Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Resource mechanics need to go and competitive gameplay will be better for it


Swagger.1459

Recommended Posts

@"UNOwen.7132"

“lowers gameplay diversity”

"you lose a lot of diversity and design space for absolutely no good reason at all"

“You have yet to bring up a single, solitary game that supports your point”...

You tell me when GW2 has more "diversity and design space" than a game that came out 1 year before GW1, that used 1 common resource called "Endurance" for all classes.... I'll be waiting...

BLASTERhttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Blaster“The Blaster is an offensive juggernaut. This hero can deal a ton of damage from a distance. But the Blaster must be careful, because he's somewhat fragile compared to other heroes. The Blaster can't stand toe to toe with most opponents at melee for long. His best defense is a great offense!The Blaster's power sets are:Primary: RangedSecondary: Support”

Primary Power Sets“A Blaster's primary power sets are designed specifically for ranged attacks. They are:”

Secondary Power Sets“A Blaster's secondary power sets are designed for support via melee attacks, minor crowd control powers, or temporary self-buffs. They are:”

Inherent Power

  • https://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Inherent_Powers#Defiance“Blasters’ earliest abilities come so naturally to them, that they are accessible even in states that normally prevent them from using powers, such as being Held, Slept or Stunned. Additionally, each time the Blaster attacks with a primary or secondary power, they gain a stacking damage bonus for the next several seconds. The amount of the damage bonus and its duration is dependent on the exact power used, with single target abilities generally giving the largest bonus.”

BRUTEhttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Brute“Brutes live to fight, and as a Brute you revel in hand-to-hand combat. With strong offensive power sets to inflict pain and impressive defenses to take it, you're the best there is in a straight fight. Protracted battles only makes you mad, and the madder you get, the more damaging your attacks become. You do lack ranged attacks, which could leave you vulnerable to hit and run tactics without some allies to cover you.The Brute's power sets are:Primary: MeleeSecondary: Defense”

“Primary Power Sets A Brute's primary power sets are designed specifically for melee. They are:”

“Secondary Power Sets A Brute's secondary power sets are designed for defense. They are:”

Inherent Powerhttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Inherent_Powers#Fury

“As a Brute engages in combat, it unleashes his Fury. The longer he remains in combat, attacking and being attacked, the more damage he deals.A Brute's Fury level is shown by an orange bar between Endurance and Experience Points. It rises each time he makes an attack or is attacked himself (regardless of hit or miss). The speed at which it rises is directly proportional to the recklessness of the Brute.”

CORRUPTORhttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Corruptor“Corrupters twist the forces of the universe to do their bidding. As a corruptor, you might strike your foes down with blasts of fire, entomb them in ice, infect them with radiation, or curse them with pure darkness. As your foes are weakened, your scourge ability kicks in, increasing your damage to an enemy as their hit points drop. You can even impart a portion of your twisted power to your allies to protect them from harm, heal them, or increase the damage they deal. This wide array of abilities comes at a price. Your defenses aren't strong, and you can quickly attract the ire of your enemies if you aren't careful.The Corruptor's power sets are:Primary: RangedSecondary: Buff”

Primary Power SetsA Corruptor's primary power sets are designed for ranged attacks. They are:

Secondary Power Sets A Corruptor's secondary power sets are designed for buffing or debuffing. They are:

Inherent Powerhttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Inherent_Powers#Scourge“The Corruptor is a dastardly villain indeed. As a Corruptor's foe health wanes, the Corruptor can start to land Scourge hits with his attack powers for up to double damage. The weaker the target is, the greater chance the Corruptor has of landing Scourge. Once a foe is weak enough, there is no escaping the Corruptor's wrath. A Corruptor shows no mercy.Scourge offers no chance of critical damage until the target has less than 50% health. The chance then smoothly increases to 100% once the target has only 10% or less of its health remaining. These percentages are based on the target's base health -- targets with large health boosts from powers can effectively delay the point at which Scourge damage starts being possible.”

DEFENDERhttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Defender“The Defender tends to help his allies, and attack his foes, from a distance. The Defender excels at powers that assist friends, but can also hinder his enemies. The Defender is able to attack at quite a range, however, the Defender is not built for hand to hand. He might be able to dodge a few attacks, but the Defender won't last for long.The Defender's power sets are:Primary: BuffSecondary: Ranged”

Primary Power SetsA Defender's primary power sets are designed specifically for buffing or debuffing. They are:

Secondary Power SetsA Defender's secondary power sets are designed for ranged attacks. They are:

Inherent Powerhttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Inherent_Powers#Vigilance“The Defender's primary focus is to protect the team. When his allies are in danger, the Defender is able to look deep within him or herself and rise to the occasion. As a Defender's teammates are in danger of being defeated, the Defender gains an Endurance Discount and can activate their powers at a reduced cost. The more teammates in trouble, the greater the discount.”

DOMINATORhttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Dominator“As a Dominator, you control a devastating combination of control and assault powers. A Dominator can freeze foes in place, render them unconscious, or cause them to flee in terror. Dominators can also smite their foes with a selection of single-target melee and ranged attacks, with devastating effectiveness. Additionally, each time a Dominator attacks, he comes closer to unleashing his true sadistic power of Domination. With so much emphasis on diverse offensive powers, Dominators lack in defenses and work best with teammates who can provide protection.The Dominator's power sets are:Primary: ControlSecondary: Assault”

Primary Power SetsA Dominator's primary power sets are designed for controlling enemies. They are:

Secondary Power SetsA Dominator's secondary power sets are designed for assault. They are:

Inherent Powerhttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Inherent_Powers#Domination“Nothing delights a Dominator more than inflicting pain. When a Dominator attacks, his sadistic nature grows. When your Domination bar is over 90% you can activate this power to unleash his true potential. Your control powers will typically last 50% longer and will more easily Dominate stronger opponents. Additionally, you will completely recover your Endurance. Domination lasts for 90 seconds and recharges in 200 seconds. The recharge can be reduced by self and ally buffs, but cannot be slotted with enhancements.Domination protects the villain from Knockback/Knockup, Repel, Disorient, Hold, Sleep, Immobilize, Fear, and Confuse effects, and can be activated even while suffering from them to break the villain free.Domination doubles the magnitude of the villain's own Disorient, Hold, Sleep, Immobilize, Fear, and Confuse effects for their normal durations, then keeps them going at normal magnitude for half that amount of time longer. Debuffs and other secondary effects are not improved.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"UNOwen.7132"

SCRAPPERhttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Scrapper“The Scrapper is a fierce melee combatant. In hand to hand, no other hero can compare. But the Scrapper is not as resilient as the Tanker, and might find himself in a little trouble if he heedlessly wades into combat. The Scrapper's aptitude for melee is countered by a total lack of long distance attacks. Scrappers possess Critical strike capability. Their melee attacks have a chance to sometimes do double damage.The Scrapper's power sets are:
Primary: MeleeSecondary: Defense”

Primary Power SetsA Scrapper's primary power sets are designed specifically for melee. They are:

Secondary Power SetsA Scrapper's secondary power sets are designed for defense. They are:

Inherent Powershttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Inherent_Powers#Critical_Hit“The Scrapper is a fierce melee combatant. In hand to hand, no other hero can compare. All Scrapper melee attacks have a chance to land a Critical Hit for up to double damage. The higher the rank of the target, the greater the chance for a successful Critical Hit.”

STALKERhttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Stalker“Skill can divert clumsy raw power, and precisely applied force can solve many problems. As a Stalker, this is the core of your specialty. You do your best work when attacking from ambush, and can even hide in plain sight to escape foes. Deadly attacks and good defenses make you a dangerous combatant and assassin, but you can be overwhelmed if you're not careful.The Stalker's power sets are:Primary: MeleeSecondary: Defense”

Primary Power SetsA Stalker's primary power sets are designed for stealth and melee. They are:

Secondary Power SetsA Stalker's secondary power sets are designed for stealth and defense. They are:

Inherent Powerhttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Inherent_Powers#Assassination“A Stalker does his best work when attacking from ambush. When properly 'Hidden", a Stalker can pull off Critical hits with his attacks, and even land a massive 'Assassins Strike' with an assassin's power. Assassin Strikes made from hide will Demoralize the Stalker's foes leaving them with a reduced chance to hit and has a chance to terrorize them. Additionally, a Stalker has a 10 percent base chance to critically hit, which is increased by an additional 3 percent per member in your party, against non-player enemies. Stalkers have a chance to land a critical hit against players if they are Held or Slept. Each of the Stalker's damaging powers within their primary power set, other than Assassin's Strike, have a chance to grant the Stalker a stack of Assassin's Focus. Each stack of this buff boosts Assassin's Strike's chance to critically (hit while the user is not hidden) by 33.3%. Assassin's Focus stacks up to 3 times.”

TANKERhttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Tanker“The Tanker can take it and dish it out all at once. The Tanker primarily can absorb vast amounts of damage, and hold his own in a fist fight. But the Tanker lacks any long range punch. The Tanker would prefer just to charge straight ahead anyway.The Tanker's power sets are:Primary: DefenseSecondary: Melee”

Primary Power SetsA Tanker's primary power sets are designed specifically for defense. They are:

Secondary Power SetsA Tanker's secondary power sets are designed for melee. They are:

Inherent Powershttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Inherent_Powers#Gauntlet“Although many try, few can withstand the irresistible force of the Tanker. Each time a Tanker attacks, he enrages the target, and those around him, enticing them to attack the Tanker. Each punch continues to provoke your enemies and allows the Tanker to do what he does best.”

https://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Bruising“Bruising is a damage resistance debuff that was added to the game in Issue 18.On a successful hit, any tier 1 Tanker secondary power set attack will bruise an enemy target. This bruising effect causes a resistible 20% damage resistance debuff which lasts for 10 seconds. Bruising cannot stack, even if there are multiple tankers attacking the same target; thus, it is a good idea for multiple tankers to spread attacks out on the whole spawn.”

CONTROLLERhttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Controller“The Controller is at the same time the weakest and yet the most powerful of the archetypes. The Controller has few offensive attacks and possesses few hit points. But the Controller has access to a range of powers and abilities that no one else does. Armed with these powers, a Controller can affect the behavior of villains, from freezing them in place, to putting them to sleep, to routing them away. Armed with such abilities, the Controller is the backbone for any super group, but the Controller depends upon their teammates for protection.The Controller's power sets are:Primary: ControlSecondary: Buff”

Primary Power SetsA Controller's primary power sets are designed specifically for control. They are:

Secondary Power SetsA Controller's secondary power sets are designed for buffing or debuffing. They are:

Inherent Powerhttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Inherent_Powers#Containment“Controllers are the masters at locking down and controlling their opponents. Few can escape their will. Controllers do extra damage to any target that is already Held, Immobilized, Slept, or Disoriented.”“An additional perk enjoyed by Controllers is a chance of getting an extra point of magnitude on the Status Effects that nearly all their primary powers cause. The word "Overpower" appears above affected enemies when this happens. This inherent is not represented by a power icon.”

MASTERMINDhttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Mastermind“As a Mastermind, you excel at using others to do your dirty work. Perhaps you build killer robots, command deadly Ninja, order hardened soldiers, or summon the undead to do your bidding. Whatever your choice, you have an army of minions at your beck and call. You can summon them when needed, order them to work your will, and even use your own powers to enhance them or weaken your foes. The Mastermind is a difficult class to play, often demanding constant attention to control your minions and stave off the retribution of your enemies.The Mastermind's power sets are:Primary: SummonSecondary: Buff”

Primary Power Sets“A Mastermind's primary power sets are designed specifically for summoning. All of the Mastermind primaries have a common structure. Masterminds gain access to their first type of Henchman at level 1, their second type at level 12, and their third type at level 26. They also gain access to one Henchman upgrading power at level 6 and another at level 32.Unlike other pet-summoning powers, Henchman-summoning powers change as the Mastermind gains levels. Specifically, once a Mastermind hits level 6, their first Henchman power stops summoning one minion at the Mastermind's level and starts summoning two at the Mastermind's level - 1. Then, at level 18, the power changes further and instead summons three minions at the Mastermind's level - 2. The second-tier Henchman power also undergoes changes like this – it begins by summoning one equal-level minion, then changes to summoning two -1 Henchmen at level 24. This behavior depends on the Mastermind's Combat Level, not his Threat Level, so Lackeying and Malefactoring can affect it. The Mastermind Primary sets are:”

Secondary Power SetsA Mastermind's secondary power sets are designed for buffing and debuffing. They are:

Inherent Powerhttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Inherent_Powers#Supremacy“A good Mastermind knows how to manage his Henchmen. The Mastermind imparts a bonus to his Henchmen's Accuracy and Damage only if he is nearby and not Phased or otherwise can only use Self Only powers. Additionally, your Henchmen within range in Defensive mode will share damage with the Mastermind, with damage being divided evenly between the Mastermind and each one of his Henchmen in range.Supremacy gives +25% Damage and +10% ToHit. It has a radius of 60'.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"UNOwen.7132"

PEACEBRINGERhttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Peacebringer“Peacebringers, along with Warshades, are one of the two Epic Archetypes for Heroes. They are available to players who are VIP or who have purchased an unlock from the Paragon Market. All Peacebringers are of Natural origin.Peacebringers are formed from the fusion of an alien energy being called a Kheldian and a willing host. While Peacebringers take more damage from most attacks, they make up for this weakness with solid Hit Points, a good variety of Energy attack powers and strong defensive powers, inherent Flight, and eventually even gain access to two shape-shift forms. Peacebringers become stronger when teamed with non-Kheldian heroes, gaining bonuses to their own powers based on the archetypes of their teammates.Alignment: HeroThe Peacebringer's powersets are:Primary: OffenseSecondary: Defense”

WARSHADEhttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Warshade“Warshades, along with Peacebringers, are one of the two Epic Archetypes for Heroes. They are available to players who are VIP or who have purchased an unlock from the Paragon Market. All Warshades are of Science origin.Warshades are former Nictus who have left that dark path behind and reformed, joining with a willing host. While Warshades take more damage from most attacks, they make up for this weakness with solid Hit Points, a good variety of Dark Energy attack powers and strong defensive powers, inherent Teleport, and eventually even gain access to two shape-shift forms. Warshades become stronger when teamed with non-Kheldian heroes, gaining bonuses to their own powers based on the archetypes of their teammates.Alignment: HeroThe Warshade's power sets are:Primary: OffenseSecondary: Defense”

ARACHNOS SOLDIERhttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Arachnos_Soldier“Arachnos Soldiers, along with Arachnos Widows, are one of the two Epic Archetypes for Villains. They are available to players who are VIP or who have purchased an unlock from the Paragon Market. All Arachnos Soldiers are of Natural origin. While NPC versions of these archetypes are typically male, PC Arachnos Soldiers may be female. An Arachnos soldier is called Spider in the targetting window.Characters with Arachnos Soldier training begin their careers as Wolf Spiders. Wolf Spider characters have a strong mix of Melee and Ranged attacks and strong protective powers available via their power armor. Beginning at level 24, the player has to choose whether he will progress down the "Crab Spider" or "Bane Spider" path. Crab Spiders gain access to the "backpack" and the powerful claw/cone attacks it provides, while the Bane Spider track provides stealth and a stronger focus on melee.Arachnos Soldiers who go the Bane Spider route gain the ability to do automatic critical damage with any of their primary melee attacks when attacking from Hidden status. These criticals do one and two-thirds times normal damage. Bane Spiders become Hidden the same way Stalkers do, by using their secondary Cloaking Device power or primary Placate power. (However, the stealth granted by Cloaking Device is slightly less than that granted by a Stalker's Hide, and Arachnos Soldiers must also use some other source of Stealth or enemy -Perception to approach Boss and higher-rank targets reliably.)Alignment: VillainThe Arachnos Soldier's power sets are:Primary: SoldiersSecondary: Gadgets”

ARACHNOS WIDOWhttps://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Arachnos_Widow“Arachnos Widows, along with Arachnos Soldiers, are one of the two Epic Archetypes for Villains. They are available to players who are VIP or who have purchased an unlock from the Paragon Market. All Arachnos Widows are of Natural origin. While all NPC Widows and Fortunata are female, PCs may be either gender. An Arachnos Widow is called Widow in the targeting window.Characters with Widow Training begin their careers as Blood Widows. Blood Widow characters begin with modest melee, ranged and buff skills. Beginning at level 24, they may choose to switch to the "Fortunata" path or remain on the "Widow" path and become "Night Widows." Night Widows gain considerably stronger melee capabilities, and only have modest ranged abilities, while those who go with the Fortunata path learn stronger ranged attack abilities and control abilities.Arachnos Widows who go the Night Widow route gain the ability to do automatic critical damage with any of their primary melee attacks when attacking from Hidden status. These criticals do one and two-thirds times normal damage. Night Widows become Hidden the same way Stalkers do, by using their primary Mask Presence or Placate power. (However, the stealth granted by Mask presence is less than that granted by a Stalker's Hide, and Night Widows must also use their Smoke Grenade power, or some other source of Stealth or enemy -Perception, to approach their target reliably.) Fortunatas are also able to perform this type of attack using the Fortunata Mask Presence power, however, lacking Placate or Smoke Grenade, they are unable to do so as often.Alignment: VillainThe Arachnos Widow's power sets are:Primary: TrainingSecondary: Teamwork”

Ancillary Power Pools“Ancillary Power Pools, also known as Epic Power Pools, become available to hero-aligned and villain-aligned characters at level 35. A character can only select one Ancillary Power Pool. Additionally, Patron Power Pools open at level 35, but require doing a Patron arc to unlock, so only characters of villain alignment can unlock these pools (though they stay unlocked for that character regardless of alignment after unlocking).Warshades, Peacebringers, Arachnos Soldiers and Arachnos Widows do not get access to Ancillary Power Pools.Unlike the regular Power Pools, these are restricted by Archetype. The powers in these pools are selected from other Archetypes, and are designed to give each Archetype access to types of abilities that they do not normally have: holds and ranged attacks for melee Archetypes, armors for ranged Archetypes, etc.Just like the regular Power Pools, you can choose a different APP/PPP during a respec.”

https://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Ancillary_Power_Pools

OR… If you were a Villain or switched from Hero to Villain…

Patron Power Pools“Patron Power Pools are the villain equivalent of Ancillary Power Pools, and attempt to balance the Archetypes' builds. Unlike Ancillary Powers, Patron Powers must be earned by completing a story arc that becomes available for a Villain at Level 35. The Villain can see Arbiter Rein, who then outlines the gravity of the situation in choosing an Arachnos Patron: Black Scorpion, Captain Mako, Ghost Widow, and Scirocco. Once selected, the story arc leads the Villain on a quest to become a true disciple of the Patron, with an Accolade rewarded at the end and all four Patron Power Pools being unlocked within the level selection screen.The powersets also have the same name for each patron, regardless of Archetype. There are only four Patron Powersets to choose from with any Archetype, however the powers within them are complementary to the Villain's Archetype, similar to Ancillary Power Pools.You must select a Patron before you can take any Patron Power Pools powers. Also note that it is possible to play through City of Villains without choosing a Patron Power Pool. The power-enabled levels (35, 41, and 44) will still present the available legal choices from your primary and secondary sets, general Power Pools, as well as the Ancillary Power Pools (excluding Arachnos Soldiers and Arachnos Widows) from City of Heroes (which can be chosen without having to become a hero).”

https://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Patron_Power_Pools

PLUS

Common Skill Resource used for ALL classes…https://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Endurance“Endurance is one of the key characteristics used in the CoX universe. All player characters and opponents have Endurance.Endurance represents the amount of energy a character has to conduct actions. It slowly recovers over time but is diminished by using powers. It may also be drained by enemies using certain powers, indicated by -Endurance or -End in the power's effects.All player characters start with a maximum of 100 Endurance. Through set bonuses, Temporary Powers and Accolades, this maximum can be increased, as can the ongoing recovery rate of endurance. A character can never have more than their maximum endurance - any boost (either over time or instant) that would put them over their maximum is capped to their maximum, and the rest is wasted.”

Common Skill Pools available to ALL classes…https://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Power_Pools“Power Pools are supplemental power sets available to all archetypes, beyond the primary and secondary power sets selected during character creation. A character may select powers from up to four power pools per build. Unlike primary and secondary archetype power sets, a character may change their power pools during a respec. Each power pool has either four or five powers, which are unlocked at various levels, as described below.Pool powers aren't as effective as their cousins in primary and secondary power sets. However, they can be used to cover a weakness in your power sets (Aid Self for a Blaster), provide support abilities to your teammates (Maneuvers for a Defender), or have a surprising twist or contradiction on your Archetype and power sets (Provoke for a Mastermind). The Travel Powers also come from the power pools. Utilizing power pools may require skipping one or more powers in the primary or secondary power sets of the character.”

Common skill pools available to earn on ALL classes at max level…https://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Incarnate_System“The Incarnate System is the name of the end game content, first unveiled in Issue 19: Alpha Strike.The system features new content, abilities, and rewards for level 50 characters. As player characters work through the content, they will be given rewards to unlock special Incarnate slots and special salvage to craft boosts and powers that will increase the capabilities of Level 50 characters. In turn, these characters will need the added abilities in order to work through subsequent and more difficult content.”

Common “potions” available to ALL classes…

https://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Inspirations“Inspirations are single-use temporary boosts. There are several different inspiration types that provide various ability increases. Three inspirations of the same type can be combined into one inspiration of different type.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"UNOwen.7132" 'Maybe you missed this too...

And just a reminder...

“lowers gameplay diversity”"you lose a lot of diversity and design space for absolutely no good reason at all"“You have yet to bring up a single, solitary game that supports your point”...

https://massivelyop.com/2019/03/28/massively-overthinking-thoughts-on-the-holy-trinity-in-mmos/

“ Brianna Royce (@nbrianna, blog): Fun fact: I still remember when “holy trinity” meant tank, healer, and mezzer – the DPS players were a given, the warm bodies that filled out the rest of the group, and not part of the trinity back in the early pre-WoW days of MMO group content. The fact that this shifted over time really says all you need to know about how MMO class and combat design have changed, and not necessarily for the better.

Don’t mistake me; I no longer believe we need or must respect a trinity of either type. But what I truly resent is the loss of class variation and combat flow that naturally accompanied the demise of the classic trinity, specifically the fact that crowd control, buffing, and debuffing classes have all but disappeared in the modern rush to make nearly everyone a damage-dealer, even the healers and tanks.

As an example, I can still think of none better than City of Heroes, which offered all of the old trinity and new trinity class types (and then some) but made none of them actually mandatory to clear content. Yes, tanks and healers and CCers and buffers and debuffers and damage dealers all existed, but it was completely possible to get through the game with no healers, or all healers. With a scrapper tanking ahead of a fleet of corruptors. With a stalker and four controllers. With three bubblers and three tankers. Whatever. I don’t want to see strict trinity MMOs, but I’m even grumpier about the “everyone deeps” MMOs even more, especially when the end result is kitten combat where nobody ever has control over the fight. It didn’t have to be that way, but modernish devs keep reinventing the wheel, convinced they can do better. Maybe someday, they will, but so far, nah.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jugglemonkey.8741 said:

@GDchiaScrub.3241 said:I will say that chill needs to affect thieve's initiative skills in some way. It seems an oversight that they're the least impacted by that conditional effect of recharge-time slowing. Unless I'm not noticing something...

