically on placement.

    Since you are claiming that pressing buttons means something is not passive: then back then when turrets actually were good in at least 1 game mode (PvP), they have been less passive than they are now. Because you were actively managing and timing your overcharges as the engineer.

    However, they should do something about them. Rework them to actually require imput from the player and even stat investment. Why not let turrets scale with your power, for example? Flame turret's damage output scales with your condition damage, why is it an exception?
    If we force players to invest in offensive stats to do damage with turrets, then we might avoid bunker turreteers becoming a thing in PvP again.

    Make the overcharge abilities something that you aim yourself as an AoE (with some exceptions, of course).
    Maybe rework some of the turrets, too many have hard CC in my opinion: rocket turret, net turret, thumper turret.
    I would rework thumper turret into the prime CC turret, while making rocket turret just an AoE dps tool (unlike rifle, which is single target dps) and net turret reworked into a chemical turret that could either fill a support role, condition damage role, or both.

  • Lily.1935Lily.1935 Member ✭✭✭✭

    "Minions are passive play"

    That's not actually the norm from my experience. Same with Turret builds. there's too much to respond to individually for me at the moment, but I may come back to it. I stand by what I said though.

  • Taril.8619Taril.8619 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Taril.8619 said:

    Well, turrets are pretty passive, given that all you really do is put them down. Maybe you pick them up again to put them down again for their overcharge later but that's about it.

    With minions, you have Flesh Golem and Shadow Fiend where you use their active but the majority of minions output is from their auto attacks.

    In any event, these CAN be played passively (I mean, this is literally the basis of the AFK-botting strategy) and thus they have been limited in their power (In addition to other reasons) hence their lack of "Viable playstyle" because it seems that ANet doesn't want strategies that play themselves to be viable and ergo, we have trash minions, turrets and animal companions (As well as no longer having perma-Phantasms) as well as limited viability of auto attack focused builds (Such as Sword Thief)

    The closest we have to viable passive builds are things like Reaper where a lot of damage comes from Shroud auto attacks (But still requires building of Life Force as well as utilization of other skills such as Wells and Shroud skill 4 to achieve a reasonable DPS) and Revenant who relies a lot on activating a legend's upkeep skill and auto attacking until out of energy (Though, other skills are used to make sure to get below 10 energy by the time legend swap comes off cooldown to be able to swap and proc Charged Mists as well as you know, actually needing to swap legends and reactivate upkeep skills)

    Keep in mind that turrets not always worked like that.
    In the past, the overcharge abilities have been abilities which you activated yourself, not automatically on placement.

    Since you are claiming that pressing buttons means something is not passive: then back then when turrets actually were good in at least 1 game mode (PvP), they have been less passive than they are now. Because you were actively managing and timing your overcharges as the engineer.

    Exactly my point. When they were LESS passive, they were MORE viable.

    @Kodama.6453 said:
    However, they should do something about them. Rework them to actually require imput from the player and even stat investment.

    They should do something about them.

    Will they do something about them? Probably not.

    Especially since they'll upset people who like their current iteration which they'll use to justify leaving turrets (Also minions and animal companions) as being terrible. Given that there are people who enjoy their passiveness as well as the fact that they don't scale with stats (Meaning that they can run cheese builds to basically afk farm open world...)

    Cat: Meow.

  • Kodama.6453Kodama.6453 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Taril.8619 said:

    Exactly my point. When they were LESS passive, they were MORE viable.

    The weird thing is: Anet changed turrets and nerfed them to the ground for being too "passive".
    Yet they managed to make them more passive with their rework.

    Honestly, I have no idea what Anet is thinking when it comes to turrets. It seems they just want to kill them and hope people forget they exist.

  • Taril.8619Taril.8619 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 27, 2020

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Taril.8619 said:

    Exactly my point. When they were LESS passive, they were MORE viable.

    The weird thing is: Anet changed turrets and nerfed them to the ground for being too "passive".
    Yet they managed to make them more passive with their rework.

    Honestly, I have no idea what Anet is thinking when it comes to turrets. It seems they just want to kill them and hope people forget they exist.

    It seems like a bit of a theme with what ANet says and what ANet does not lining up.

    Similar to the whole "Signets of Suffering is not taken because it's not strong enough" and then they nerf it.

    For turrets and minions... They just want them to stay competitvely unviable so they don't have to bother with actually needing to work on them.

    There's a lot they could do to make them actually useful while avoiding the early issues of bunker builds in PvP, but it would all require actual work more so than many other trash utilities that simply need number adjustments and/or added boons/condi's...

    I mean, we're nearly 8 years into the game's life and we still have tons of core utiltiies, weapons and specializations that are total trash with no sign of attempts to update them to the same standards as newer designed options (I.e. What is found in E-Specs where many weapons are well designed, many specs have multiple viable and useful traits and many specs come with utilities that are useful and interesting).

    Not to mention we also have things like good utilities that have outdated designs (For example, Warrior Banners, Engie Elixirs, Necro Corruptions and Chrono Wells) that are useful and strong but clunky as all heck or limited compared to more modern designed skills (I.e. Comparing Elixir's self only effects with minor ally effects on toolbelt action with the plethora of AoE boon application effects found throughout things like Herald, Firebrand, Deadeye, Renegade, Druid etc... It's to the point where skills like Warrior and Guardian Shouts have fallen out of favour because their AoE boon application just isn't necessary due to many other sources of AoE boonspam)

    Either way, when it comes to the topic at hand and "New Players", both Turrets and Minions in their current state are viable for newbs due to being usable/good in all open world PvE content. Their lack of competitive prowess will not discourage new players as new players tend not to focus on min/max gameplay and the ones that do would be fully aware that in a min/max setting, build options are vastly decreased and would not be dissuaded by knowing that a utility such as turrets/minions would not be viable in end game, instanced PvE.

    Cat: Meow.

  • Raarsi.6798Raarsi.6798 Member ✭✭

    I think what really causes issues for new players is that the game itself (and ANet overall) doesn't exactly provide enough resources to teach new players about what they're getting into whenever they start a new class. While it might seem like a good idea to make players learn for themselves, that lack of grounding means they have to rely on other players for even some of the most basic information on classes, which is an absolutely terrible idea on multiple levels. Not only do you have the general bias that comes with the overwhelming majority of players who likely won't be able to provide enough of a neutral and objective overview of all the classes, but any playerbase of a given game will never has as much information on the game they play as the devs who made it and can provide more of an intermediate guide saying "here are some builds you might want to give a try" that can be changed as the game changes and expands.

    Yes, there are resources for explaining more in-depth of how classes work and what builds are ideal for what, and of course players shouldn't be hand-held through the whole game. Other popular MMORPGs manage to do this well enough. What I see in this game for the experience of a new player is the deadbeat dad going out "just for cigarettes" and never coming back, which is great for more hardcore gamers that can dedicate the time and energy for that, but not for the overwhelming majority of gamers that play games for casual experiences. It's why I've always seen GW2 as more of a hardcore gamer's title despite there being content for casual players, but not nowhere near enough for the game to be as popular as higher-end titles in the genre.

    As for the classes themselves, as we get more expansions and therefore more elite specs, it'd actually make sense just to completely phase out core specs. Yes, there are useful ones for various endgame purposes, but by making them leveling specs to work with prior to gaining elite specs (like how most people seem to play them), it could bring a bit more simplicity and straightforwardness that newer players need to better engage themselves into what they're playing. It would also promote people buying expansions, meaning ANet would get a bit more profit from it as well. That being said, there would be the argument of it reducing options, but gamers should know by now that more option means less option, especially when it comes to classes or any other means by which a player views the game.

    In summary, making the classes more straightforward, new players would have much less trouble. This doesn't mean make certain classes fall into hard-defined roles (like how it seems players already have), but rather show at least some pathways through the swamp that is class builds rather than leaving players to their own devices. A player spending less time having to learn about the game means they have more time simply playing the game; this can sound odd to some players who might like that, but those players will always be in the minority in voice as well as in what cash they're willing to shell out.

