Jump to content
  • Sign Up

[merged] I want to keep using Arc Build Templates... :/


Recommended Posts

@"Despond.2174" said:Is there an official word with Anet that ARC is 100% supported and fine? I know it's always been unofficially fine but they've never gone out and said anything.

By Chris Cleary (GM Shazbot) :

1) https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/66m13h/anet_this_really_should_be_part_of_the_game/dgjwapj/ (his reddit account was deleted since)2) https://twitter.com/Shazbawt/status/905910888573673473

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 396
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

@Asum.4960 said:

@"Lottie.5370" said:

Who needs more than 6 gear templates for one character??

Pretty much everybody that plays WvW

I run 14 different builds on roaming ranger alone, each with different gear configuration.

If you run 14 different builds, have you considered minimizing the number of builds you would actually need a template for?Im just hoping when people say i have 10+ or 20+ builds its not having a build that you change where only 1 small minor thing changes like a utility slot, or a single trait or two or just a single weapon.

I get that you can have quite a few builds in pvp/wvw and raid situations but i mean 14 for a single character is a lot.

I can once again list off some builds, taking my guardian as example.

DH Power DPS
(Raids/Fractals), which consists of Berserker gear with Scholar Runes, requires separate Build Template.
FB condition DPS
(Raids), which is a Viper/Sinister/Grieving mix with Balthazar Runes, requires separate Build Template.
Condition Quickbrand
(Raids), which is full Viper with Firebrand Runes, mostly shares build with FB condition DPS, but a separate build template as now in Arc would still be handy.
Power Quickbrand
(Fractals), which is a Scholar/Diviner mix with Scholar Runes, requires separate Build Template.
Healbrand
(Raids), which is full Harrier with Monk Runes, requires separate Build Template.
Healbrand
(Fractals), which is a Harrier/Magi mix with Monk Runes, shares build template with the Raids version for the most part.different versions for Virtues and Radiance for Healbrand, which wouldn't be too much trouble to select by hand without Templates, but nice to have
Tank Healbrand
(Raids), which is full Minstrel with Monk Runes, shares Build Template with Healbrand for the most part.
Open World FB
(OW), which is a Marauder/Berserker/Diviner mix with Firework Runes, with multiple other versions (ie Templates) depending on what I want to play, , requires multiple separate Build Templates.
Zerg FB
(WvW), which could share a Gear Template with Tank Healbrand, but requires a different build Template.
Roaming FB
(WvW), of those I have multiple Templates depending on what I feel like playing/trying out/to iterate on as build.
Core Guard
(PvP/WvW), a Valkyrie/Berserker Mix, requires separate Build Template.
Sup Bunker FB
(PvP), separate build Template for PvP
Hybrid FB
(PvP), seperate build Template for PvP

That's just a glimpse of my templates for one character on what I deem most essential (generally see play every week at multiple points), with there being plenty more I could awkwardly mix and match together to consolidate Templates or which I play more rarely, but just doing one Shift+Click in arc and loading them on demand obviously is far superior.And still it's too many to bring into Anet's templates, even if I had the cash to spare to unlock all these slots on all my characters that I need for smooth and enjoyable playing.

I see well i would like to ask you a few more questions if you don't mind. I'll start with just these because they're probably the most relevant that would lead to any others.

Question 1For the sake of humoring me what would your alternative work around had been to carry this many builds for your character, What would you have done as a work around if arc templates would have never been allowed in the first place?

There was no alternative. I started using Arc over 2 years ago in tandem with getting into Raiding or rather shortly after, as I noticed very quickly that the constant swapping without Arc templates just wasn't feasible or fun, especially as someone who started covering many different roles from boss to boss.

Is suppose the "alternative" for me would have been not playing or not getting into that type of content due to getting too annoyed by that aspect of it.

I was thinking more along the line of "alternative" being

  • carrying your extra gear sets on you and just swapping them out manually
  • making alt characters which can hold a few different alt builds each

So its safe to say you started using arc templates at the same time you roughly started getting into raids roughly which would lead to an increase in having different builds for different wings and bosses etc.

Question 2Did you know going into the use of arc templates before hand that arc templates were a temporary and not a permanent solution?

No, I started using Arc long before official templates were announced, with the sentiment in the community being that they would likely never come.Unfortunately we were wrong.