D:Just addressing this point, you're correct in that chill affects thieves the least because of initiative, but by the same token quickness also affects thieves the least because it does not affect initiative gain. If you want chill to affect initiative gain negatively there's no good reason to not have quickness affect it positively, and given how easy it is to cleanse chill on thief I'm pretty sure you'll dislike that scenario more than the current one.

You mean alacrity?

D:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@GDchiaScrub.3241 said:

@GDchiaScrub.3241 said:I will say that chill needs to affect thieve's initiative skills in some way. It seems an oversight that they're the least impacted by that conditional effect of recharge-time slowing. Unless I'm not noticing something...

D:Just addressing this point, you're correct in that chill affects thieves the least because of initiative, but by the same token quickness also affects thieves the least because it does not affect initiative gain. If you want chill to affect initiative gain negatively there's no good reason to not have quickness affect it positively, and given how easy it is to cleanse chill on thief I'm pretty sure you'll dislike that scenario more than the current one.

You mean alacrity?

D:

Either or. My point is that maybe chill, quickness and alacrity not affecting ini regen is actually a good thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jugglemonkey.8741 said:

@GDchiaScrub.3241 said:I will say that chill needs to affect thieve's initiative skills in some way. It seems an oversight that they're the least impacted by that conditional effect of recharge-time slowing. Unless I'm not noticing something...

D:Just addressing this point, you're correct in that chill affects thieves the least because of initiative, but by the same token quickness also affects thieves the least because it does not affect initiative gain. If you want chill to affect initiative gain negatively there's no good reason to not have quickness affect it positively, and given how easy it is to cleanse chill on thief I'm pretty sure you'll dislike that scenario more than the current one.

You mean alacrity?

D:

Either or. My point is that maybe chill, quickness and alacrity not affecting ini regen is actually a good thing.

I don't know why anyone would suggest quickness doing something to initiative regen (it doesn't in its current form).

Both Alacrity, and Chilled's cooldown-effect can be oversights. This isn't a mutually exclusive thing even if thief receives the least from both effects. Keep in mind from inception Thief was designed in a time Alacrity wasn't even a concept (it came with Chrono in HoT) while chilled was there in the beginning. Which is why I stated it as an oversight. Thank you finding another one in Alacrity. Furthermore, I don't even like Alacrity because it increases spam in general. The OP already doesn't like the "spam" in thief weapon skills, which I'm happy to say I wouldn't want to increase spam either. Luckily, I don't have to worry about Thieve's Alacrity output either for me to care about the hypothetical scenario their initiative regen benefited.

D:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@GDchiaScrub.3241 said:

@GDchiaScrub.3241 said:I will say that chill needs to affect thieve's initiative skills in some way. It seems an oversight that they're the least impacted by that conditional effect of recharge-time slowing. Unless I'm not noticing something...

D:Just addressing this point, you're correct in that chill affects thieves the least because of initiative, but by the same token quickness also affects thieves the least because it does not affect initiative gain. If you want chill to affect initiative gain negatively there's no good reason to not have quickness affect it positively, and given how easy it is to cleanse chill on thief I'm pretty sure you'll dislike that scenario more than the current one.

You mean alacrity?

D:

Either or. My point is that maybe chill, quickness and alacrity not affecting ini regen is actually a good thing.Keep in mind from inception Thief was designed in a time Alacrity wasn't even a concept (it came with Chrono in HoT) while chilled was there in the beginning.

Ok, everyone's keeping this in mind. How is this important here?

Which is why I stated it as an oversight. Thank you finding another one in Alacrity.

What kind of logic is this? How do you go from "chilled was there in the beginning" to "which is why I stated it was oversight"? Even moreso when you suggest the opposite makes sense too when it comes to alacrity. I can't connect the dots here.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sobx.1758 said:

@GDchiaScrub.3241 said:I will say that chill needs to affect thieve's initiative skills in some way. It seems an oversight that they're the least impacted by that conditional effect of recharge-time slowing. Unless I'm not noticing something...

D:Just addressing this point, you're correct in that chill affects thieves the least because of initiative, but by the same token quickness also affects thieves the least because it does not affect initiative gain. If you want chill to affect initiative gain negatively there's no good reason to not have quickness affect it positively, and given how easy it is to cleanse chill on thief I'm pretty sure you'll dislike that scenario more than the current one.

You mean alacrity?

D:

Either or. My point is that maybe chill, quickness and alacrity not affecting ini regen is actually a good thing.Keep in mind from inception Thief was designed in a time Alacrity wasn't even a concept (it came with Chrono in HoT) while chilled was there in the beginning.

Ok, everyone's keeping this in mind. How is this important here?

Because when they were designing thief's initiative resource the condition chilled existed with its cooldown debuff. Alacrity wasn't present until HoT, so it couldn't have been possible to consider Alacrity in the beginning. I don't really see how that's hard to understand. Clearly they chose to stay the course and ignore cooldown related things when it came to thieve's initiative based skills with the inclusion of Alacrity.

Which is why I stated it as an oversight. Thank you finding another one in Alacrity.

What kind of logic is this? How do you go from "chilled was there in the beginning" to "which is why I stated it was oversight"? Even moreso when you suggest the opposite makes sense too when it comes to alacrity. I can't connect the dots here.

I'm starting to think this is turning into a semantics issue only to derail the topic. Forget the term oversight. I also never said quickness should affect quickness, so we can forget that boon too. What is agreed is that both Alacrity, and Chilled cooldown debuff affect Thief's initiative the least. My opinion is I don't like boons/conditions affecting a classes unequally unless the game revolved around it more heavily (GW2 doesn't). I don't care if thief can clear chilled (if they spec for it which isn't hard) nor do I care that they lack Alacrity application anyway (which is hard to spec for). The OP wants to upend the Thief's initiative system with the goal to reduce it's perceived spam (and a lot of other game "balance"). If spam was truly the problem with thief then the easiest solution is to raise initiative costs on select skills, or a function change like turning a duel attack into two skills. Easiest doesn't necessarily mean best of course.

D:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Swagger.1459 said:@"UNOwen.7132" 'Maybe you missed this too...

And just a reminder...

“lowers gameplay diversity”"you lose a lot of diversity and design space for absolutely no good reason at all"“You have yet to bring up a single, solitary game that supports your point”...

https://massivelyop.com/2019/03/28/massively-overthinking-thoughts-on-the-holy-trinity-in-mmos/

“ Brianna Royce (@nbrianna, blog): Fun fact: I still remember when “holy trinity” meant tank, healer, and mezzer – the DPS players were a given, the warm bodies that filled out the rest of the group, and not part of the trinity back in the early pre-WoW days of MMO group content. The fact that this shifted over time really says all you need to know about how MMO class and combat design have changed, and not necessarily for the better.

Don’t mistake me; I no longer believe we need or must respect a trinity of either type. But what I truly resent is the loss of class variation and combat flow that naturally accompanied the demise of the classic trinity, specifically the fact that crowd control, buffing, and debuffing classes have all but disappeared in the modern rush to make nearly everyone a damage-dealer, even the healers and tanks.

As an example, I can still think of none better than City of Heroes, which offered all of the old trinity and new trinity class types (and then some) but made none of them actually mandatory to clear content. Yes, tanks and healers and CCers and buffers and debuffers and damage dealers all existed, but it was completely possible to get through the game with no healers, or all healers. With a scrapper tanking ahead of a fleet of corruptors. With a stalker and four controllers. With three bubblers and three tankers. Whatever. I don’t want to see strict trinity MMOs, but I’m even grumpier about the “everyone deeps” MMOs even more, especially when the end result is kitten combat where nobody ever has control over the fight. It didn’t have to be that way, but modernish devs keep reinventing the wheel, convinced they can do better. Maybe someday, they will, but so far, nah.”

Holy wall of text. Well, Im not gonna read all of it, mainly because that is too much effort, and I remember CoH anyway. Yes, CoH had less gameplay diversity. Having many different sets of numbers didnt change the fact that the moment to moment gameplay boiled down to the same basic concept for (almost) all characters. And of course, the design space was much, much narrower. Thats why so many skills were just variations of the same basic concept (or even just the same skill with different damage values).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@GDchiaScrub.3241 said:

@GDchiaScrub.3241 said:I will say that chill needs to affect thieve's initiative skills in some way. It seems an oversight that they're the least impacted by that conditional effect of recharge-time slowing. Unless I'm not noticing something...

D:Just addressing this point, you're correct in that chill affects thieves the least because of initiative, but by the same token quickness also affects thieves the least because it does not affect initiative gain. If you want chill to affect initiative gain negatively there's no good reason to not have quickness affect it positively, and given how easy it is to cleanse chill on thief I'm pretty sure you'll dislike that scenario more than the current one.

You mean alacrity?

D:

Either or. My point is that maybe chill, quickness and alacrity not affecting ini regen is actually a good thing.Keep in mind from inception Thief was designed in a time Alacrity wasn't even a concept (it came with Chrono in HoT) while chilled was there in the beginning.

Ok, everyone's keeping this in mind. How is this important here?

Because when they were designing thief's initiative resource the condition
chilled
existed with its cooldown debuff. Alacrity wasn't present until HoT, so it couldn't have been possible to consider Alacrity in the beginning. I don't really see how that's hard to understand. Clearly they chose to stay the course and ignore cooldown related things when it came to thieve's initiative based skills with the inclusion of Alacrity.

It's hard to understand because you seemed to be claiming something along the lines of "chilled could be an oversight because it existed since the beginning" while at the same time claiming "alacrity could be an oversight because it didn't exist since the beginning". Also 2 things being designed at the similar time in no way implies an oversight, so that chilling conclusion is "a bit" random in the first place. Hence me saying I can't connect the dots, because I still don't see the line between that statement and the conclusion.If it was an oversight -which I doubt- they could easly fix it at the very least when they introduced the alacrity. You seem to understand that fact based on what you're saying now (as opposed to "Both Alacrity, and Chilled's cooldown-effect can be oversights" from previous post), so I'm still not sure why you'd try to claim chill is/was an oversight.Overally I don't understand the point you're trying to make here and my confusion comes exactly from you contradicting yourself even after you made your weirdly disconnected conclusions.

Which is why I stated it as an oversight. Thank you finding another one in Alacrity.

What kind of logic is this? How do you go from "chilled was there in the beginning" to "which is why I stated it was oversight"? Even moreso when you suggest the opposite makes sense too when it comes to alacrity. I can't connect the dots here.

I'm starting to think this is turning into a semantics issue only to derail the topic. Forget the term oversight. I also never said quickness should affect quickness, so we can forget that boon too.

You're the one that started talking about chill, not sure how it's suddenly me who's derailing the discussion. And your disconnected conclusions making no sense doesn't have anything to do with semantics. It's just that your argument made no sense to the point you started contradicting yourself soon after.

And I don't know what you mean about quickness affecting quickness. Someone wrote "quickness" instead of "alacrity", I think now it's clear for everyone involved and I never even mentioned that in the first place.

What is agreed is that both Alacrity, and Chilled cooldown debuff affect Thief's initiative the least. My opinion is I don't like boons/conditions affecting a classes unequally unless the game revolved around it more heavily (GW2 doesn't). I don't care if thief can clear chilled (if they spec for it which isn't hard) nor do I care that they lack Alacrity application anyway (which is hard to spec for). The OP wants to upend the Thief's initiative system with the goal to reduce it's perceived spam (and a lot of other game "balance"). If spam was truly the problem with thief then the easiest solution is to raise initiative costs on select skills, or a function change like turning a duel attack into two skills. Easiest doesn't necessarily mean best of course.