  • ASP.8093ASP.8093 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 29, 2020

    @Raarsi.6798 said:
    I think what really causes issues for new players is that the game itself (and ANet overall) doesn't exactly provide enough resources to teach new players about what they're getting into whenever they start a new class.

    I mean, the game does try to drip-feed you abilities and information. There's obviously some space for improvement (I think the pacing of the basic personal story might need to be looked at some, and the way dungeons intersect with leveling/personal-story has always been awkward) but I didn't really find myself twisting in the wind when I started even back under the old system.

    (Nowadays I always just use scrolls/tomes, because leveling is actually rather tedious because of the aspects designed to provide a gentler onramp for starting players.)

    You also have to remember that you can't train everyone. I've got a friend who's running an alt through the story with some new-ish hyper-casual players and they just refuse to do stuff even after it's explained to them repeatedly over voice chat, with personalized feedback and everything. I'm not talking about mastering some unforgiving dodge timings or forcing them to play an all-in DPS meta build, I mean like "how to make the blue bar go down at all." It's very hard to imagine any automated tutorial actually getting through to them.

  • Raarsi.6798Raarsi.6798 Member ✭✭

    @ASP.8093 said:
    You also have to remember that you can't train everyone. I've got a friend who's running an alt through the story with some new-ish hyper-casual players and they just refuse to do stuff even after it's explained to them repeatedly over voice chat, with personalized feedback and everything. I'm not talking about mastering some unforgiving dodge timings or forcing them to play an all-in DPS meta build, I mean like "how to make the blue bar go down at all." It's very hard to imagine any automated tutorial actually getting through to them.

    Of course there is always that hallmark lesson of Programming 101 that if you make something idiot-proof, then someone's just going to build a bigger idiot. As for bar breaking, they could probably do pop-up messages pointing to the blue bar on select mobs that have extreme damage reduction and automatically die whenever they get bar broken. That being said, I do agree that they need to do something about pacing for the leveling experience, especially when it's more time utilizing playstyles that some classes won't ever deal with again after hitting 80.

    While you can't train everyone, you still need to have the resources for those who want to learn without being immediately bogged down in endgame data or some other sort of nonsense from other players. ANet is in a far better position to do that because they will always know the game better than players ever will.

  • Lynx.9058Lynx.9058 Member ✭✭

    Just posting here to say that, as a new player (going on 4 days now since starting), this is definitely spot on.

    When looking through the classes, heres what comes to mind:

    Warrior: probably a tanky class /weapons master.
    Guardian: Paladin style tank/support.
    Revenant: most likely a berserker type melee character, maybe demon hunter esque given the blindfold and coming from a wow perspective.
    Ranger: standard archer/hunter. If I didn't look at the wiki or other sources I would never guess this ends up as a druid or shapeshifter.
    Thief: probably the one class that is exactly what it looks like.
    Engineer: support centric, lots of options, probably a hybrid class or Jack of all trades.
    Necromancer: minion focused spellcaster. Would not expect it to start with an axe or have melee heavy specializations.
    Elementalist: typical mage/spellcaster.
    Mesmer: honestly doesn't seem to relate much to other game class archetypes. I'd guess a priest- like caster or cleric.

    Obviously most of those end up being completely wrong, but that's what I assumed when first creating a character.

  • draxynnic.3719draxynnic.3719 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Chronotanks aren't used because chronomancer has the highest survivability - bunker chrono hasn't been a thing in competitive modes for years for a reason. The actual toughest professions genuinely are the professions you'd expect them to be. The reason chronotanks are meta is that they survive well enough while sacrificing less than other professions would to get their tanky stats.

    I can see how that thinking might be confusing to a new player, but honestly, tanking in raids is probably not a role I'd want to give to someone who isn't already experienced enough to understand why it's done that way. Largely because the role of 'tank' has a different function to what it does in most games. Your primary job isn't to take damage so that the squishies aren't the ones being attacked (most raids that use tanks have plenty of mechanics that mean that there's still plenty of danger to the rest of the squad), the job of the tank is usually to lead the boss out of punishing AoE fields the the rest of the squad can keep fighting them without dying to said AoE fields.

    On this basis, I'm not convinced it would be a bad thing if a minionmancer or turreteer tank ever became a thing in PvE raids. It'd work on a similar principle - it doesn't have the same potential DPS in full DPS gear as the true DPS professions, but it doesn't lose as much by choosing to use tankier gear. Obviously, we wouldn't want this to start becoming a big thing in competitive modes again, but splits exist for a reason.

    Regardless of calling such builds "passive" - I wouldn't say they're any more passive than builds that make heavy use of signets, or even non-signet buffs that have long durations and cooldowns (as opposed to things like firebrand mantras where you're usually activating one every few seconds). A minionmancer build still has a fair amount of active gameplay through weapon skills, life force usage and, if you want optimal benefit from your minions, use of the minion actives. Engineers could have a similar relationship with turrets if the turret toolbelt skills were buffed to make them more interesting - Rifle Turret, for instance, has been taken at least as much for Surprise Shot as for the actual turret for a while, and I don't see an in-principle reason why other turret toolbelt skills couldn't have similar relationships. It's just that at the moment, most of them have weak effects on long cooldowns.

    @Lynx.9058 said:
    Elementalist: typical mage/spellcaster.
    Mesmer: honestly doesn't seem to relate much to other game class archetypes. I'd guess a priest- like caster or cleric.

    Obviously most of those end up being completely wrong, but that's what I assumed when first creating a character.

    The way I'd explain it to someone is that the typical arcane spellcaster is split into two. Elementalist specialises in, well, elemental magic, while mesmer covers pretty much everything else that falls under the domain of a typical arcane spellcaster.

    Or, to consider the five-colour system used by Magic: the Gathering, mesmers are basically the blue magic specialists, while necromancers are black, elementalists are red, and guardians are white. (Strictly speaking, Guild Wars had a four-point magic system, which differs from the five-colour system in that Nature is rolled into one of the four points, and four-point systems keep all forms of elemental magic in the elemental point while five-colour systems split elemental magic across multiple colours. It's not the only setting that uses such a system - Spellforce uses something similar, for instance - but more people are familiar with five-colour systems.)

  • Lynx.9058Lynx.9058 Member ✭✭

    Now that I've discovered the pvp lobby im also finding out that most classes don't play anything like I'd expect. Kind of a let down tbh

  • ASP.8093ASP.8093 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 11, 2020

    @Lynx.9058 said:
    Now that I've discovered the pvp lobby im also finding out that most classes don't play anything like I'd expect. Kind of a let down tbh

    Which classes — besides Mesmer and Rev — do you find confusing or counter-intuitive?

  • Lily.1935Lily.1935 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 11, 2020

    @Lynx.9058 said:
    Just posting here to say that, as a new player (going on 4 days now since starting), this is definitely spot on.

    When looking through the classes, heres what comes to mind:

    Warrior: probably a tanky class /weapons master.
    Guardian: Paladin style tank/support.
    Revenant: most likely a berserker type melee character, maybe demon hunter esque given the blindfold and coming from a wow perspective.
    Ranger: standard archer/hunter. If I didn't look at the wiki or other sources I would never guess this ends up as a druid or shapeshifter.
    Thief: probably the one class that is exactly what it looks like.
    Engineer: support centric, lots of options, probably a hybrid class or Jack of all trades.
    Necromancer: minion focused spellcaster. Would not expect it to start with an axe or have melee heavy specializations.
    Elementalist: typical mage/spellcaster.
    Mesmer: honestly doesn't seem to relate much to other game class archetypes. I'd guess a priest- like caster or cleric.

    Obviously most of those end up being completely wrong, but that's what I assumed when first creating a character.

    This is what I was talking about with the genre tropes and player expectations. Guild Wars 2 is a very flawed but good game.