I see. Based on what a few others having saying it seems like arenanet knew they would get to it eventually after allowing the use of Arc templates which were allowed only up to the point they were ready for live release.

ok i have just a few more.

Question 3Before you got into raids (before the use of Arc templates) did you still have a lot of different builds for wvw/ fractals/ open world etc? IF so how many and how did you handle storing them and was it still a major annoyance for you?

Question 4Not including continuous use of Arc Templates, what would you suggest anet do their templates to help players like you who need a higher number of builds per character?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question 3Before you got into raids (before the use of Arc templates) did you still have a lot of different builds for wvw/ fractals/ open world etc? IF so how many and how did you handle storing them and was it still a major annoyance for you?

  • I had to memorise them for each boss, part of a run and create GW2Skill templates specificially saved externally - it took a long time, and it was annoying if I got something wrong causing individuals to fail and wipe where we should do a clear. I have multiple videos of 'fast' dungeon running, where I had to manually swap weapons and traits between different sections. It is not only annoying to have to be skill clicking and memorise this, but frustrating to cause a group wipe. QoL features should not cause frustration.

Question 4Not including continuous use of Arc Templates, what would you suggest anet do their templates to help players like you who need a higher number of builds per character?

  • It is not only builds it is also 'equipment slots', the current implementation does not link skills and equipment with legendary armor allowing swapping.

What I suggest ANET does - is allow Arc to continue until they reword their implementation to cater for the players who need build templates the most. It is still an advantage to use the ANET system if you want to free storage slots (however many players who have played the game for a long time - do not have this problem).ANET needs to look at allowing the 'build' (skills, stats, sigils, weapons, armor, infusions, wardrobe selection) to be saved and allowing each component to be loaded as a complete build or as part (e.g. equipment, skills). To reiterate one prior posters who has builds, I have a Mesmer main and currently have 1-6 different build for every boss in a RAID which has minor changes depending if I am main tank, off-tank or dps/hybrid as well as a challenge mode build for that boss. The reason for doing this is so that I do not forget an essential skill, trait which could cause a group wipe and want to quickly select to a build that I know will not cause a group wipe. In addition, I have builds for fractals (a selection of variations). At last count, I have around 50 builds with equipment configured specifically for encounters that modifies legendary armor, weapons , sigils, runes and in some cases infusions.

The current implementation that has been proposed by the developers does not need my needs at all - the arc templates which are basic and not particularly UX friendly does meet my needs.

TLDR; ANET needs to address the needs of the community that need the functionality of build templates who are require numerous builds (and equipment templates - which are stuck at 6 slots) and rewrite the proposed solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@"ZDragon.3046" said:Issue for you is that you wont get to keep arc templatesIssue for anet is they have to deal with all the unhappy customers who dont like how they are making the system.Notice, how the second issue doesn't disappear with arc templates gone. Quite the opposite.First issue however does disappear if Arc remains a solution.First off there are a great number of people who actually will be fine with the base level slots of anet is offering or people who just didnt use arc build templates at all.Secondly the 2nd issue is always there you cant please everyone. Even if the allow arc there will still be people upset about something somewhere.I need to respond accurately to what you also just said.

Thought experiment

Anet caves and allows it arc templates. But updates to game make arc templates buggy as heck (Without or possibly with their knowledge) with a high chance of erasing your gear into the void. (of corse you would have no way of knowing till it happens) You wont be able to submit tickets for help or come here to talk about it as per the current understandings of using arc templates.You decide to submit a ticket for help anyways and some one at arena net sees your ticket responds with "We are sorry for your loss but we are unable to restore any data erased by 3rd party software and suggest you stop using that software"While they are saying typing this in your ticket they simply think "First issue disappeared"

This seems fair.

Now think about that along side the idea of anet employee who is being forced to work on these templates while reading these comments when he probably has no choice but to design them a certain way. He/She is also told they will be paid less for their work because not every person will use the systems he/she has spent hours on hours working on even if its not the best ideal system for players with 30 builds perhaps there are reasons He/she cannot control other than just money cost as to why the system is designed the way it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"ZDragon.3046" said:Question 4Not including continuous use of Arc Templates, what would you suggest anet do their templates to help players like you who need a higher number of builds per character?A heavy revamp of the system would be necessary before it would become useful enough.