Yes, they affect it the least, they're pretty much the opposite of each other and it's fine to have a mechanic that's unaffected by both. You don't like it and you're free to do so, there's not much to argue about here, because you either like something or you don't. If "I don't like it" is all you want to say here, then there's nothing to talk about. It's just that your claim that about chill and alacrity being an oversight didn't make much sense.

D:

Does this emote has any purpose in your posts?

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sobx.1758 said:

@"JugglemonkeySoHeCanStopBeingSpammed.8741" said:

@"JugglemonkeySoHeCanStopBeingSpammed.8741" said:

@GDchiaScrub.3241 said:I will say that chill needs to affect thieve's initiative skills in some way. It seems an oversight that they're the least impacted by that conditional effect of recharge-time slowing. Unless I'm not noticing something...

D:Just addressing this point, you're correct in that chill affects thieves the least because of initiative, but by the same token quickness also affects thieves the least because it does not affect initiative gain. If you want chill to affect initiative gain negatively there's no good reason to not have quickness affect it positively, and given how easy it is to cleanse chill on thief I'm pretty sure you'll dislike that scenario more than the current one.

You mean alacrity?

D:

Either or. My point is that maybe chill, quickness and alacrity not affecting ini regen is actually a good thing.Keep in mind from inception Thief was designed in a time Alacrity wasn't even a concept (it came with Chrono in HoT) while chilled was there in the beginning.

Ok, everyone's keeping this in mind. How is this important here?

Because when they were designing thief's initiative resource the condition
chilled
existed with its cooldown debuff. Alacrity wasn't present until HoT, so it couldn't have been possible to consider Alacrity in the beginning. I don't really see how that's hard to understand. Clearly they chose to stay the course and ignore cooldown related things when it came to thieve's initiative based skills with the inclusion of Alacrity.

It's hard to understand because you seemed to be claiming something along the lines of "
chilled could be an oversight because it existed since the beginning
" while at the same time claiming "
alacrity could be an oversight because it didn't exist since the beginning
". Also 2 things being designed at the similar time in no way implies an oversight, so that chilling conclusion is "a bit" random in the first place. Hence me saying I can't connect the dots, because I still don't see the line between that statement and the conclusion.If it was an oversight -which I doubt- they could easly fix it at the very least when they introduced the alacrity. You seem to understand that fact based on what you're saying
now
(as opposed to "
Both Alacrity, and Chilled's cooldown-effect can be oversights
" from previous post), so I'm still not sure why you'd try to claim chill is/was an oversight.Overally I don't understand the point you're trying to make here and my confusion comes exactly from you contradicting yourself even after you made your weirdly disconnected conclusions.

No. This is not my intention at all. I didn't view chill in a vacuum completely disconnected from everything else with only it's mere existence in the beginning as the sole argument. That is too much simplification. I viewed it as connected to thief's design philosophy of initiative. If they were designed in parallel, then it was reasonable for me to assume ANET considered how the class would interact with the conditions present (chill in this case). If they didn't care that half the effect of chill played no role on initiative then technically no. They could have chose to ignore it in their own design, and thus it's not an "oversight" since I can't read minds. It was the inconsistency that made me perceive it as an "oversight." "It seems an oversight that they're the least impacted." - Me

Which is why I stated it as an oversight. Thank you finding another one in Alacrity.

What kind of logic is this? How do you go from "chilled was there in the beginning" to "which is why I stated it was oversight"? Even moreso when you suggest the opposite makes sense too when it comes to alacrity. I can't connect the dots here.

I'm starting to think this is turning into a semantics issue only to derail the topic. Forget the term oversight. I also never said quickness should affect quickness, so we can forget that boon too.

Which is why I bring up semantics. It was more accurate to give my opinion below instead of sticking to "it's an oversight." While true I used "stated" like "I said," but my perception of "Oversight" is not factual. Still can't read ANET's mind. "Oversight" was probably hyperbolic that only aided in your confusion.

You're the one that started talking about chill, not sure how it's suddenly me who's derailing the discussion. And your disconnected conclusions making no sense doesn't have anything to do with semantics. It's just that your argument made no sense to the point you started contradicting yourself soon after.

And I don't know what you mean about quickness affecting quickness. Someone wrote "quickness" instead of "alacrity", I think now it's clear for everyone involved and I never even mentioned that in the first place.

Yes, I did start with chill. OP doesn't like spam. Slow and Chill are two counter plays to reduce "spam." I didn't fully support OP's way of dealing with balance, but I also don't like spam. That someone (Juggles) didn't throw out quickness so I had to reiterate, but they agreed with alacrity being another issue. Unless either or has a different interpretation. "Either or. My point is that maybe chill, quickness and alacrity not affecting ini regen is actually a good thing." - Juggle

What is agreed is that both Alacrity, and Chilled cooldown debuff affect Thief's initiative the least. My opinion is I don't like boons/conditions affecting a classes unequally unless the game revolved around it more heavily (GW2 doesn't). I don't care if thief can clear chilled (if they spec for it which isn't hard) nor do I care that they lack Alacrity application anyway (which is hard to spec for). The OP wants to upend the Thief's initiative system with the goal to reduce it's perceived spam (and a lot of other game "balance"). If spam was truly the problem with thief then the easiest solution is to raise initiative costs on select skills, or a function change like turning a duel attack into two skills. Easiest doesn't necessarily mean best of course.

Yes, they affect it the least, they're pretty much the opposite of each other and it's fine to have a mechanic that's unaffected by both. You don't like it and you're free to do so, there's not much to argue about here, because you either like something or you don't. If "I don't like it" is all you want to say here, then there's nothing to talk about. It's just that your claim that about chill and alacrity being an oversight didn't make much sense.

Opposite? Technically Alacrity would need a movement speed increase a well. Not really for buffing Alacrity with speed. Regardless of nitpicking, ANET is allowed to do whatever they feel fit, just as you are also allowed to like/dislike it. The forums are place to share opinions, and many dislike/like ANET's balance yet they come to "discuss" it here anyway. If you feel me calling it an oversight is hyperbolic that's fine too.

Since you were confused I will give a shot by shot remake:

  1. OP wants to change up Anet's balance (resource mechanics in this case).
  2. I wasn't fully on board with OP, but I did say there was a small inconsistency in chill affecting cooldowns/resources for some classes .
  3. OP felt thief was particularly spammy, so I said thief (although some rev utility stuff doesn't have a "cooldown" either, but they aren't necessarily effective if "spammed")
  4. Alacrity was also brought up as a inconsistency in regards to cooldowns on classes that might not have them.
  5. I stated thief was created in an environment where Chilled already existed, but Alacrity did not thus leaning me towards mentioning Chilled first. This mention didn't exclude the existence of Alacrity being in a similar vein.
  6. Confusion was created because I presumed everyone would know the long thought process that also required knowledge of the game from the beginning..
  7. I need to remember that people can't read minds, and might require more than a Twitter Post's length.
  8. Still not on board with upending a system, but I guess giving my opinion on Chilled is too much. Want to know what I think of Weakness?

D:

Does this emote has any purpose in your posts?

Yes.

D:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@GDchiaScrub.3241 said:

@"JugglemonkeySoHeCanStopBeingSpammed.8741" said:

@"JugglemonkeySoHeCanStopBeingSpammed.8741" said:

@GDchiaScrub.3241 said:I will say that chill needs to affect thieve's initiative skills in some way. It seems an oversight that they're the least impacted by that conditional effect of recharge-time slowing. Unless I'm not noticing something...

D:Just addressing this point, you're correct in that chill affects thieves the least because of initiative, but by the same token quickness also affects thieves the least because it does not affect initiative gain. If you want chill to affect initiative gain negatively there's no good reason to not have quickness affect it positively, and given how easy it is to cleanse chill on thief I'm pretty sure you'll dislike that scenario more than the current one.

You mean alacrity?

D:

Either or. My point is that maybe chill, quickness and alacrity not affecting ini regen is actually a good thing.Keep in mind from inception Thief was designed in a time Alacrity wasn't even a concept (it came with Chrono in HoT) while chilled was there in the beginning.

Ok, everyone's keeping this in mind. How is this important here?

Because when they were designing thief's initiative resource the condition
chilled
existed with its cooldown debuff. Alacrity wasn't present until HoT, so it couldn't have been possible to consider Alacrity in the beginning. I don't really see how that's hard to understand. Clearly they chose to stay the course and ignore cooldown related things when it came to thieve's initiative based skills with the inclusion of Alacrity.

It's hard to understand because you seemed to be claiming something along the lines of "
chilled could be an oversight because it existed since the beginning
" while at the same time claiming "
alacrity could be an oversight because it didn't exist since the beginning
". Also 2 things being designed at the similar time in no way implies an oversight, so that chilling conclusion is "a bit" random in the first place. Hence me saying I can't connect the dots, because I still don't see the line between that statement and the conclusion.If it was an oversight -which I doubt- they could easly fix it at the very least when they introduced the alacrity. You seem to understand that fact based on what you're saying
now
(as opposed to "
Both Alacrity, and Chilled's cooldown-effect can be oversights
" from previous post), so I'm still not sure why you'd try to claim chill is/was an oversight.Overally I don't understand the point you're trying to make here and my confusion comes exactly from you contradicting yourself even after you made your weirdly disconnected conclusions.

No. This is not my intention at all. I didn't view chill in a vacuum completely disconnected from everything else with only it's mere existence in the beginning as the sole argument. That is too much simplification. I viewed it as connected to thief's design philosophy of initiative. If they were designed in parallel, then it was reasonable for me to assume ANET considered how the class would interact with the conditions present (chill in this case). If they didn't care that half the effect of chill played no role on initiative then technically no. They could have chose to ignore it in their own design, and thus it's not an "oversight" since I can't read minds. It was the inconsistency that made me perceive it as an "oversight." "It
seems
an oversight that they're the least impacted." - Me

I didn't say anything about vacuum, at which point I simplified anything here? Unless you mean you're the one that simplified your own thoughts here, at which point I'm not sure why you were so surprised about someone else misunderstanding what you're trying to say. Because what you actually said didn't make much sense.And there was/is no inconsistency about how it works -actually it IS more consistent this way.

Which is why I stated it as an oversight. Thank you finding another one in Alacrity.

What kind of logic is this? How do you go from "chilled was there in the beginning" to "which is why I stated it was oversight"? Even moreso when you suggest the opposite makes sense too when it comes to alacrity. I can't connect the dots here.

I'm starting to think this is turning into a semantics issue only to derail the topic. Forget the term oversight. I also never said quickness should affect quickness, so we can forget that boon too.

Which is why I bring up semantics. It was more accurate to give my opinion below instead of sticking to "it's an oversight." While true I used "stated" like "I said," but my perception of "Oversight" is not factual. Still can't read ANET's mind. "Oversight" was probably hyperbolic that only aided in your confusion.

Ok, makes sense. But then if you don't explain exactly what you think then don't act surprised about someone taking your simplification and saying it doesn't make much sense when it doesn't. :x

What is agreed is that both Alacrity, and Chilled cooldown debuff affect Thief's initiative the least. My opinion is I don't like boons/conditions affecting a classes unequally unless the game revolved around it more heavily (GW2 doesn't). I don't care if thief can clear chilled (if they spec for it which isn't hard) nor do I care that they lack Alacrity application anyway (which is hard to spec for). The OP wants to upend the Thief's initiative system with the goal to reduce it's perceived spam (and a lot of other game "balance"). If spam was truly the problem with thief then the easiest solution is to raise initiative costs on select skills, or a function change like turning a duel attack into two skills. Easiest doesn't necessarily mean best of course.