    As for Mesmer, Mesmer actually does have parallels in other games, its just not something that's common. If you're familiar with Magic: The gathering they're supposed to embody the idea of the Blue mage. beowulf from Final Fantasy tactics is similar as a spellsword which uses disabling and disorienting spells. They also have similarities with Time mage and blue mage from final fantasy. Or at least that's how they operated in the First Guild Wars game.

    So think heavy control and support. Not so much a cleric. Although their control has been toned down over the years.

  • Lynx.9058Lynx.9058 Member ✭✭

    @ASP.8093 said:

    @Lynx.9058 said:
    Now that I've discovered the pvp lobby im also finding out that most classes don't play anything like I'd expect. Kind of a let down tbh

    Which classes — besides Mesmer and Rev — do you find confusing or counter-intuitive?

    Only tested a few so far, but some examples:

    Everything I'd heard or read about soul beast made me think you actually shapeshifted into your pet, but it turns out you just turn your pet into a wolf slurpee and drink it to buff yourself.
    Druid seemed like it would have more nature based abilities and heals, but only seemed to have a couple of vine abilities and passive heals from attacking. Just wasnt what I expected.

    Weaver I knew was going to be complex but it was above and beyond what I had imagined, and didnt even feel interesting tbh. Tempest was mich more engaging and can still manage a melee playstyle with daggers.

    Necromancer minions and spell animations werent quite what I was hoping for either. Not even a skeleton or zombie in the spellbook, just weird looking abominations. Also bugged me that the lich form for a female necro turns you into this big glowing blue Arnold Schwarzenegger dude.

    Mesmer I just wasnt a fan of the animations, every ability looks the same to me and theres no visual impact or distinction to the casts. Purple circles, purple lines, purple walls, feels like just casting the same spell in different shapes.

    I'm going to try some of the melee classes later today when I get a chance to see if I end up liking them any. I had no interest in them at first but now most of the ranged classes just dont feel right to me and arent what I expected. Of them only the engineer and tempest have kept me entertained.

  • draxynnic.3719draxynnic.3719 Member ✭✭✭✭

    On a further topic of parallels...

    Guardian might look like a paladin at first glance, but it's actually a mix of paladin, cleric, and arcane knight. 'Paladin' usually carries a certain assumption that while you've got a lot of defensive and healing magic, you're reliant on beating the enemy with a physical weapon (albeit possibly a magically enhanced one) unless the enemy is undead or some other specific type that the paladin has special powers against. Guardians certainly aren't shy about smacking people around and they're still more inclined towards close combat than ranged combat, but when they want to fight someone at a distance it's generally spells they reach for rather than some form of conventional ranged weapon, and even in close combat they rely about as much on close-range offensive magic as they do on actually making contact with a physical weapon.

  • Sobx.1758Sobx.1758 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 11, 2020

    @Lynx.9058 said:

    @ASP.8093 said:

    @Lynx.9058 said:
    Now that I've discovered the pvp lobby im also finding out that most classes don't play anything like I'd expect. Kind of a let down tbh

    Which classes — besides Mesmer and Rev — do you find confusing or counter-intuitive?

    Only tested a few so far, but some examples:

    Everything I'd heard or read about soul beast made me think you actually shapeshifted into your pet, but it turns out you just turn your pet into a wolf slurpee and drink it to buff yourself.

    But that's the opposite of your initial claim, isn't it? You said you would "never expect it to shapeshift, but apparently it does". Now you say your expectations were totally subverted because it doesn't shapeshift. It's as if you want to fit into this thread so hard that you forget what you thought yesterday?
    But the truth is, most of what you've described in your initial post is fairly accurate with what -at the very least- core classes do.

    Druid seemed like it would have more nature based abilities and heals, but only seemed to have a couple of vine abilities and passive heals from attacking. Just wasnt what I expected.

    Weaver I knew was going to be complex but it was above and beyond what I had imagined, and didnt even feel interesting tbh. Tempest was mich more engaging and can still manage a melee playstyle with daggers.

    Necromancer minions and spell animations werent quite what I was hoping for either. Not even a skeleton or zombie in the spellbook, just weird looking abominations. Also bugged me that the lich form for a female necro turns you into this big glowing blue Arnold Schwarzenegger dude.

    Mesmer I just wasnt a fan of the animations, every ability looks the same to me and theres no visual impact or distinction to the casts. Purple circles, purple lines, purple walls, feels like just casting the same spell in different shapes.

    I'm going to try some of the melee classes later today when I get a chance to see if I end up liking them any. I had no interest in them at first but now most of the ranged classes just dont feel right to me and arent what I expected. Of them only the engineer and tempest have kept me entertained.

    Most of your confusion(?) seems to come from a fact that you don't understand most e-specs are indeed specialisations, not seperate classes (which is why druid won't suddenly have every single thing about it changed to be "more druidy"). That and the stylistycal choices, like "necro minions are abominations instead of copying bored-to-death skeleton/zombie tropes" or mesmer pretty much "not being flashy enough".

  • Lynx.9058Lynx.9058 Member ✭✭

    Think you misunderstood my original comment. I said "I would never expect this (the ranger) to end up as a druid or shapeshifter". That's because nothing about the specializations is mentioned anywhere in the character creation process. Typically a player would not associate the hunter/ranger archetype with the more classically magic-based archetypes of a druid or shapeshifter.

    Now, afterwards, when you do hear about specializations, the descriptions of the soul beast spec on the website or wiki seem to imply that soulbeasts shapeshifting into their pets. Its not until trying it out that I learned that wasn't the case, and you just lose the pet to gain a self boost.

    Also I would say that the mesmer is too flashy, and the real issue is that all of their flashies look the same, whereas with the elementalist you have a lot more visual distinction between different spells

  • Sobx.1758Sobx.1758 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 11, 2020

    @Lynx.9058 said:
    Think you misunderstood my original comment. I said "I would never expect this (the ranger) to end up as a druid or shapeshifter". That's because nothing about the specializations is mentioned anywhere in the character creation process. Typically a player would not associate the hunter/ranger archetype with the more classically magic-based archetypes of a druid or shapeshifter.

    Now, afterwards, when you do hear about specializations, the descriptions of the soul beast spec on the website or wiki seem to imply that soulbeasts shapeshifting into their pets. Its not until trying it out that I learned that wasn't the case, and you just lose the pet to gain a self boost.

    I don't know where you were looking then, but I don't see anything about shapeshifting on the first glance when looking at class descriptions (including wiki, which is the first link when you search for gw2 professions).
    I agree that character creation descriptions are vague, because they are relating to the core game (and they're mainly a flavor descriptor anyways), but trying to describe specialisations and espec choices in that place wouldn't really bring much value to a new player considering they weren't willing to dive into the game mechanic/class/spec system in the first place. For me it seems to be a natural learning progression -if you throw everything at the new player on his character creation screen, he'll probably just get more confused than he was before. Pick the flavor you think you'll enjoy, play/learn the game, see other classes and their skills and go from there.

    "I came from wow and this game is not wow" is a weird complaint to me. And it sure as hell is not a valid one. There's enough clones floating around, so if someone enjoys swapping to a "new-old-same-game" every year, then they're free to keep doing that, I guess.

    Also I would say that the mesmer is too flashy, and the real issue is that all of their flashies look the same, whereas with the elementalist you have a lot more visual distinction between different spells

    Ok. So Elementalist juggles with elements as expected, while Mesmers play with illusions and you just prefer one class over the other based on their flavor/animations. I don't really see a problem here.

  • Lynx.9058Lynx.9058 Member ✭✭

    You seem to be getting really defensive over a miscommunication. I never said that I wanted "another wow clone", just that MOST fantasy rpgs follow some general guidelines for character classes and names, and that guild wars breaks some of those which obviously leads to some confusion amongst new players.

    Being different isn't the issue, its being so different that you call something what it's not. I'm enjoying the game so far but from my perspective a lot of the classes, by name or description, don't match up to what they actually are, or at least what your common rpg gamer might expect them to be.