So:

  • An unlimited number of build template storage slots (the account wide ones, that now have a cap of 24) is required. If it can't be done with data being saved server-side, then it needs to be switched to client-side instead.

  • build template loadout tabs (the per-character ones) cap could be raised a bit, although with the previous point done it won't be as necessary.

  • gear storage loadout system needs to be revamped, and split:

  • Leave the gear storage tabs as they are, as far as storing alternate gear sets are concerned. raising the cap a bit might be nice, but see below. Make it so their only function is to hold gear that will be used by the second system.

  • That second system would be "virtual" gear template slots. It would be populated only by links to the actual gear, from both the gear storage tabs, and inventory. You would then apply those templates to a separate "active" gear pane (separate, because you may want to make manual changes to the active loadout without having that change affect the templates or gear storage). Since that "virtual gear template" system would not hold actual gear, and offer no additional storage, it could be uncapped (or have a ridiculously high cap) with no problem.

  • there should be a way to turn your gear template in a chat code that others might see it and compare to theirs. As i understand, that would be the hardest part here, due to the way items are currently stored in game. Perhaps some sort of "generic" gear could be created that would be shown in such a way - the important things that need to be shown are: stat type (berserker etc), upgrade, potentially infusion (ar, stats). In the end things like gear tier and level are unimportant - those would be only so you could easily see in game if your setup matches the build you were given, and so sites like metabattle or snowcrows could simply put a gear chatcode to be copied. I don;t consider this part to be easy to implement, but, fortunately, it is the least important element, and one that can reasonably be skipped.

Notice, for example, how such a system would enhance the worth of a legendary gear, instead of reducing it as current system does. And it would make the gear storage tabs truly optional, but still very valuable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ZDragon.3046 said:Now think about that along side the idea of anet employee who is being forced to work on these templates while reading these comments when he probably has no choice but to design them a certain way. He/She is also told they will be paid less for their work because not every person will use the systems he/she has spent hours on hours working on even if its not the best ideal system for players with 30 builds perhaps there are reasons He/she cannot control other than just money cost as to why the system is designed the way it is.And? I am not blaming the dev. Were anet to push responsibility for their own bad design decisions on individual devs, that's their failure as a business. Not mine.

In short: it doesn't matter if a dev was forced to make the system in an intentionally crippled way or not. All that matters is that the system is crippled and badly designed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@vesica tempestas.1563 said:

@"Schwarzwald.9078" said:

That's why the solution is a simple clarification from ArenaNet allowing people to continue to keep using ArcDPS build templates.Which makes absolutely no business sense. "Here's something you'll likely want and it's going to cost you but hey, it's ok to keep using the free thingy and not pay us so that we've wasted all of our resources in making this thing with no profit to show for it."

Now i don't want to be that guy but i guess i have to.

Anet had build templates in GW1 and those were not monitized, could be shared and even uploaded/downloaded to a folder on your pc.Why should this new system be monitized (specifically the trait system) ?Most rational people don't mind them taking the Armor Templates and monitizing that because it takes those items out of personal inventory which is a godsend. But traits ? That's a bit of a special move especially given that it doesn't unlock anything or do anything beyond the previous functionality of a system that's now over 10 years old.
  1. Gw1 was a different game with different expenses.
  2. Its not 'monetised', it's a non essential feature that was desired that anet built and has offered in the gem shop. When you see a thing in a shop in rl you do not complain if it is monetised, what you do is decide if it is worth the cost to you.
  3. You can get it for free by trading gold for gems.

All this complaining is self entitled nonsense, you play for free, it's a convenience item, buy it or don't. Honestly, by this logic we would only be happy if anet sold stuff in the gem shop that we don't want.

It's entilted now to point out the absurd nature of the design of the system ?Okay, you win. I can't beat such flawless logic.

The trait system is only limited due to the way they chose to implement it. It's prior incarnation was better in every measurable way and mind you free and you're willing to accept worse and pay for it. That's on you.