Yes, they affect it the least, they're pretty much the opposite of each other and it's fine to have a mechanic that's unaffected by both. You don't like it and you're free to do so, there's not much to argue about here, because you either like something or you don't. If "I don't like it" is all you want to say here, then there's nothing to talk about. It's just that your claim that about chill and alacrity being an oversight didn't make much sense.

Opposite? Technically Alacrity would need a movement speed increase a well. Not really for buffing Alacrity with speed.

Yup, "PRETTY MUCH" opposite in the context we're talking about in addition to the other part of chill actually affecting thief, so not sure why we'd talk about the slow here -it's irrelevant and works the same as for other classes. If alacrity gave the speed to be LITERALLY the opposite of chill, thief would be affected by it as well, so it would still be irrelevant.Bottom line, I know what they do, so no worries here.

Regardless of nitpicking, ANET is allowed to do whatever they feel fit, just as you are also allowed to like/dislike it. The forums are place to share opinions, and many dislike/like ANET's balance yet they come to "discuss" it here anyway. If you feel me calling it an oversight is hyperbolic that's fine too.

Sure, didn't I literally say that if you just came to say that "you dislike it", then there's not much to talk about here? I'm not trying to change your opinion, what I said was that your simplified/hyperbolic statement that tried to serve as a justification didn't make much sense -because it didn't. Still free to dislike the mechanic.

Since you were confused I will give a shot by shot remake:

  1. OP wants to change up Anet's balance (resource mechanics in this case).
  2. I wasn't fully on board with OP, but I did say there was a small inconsistency in chill affecting cooldowns/resources for some classes .
  3. OP felt thief was particularly spammy, so I said thief (although some rev utility stuff doesn't have a "cooldown" either, but they aren't necessarily effective if "spammed")
  4. Alacrity was also brought up as a inconsistency in regards to cooldowns on classes that might not have them.
  5. I stated thief was created in an environment where Chilled already existed, but Alacrity did not thus leaning me towards mentioning Chilled first. This mention didn't exclude the existence of Alacrity being in a similar vein.
  6. Confusion was created because I presumed everyone would know the long thought process that also required knowledge of the game from the beginning..
  7. I need to remember that people can't read minds, and might require more than a Twitter Post's length.
  8. Still not on board with upending a system, but I guess giving my opinion on Chilled is too much. Want to know what I think of Weakness?

Thanks for the recap clearing up previous posts, remembering about people not reading minds seems to be important :p aaaaaand I still think that a skill that slows down cd recharge time not affecting skills without said cooldown is more consistent than inconsistent, but I guess we'll need to agree to disagree on that one, w/e.

D:

Does this emote has any purpose in your posts?

Yes.

D:

What purpose exactly is it? :blush:

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sobx.1758 said:

@"JugglemonkeySoHeCanStopBeingSpammed.8741" said:

@"JugglemonkeySoHeCanStopBeingSpammed.8741" said:

@GDchiaScrub.3241 said:I will say that chill needs to affect thieve's initiative skills in some way. It seems an oversight that they're the least impacted by that conditional effect of recharge-time slowing. Unless I'm not noticing something...

D:Just addressing this point, you're correct in that chill affects thieves the least because of initiative, but by the same token quickness also affects thieves the least because it does not affect initiative gain. If you want chill to affect initiative gain negatively there's no good reason to not have quickness affect it positively, and given how easy it is to cleanse chill on thief I'm pretty sure you'll dislike that scenario more than the current one.

You mean alacrity?

D:

Either or. My point is that maybe chill, quickness and alacrity not affecting ini regen is actually a good thing.Keep in mind from inception Thief was designed in a time Alacrity wasn't even a concept (it came with Chrono in HoT) while chilled was there in the beginning.

Ok, everyone's keeping this in mind. How is this important here?

Because when they were designing thief's initiative resource the condition
chilled
existed with its cooldown debuff. Alacrity wasn't present until HoT, so it couldn't have been possible to consider Alacrity in the beginning. I don't really see how that's hard to understand. Clearly they chose to stay the course and ignore cooldown related things when it came to thieve's initiative based skills with the inclusion of Alacrity.

It's hard to understand because you seemed to be claiming something along the lines of "
chilled could be an oversight because it existed since the beginning
" while at the same time claiming "
alacrity could be an oversight because it didn't exist since the beginning
". Also 2 things being designed at the similar time in no way implies an oversight, so that chilling conclusion is "a bit" random in the first place. Hence me saying I can't connect the dots, because I still don't see the line between that statement and the conclusion.If it was an oversight -which I doubt- they could easly fix it at the very least when they introduced the alacrity. You seem to understand that fact based on what you're saying
now
(as opposed to "
Both Alacrity, and Chilled's cooldown-effect can be oversights
" from previous post), so I'm still not sure why you'd try to claim chill is/was an oversight.Overally I don't understand the point you're trying to make here and my confusion comes exactly from you contradicting yourself even after you made your weirdly disconnected conclusions.

No. This is not my intention at all. I didn't view chill in a vacuum completely disconnected from everything else with only it's mere existence in the beginning as the sole argument. That is too much simplification. I viewed it as connected to thief's design philosophy of initiative
[skills]
. If they were designed in parallel, then it was reasonable for me to assume ANET considered how the class would interact with the conditions present (chill in this case). If they didn't care that half the effect of chill played no role on initiative
[skills]
then technically no. They could have chose to ignore it in their own design, and thus it's not an "oversight" since I can't read minds. It was the inconsistency that made me perceive it as an "oversight." "It
seems
an oversight that they're the least impacted." - Me

I didn't say anything about vacuum, at which point I simplified anything here? Unless you mean you're the one that simplified your own thoughts here, at which point I'm not sure why you were so surprised about someone else misunderstanding what you're trying to say. Because what you actually said didn't make much sense.And there was/is no inconsistency about how it works -actually it IS more consistent this way.

Should have said initiative skills this whole time, and not just the word initiative. RIP.

Which is why I stated it as an oversight. Thank you finding another one in Alacrity.

What kind of logic is this? How do you go from "chilled was there in the beginning" to "which is why I stated it was oversight"? Even moreso when you suggest the opposite makes sense too when it comes to alacrity. I can't connect the dots here.

I'm starting to think this is turning into a semantics issue only to derail the topic. Forget the term oversight. I also never said quickness should affect quickness, so we can forget that boon too.

Which is why I bring up semantics. It was more accurate to give my opinion below instead of sticking to "it's an oversight." While true I used "stated" like "I said," but my perception of "Oversight" is not factual. Still can't read ANET's mind. "Oversight" was probably hyperbolic that only aided in your confusion.

Ok, makes sense. But then if you don't explain exactly what you think then don't act surprised about someone taking your simplification and saying it doesn't make much sense when it doesn't. :x

What is agreed is that both Alacrity, and Chilled cooldown debuff affect Thief's initiative the least. My opinion is I don't like boons/conditions affecting a classes unequally unless the game revolved around it more heavily (GW2 doesn't). I don't care if thief can clear chilled (if they spec for it which isn't hard) nor do I care that they lack Alacrity application anyway (which is hard to spec for). The OP wants to upend the Thief's initiative system with the goal to reduce it's perceived spam (and a lot of other game "balance"). If spam was truly the problem with thief then the easiest solution is to raise initiative costs on select skills, or a function change like turning a duel attack into two skills. Easiest doesn't necessarily mean best of course.

Yes, they affect it the least, they're pretty much the opposite of each other and it's fine to have a mechanic that's unaffected by both. You don't like it and you're free to do so, there's not much to argue about here, because you either like something or you don't. If "I don't like it" is all you want to say here, then there's nothing to talk about. It's just that your claim that about chill and alacrity being an oversight didn't make much sense.

Opposite? Technically Alacrity would need a movement speed increase a well. Not really for buffing Alacrity with speed.

Yup, "PRETTY MUCH" opposite in the context we're talking about in addition to the other part of chill actually affecting thief, so not sure why we'd talk about the slow here -it's irrelevant and works the same as for other classes. If alacrity gave the speed to be LITERALLY the opposite of chill, thief would be affected by it as well, so it would still be irrelevant.Bottom line, I know what they do, so no worries here.

Regardless of nitpicking, ANET is allowed to do whatever they feel fit, just as you are also allowed to like/dislike it. The forums are place to share opinions, and many dislike/like ANET's balance yet they come to "discuss" it here anyway. If you feel me calling it an oversight is hyperbolic that's fine too.

Sure, didn't I literally say that if you just came to say that "you dislike it", then there's not much to talk about here? I'm not trying to change your opinion, what I said was that your
simplified/hyperbolic statement
that tried to serve as a justification didn't make much sense -because it didn't. Still free to dislike the mechanic.

I should have made a longer post that was riddled with sarcasm and snark as my first post hoping it'd get the attention of the OP so I could then get in a long thread war with them simply to say, "I dislike their ideas, and those ideas wouldn't work." Live by your example, no?

Since you were confused I will give a shot by shot remake:
  1. OP wants to change up Anet's balance (resource mechanics in this case).
  2. I wasn't fully on board with OP, but I did say there was a small inconsistency in chill affecting cooldowns/resources for some classes .
  3. OP felt thief was particularly spammy, so I said thief (although some rev utility stuff doesn't have a "cooldown" either, but they aren't necessarily effective if "spammed")
  4. Alacrity was also brought up as a inconsistency in regards to cooldowns on classes that might not have them.
  5. I stated thief was created in an environment where Chilled already existed, but Alacrity did not thus leaning me towards mentioning Chilled first. This mention didn't exclude the existence of Alacrity being in a similar vein.
  6. Confusion was created because I presumed everyone would know the long thought process that also required knowledge of the game from the beginning..
  7. I need to remember that people can't read minds, and might require more than a Twitter Post's length.
  8. Still not on board with upending a system, but I guess giving my opinion on Chilled is too much. Want to know what I think of Weakness?

Thanks for the recap clearing up previous posts, remembering about people not reading minds seems to be important :p aaaaaand I still think that a skill that slows down cd recharge time not affecting skills without said cooldown is more consistent than inconsistent, but I guess we'll need to agree to disagree on that one, w/e.

Yes, the math is correct. A skill without cooldown wouldn't be affected by chilled/alacrity. Imagine if our 1 spam farm was hindered? Oh dear oh my the posts we'd see here. Obviously, not all skills without "cooldown" are auto attack skills. Rather, it's the idea that half of the thieves kit (the weapon skills) becomes immune because their "cooldown" (metaphorically speaking) is in their initiative, and not the standard per ability cooldown. A pew pew soulbeast weapon set is affected in contrast. I don't want to do what the OP wishes by scrapping the mechanical idea of mana, I mean initiative. ANET has already decided on this by keeping it so far. I doubt my dislike is going to change that. Furthermore, my original post was mostly about combo fields and the chill was the last thought. I even left open what that change to chill could be with the, "in some way." Others want things to stay the same, of course. Changing it's description to fit the special use cases of no-cooldown abilities would be irritating and inconsistent.

I'm guessing you wanted an example for these cooldown related boon/condis. There are three paths that can be taken, but theory crafting specifics will be beyond this topic (oh how far we have driven off course).:

! 1. Do Nothing. The most practical thing ANET can do, and requires no money that they probably don't have to waste on addressing this. Remember they did have to lay people off...! 2. Remove cooldown related boon/condi effects. The most dramatic thing, and risky because Alacrity is a feature for Chronos/Dat one Rev Build, and would make Chill another crap snare that would need to be altered. Hindsight is 20/20 after seeing that Alacrity is such a spam inducing mess. To think they even tried nerfing the crap out of mesmer! Shame.! 3. Alter functionality of Chilled and/or Alacrity. Similar results on changing Alacrity if people relied on its cooldown reducing benefits.!! Because I live in reality. I would choose option 1 given the practical circumstances like money, and the age of the game. Making a fiddly change wouldn't guarantee increased profit either. Pity. At best it'd need to be paired with a meaningful content update.