    As far as the mesmer, I just think the animations need more distinction from one another. There are 3 or 4 "ground aoe" skills that, in the thick of combat, all might as well be using the exact same animation despite doing completely different things. It leads to more confusion and visual clutter than is necessary. A lot of posts around here comment on how arenanet apparently wants people to be able to tell what abilities their enemies are using at a glance, but the animations team obviously didn't get that memo

  • Sobx.1758Sobx.1758 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 11, 2020

    @Lynx.9058 said:
    You seem to be getting really defensive over a miscommunication. I never said that I wanted "another wow clone", just that MOST fantasy rpgs follow some general guidelines for character classes and names, and that guild wars breaks some of those which obviously leads to some confusion amongst new players.

    I don't see how me trying to communicate with you and explaining what I think or what it seemed to me you wrote in your previous posts is suddenly "defensive", so make sure you explain your choice of words here. If you don't understand what "wow clone" has to do with this thread, then try rereading the thread from the top.

    About the classes -as I already wrote above, most of your initial thoughts about each class were pretty accurate, so... I'm not sure what's the issue here? Misunderstanding of especs? You disliking models of minions or mesmer's particle colors? Mind that this is not me "being defensive", this is me "trying to understand what exactly you mean".

    Being different isn't the issue, its being so different that you call something what it's not. I'm enjoying the game so far but from my perspective a lot of the classes, by name or description, don't match up to what they actually are, or at least what your common rpg gamer might expect them to be.

    Again: especs are not classes. Your initial core class descriptions seemed to be mostly accurate.
    You were asked by someone "Which classes — besides Mesmer and Rev — do you find confusing or counter-intuitive?" and what you listed were pretty much:
    -soulbeast not shapeshifting
    (but that wasn't your initial ranger expectation, right? And you still didn't tell me where that "shapeshift" idea came from -these aren't some accusations, these are actual questions which you dodged for some reason)
    -druid having not enough nature based spells (that's because it's not a new class, it's a specialisation that pushes the core class in a certain direction, it won't suddenly get a full reskin+new particle set for already existing skills)
    -expecting weaver to be complex, but I guess not that complex? (this one's actually pretty weird to include in this thread/list at all imo, but maybe I misunderstood something again)
    -minions not being typical bored-to-death skeletals/zombies (a.k.a copies form the other game)
    -mesmer particles not being colorful/distinctive enough (which is a valid opinion/complaint about game's stylistics, but I don't see how it fits in this thread or as an answer about incorrect class expectations?)

  • draxynnic.3719draxynnic.3719 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 12, 2020

    I think another consideration with class expectations is that most franchises tend to have a set of classes that fit reasonably close to the fantasy norms (fighter/warrior, ranger/archer, rogue/thief, mage/elementalist, etc), most also have a few that are unique to the setting.

    Let's consider WoW, for instance. Warrior, hunter, rogue, mage, priest... all fairly standard fare. But if you knew nothing about the Warcraft setting... what's a shaman? The Blizzard shaman is essentially a kind of druid that's more about the elemental side of nature and less about the animal and plant side, but would you know this just by looking at the name? Probably not - 'shaman' can mean a lot of different things in fantasy. Similarly, what's a 'warlock'? Most people with a passing exposure of fantasy tropes will probably recognise that that likely involves dark magic of some form, but not necessarily a demon summoner.

    And that's without getting into prestige classes like the demon hunter. Even Blizzard isn't consistent as to what that is - the Warcraft demon hunter is an agile melee fighter, while the Diablo demon hunter was Diablo 3's archer class.

    So you can generally expect, in any given franchise, to have some 'standard' classes, some that are unique to the franchise (even if they have some similarities to things in other franchises), and some with aren't really 'standard', but which are common enough that people will still recognise them and have some expectations.

    In the first category in GW2, we have the warrior, ranger, thief, and elementalist. These pretty much fit the expectations. One could argue that elite specialisations for those professions don't necessarily fit the expectations, but elite specialisations aren't intended to be anyone's first experience of the game. Warriors are tough and smash things in melee. Rangers make pincushions of their enemies. Thieves sneak around and backstab people. Elementalists drop large AoEs over the battlefield. These aren't the only things you can do with those professions, mind you, but the 'stereotypical' behaviours are there.

    In the second category, we have mesmer, guardian, and revenant. They have some resemblances to classes in other fantasy settings, but they're essentially ArenaNet's creations. You could probably figure out that the mesmer relates to hypnosis somehow and that the guardian is going to be defensive in nature, but that's about all you'd get just by looking at the name.

    Necromancers and engineers are in the third category. They're not a baseline expectation, but there are some expectations inherent in the name, especially with the necromancer (necrominions), but engineers are also likely to have some expectations based on its presence in other genres and, increasingly, in more steampunky fantasy settings.

    With that said, I think necromancer does a fairly good job. Full minionmancers might not be that common, but there are also quite a few builds that just toss in a couple rather than having an entire build based around them, and necromancers have never been exclusively about the minions - in fantasy, they've always been a direct threat as well. So I don't think it's a problem that necromancers don't always have minions. Going full minions is still perfectly viable for solo play, and it's not uncommon for other builds to use one to three minion skills for one purpose or another. Even the Snowcrows raid builds for necromancer each carry a minion or two. Granted, shroud is a bit of an unusual mechanic, which arguably makes scourge closer to a 'classic' necromancer than the core necromancer, but this is an extra which has been added to the theme, and the majority of the skills in the classic death shroud seem to fit the expectations (lifesteal, fear, etc).

    Engineer is a bit more problematic. They definitely do tech well, but for people coming in looking for turret play... well, there's a problem.

    Apart from that, though, I don't think there's a broad issue with ArenaNet's professions not doing what people expect them to. The professions that are fantasy staples do what you'd expect them to do (even if they have the options to do something else instead). There are a few that are Guild Wars specific, but most successful franchises have a few classes that are specific to that franchise.

    If there is a problem with expectations not matching reality, it's mostly coming from it still being the case that people still generally have the impression that elite specialisations are what you should be using when you can, and these often are intended to take the profession in a different direction and allow it to do something you wouldn't normally expect.

  • Lily.1935Lily.1935 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @draxynnic.3719 said:

    Necromancers and engineers are in the third category. They're not a baseline expectation, but there are some expectations inherent in the name, especially with the necromancer (necrominions), but engineers are also likely to have some expectations based on its presence in other genres and, increasingly, in more steampunky fantasy settings.

    With that said, I think necromancer does a fairly good job. Full minionmancers might not be that common, but there are also quite a few builds that just toss in a couple rather than having an entire build based around them, and necromancers have never been exclusively about the minions - in fantasy, they've always been a direct threat as well. So I don't think it's a problem that necromancers don't always have minions. Going full minions is still perfectly viable for solo play, and it's not uncommon for other builds to use one to three minion skills for one purpose or another. Even the Snowcrows raid builds for necromancer each carry a minion or two. Granted, shroud is a bit of an unusual mechanic, which arguably makes scourge closer to a 'classic' necromancer than the core necromancer, but this is an extra which has been added to the theme, and the majority of the skills in the classic death shroud seem to fit the expectations (lifesteal, fear, etc).

    Engineer is a bit more problematic. They definitely do tech well, but for people coming in looking for turret play... well, there's a problem.

    I don't quite agree with this statement as Necromancer DOES have established tropes in popular culture before hand and there are genre expectations of them. Some of them they fit and others they completely ignore.

    Before Guild Wars 2 Diablo II, Magic the gathering's color black, multiple Necromancer enemies in video games and dungeons and dragons as well as media portrayal of these dark mages has given specific expectations. Necromancer does the Hexing thing serviceable enough. But the endless ranks of the dead, especially when GW2 was released in the midst of the height of the Zombie Apocalypse genre the necromancer of whom summons the undead fails hard at this front. Which I did mention from my initial post how Minion Master builds are not good and failed the players who wanted to play this.

    I have more Subjective opinions on Necromancer in that they SHOULD follow suit with what GW1 set as the series standard. A Glassy debuffer/support spec, yet this was turned on its head where they're tanky debuffer with almost no support. This for me when I joined GW2 was Extremely jarring and has Damaged my enjoyment of the game to this day. While other games like Diabo III embraced this side of necromancer which has given me more enjoyment with a worse game In my opinion.