I however, won't accept that and will emplore Anet to do the right thing here. The "build storage" shouldn't have a paid component to it at all. It should be locally stored just as it was in GW1 with a chat code that could be shared.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@TPMN.1483 said:QoL features should not cause frustration.Im going to zone in on this bit

Most of them dont and this one wont exactly do that for most players thats why its called quality of life because it makes things better. Anet adding this feature in itself wont exactly directly be causing frustration to players who

  • have only a few different builds
  • do not use arc templates

Which is surely a large number of people. Im not saying a fair amount of people dont use arc templates but im sure a large number dont. Even players who have alot of builds but dont use 3rd party addons will find this helpful to some degree, not frustrating even if the base number of slots does not fit all of their builds.

Question 4Not including continuous use of Arc Templates, what would you suggest anet do their templates to help players like you who need a higher number of builds per character?

  • It is not only builds it is also 'equipment slots', the current implementation does not link skills and equipment with legendary armor allowing swapping.

Are you 100% sure about this i think i read otherwise but i could be wrong

What I suggest ANET does - is allow Arc to continue until they reword their implementation to cater for the players who need build templates the most. It is still an advantage to use the ANET system if you want to free storage slots (however many players who have played the game for a long time - do not have this problem).ANET needs to look at allowing the 'build' (skills, stats, sigils, weapons, armor, infusions, wardrobe selection) to be saved and allowing each component to be loaded as a complete build or as part (e.g. equipment, skills). To reiterate one prior posters who has builds, I have a Mesmer main and currently have 1-6 different build for every boss in a RAID which has minor changes depending if I am main tank, off-tank or dps/hybrid as well as a challenge mode build for that boss. The reason for doing this is so that I do not forget an essential skill, trait which could cause a group wipe and want to quickly select to a build that I know will not cause a group wipe. In addition, I have builds for fractals (a selection of variations). At last count, I have around 50 builds with equipment configured specifically for encounters that modifies legendary armor, weapons , sigils, runes and in some cases infusions.

The current implementation that has been proposed by the developers does not need my needs at all - the arc templates which are basic and not particularly UX friendly does meet my needs.

TLDR; ANET needs to address the needs of the community that need the functionality of build templates who are require numerous builds (and equipment templates - which are stuck at 6 slots) and rewrite the proposed solution.

Thanks, At least you have a understandable and reasonable explanation for your specific situation in great detail.

In the event that its technical and slots per character cannot exceed 6 what would you propose anet do? What if there is no way for them to code over 6 slots or if going beyond this number of slots per character for every person would be very costly in terms of server storage / maintenance / upgrades etc?Should anet just fork up the cash with no return investment?Should anet just abandon the work and time spent so far (who knows how many man hours) and drop it all together to just allow arc?What if when anet started this design they realized it simply will not work with arc which is even more of a reason why it wont be allowed?Should anet be forced to design around arc because thats just what people such as yourself have gotten use to even if it means scrapping other features they have planned in the future?

The deeper i think about this the more im starting to wonder how hard of a choice anet is probably going to have to make overall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@ZDragon.3046 said:Now think about that along side the idea of anet employee who is being forced to work on these templates while reading these comments when he probably has no choice but to design them a certain way. He/She is also told they will be paid less for their work because not every person will use the systems he/she has spent hours on hours working on even if its not the best ideal system for players with 30 builds perhaps there are reasons He/she cannot control other than just money cost as to why the system is designed the way it is.And? I am not blaming the dev. Were anet to push responsibility for their own bad design decisions on individual devs, that's their failure as a business. Not mine.By this logic, some one could see a bad design decision is allowing players to use and be spoiled by arc Templates ;P

In short: it doesn't matter if a dev was forced to make the system in an intentionally crippled way or not. All that matters is that the system is crippled and badly designed.

The game is old and its built on old tech dont confuse the possibility of technical limitation with bad design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@ZDragon.3046 said:The game is old and its built on old tech dont confuse the possibility of technical limitation with bad design.both gw1 templates (older version of the same engine,remember) and arc templates show clearly that's not a case of technical limitetions, but is entirely a case of bad design.

Weren't GW1 templates client-side? Aren't GW2 templates going to be server-side? Maybe the decision to move to server-side was one for security reasons and being server-side would be constrained by hardware/database limitations? Just speculation since we really haven't been told either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@"ZDragon.3046" said:The game is old and its built on old tech dont confuse the possibility of technical limitation with bad design.both gw1 templates (older version of the same engine,remember) and arc templates show clearly that's not a case of technical limitetions, but is entirely a case of bad design.