To conclude. I don't like chilled, but now I really-really-really don't like Alacrity. I somewhat support anyone's effort on reducing spam, but I don't think re-classing will be possible any time Soon™. Thanks team.

D:

Does this emote has any purpose in your posts?

Yes.

D:

What purpose exactly is it? :blush:

To make the pretty people blush. What is more attractive than a bad guy? Because I'm bad at everything bebe.

D:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@UNOwen.7132 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:@UNOwen.7132 'Maybe you missed this too...

And just a reminder...

“lowers gameplay diversity”"you lose a lot of diversity and design space for absolutely no good reason at all"“You have yet to bring up a single, solitary game that supports your point”...

“ Brianna Royce (@nbrianna, blog): Fun fact: I still remember when “holy trinity” meant tank, healer, and mezzer – the DPS players were a given, the warm bodies that filled out the rest of the group, and not part of the trinity back in the early pre-WoW days of MMO group content. The fact that this shifted over time really says all you need to know about how MMO class and combat design have changed, and not necessarily for the better.

Don’t mistake me; I no longer believe we need or must respect a trinity of either type. But what I truly resent is the loss of class variation and combat flow that naturally accompanied the demise of the classic trinity, specifically the fact that crowd control, buffing, and debuffing classes have all but disappeared in the modern rush to make nearly everyone a damage-dealer, even the healers and tanks.

As an example, I can still think of none better than City of Heroes, which offered all of the old trinity and new trinity class types (and then some) but made none of them actually mandatory to clear content. Yes, tanks and healers and CCers and buffers and debuffers and damage dealers all existed, but it was completely possible to get through the game with no healers, or all healers. With a scrapper tanking ahead of a fleet of corruptors. With a stalker and four controllers. With three bubblers and three tankers. Whatever. I don’t want to see strict trinity MMOs, but I’m even grumpier about the “everyone deeps” MMOs even more, especially when the end result is kitten combat where nobody ever has control over the fight. It didn’t have to be that way, but modernish devs keep reinventing the wheel, convinced they can do better. Maybe someday, they will, but so far, nah.”

Holy wall of text. Well, Im not gonna read all of it, mainly because that is too much effort, and I remember CoH anyway. Yes, CoH had less gameplay diversity. Having many different sets of numbers didnt change the fact that the moment to moment gameplay boiled down to the same basic concept for (almost) all characters. And of course, the design space was much,
much
narrower. Thats why so many skills were just variations of the same basic concept (or even just the same skill with different damage values).

So what we know... You edited out where you agreed about the issue with Necro. There are indeed examples of games that have common core designs. We learned that recharge timers are not “resources. And we also learned that there are games that use a common class foundation, but offer way more unique play styles, more unique roles and more unique skills than in GW2.

And you can try to deny those above facts with misinformation, spin doctoring and editing, but it won’t make what I brought up as incorrect... Only makes you look like you are here to argue for the sake of arguing because you don’t have a good grasp of things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seeking balance is what the Jedi did in Star Wars and we can see how that turned out.

Until GW2 elminates all classes/builds there will never be class balance since some class/build will always be meta over others just like virtually every other MMO. I would argue GW2 is actually one of the better class balanced MMOs with competitive scene out there. There isn't a single class that someone can point to that is under-served in WvW right now. Every class is "viable" for one role or another.

What would help is more meta diversity. Firebrands and Scourges dominate large scale and that needs to evolve with some gentle nerfs and gentle buffs to other zerg classes. WvW is missing composition variety which eliminates a lot of the comp theory crafting. WvW needs to be more rock/paper/scissors in the comp in large scale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Swagger.1459 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:@UNOwen.7132 'Maybe you missed this too...

And just a reminder...

“lowers gameplay diversity”"you lose a lot of diversity and design space for absolutely no good reason at all"“You have yet to bring up a single, solitary game that supports your point”...

“ Brianna Royce (@nbrianna, blog): Fun fact: I still remember when “holy trinity” meant tank, healer, and mezzer – the DPS players were a given, the warm bodies that filled out the rest of the group, and not part of the trinity back in the early pre-WoW days of MMO group content. The fact that this shifted over time really says all you need to know about how MMO class and combat design have changed, and not necessarily for the better.

Don’t mistake me; I no longer believe we need or must respect a trinity of either type. But what I truly resent is the loss of class variation and combat flow that naturally accompanied the demise of the classic trinity, specifically the fact that crowd control, buffing, and debuffing classes have all but disappeared in the modern rush to make nearly everyone a damage-dealer, even the healers and tanks.

As an example, I can still think of none better than City of Heroes, which offered all of the old trinity and new trinity class types (and then some) but made none of them actually mandatory to clear content. Yes, tanks and healers and CCers and buffers and debuffers and damage dealers all existed, but it was completely possible to get through the game with no healers, or all healers. With a scrapper tanking ahead of a fleet of corruptors. With a stalker and four controllers. With three bubblers and three tankers. Whatever. I don’t want to see strict trinity MMOs, but I’m even grumpier about the “everyone deeps” MMOs even more, especially when the end result is kitten combat where nobody ever has control over the fight. It didn’t have to be that way, but modernish devs keep reinventing the wheel, convinced they can do better. Maybe someday, they will, but so far, nah.”

Holy wall of text. Well, Im not gonna read all of it, mainly because that is too much effort, and I remember CoH anyway. Yes, CoH had less gameplay diversity. Having many different sets of numbers didnt change the fact that the moment to moment gameplay boiled down to the same basic concept for (almost) all characters. And of course, the design space was much,
much
narrower. Thats why so many skills were just variations of the same basic concept (or even just the same skill with different damage values).

So what we know... You edited out where you agreed about the issue with Necro. There are indeed examples of games that have common core designs. We learned that recharge timers are not “resources. And we also learned that there are games that use a common class foundation, but offer way more unique play styles, more unique roles and more unique skills than in GW2.

And you can try to deny those above facts with misinformation, spin doctoring and editing, but it won’t make what I brought up as incorrect... Only makes you look like you are here to argue for the sake of arguing because you don’t have a good grasp of things.

Except as you might be able to tell by the fact have that little message saying "edited X:XX AM/PM", I never edited that out, because I never even said it. There are games that have one shared common resource with no secondary resource to distinguish them, but they are in the vast minority, and generally not example of great design. Cooldowns are resources. Ironically theyre actually more relevant resources than most resources, given that in just about every game that has mana, its merely a formality youre not going to run out of in any normal gameplay scenario. And no, thats just what you want to believe, but fact is City of Heroes, while having great build diversity, had very low gameplay diversity. The playstyles were very same-y. The same cant be said for GW2.

I can deny those "facts" by pointing out theyre not facts in the first place. Theyre, at best, your opinion. And it seems that your opinion is not shared by many people. Not here, not in other games, not even in the game industry as a whole. The biggest, most popular and even the most well designed games all follow a paradigm similiar to, if not identical to GW2s. Whereas the only example you gave was a niche game that eventually failed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@UNOwen.7132 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:@UNOwen.7132 'Maybe you missed this too...

And just a reminder...

“lowers gameplay diversity”"you lose a lot of diversity and design space for absolutely no good reason at all"“You have yet to bring up a single, solitary game that supports your point”...

“ Brianna Royce (@nbrianna, blog): Fun fact: I still remember when “holy trinity” meant tank, healer, and mezzer – the DPS players were a given, the warm bodies that filled out the rest of the group, and not part of the trinity back in the early pre-WoW days of MMO group content. The fact that this shifted over time really says all you need to know about how MMO class and combat design have changed, and not necessarily for the better.

Don’t mistake me; I no longer believe we need or must respect a trinity of either type. But what I truly resent is the loss of class variation and combat flow that naturally accompanied the demise of the classic trinity, specifically the fact that crowd control, buffing, and debuffing classes have all but disappeared in the modern rush to make nearly everyone a damage-dealer, even the healers and tanks.

As an example, I can still think of none better than City of Heroes, which offered all of the old trinity and new trinity class types (and then some) but made none of them actually mandatory to clear content. Yes, tanks and healers and CCers and buffers and debuffers and damage dealers all existed, but it was completely possible to get through the game with no healers, or all healers. With a scrapper tanking ahead of a fleet of corruptors. With a stalker and four controllers. With three bubblers and three tankers. Whatever. I don’t want to see strict trinity MMOs, but I’m even grumpier about the “everyone deeps” MMOs even more, especially when the end result is kitten combat where nobody ever has control over the fight. It didn’t have to be that way, but modernish devs keep reinventing the wheel, convinced they can do better. Maybe someday, they will, but so far, nah.”

Holy wall of text. Well, Im not gonna read all of it, mainly because that is too much effort, and I remember CoH anyway. Yes, CoH had less gameplay diversity. Having many different sets of numbers didnt change the fact that the moment to moment gameplay boiled down to the same basic concept for (almost) all characters. And of course, the design space was much,
much
narrower. Thats why so many skills were just variations of the same basic concept (or even just the same skill with different damage values).

So what we know... You edited out where you agreed about the issue with Necro. There are indeed examples of games that have common core designs. We learned that recharge timers are not “resources. And we also learned that there are games that use a common class foundation, but offer way more unique play styles, more unique roles and more unique skills than in GW2.

And you can try to deny those above facts with misinformation, spin doctoring and editing, but it won’t make what I brought up as incorrect... Only makes you look like you are here to argue for the sake of arguing because you don’t have a good grasp of things.

Except as you might be able to tell by the fact have that little message saying "edited X:XX AM/PM", I never edited that out, because I never even said it. There are games that have one shared common resource with no secondary resource to distinguish them, but they are in the vast minority, and generally not example of great design. Cooldowns
are
resources. Ironically theyre actually more relevant resources than most resources, given that in just about every game that has mana, its merely a formality youre not going to run out of in any normal gameplay scenario. And no, thats just what you want to believe, but fact is City of Heroes, while having great
build
diversity, had very low
gameplay
diversity. The playstyles were very same-y. The same cant be said for GW2.

I can deny those "facts" by pointing out theyre not facts in the first place. Theyre, at best, your opinion. And it seems that your opinion is not shared by many people. Not here, not in other games, not even in the game industry as a whole. The biggest, most popular and even the most well designed games all follow a paradigm similiar to, if not identical to GW2s. Whereas the only example you gave was a niche game that eventually failed.

Lying about a comment you made, and edited out, that acknowledged the issues isn't helping you here...

Learn the differences before we continue...

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Recharge

"Recharge , alternatively cooldown or CD, is the interval of time (in seconds) after a skill or ability has been used before it can be used again."

Main wording... "interval of time"

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Energy

"Energy functions similarly to the thief's initiative mechanic, although many of the revenant's skills still have a recharge time. Most skills (except auto-attacks) have an energy cost, ranging from 4 to 50. While out of combat, energy cannot go over 50%, and any energy over 50% is lost immediately upon leaving combat. While in combat, energy is able to drop to 0% and increase to 100%.

Energy is replenished over time as indicated by the arrows to the left and right of the energy indicator. Each arrow indicates how many percentage units are gained or lost per second. When swapping to a new legend, the energy pool is instantly reset to 50%. As this is the only way to regain energy other than natural replenishment (or by using Ancient Echo), players will often swap legends when they have depleted their energy."

Main wording "an energy cost".