    There is the other aspecs of other classes to which the necromancer does parallel that are not themselves "necromancers" Such as Warlock and Shaman from WoW as well as Summoner from Final Fantasy. I do agree that each class is an Amalgamation of quite a few different classes but I feel necromancer is taking an element from typical Enemy NPC tropes that is counter intuitive to the mechanics of these other classes. My speculation on this is they were trying to simulate the play style of a Lich, but this fails as that seems more like it should have been an Elite spec and not baseline.

    As for Engineer we're kinda missing the Tools for every situation. Its not just turrets but Gadgets and elixirs as well. None of them are particularly well designed at the moment when comparison to their kits. This is less about the tropes and more a poor execution of their skill balance.

    Engineer is probably a tough skull to crack, as I feel that their kits actually need to be strong enough to stand on their own. If a player takes the flamethrower kit, they should want to stick in that kit for as long as they can. And their build should be defined around that specific kit. But that's not effective. The kits are extremely good but they're more good as having 3 extra utility skills since you don't typically want to stick in any one kit and only want to use one or 2 skills from that kit and drop them. And the play style of them really gives you incentive to do that.

    If I was to redesign kits, I'd probably treat them like a weapon swap. So 5-10 seconds to enter a new kit or even drop them, so you have to DEDICATE to that kit and I'd buff them accordingly to make them desirable to stick in for extended periods of time. The other option is giving them that 5 second recharge for each of your kits and giving them a charge system or some form of energy system that puts them on cooldown. I want them to be Extremely good, because I love kits, but I want to run the kits not juggle 3 kits at a time and basically just use the best skills of each.

    But to be perfectly fair, I do really enjoy the kits build... But I'm also willing to sacrifice it for a better focus on individual kits.

  • ASP.8093ASP.8093 Member ✭✭✭

    @Lily.1935 said:
    As for Engineer we're kinda missing the Tools for every situation. Its not just turrets but Gadgets and elixirs as well. None of them are particularly well designed at the moment when comparison to their kits. This is less about the tropes and more a poor execution of their skill balance.

    Engineer is probably a tough skull to crack, as I feel that their kits actually need to be strong enough to stand on their own. If a player takes the flamethrower kit, they should want to stick in that kit for as long as they can. And their build should be defined around that specific kit. But that's not effective. The kits are extremely good but they're more good as having 3 extra utility skills since you don't typically want to stick in any one kit and only want to use one or 2 skills from that kit and drop them. And the play style of them really gives you incentive to do that.

    If I was to redesign kits, I'd probably treat them like a weapon swap. So 5-10 seconds to enter a new kit or even drop them, so you have to DEDICATE to that kit and I'd buff them accordingly to make them desirable to stick in for extended periods of time. The other option is giving them that 5 second recharge for each of your kits and giving them a charge system or some form of energy system that puts them on cooldown. I want them to be Extremely good, because I love kits, but I want to run the kits not juggle 3 kits at a time and basically just use the best skills of each.

    But to be perfectly fair, I do really enjoy the kits build... But I'm also willing to sacrifice it for a better focus on individual kits.

    I see what you're saying but I think you're over-focused on raid-style DPS rotations here.

    Alchemy is an incredibly common Engineer trait in competitive play, and at least half of standard PvP/WvW Engineer builds use at least one Elixir besides the heal. That's completely fine for a skill type.

    Also, ime, Juggernaut Flamethrower is actually pretty playable if you just want a simple build for open-world stuff. It's even possible to run it as meme build in WvW.

  • Lily.1935Lily.1935 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @ASP.8093 said:

    @Lily.1935 said:
    As for Engineer we're kinda missing the Tools for every situation. Its not just turrets but Gadgets and elixirs as well. None of them are particularly well designed at the moment when comparison to their kits. This is less about the tropes and more a poor execution of their skill balance.

    Engineer is probably a tough skull to crack, as I feel that their kits actually need to be strong enough to stand on their own. If a player takes the flamethrower kit, they should want to stick in that kit for as long as they can. And their build should be defined around that specific kit. But that's not effective. The kits are extremely good but they're more good as having 3 extra utility skills since you don't typically want to stick in any one kit and only want to use one or 2 skills from that kit and drop them. And the play style of them really gives you incentive to do that.

    If I was to redesign kits, I'd probably treat them like a weapon swap. So 5-10 seconds to enter a new kit or even drop them, so you have to DEDICATE to that kit and I'd buff them accordingly to make them desirable to stick in for extended periods of time. The other option is giving them that 5 second recharge for each of your kits and giving them a charge system or some form of energy system that puts them on cooldown. I want them to be Extremely good, because I love kits, but I want to run the kits not juggle 3 kits at a time and basically just use the best skills of each.

    But to be perfectly fair, I do really enjoy the kits build... But I'm also willing to sacrifice it for a better focus on individual kits.

    I see what you're saying but I think you're over-focused on raid-style DPS rotations here.

    Alchemy is an incredibly common Engineer trait in competitive play, and at least half of standard PvP/WvW Engineer builds use at least one Elixir besides the heal. That's completely fine for a skill type.

    Also, ime, Juggernaut Flamethrower is actually pretty playable if you just want a simple build for open-world stuff. It's even possible to run it as meme build in WvW.

    The entire focus of this post is PvE, yes.

  • Sobx.1758Sobx.1758 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Lily.1935 said:

    @ASP.8093 said:

    @Lily.1935 said:
    As for Engineer we're kinda missing the Tools for every situation. Its not just turrets but Gadgets and elixirs as well. None of them are particularly well designed at the moment when comparison to their kits. This is less about the tropes and more a poor execution of their skill balance.

    Engineer is probably a tough skull to crack, as I feel that their kits actually need to be strong enough to stand on their own. If a player takes the flamethrower kit, they should want to stick in that kit for as long as they can. And their build should be defined around that specific kit. But that's not effective. The kits are extremely good but they're more good as having 3 extra utility skills since you don't typically want to stick in any one kit and only want to use one or 2 skills from that kit and drop them. And the play style of them really gives you incentive to do that.

    If I was to redesign kits, I'd probably treat them like a weapon swap. So 5-10 seconds to enter a new kit or even drop them, so you have to DEDICATE to that kit and I'd buff them accordingly to make them desirable to stick in for extended periods of time. The other option is giving them that 5 second recharge for each of your kits and giving them a charge system or some form of energy system that puts them on cooldown. I want them to be Extremely good, because I love kits, but I want to run the kits not juggle 3 kits at a time and basically just use the best skills of each.

    But to be perfectly fair, I do really enjoy the kits build... But I'm also willing to sacrifice it for a better focus on individual kits.

    I see what you're saying but I think you're over-focused on raid-style DPS rotations here.

    Alchemy is an incredibly common Engineer trait in competitive play, and at least half of standard PvP/WvW Engineer builds use at least one Elixir besides the heal. That's completely fine for a skill type.

    Also, ime, Juggernaut Flamethrower is actually pretty playable if you just want a simple build for open-world stuff. It's even possible to run it as meme build in WvW.

    The entire focus of this post is PvE, yes.

    Sure, but the class design isn't restricted to pve, so leaving out other modes while talking about it doesn't seem to make much sense.

  • ASP.8093ASP.8093 Member ✭✭✭

    @Lily.1935 said:
    The entire focus of this post is PvE, yes.

    Most of the builds that are viable in competitive are 100% playable in PvE as long as you're not in a raid group that wants maximum damage. And I don't mean in the "you can play anything, it's easy!" sense: they have synergistic abilities and a coherent gameplan, and the skills that make it into PvP builds often do serve as effective safety tools for solo PvE stuff.

  • Lily.1935Lily.1935 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @ASP.8093 said:

    @Lily.1935 said:
    As for Engineer we're kinda missing the Tools for every situation. Its not just turrets but Gadgets and elixirs as well. None of them are particularly well designed at the moment when comparison to their kits. This is less about the tropes and more a poor execution of their skill balance.