Gw1 is still a very very old game and back during that time of online pc games you had 1 of 2 things happening in the game.Everyone was cheating or no one was. Given gw2's track record im gonna go with the idea that it was alot less likely. Not to say it probably still didnt happen.

1: With respect for the advancements in technology and how smart some people are today I can see why they dont want to allow local templates. Its very risky in 2019 to just break open your system and let people do what they want. Give them a crumb and they'll take a whole cookie. While it's unlikely that anyone would find away to do something against the TOS aka cheat in some way or form there is no promise that this would not create a number of problems in the future.

2: There is also the matter of what happens if your drive crashes or you need to do a clean start. You will now have to set all this back up and for people who have 30+ builds i can only imagine the annoyance of how troublesome that would be.Now this last example is always the case of "That wont be me" Untill it happens. That said you could just make back ups but that does not excuse the first reason

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@kharmin.7683 said:

@ZDragon.3046 said:The game is old and its built on old tech dont confuse the possibility of technical limitation with bad design.both gw1 templates (older version of the same engine,remember) and arc templates show clearly that's not a case of technical limitetions, but is entirely a case of bad design.

Weren't GW1 templates client-side? Aren't GW2 templates going to be server-side? Maybe the decision to move to server-side was one for security reasons and being server-side would be constrained by hardware/database limitations? Just speculation since we really haven't been told either way.

Yes they were and this is what i was thinking

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ZDragon.3046 said:In the event that its technical and slots per character cannot exceed 6 what would you propose anet do? What if there is no way for them to code over 6 slots or if going beyond this number of slots per character for every person would be very costly in terms of server storage / maintenance / upgrades etc?I included the answer for that in my proposal few posts above.

Should anet just abandon the work and time spent so far (who knows how many man hours) and drop it all together to just allow arc?If it cannot be improved to work properly, then yes, they should.

What if when anet started this design they realized it simply will not work with arc which is even more of a reason why it wont be allowed?Considering the way arc works, that is... not very likely. Not unless they would go to great pains to make it so, and perhaps not even then.Arc creator might make some adjustments to make it still work, but that is all.

@"kharmin.7683" said:Weren't GW1 templates client-side? Aren't GW2 templates going to be server-side? Maybe the decision to move to server-side was one for security reasons...what security reasons?and being server-side would be constrained by hardware/database limitations?

Yes, server side would have constrains. There's however no reason to have it server side. No, "security reasons" in case of build templates is not a serious consideration. They already told us this is a chatcode. One that will work when used from chat or put to chat from notepad. So, there's absolutely no reason why it couldn't be stored in plain text file clientside.

@ZDragon.3046 said:2: There is also the matter of what happens if your drive crashes or you need to do a clean start. You will now have to set all this back up and for people who have 30+ builds i can only imagine the annoyance of how troublesome that would be.Backup is a thing. Backing up a few pages of chatcodes in a google doc or something is trivial. And if you don't back up things you consider important, then in that crash you probably lost far more important things and GW2 is last of your concerns.Besides, i am certain chatcodes of both more and less common builds will find their way to the internet very soon after the system starts. You would not need to recover all the builds by hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Astralporing.1957 said:

Should anet just abandon the work and time spent so far (who knows how many man hours) and drop it all together to just allow arc?If it cannot be improved to work properly, then yes, they should.This alone is enough for me

I will agree with you one one thing from the overall conversation arenanet has clearly made some bad decisions.The decision to branch out and allow arc templates to spoil people will be what really hurst them the most with this feature

Maybe in the end they will allow arc to remain. I think im done with this topic for now though its started to get too repetitive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@kharmin.7683 said:Weren't GW1 templates client-side? Aren't GW2 templates going to be server-side? Maybe the decision to move to server-side was one for security reasons...what security reasons?Well, I'm not a hacker so I don't know if code could be injected into whatever was on the client side that might be called by the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@kharmin.7683 said:

@kharmin.7683 said:Weren't GW1 templates client-side? Aren't GW2 templates going to be server-side? Maybe the decision to move to server-side was one for security reasons...what security reasons?Well, I'm not a hacker so I don't know if code could be injected into whatever was on the client side that might be called by the game.