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Initiative"Initiative is a skill cost mechanic unique to the thief profession. It replaces recharge on the thief's weapon skills with a pool of twelve points which are spent when the skills are used and gradually returns over time. Using initiative the thief is able to tactically attack an opponent with their own chains and bursts of damage until they run out of the resource."

Main wording... "a skill cost" and " resource"

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Life_force

"Life force is the necromancer's resource that fuels Death Shroud and Reaper's Shroud. Life force is gained when players or NPCs die nearby (providing 10% life force per death, approximately within a range of 1,200 units) and through certain skills.[1] Death Shroud depletes life force and ends when it reaches zero."

Main wording... "resource that fuels"

Again, to be helpful... Recharge is an "interval of time" and... Resources are "an energy cost", "a skill cost" and "resource that fuels".

And for this... "fact is City of Heroes, while having great build diversity, had very low gameplay diversity. The playstyles were very same-y. The same cant be said for GW2."... Nice of you to acknowledge that a game (launched in 2004) with a common resource had greater diversity than GW2 after saying "you lose a lot of diversity and design space". But again, you don't know what you are talking about here... " The playstyles were very same-y"... As if a stalker and tanker playstyles were "same-y", or a mastermind and controller were "same-y" or a defender and a dominator were "same-y"... yeah...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@GDchiaScrub.3241 said:

@"JugglemonkeySoHeCanStopBeingSpammed.8741" said:

@"JugglemonkeySoHeCanStopBeingSpammed.8741" said:

@GDchiaScrub.3241 said:I will say that chill needs to affect thieve's initiative skills in some way. It seems an oversight that they're the least impacted by that conditional effect of recharge-time slowing. Unless I'm not noticing something...

D:Just addressing this point, you're correct in that chill affects thieves the least because of initiative, but by the same token quickness also affects thieves the least because it does not affect initiative gain. If you want chill to affect initiative gain negatively there's no good reason to not have quickness affect it positively, and given how easy it is to cleanse chill on thief I'm pretty sure you'll dislike that scenario more than the current one.

You mean alacrity?

D:

Either or. My point is that maybe chill, quickness and alacrity not affecting ini regen is actually a good thing.Keep in mind from inception Thief was designed in a time Alacrity wasn't even a concept (it came with Chrono in HoT) while chilled was there in the beginning.

Ok, everyone's keeping this in mind. How is this important here?

Because when they were designing thief's initiative resource the condition
chilled
existed with its cooldown debuff. Alacrity wasn't present until HoT, so it couldn't have been possible to consider Alacrity in the beginning. I don't really see how that's hard to understand. Clearly they chose to stay the course and ignore cooldown related things when it came to thieve's initiative based skills with the inclusion of Alacrity.

It's hard to understand because you seemed to be claiming something along the lines of "
chilled could be an oversight because it existed since the beginning
" while at the same time claiming "
alacrity could be an oversight because it didn't exist since the beginning
". Also 2 things being designed at the similar time in no way implies an oversight, so that chilling conclusion is "a bit" random in the first place. Hence me saying I can't connect the dots, because I still don't see the line between that statement and the conclusion.If it was an oversight -which I doubt- they could easly fix it at the very least when they introduced the alacrity. You seem to understand that fact based on what you're saying
now
(as opposed to "
Both Alacrity, and Chilled's cooldown-effect can be oversights
" from previous post), so I'm still not sure why you'd try to claim chill is/was an oversight.Overally I don't understand the point you're trying to make here and my confusion comes exactly from you contradicting yourself even after you made your weirdly disconnected conclusions.

No. This is not my intention at all. I didn't view chill in a vacuum completely disconnected from everything else with only it's mere existence in the beginning as the sole argument. That is too much simplification. I viewed it as connected to thief's design philosophy of initiative
[skills]
. If they were designed in parallel, then it was reasonable for me to assume ANET considered how the class would interact with the conditions present (chill in this case). If they didn't care that half the effect of chill played no role on initiative
[skills]
then technically no. They could have chose to ignore it in their own design, and thus it's not an "oversight" since I can't read minds. It was the inconsistency that made me perceive it as an "oversight." "It
seems
an oversight that they're the least impacted." - Me

I didn't say anything about vacuum, at which point I simplified anything here? Unless you mean you're the one that simplified your own thoughts here, at which point I'm not sure why you were so surprised about someone else misunderstanding what you're trying to say. Because what you actually said didn't make much sense.And there was/is no inconsistency about how it works -actually it IS more consistent this way.

Should have said
initiative skills
this whole time, and not just the word initiative. RIP.

Doesn't make much of a difference here tbh. Current version is still more consistent than what you're suggesting.

Which is why I stated it as an oversight. Thank you finding another one in Alacrity.

What kind of logic is this? How do you go from "chilled was there in the beginning" to "which is why I stated it was oversight"? Even moreso when you suggest the opposite makes sense too when it comes to alacrity. I can't connect the dots here.

I'm starting to think this is turning into a semantics issue only to derail the topic. Forget the term oversight. I also never said quickness should affect quickness, so we can forget that boon too.

Which is why I bring up semantics. It was more accurate to give my opinion below instead of sticking to "it's an oversight." While true I used "stated" like "I said," but my perception of "Oversight" is not factual. Still can't read ANET's mind. "Oversight" was probably hyperbolic that only aided in your confusion.

Ok, makes sense. But then if you don't explain exactly what you think then don't act surprised about someone taking your simplification and saying it doesn't make much sense when it doesn't. :x

What is agreed is that both Alacrity, and Chilled cooldown debuff affect Thief's initiative the least. My opinion is I don't like boons/conditions affecting a classes unequally unless the game revolved around it more heavily (GW2 doesn't). I don't care if thief can clear chilled (if they spec for it which isn't hard) nor do I care that they lack Alacrity application anyway (which is hard to spec for). The OP wants to upend the Thief's initiative system with the goal to reduce it's perceived spam (and a lot of other game "balance"). If spam was truly the problem with thief then the easiest solution is to raise initiative costs on select skills, or a function change like turning a duel attack into two skills. Easiest doesn't necessarily mean best of course.

Yes, they affect it the least, they're pretty much the opposite of each other and it's fine to have a mechanic that's unaffected by both. You don't like it and you're free to do so, there's not much to argue about here, because you either like something or you don't. If "I don't like it" is all you want to say here, then there's nothing to talk about. It's just that your claim that about chill and alacrity being an oversight didn't make much sense.

Opposite? Technically Alacrity would need a movement speed increase a well. Not really for buffing Alacrity with speed.

Yup, "PRETTY MUCH" opposite in the context we're talking about in addition to the other part of chill actually affecting thief, so not sure why we'd talk about the slow here -it's irrelevant and works the same as for other classes. If alacrity gave the speed to be LITERALLY the opposite of chill, thief would be affected by it as well, so it would still be irrelevant.Bottom line, I know what they do, so no worries here.

Regardless of nitpicking, ANET is allowed to do whatever they feel fit, just as you are also allowed to like/dislike it. The forums are place to share opinions, and many dislike/like ANET's balance yet they come to "discuss" it here anyway. If you feel me calling it an oversight is hyperbolic that's fine too.

Sure, didn't I literally say that if you just came to say that "you dislike it", then there's not much to talk about here? I'm not trying to change your opinion, what I said was that your
simplified/hyperbolic statement
that tried to serve as a justification didn't make much sense -because it didn't. Still free to dislike the mechanic.

I should have made a longer post that was riddled with sarcasm and snark as my first post hoping it'd get the attention of the OP so I could then get in a long thread war with them simply to say, "I dislike their ideas, and those ideas wouldn't work." Live by your example, no?

Ah yes, because you're the one to talk down about using sarcasm in posts, whatever you say. :DAnd since you asked -as far as I'm concerned about it, use whatever amount of sarcasm you need as long as you make sense. Why would I care?

Since you were confused I will give a shot by shot remake:
  1. OP wants to change up Anet's balance (resource mechanics in this case).
  2. I wasn't fully on board with OP, but I did say there was a small inconsistency in chill affecting cooldowns/resources for some classes .
  3. OP felt thief was particularly spammy, so I said thief (although some rev utility stuff doesn't have a "cooldown" either, but they aren't necessarily effective if "spammed")
  4. Alacrity was also brought up as a inconsistency in regards to cooldowns on classes that might not have them.
  5. I stated thief was created in an environment where Chilled already existed, but Alacrity did not thus leaning me towards mentioning Chilled first. This mention didn't exclude the existence of Alacrity being in a similar vein.
  6. Confusion was created because I presumed everyone would know the long thought process that also required knowledge of the game from the beginning..
  7. I need to remember that people can't read minds, and might require more than a Twitter Post's length.
  8. Still not on board with upending a system, but I guess giving my opinion on Chilled is too much. Want to know what I think of Weakness?

Thanks for the recap clearing up previous posts, remembering about people not reading minds seems to be important :p aaaaaand I still think that a skill that slows down cd recharge time not affecting skills without said cooldown is more consistent than inconsistent, but I guess we'll need to agree to disagree on that one, w/e.

Yes, the math is correct. A skill without cooldown wouldn't be affected by chilled/alacrity. Imagine if our 1 spam farm was hindered? Oh dear oh my the posts we'd see here. Obviously, not all skills without "cooldown" are auto attack skills. Rather, it's the idea that half of the thieves kit (the weapon skills) becomes immune because their "cooldown" (metaphorically speaking) is in their initiative, and not the standard per ability cooldown. A pew pew soulbeast weapon set is affected in contrast. I don't want to do what the OP wishes by scrapping the mechanical idea of
mana
, I mean initiative. ANET has already decided on this by keeping it so far. I doubt my dislike is going to change that. Furthermore, my original post was mostly about combo fields and the chill was the last thought. I even left open what that change to chill could be with the, "
in some way
." Others want things to stay the same, of course. Changing it's description to fit the special use cases of no-cooldown abilities would be irritating and inconsistent.

Soo... uh, now we agree that it's more consistent in the current form than it would be with your proposed change? I'm not even touching the autoattack issue, that wasn't my point at all. But if the skills without cooldown exist, because they're using a different resource, then them not being affected by CD-altering buffs/debuffs simply make sense. Rangers pewpew being affected is obvious, there's no reason why it shouldn't be.The thing is your main argument here is still "because I don't like it", which -again- is fine. But stop trying to claim it's somehow inconsistent when it's not or that it was an oversight when there's literally no reason to assume it was.It's like OP claiming that discarding different resource mechanics is a great way to balance the game. No, it's not, not even close. He just doesn't like those mechanics, there's no need to dress that opinion up in something it's not.

I'm guessing you wanted an example for these cooldown related boon/condis. There are three paths that can be taken, but theory crafting specifics will be beyond this topic (oh how far we have driven off course).:

! 1. Do Nothing.
The most practical thing ANET can do, and requires no money that they probably don't have to waste on addressing this. Remember they did have to lay people off...
! 2. Remove cooldown related boon/condi effects.
The most dramatic thing, and risky because Alacrity is a feature for Chronos/Dat one Rev Build, and would make Chill another kitten snare that would need to be altered. Hindsight is 20/20 after seeing that Alacrity is such a spam inducing mess. To think they even tried nerfing the kitten out of mesmer! Shame.
! 3. Alter functionality of Chilled and/or Alacrity.
Similar results on changing Alacrity if people relied on its cooldown reducing benefits.
!! Because I live in reality. I would choose option 1 given the practical circumstances like money, and the age of the game. Making a fiddly change wouldn't guarantee increased profit either. Pity. At best it'd need to be paired with a meaningful content update.

To conclude. I don't like chilled, but now I really-really-really don't like Alacrity. I somewhat support anyone's effort on reducing spam, but I don't think re-classing will be possible any time
Soon
™. Thanks team.