    Engineer is probably a tough skull to crack, as I feel that their kits actually need to be strong enough to stand on their own. If a player takes the flamethrower kit, they should want to stick in that kit for as long as they can. And their build should be defined around that specific kit. But that's not effective. The kits are extremely good but they're more good as having 3 extra utility skills since you don't typically want to stick in any one kit and only want to use one or 2 skills from that kit and drop them. And the play style of them really gives you incentive to do that.

    If I was to redesign kits, I'd probably treat them like a weapon swap. So 5-10 seconds to enter a new kit or even drop them, so you have to DEDICATE to that kit and I'd buff them accordingly to make them desirable to stick in for extended periods of time. The other option is giving them that 5 second recharge for each of your kits and giving them a charge system or some form of energy system that puts them on cooldown. I want them to be Extremely good, because I love kits, but I want to run the kits not juggle 3 kits at a time and basically just use the best skills of each.

    But to be perfectly fair, I do really enjoy the kits build... But I'm also willing to sacrifice it for a better focus on individual kits.

    I see what you're saying but I think you're over-focused on raid-style DPS rotations here.

    Alchemy is an incredibly common Engineer trait in competitive play, and at least half of standard PvP/WvW Engineer builds use at least one Elixir besides the heal. That's completely fine for a skill type.

    Also, ime, Juggernaut Flamethrower is actually pretty playable if you just want a simple build for open-world stuff. It's even possible to run it as meme build in WvW.

    Another note. On the flamethrower aspect, its a meme. Its about as effective as full minions, which is not very. I'm not just looking at it from a raid perspective though but general PvE. The post is about players first experiences and how those experiences can be polluted through poor design and functionality long term. My focus on General PvE is because typically this will be a player's first experience. Although it is possible they jump into PvP and never touch PvE and I'm not sure how common that is. From my personal experience and the experience of those I know it seems that PvP is the last thing they do in an MMO. Not typically the first. now that's just anecdotal as I don't have the data. New players typically can't get into WvW when they first start out either, needing to wait till level 30 for free accounts I think it was.

    As the title suggests I'm looking at this from a PvE perspective. Raids are the Goal for new players. its the endpoint they seek to strive for. And as such it should be noted that their transition into that scene should be as smooth as possible. And considering many of these meme builds don't translate at all or even are bad in Dungeons, it sours early experiences.

    Now the issue with Dungeons is a completely other issue I've talk about at length and not my focus here.

  • Lily.1935Lily.1935 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @ASP.8093 said:

    @Lily.1935 said:
    The entire focus of this post is PvE, yes.

    Most of the builds that are viable in competitive are 100% playable in PvE as long as you're not in a raid group that wants maximum damage. And I don't mean in the "you can play anything, it's easy!" sense: they have synergistic abilities and a coherent gameplan, and the skills that make it into PvP builds often do serve as effective safety tools for solo PvE stuff.

    That's not actually true. Some are, and some aren't. What is viable long term, at end game or even in dungeons doesn't translate all too well for new players. In core tyria open world, yes everything is viable, but once you start moving into HoT and PoF maps, Dungeons, Raids, Fractals, Strike missions it becomes very apparent that these builds are not suited for these game modes. I mean, I ran a bunker Necromancer in PvP with minion. All I did was sit on points and not die while people tried to kill me. That is barely viable in open world PvE and at the time my DPS was so low with DPS gear I rarely got credit for events and if I did it was partial credit. Mind you this was years ago, but the point does stand still.

    Players who used similar bunker builds, new players have asked me to help them with story missions because they actually couldn't deal enough damage to succeed in some of the easiest missions. So no, I have to disagree with that statement based on my experience and the experience of my friends.

  • ASP.8093ASP.8093 Member ✭✭✭

    Get a Reaper with some Berserker/Marauder gear. Give them 3-4 minion skills and a stun break.

    Open-world events, exploration, and farming? Pretty easy. (The minions even travel with you nicely while you're mounted.)
    Story mode, including the hard parts? Pretty easy.
    Fractals up to T2 or T3? You'll do fine.

    The minions tank for you some and provide incidental damage. They're kinda boring and clumsy but the "mediocre" Reaper build on Snow Crows still uses them in ever slot that they couldn't manage to fill up with a passive power Signet (yawn) or a Well. (Wells are better for DPS than minions against a stationary target? That doesn't seem busted to me.)

    Do I like them compared to the GW1 minions? No. I hate 'em compared to the GW1 minions. But they're actually really easy compared to the GW1 minions. Progressing to the point where you could actually juggle all the minion-maintenance cooldowns and snowball your army perfectly in GW1 was actually quite the learning curve for new players (before Discordway or whatever, at least).

  • Sobx.1758Sobx.1758 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 13, 2020

    @Lily.1935 said:

    @ASP.8093 said:

    @Lily.1935 said:
    The entire focus of this post is PvE, yes.

    Most of the builds that are viable in competitive are 100% playable in PvE as long as you're not in a raid group that wants maximum damage. And I don't mean in the "you can play anything, it's easy!" sense: they have synergistic abilities and a coherent gameplan, and the skills that make it into PvP builds often do serve as effective safety tools for solo PvE stuff.

    That's not actually true. Some are, and some aren't. What is viable long term, at end game or even in dungeons doesn't translate all too well for new players. In core tyria open world, yes everything is viable, but once you start moving into HoT and PoF maps, Dungeons, Raids, Fractals, Strike missions it becomes very apparent that these builds are not suited for these game modes. I mean, I ran a bunker Necromancer in PvP with minion. All I did was sit on points and not die while people tried to kill me. That is barely viable in open world PvE and at the time my DPS was so low with DPS gear I rarely got credit for events and if I did it was partial credit. Mind you this was years ago, but the point does stand still.

    So the goal here is what exactly? Being able to pick any mix of traits, skills and gear in an incoherent manner and succeeding long term in late/endgame content? I don't think that's a great idea, duh considering that later those pieces can be put together in a better, more thought out way with greater understanding of the game and its mechanics, it would make the power swings between the builds potentially even bigger and any pve content even easier. That's a weird goal to strive for.
    Fairly sure having troubles with getting event credit while playing minion necro is some kind of l2p issue -duh, when I've started playing necro as a minion user (long time ago), I've never noticed the problem you're talking about here. But that aside, "if I pick tanky stats, I won't have a lot of dmg" shouldn't be a huge mystery that a new player struggles to uncover and usually it's not. It seems self-explanatory and far from being a bad design. In fact, pretty sure it's the opposite.

    @Lily.1935 said:

    @ASP.8093 said:

    @Lily.1935 said:
    The entire focus of this post is PvE, yes.

    Most of the builds that are viable in competitive are 100% playable in PvE as long as you're not in a raid group that wants maximum damage. And I don't mean in the "you can play anything, it's easy!" sense: they have synergistic abilities and a coherent gameplan, and the skills that make it into PvP builds often do serve as effective safety tools for solo PvE stuff.

    I mean, I ran a bunker Necromancer in PvP with minion. All I did was sit on points and not die while people tried to kill me.

    Ah and this is pretty much what I wrote about in my first post of this thread and why minion builds shouldn't be even close to strong builds endgame, let alone competitive modes.

  • Lily.1935Lily.1935 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @ASP.8093 said:
    Get a Reaper with some Berserker/Marauder gear. Give them 3-4 minion skills and a stun break.

    Open-world events, exploration, and farming? Pretty easy. (The minions even travel with you nicely while you're mounted.)
    Story mode, including the hard parts? Pretty easy.
    Fractals up to T2 or T3? You'll do fine.

    The minions tank for you some and provide incidental damage. They're kinda boring and clumsy but the "mediocre" Reaper build on Snow Crows still uses them in ever slot that they couldn't manage to fill up with a passive power Signet (yawn) or a Well. (Wells are better for DPS than minions against a stationary target? That doesn't seem busted to me.)