Like i said, from what we were told, it's a chatcode. One you
can
keep in a file locally and just paste into chatbox to work. So, again, why loading it from file would introduce security concerns and pasting into chat wouldn't?(hint: there's no practical difference)

@ZDragon.3046 said:The decision to branch out and allow arc templates to spoil people will be what really hurst them the most with this featureNo.
Making a bad feature and trying to heavily monetize it
will.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@ZDragon.3046 said:2: There is also the matter of what happens if your drive crashes or you need to do a clean start. You will now have to set all this back up and for people who have 30+ builds i can only imagine the annoyance of how troublesome that would be.Backup is a thing. Backing up a few pages of chatcodes in a google doc or something is trivial. And if you don't back up things you consider important, then in that crash you probably lost far more important things and GW2 is last of your concerns.Besides, i am certain chatcodes of both more and less common builds will find their way to the internet very soon after the system starts. You would not need to recover all the builds by hand.

I feel like you're trying to explain GW1 templates to people who've never played it and don't know that websites like PvXWikia exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ZDragon.3046 said:

@"Lottie.5370" said:

Who needs more than 6 gear templates for one character??

Pretty much everybody that plays WvW

I run 14 different builds on roaming ranger alone, each with different gear configuration.

If you run 14 different builds, have you considered minimizing the number of builds you would actually need a template for?Im just hoping when people say i have 10+ or 20+ builds its not having a build that you change where only 1 small minor thing changes like a utility slot, or a single trait or two or just a single weapon.

I get that you can have quite a few builds in pvp/wvw and raid situations but i mean 14 for a single character is a lot.

I can once again list off some builds, taking my guardian as example.

DH Power DPS
(Raids/Fractals), which consists of Berserker gear with Scholar Runes, requires separate Build Template.
FB condition DPS
(Raids), which is a Viper/Sinister/Grieving mix with Balthazar Runes, requires separate Build Template.
Condition Quickbrand
(Raids), which is full Viper with Firebrand Runes, mostly shares build with FB condition DPS, but a separate build template as now in Arc would still be handy.
Power Quickbrand
(Fractals), which is a Scholar/Diviner mix with Scholar Runes, requires separate Build Template.
Healbrand
(Raids), which is full Harrier with Monk Runes, requires separate Build Template.
Healbrand
(Fractals), which is a Harrier/Magi mix with Monk Runes, shares build template with the Raids version for the most part.different versions for Virtues and Radiance for Healbrand, which wouldn't be too much trouble to select by hand without Templates, but nice to have
Tank Healbrand
(Raids), which is full Minstrel with Monk Runes, shares Build Template with Healbrand for the most part.
Open World FB
(OW), which is a Marauder/Berserker/Diviner mix with Firework Runes, with multiple other versions (ie Templates) depending on what I want to play, , requires multiple separate Build Templates.
Zerg FB
(WvW), which could share a Gear Template with Tank Healbrand, but requires a different build Template.
Roaming FB
(WvW), of those I have multiple Templates depending on what I feel like playing/trying out/to iterate on as build.
Core Guard
(PvP/WvW), a Valkyrie/Berserker Mix, requires separate Build Template.
Sup Bunker FB
(PvP), separate build Template for PvP
Hybrid FB
(PvP), seperate build Template for PvP

That's just a glimpse of my templates for one character on what I deem most essential (generally see play every week at multiple points), with there being plenty more I could awkwardly mix and match together to consolidate Templates or which I play more rarely, but just doing one Shift+Click in arc and loading them on demand obviously is far superior.And still it's too many to bring into Anet's templates, even if I had the cash to spare to unlock all these slots on all my characters that I need for smooth and enjoyable playing.

I see well i would like to ask you a few more questions if you don't mind. I'll start with just these because they're probably the most relevant that would lead to any others.

Question 1For the sake of humoring me what would your alternative work around had been to carry this many builds for your character, What would you have done as a work around if arc templates would have never been allowed in the first place?

There was no alternative. I started using Arc over 2 years ago in tandem with getting into Raiding or rather shortly after, as I noticed very quickly that the constant swapping without Arc templates just wasn't feasible or fun, especially as someone who started covering many different roles from boss to boss.

Is suppose the "alternative" for me would have been not playing or not getting into that type of content due to getting too annoyed by that aspect of it.