    Do I like them compared to the GW1 minions? No. I hate 'em compared to the GW1 minions. But they're actually really easy compared to the GW1 minions. Progressing to the point where you could actually juggle all the minion-maintenance cooldowns and snowball your army perfectly in GW1 was actually quite the learning curve for new players (before Discordway or whatever, at least).

    "As the title suggests I'm looking at this from a PvE perspective. Raids are the Goal for new players. its the endpoint they seek to strive for. And as such it should be noted that their transition into that scene should be as smooth as possible. And considering many of these meme builds don't translate at all or even are bad in Dungeons, it sours early experiences."

    Try reading my posts because minions do not do this. They don't offer a transition into the end game content as I've run them. I've played perhaps dozens of Minion master builds over the years I've played the game as well as about a Dozen Turret builds and they just don't function as you would hope. Even with proper gear. You seem to forget that I'm a veteran player and don't need advice on how to build a class, and especially not on necromancer. I've also had the misfortune of experiencing(when I was new) and seeing Necromancer players in open world fail to get credit for events because their minions were just poorly designed.

    I'm coming from a perspective of a teacher and recruiter for Guild Wars 2. Of all the people I've attempted to get into the game maybe 1 had stuck with it. And the complaints are always the same. So I speak from my experience trying to get people in. So your advice to me is absolutely worthless as it doesn't solve or even help with the issues i'm speaking about. You're looking at the scope from too narrow of a lens or not at the right perspective at all.

    There needs to be some major changes to class balance in PvE as well as PvE content itself to better accommodate new players and their experiences. The hook isn't working. GW2 is poorly designed for new players. The end game content is pretty good. But its getting there and that we need to recognize that the end game often IS their goal. And the transition is rocky to say the very least.

  • Sobx.1758Sobx.1758 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 13, 2020

    @Lily.1935 said:

    @ASP.8093 said:
    Get a Reaper with some Berserker/Marauder gear. Give them 3-4 minion skills and a stun break.

    Open-world events, exploration, and farming? Pretty easy. (The minions even travel with you nicely while you're mounted.)
    Story mode, including the hard parts? Pretty easy.
    Fractals up to T2 or T3? You'll do fine.

    The minions tank for you some and provide incidental damage. They're kinda boring and clumsy but the "mediocre" Reaper build on Snow Crows still uses them in ever slot that they couldn't manage to fill up with a passive power Signet (yawn) or a Well. (Wells are better for DPS than minions against a stationary target? That doesn't seem busted to me.)

    Do I like them compared to the GW1 minions? No. I hate 'em compared to the GW1 minions. But they're actually really easy compared to the GW1 minions. Progressing to the point where you could actually juggle all the minion-maintenance cooldowns and snowball your army perfectly in GW1 was actually quite the learning curve for new players (before Discordway or whatever, at least).

    "As the title suggests I'm looking at this from a PvE perspective. Raids are the Goal for new players. its the endpoint they seek to strive for. And as such it should be noted that their transition into that scene should be as smooth as possible. And considering many of these meme builds don't translate at all or even are bad in Dungeons, it sours early experiences."

    Try reading my posts because minions do not do this. They don't offer a transition into the end game content as I've run them. I've played perhaps dozens of Minion master builds over the years I've played the game as well as about a Dozen Turret builds and they just don't function as you would hope. Even with proper gear. You seem to forget that I'm a veteran player and don't need advice on how to build a class, and especially not on necromancer. I've also had the misfortune of experiencing(when I was new) and seeing Necromancer players in open world fail to get credit for events because their minions were just poorly designed.

    I'm coming from a perspective of a teacher and recruiter for Guild Wars 2. Of all the people I've attempted to get into the game maybe 1 had stuck with it. And the complaints are always the same. So I speak from my experience trying to get people in. So your advice to me is absolutely worthless as it doesn't solve or even help with the issues i'm speaking about. You're looking at the scope from too narrow of a lens or not at the right perspective at all.

    There needs to be some major changes to class balance in PvE as well as PvE content itself to better accommodate new players and their experiences. The hook isn't working. GW2 is poorly designed for new players. The end game content is pretty good. But its getting there and that we need to recognize that the end game often IS their goal. And the transition is rocky to say the very least.

    Cool. What's the dps of the minion builds you've tried and adviced on and what in your opinion SHOULD be the dps to make them viable, yet not "I can literally play armor-less while spamming 1 and still easly succeed"?

  • ASP.8093ASP.8093 Member ✭✭✭
    edited August 13, 2020

    @Lily.1935 said:
    Try reading my posts because minions do not do this. They don't offer a transition into the end game content as I've run them. I've played perhaps dozens of Minion master builds over the years I've played the game as well as about a Dozen Turret builds and they just don't function as you would hope. Even with proper gear. You seem to forget that I'm a veteran player and don't need advice on how to build a class, and especially not on necromancer. I've also had the misfortune of experiencing(when I was new) and seeing Necromancer players in open world fail to get credit for events because their minions were just poorly designed.
    I'm coming from a perspective of a teacher and recruiter for Guild Wars 2. Of all the people I've attempted to get into the game maybe 1 had stuck with it. And the complaints are always the same. So I speak from my experience trying to get people in. So your advice to me is absolutely worthless as it doesn't solve or even help with the issues i'm speaking about. You're looking at the scope from too narrow of a lens or not at the right perspective at all.

    Snow Crows, the site newbies get deluged with 10,000 times a day, thinks you should put some minions on your Reaper skill bar. Not shouts! Not corruption or spectral skills! Minions.

    It's not unusual to walk into town or run around HoT or the meta maps and see a necro with a legendary weapon, 20,000 AP, and… minions.

    "Veteran players" are constantly playing this exact "fan favorite" build — spending hundreds of hours running around with the dang minions everywhere, even taking them on fractals and strikes — and encountering only minor issues with this setup.

    @Lily.1935 said:
    There needs to be some major changes to class balance in PvE as well as PvE content itself to better accommodate new players and their experiences. The hook isn't working. GW2 is poorly designed for new players. The end game content is pretty good. But its getting there and that we need to recognize that the end game often IS their goal. And the transition is rocky to say the very least.

    Your original argument is that we need to gut like four classes in order to give the players who can't figure out how to survive open world on a guardian the opportunity to play one as a raid tank.

  • Taril.8619Taril.8619 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Lily.1935 said:

    @ASP.8093 said:
    Get a Reaper with some Berserker/Marauder gear. Give them 3-4 minion skills and a stun break.

    Open-world events, exploration, and farming? Pretty easy. (The minions even travel with you nicely while you're mounted.)
    Story mode, including the hard parts? Pretty easy.
    Fractals up to T2 or T3? You'll do fine.

    The minions tank for you some and provide incidental damage. They're kinda boring and clumsy but the "mediocre" Reaper build on Snow Crows still uses them in ever slot that they couldn't manage to fill up with a passive power Signet (yawn) or a Well. (Wells are better for DPS than minions against a stationary target? That doesn't seem busted to me.)

    Do I like them compared to the GW1 minions? No. I hate 'em compared to the GW1 minions. But they're actually really easy compared to the GW1 minions. Progressing to the point where you could actually juggle all the minion-maintenance cooldowns and snowball your army perfectly in GW1 was actually quite the learning curve for new players (before Discordway or whatever, at least).

    "As the title suggests I'm looking at this from a PvE perspective. Raids are the Goal for new players. its the endpoint they seek to strive for. And as such it should be noted that their transition into that scene should be as smooth as possible. And considering many of these meme builds don't translate at all or even are bad in Dungeons, it sours early experiences."

    Try reading my posts because minions do not do this. They don't offer a transition into the end game content as I've run them. I've played perhaps dozens of Minion master builds over the years I've played the game as well as about a Dozen Turret builds and they just don't function as you would hope. Even with proper gear. You seem to forget that I'm a veteran player and don't need advice on how to build a class, and especially not on necromancer. I've also had the misfortune of experiencing(when I was new) and seeing Necromancer players in open world fail to get credit for events because their minions were just poorly designed.