I was thinking more along the line of "alternative" being
  • carrying your extra gear sets on you and just swapping them out manually
  • making alt characters which can hold a few different alt builds each

So its safe to say you started using arc templates at the same time you roughly started getting into raids roughly which would lead to an increase in having different builds for different wings and bosses etc.

Swapping all these gear sets, and by now Legendary armor sets, manually isn't an alternative, it's the problem.I sought out a tool like ArcDPS because of the frustrations that came with not having a template feature, which became necessary after becoming engaged in more game modes, as in starting to play especially Raids but also PvP in addition to Fractals and WvW, which meant keeping track of way too many builds eventually, and way too much swapping by hand to be fun.

That problem obviously got worse over time with each new boss to tackle, requiring different compositions and with it builds to have at hand.

The reason I didn't make 2-3 alts for each class was one, I was going for legendary Armor (which I now have for all frequently played characters, which ironically makes swapping by hand even worse) and two the fact that that would cost me quite a bit in character slots while still not being convenient with constant relogs, especially since my PC is ageing and loading screens quite long.

Question 2Did you know going into the use of arc templates before hand that arc templates were a temporary and not a permanent solution?

No, I started using Arc long before official templates were announced, with the sentiment in the community being that they would likely never come.Unfortunately we were wrong.

I see. Based on what a few others having saying it seems like arenanet knew they would get to it eventually after allowing the use of Arc templates which were allowed > > > only up to the point they were ready for live release.ok i have just a few more.

Question 3Before you got into raids (before the use of Arc templates) did you still have a lot of different builds for wvw/ fractals/ open world etc? IF so how many and how did you handle storing them and was it still a major annoyance for you?

Before getting into Raids and PvP I was mostly playing Fractals as well as some WvW. For WvW I made one alt specifically for that gamemode of an already existing profession, with the rest mainly being geared and setup for Fractals. But I was also playing a lot less characters with much fewer build's at that point, as we didn't have as much and easy opportunities to gear new characters to make new builds back then.So generally at that point isn't wasn't a major annoyance, no.I wanted to have more builds and be able to hop into more different gamemodes, but before Arc I simply didn't, because the swapping around of things wasn't worth the effort, so I just mostly stuck to my niche I already had builds for, so the lack of access to many or any templates simply kept me from playing and enjoying parts of the game/multiple builds.

Question 4Not including continuous use of Arc Templates, what would you suggest anet do their templates to help players like you who need a higher number of builds per character?

Drastically increase Gear but especially Build Templates to 20+ and reasonable pricing, something like a 10-Slot pack for 400-800 Gems, and/or account wide Slot unlocks for 400 gems would go a long way.Basically anything that means I have to spend less than 400€+ to have still too few templates would be an improvement over what they had discussed on stream.

That's simply both not affordable, and not enough even if it was.

The Account Templates need to be vastly expanded over the 24 and frankly should probably be either free, or come in 20-Slots for 400-800 gems max. Unlocking them 3 at a time for 400-600 Gems each with a cap of 24 is a nightmare for Raiders/Theorycrafters or any sort of hardcore player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Trise.2865" said:Person caught stealing cable angry about having to pay for cable:"Please let me continue stealing cable instead of paying for it."

I was going to use the same analogy ... but there are probably too many juveniles that have no idea what we would be talking about. Yes, pretty much the same thing. The best part is that the complaint isn't really that they can't get cable anymore, it's that they want it at the same rate and number of channels at the one they were stealing ... for free and all channels. It's weak stuff. There are far better arguments to be put forward for the offering ... but they pick the one that exposes them in the worst light possible. You can't make this stuff up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Obtena.7952 said:

@"Trise.2865" said:Person caught stealing cable angry about having to pay for cable:"Please let me continue stealing cable instead of paying for it."

I was going to use the same analogy ... but there are probably too many juveniles that have no idea what we would be talking about.Rather, there are enough people that are mature enough to understand that this "analogy" has nothing to do with situation at hand. Nobody was "stealing cable" here. People were using a third-party,
completely legal and allowed
addon.

No amounts of "analogies" you make can present this implementation of build templates as anything more than at best half-useful and heavily overpriced.

Besides, seriously, can you even make a point in this discussion without heavily misrepresenting reality?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...