    Again, since when has Raids been the goal for new players?

    Raids are only done by a minority of players. Even in other MMO's Raids are only done by a minority of players, outside of LFR versions that are nerfed to the point of being faceroll so that random plebs can drool over their keyboard and still beat the encounters to get loot.

    Raids in GW2 are so unpopular, that ANet simply hasn't released one in ages, instead replacing them with Strikes.

    So, why are "New players" so concerned with this content that is so niche? Especially if when they ask "What's the best place to get gear?" or "How to earn gold?" they'll be told anything BUT Raids since GW2's Raids are terrible for loot and actually only worth doing for a handful of unique skins.

    The main "End Game" for GW2, is either PvP, WvW or OW PvE. With OW PvE being by far the most popular and being the most pushed content (Every content update from LW's introduces new maps with new events, metas and things to farm)

    With OW PvE being viable, if not outright great for minion builds. Lots of sustain is possible very easily, minions can tank hits too because OW PvE enemies AI is jank and they like to switch targets for no reason. Turret builds are viable because DPS requirements are low.

    As far as the point about "Experiencing and seeing Necromancer players in open world fail to get credit for events because their minions were just poorly designed" literally all you need to do is hit an enemy in an event once with any skill, even an auto attack, and eventually die and you get credit. If someone is just afking in an event and letting their minions run around and kill stuff and not even auto attacking, then that's on them and not the fault of minions.

    Bearing in mind, that in fact, popular AFK farm strategies involve necromancers using minions and going AFK and having their minions kill stuff so they get loot. Which also suggests that minion damage on its own does even contribute to the necromancer now, otherwise these AFK farmers wouldn't all be playing Necromancer and Engineer and using minions and turrets.

    Cat: Meow.

  • Yasai.3549Yasai.3549 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 13, 2020

    They should make every Profession have a Taunt skill , and this Taunt skill increases the player's enmity significantly.
    To prevent trolling, having additional Toughness increases the strength of the Enmity gain in addition to adding Armor as well as make Taunt skills do more damage.

    If I play a stupid build, I deserve to die.
    If I beat people on a stupid build, I deserve to get away with it.

  • Lily.1935Lily.1935 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @ASP.8093 said:
    Your original argument is that we need to gut like four classes in order to give the players who can't figure out how to survive open world on a guardian the opportunity to play one as a raid tank.

    What?

    What?

    What the hell are you talking about?

    Abridged version of part of my argument. "These fan favorite builds aren't good. They should be made good."

    Quote myself:

    Other issues we see are builds that are just not great in pve that have no right not to be at least viable. Minion Master Necromancer and Turret engineer both come to mind as these builds are extremely popular with new players but once they get into more difficult content they quickly find that these builds are not good and they have to abandon what it was they want to play. The Turrent engineer specifically being really bad is what got my boyfriend to quit the game because that's what he really wanted to play.

    Sooo... What are you talking about? You know I said before you should actually read my posts... I even put a tldr at the end... that says "Make fan favorite builds viable"

    Like... Seriously... You need to actually read the posts before you respond.

  • Lily.1935Lily.1935 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Yasai.3549 said:
    They should make every Profession have a Taunt skill , and this Taunt skill increases the player's enmity significantly.
    To prevent trolling, having additional Toughness increases the strength of the Enmity gain in addition to adding Armor as well as make Taunt skills do more damage.

    I'm not sure what you mean. I don't think taunt should be universal. I do think a threat system should be in place though.

    I want to put the suggestions as it's own thing in the raids/dungeons/fractals/strike mission section but I honestly I think people would legitimately hate the idea. A y major changes I've suggested on the forums have been met with extreme vitriol and outright lack of understanding of why I was making those suggestions even when if implemented they have improved the game.

    Like breakbars for example. I was one of the earliest people to suggest that about a year before it became a thing. I wasn't the first to I'm sure and I wasn't the last but holy kittens did people throw a fit over the suggestion...

    As flawed as the break bar system is it's way better than the system we had before hand where a longbow ranger would absolutely destroy your parties strategy without fail.

    So I'm hesitant to make that suggestion as these kind of suggestions are stressful at times.

  • ASP.8093ASP.8093 Member ✭✭✭

    @Lily.1935 said:

    @ASP.8093 said:
    Your original argument is that we need to gut like four classes in order to give the players who can't figure out how to survive open world on a guardian the opportunity to play one as a raid tank.

    What?

    What?

    What the hell are you talking about?

    All this stuff:

    New players when they enter into Guild wars 2 are going to have specific expectations from the classes that are presented without ever looking at this skills. Just looking at what they are and how they're described. For instance, Guardian has probably the biggest disconnect for new players and what it actually does and what its role is. What new players expect is a Tank that supports allies and possibly heals to a minor extent. And the way the game mechanics are set up the Guardian is just not really a good tank. They can play the healer/support role fine but they're primarily a DPS, and one of the best at that. I've heard storied of players joining the game to try out a Warrior or guardian to be a tank only to find out that Mesmer was the tank in almost all content which quickly turned them off. Although a novel concept for sure, because the game has such a drastic disconnect from genre expectations this is more likely to turn new players away than to keep them playing.

    Human psychology is weird. Humans both want something different but not so different that it breaks with conventions that they would otherwise expect. And we're all like that in some way. It would be nice if most humans could just take on a new experience and just slip into it and be delighted with its uniqueness. And there are definitely people who can do that, but its absolutely not something you should rely on. Its nice if you have that strange option like a mesmer tank, but you should still have those other options, such as Guardian and Warrior tanks, be just as good at that job if not better.

    This issue is a bit more complex than all the issues I'm going to bring up but the suggested solution I have would be to change the Aggro system from a "Who has the biggest toughness" to a threat system where all skill either generate threat or reduce your threat so the player with the highest threat level takes aggro. And to keep toughness viable have bosses and specific enemies aggroed on the threatened Ally deal greatly increased damage so toughness gear becomes a necessity. This way if you want to run a support like a chronomancer you could have their supportive skills generate very little threat making it very difficult for them to tank over something else.

  • Lily.1935Lily.1935 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @ASP.8093 said:

    @Lily.1935 said:

    @ASP.8093 said:
    Your original argument is that we need to gut like four classes in order to give the players who can't figure out how to survive open world on a guardian the opportunity to play one as a raid tank.

    What?

    What?

    What the hell are you talking about?

    All this stuff:

    New players when they enter into Guild wars 2 are going to have specific expectations from the classes that are presented without ever looking at this skills. Just looking at what they are and how they're described. For instance, Guardian has probably the biggest disconnect for new players and what it actually does and what its role is. What new players expect is a Tank that supports allies and possibly heals to a minor extent. And the way the game mechanics are set up the Guardian is just not really a good tank. They can play the healer/support role fine but they're primarily a DPS, and one of the best at that. I've heard storied of players joining the game to try out a Warrior or guardian to be a tank only to find out that Mesmer was the tank in almost all content which quickly turned them off. Although a novel concept for sure, because the game has such a drastic disconnect from genre expectations this is more likely to turn new players away than to keep them playing.

    Human psychology is weird. Humans both want something different but not so different that it breaks with conventions that they would otherwise expect. And we're all like that in some way. It would be nice if most humans could just take on a new experience and just slip into it and be delighted with its uniqueness. And there are definitely people who can do that, but its absolutely not something you should rely on. Its nice if you have that strange option like a mesmer tank, but you should still have those other options, such as Guardian and Warrior tanks, be just as good at that job if not better.

    This issue is a bit more complex than all the issues I'm going to bring up but the suggested solution I have would be to change the Aggro system from a "Who has the biggest toughness" to a threat system where all skill either generate threat or reduce your threat so the player with the highest threat level takes aggro. And to keep toughness viable have bosses and specific enemies aggroed on the threatened Ally deal greatly increased damage so toughness gear becomes a necessity. This way if you want to run a support like a chronomancer you could have their supportive skills generate very little threat making it very difficult for them to tank over something else.

    Where did I say that they should be gutted?