Ok.I, on the other hand, would pick 1 not because of money or possibilities, but because I think there's no reason to change it -I think additional mechanics in the game have easly their place in this game and there's no reason to suddenly eradicate them or alter the buffs affecting/not affecting them. But obviously that's also just my opinion.

D:

Does this emote has any purpose in your posts?

Yes.

D:

What purpose exactly is it? :blush:

To make the pretty people blush. What is more attractive than a bad guy? Because I'm bad at everything bebe.

D:

:astonished:

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Swagger.1459 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:@UNOwen.7132 'Maybe you missed this too...

And just a reminder...

“lowers gameplay diversity”"you lose a lot of diversity and design space for absolutely no good reason at all"“You have yet to bring up a single, solitary game that supports your point”...

“ Brianna Royce (@nbrianna, blog): Fun fact: I still remember when “holy trinity” meant tank, healer, and mezzer – the DPS players were a given, the warm bodies that filled out the rest of the group, and not part of the trinity back in the early pre-WoW days of MMO group content. The fact that this shifted over time really says all you need to know about how MMO class and combat design have changed, and not necessarily for the better.

Don’t mistake me; I no longer believe we need or must respect a trinity of either type. But what I truly resent is the loss of class variation and combat flow that naturally accompanied the demise of the classic trinity, specifically the fact that crowd control, buffing, and debuffing classes have all but disappeared in the modern rush to make nearly everyone a damage-dealer, even the healers and tanks.

As an example, I can still think of none better than City of Heroes, which offered all of the old trinity and new trinity class types (and then some) but made none of them actually mandatory to clear content. Yes, tanks and healers and CCers and buffers and debuffers and damage dealers all existed, but it was completely possible to get through the game with no healers, or all healers. With a scrapper tanking ahead of a fleet of corruptors. With a stalker and four controllers. With three bubblers and three tankers. Whatever. I don’t want to see strict trinity MMOs, but I’m even grumpier about the “everyone deeps” MMOs even more, especially when the end result is kitten combat where nobody ever has control over the fight. It didn’t have to be that way, but modernish devs keep reinventing the wheel, convinced they can do better. Maybe someday, they will, but so far, nah.”

Holy wall of text. Well, Im not gonna read all of it, mainly because that is too much effort, and I remember CoH anyway. Yes, CoH had less gameplay diversity. Having many different sets of numbers didnt change the fact that the moment to moment gameplay boiled down to the same basic concept for (almost) all characters. And of course, the design space was much,
much
narrower. Thats why so many skills were just variations of the same basic concept (or even just the same skill with different damage values).

So what we know... You edited out where you agreed about the issue with Necro. There are indeed examples of games that have common core designs. We learned that recharge timers are not “resources. And we also learned that there are games that use a common class foundation, but offer way more unique play styles, more unique roles and more unique skills than in GW2.

And you can try to deny those above facts with misinformation, spin doctoring and editing, but it won’t make what I brought up as incorrect... Only makes you look like you are here to argue for the sake of arguing because you don’t have a good grasp of things.

Except as you might be able to tell by the fact have that little message saying "edited X:XX AM/PM", I never edited that out, because I never even said it. There are games that have one shared common resource with no secondary resource to distinguish them, but they are in the vast minority, and generally not example of great design. Cooldowns
are
resources. Ironically theyre actually more relevant resources than most resources, given that in just about every game that has mana, its merely a formality youre not going to run out of in any normal gameplay scenario. And no, thats just what you want to believe, but fact is City of Heroes, while having great
build
diversity, had very low
gameplay
diversity. The playstyles were very same-y. The same cant be said for GW2.

I can deny those "facts" by pointing out theyre not facts in the first place. Theyre, at best, your opinion. And it seems that your opinion is not shared by many people. Not here, not in other games, not even in the game industry as a whole. The biggest, most popular and even the most well designed games all follow a paradigm similiar to, if not identical to GW2s. Whereas the only example you gave was a niche game that eventually failed.

Lying about a comment you made, and edited out, that acknowledged the issues isn't helping you here...

Learn the differences before we continue...

"Recharge , alternatively cooldown or CD, is the interval of time (in seconds) after a skill or ability has been used before it can be used again."

Main wording... "interval of time"

"Energy functions similarly to the thief's initiative mechanic, although many of the revenant's skills still have a recharge time. Most skills (except auto-attacks) have an energy cost, ranging from 4 to 50. While out of combat, energy cannot go over 50%, and any energy over 50% is lost immediately upon leaving combat. While in combat, energy is able to drop to 0% and increase to 100%.

Energy is replenished over time as indicated by the arrows to the left and right of the energy indicator. Each arrow indicates how many percentage units are gained or lost per second. When swapping to a new legend, the energy pool is instantly reset to 50%. As this is the only way to regain energy other than natural replenishment (or by using Ancient Echo), players will often swap legends when they have depleted their energy."

Main wording "an energy cost".

"Initiative is a skill cost mechanic unique to the thief profession. It replaces recharge on the thief's weapon skills with a pool of twelve points which are spent when the skills are used and gradually returns over time. Using initiative the thief is able to tactically attack an opponent with their own chains and bursts of damage until they run out of the resource."

Main wording... "a skill cost" and " resource"

"Life force is the necromancer's resource that fuels Death Shroud and Reaper's Shroud. Life force is gained when players or NPCs die nearby (providing 10% life force per death, approximately within a range of 1,200 units) and through certain skills.[1] Death Shroud depletes life force and ends when it reaches zero."

Main wording... "resource that fuels"

Again, to be helpful... Recharge is an "interval of time" and... Resources are "an energy cost", "a skill cost" and "resource that fuels".

And for this... "fact is City of Heroes, while having great
build
diversity, had very low
gameplay
diversity. The playstyles were very same-y. The same cant be said for GW2."... Nice of you to acknowledge that a game (launched in 2004) with a common resource had greater diversity than GW2 after saying "you lose a lot of diversity and design space". But again, you don't know what you are talking about here... " The playstyles were very same-y"... As if a stalker and tanker playstyles were "same-y", or a mastermind and controller were "same-y" or a defender and a dominator were "same-y"... yeah...

The only one lying here is you. Again, if I had edited a comment like youre claiming, why is it that none of my comments show that little "edited X:XX AM/PM" bit, huh? Are you trying to say that I hacked into the forums, somehow altered the code so that the edit would not be visible, all to then later try ot claim I didnt edit it? Yeah not thats stupid, you know its stupid, yet you continue to lie about it. Do try to realize when its time to quit the lie, yes?

Semantics dont help your point. Fact is, cooldowns are a resource. You dont have a cooldown cost, but hey, if it was that easy, then you could just redefine any bar as the inverse (like say, Holosmiths heat bar which gets increased by any of the skills you use, and once you hit 100 youre locked out), and boom. They all suddenly arent resources anymore. Of course, thats silly. Because the original point is silly.

Greater build diversity. Which is a very different thing from gameplay diversity. Its easy to have large build diversity, just have minor variations of the same skill 100 times and boom, you have thousands upon thousands of builds (ironically, this isnt too far off from what CoH did so). But gameplay diversity is harder. You need to have the classes feel distinct to play. Something CoH failed to accomplish. And yes, the classes felt same-y. Different animations, slightly different things they did, but you wouldnt be able to tell from playing them because boy you played them basically the same way. CoH was a minmaxers dream. But for regular players, the fact that everything felt the same was boring. So it failed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@UNOwen.7132 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:@UNOwen.7132 'Maybe you missed this too...

And just a reminder...

“lowers gameplay diversity”"you lose a lot of diversity and design space for absolutely no good reason at all"“You have yet to bring up a single, solitary game that supports your point”...

“ Brianna Royce (@nbrianna, blog): Fun fact: I still remember when “holy trinity” meant tank, healer, and mezzer – the DPS players were a given, the warm bodies that filled out the rest of the group, and not part of the trinity back in the early pre-WoW days of MMO group content. The fact that this shifted over time really says all you need to know about how MMO class and combat design have changed, and not necessarily for the better.

Don’t mistake me; I no longer believe we need or must respect a trinity of either type. But what I truly resent is the loss of class variation and combat flow that naturally accompanied the demise of the classic trinity, specifically the fact that crowd control, buffing, and debuffing classes have all but disappeared in the modern rush to make nearly everyone a damage-dealer, even the healers and tanks.

As an example, I can still think of none better than City of Heroes, which offered all of the old trinity and new trinity class types (and then some) but made none of them actually mandatory to clear content. Yes, tanks and healers and CCers and buffers and debuffers and damage dealers all existed, but it was completely possible to get through the game with no healers, or all healers. With a scrapper tanking ahead of a fleet of corruptors. With a stalker and four controllers. With three bubblers and three tankers. Whatever. I don’t want to see strict trinity MMOs, but I’m even grumpier about the “everyone deeps” MMOs even more, especially when the end result is kitten combat where nobody ever has control over the fight. It didn’t have to be that way, but modernish devs keep reinventing the wheel, convinced they can do better. Maybe someday, they will, but so far, nah.”

Holy wall of text. Well, Im not gonna read all of it, mainly because that is too much effort, and I remember CoH anyway. Yes, CoH had less gameplay diversity. Having many different sets of numbers didnt change the fact that the moment to moment gameplay boiled down to the same basic concept for (almost) all characters. And of course, the design space was much,
much
narrower. Thats why so many skills were just variations of the same basic concept (or even just the same skill with different damage values).

So what we know... You edited out where you agreed about the issue with Necro. There are indeed examples of games that have common core designs. We learned that recharge timers are not “resources. And we also learned that there are games that use a common class foundation, but offer way more unique play styles, more unique roles and more unique skills than in GW2.

And you can try to deny those above facts with misinformation, spin doctoring and editing, but it won’t make what I brought up as incorrect... Only makes you look like you are here to argue for the sake of arguing because you don’t have a good grasp of things.

Except as you might be able to tell by the fact have that little message saying "edited X:XX AM/PM", I never edited that out, because I never even said it. There are games that have one shared common resource with no secondary resource to distinguish them, but they are in the vast minority, and generally not example of great design. Cooldowns
are
resources. Ironically theyre actually more relevant resources than most resources, given that in just about every game that has mana, its merely a formality youre not going to run out of in any normal gameplay scenario. And no, thats just what you want to believe, but fact is City of Heroes, while having great
build
diversity, had very low
gameplay
diversity. The playstyles were very same-y. The same cant be said for GW2.

I can deny those "facts" by pointing out theyre not facts in the first place. Theyre, at best, your opinion. And it seems that your opinion is not shared by many people. Not here, not in other games, not even in the game industry as a whole. The biggest, most popular and even the most well designed games all follow a paradigm similiar to, if not identical to GW2s. Whereas the only example you gave was a niche game that eventually failed.

Lying about a comment you made, and edited out, that acknowledged the issues isn't helping you here...

Learn the differences before we continue...

"Recharge , alternatively cooldown or CD, is the interval of time (in seconds) after a skill or ability has been used before it can be used again."

Main wording... "interval of time"

"Energy functions similarly to the thief's initiative mechanic, although many of the revenant's skills still have a recharge time. Most skills (except auto-attacks) have an energy cost, ranging from 4 to 50. While out of combat, energy cannot go over 50%, and any energy over 50% is lost immediately upon leaving combat. While in combat, energy is able to drop to 0% and increase to 100%.

Energy is replenished over time as indicated by the arrows to the left and right of the energy indicator. Each arrow indicates how many percentage units are gained or lost per second. When swapping to a new legend, the energy pool is instantly reset to 50%. As this is the only way to regain energy other than natural replenishment (or by using Ancient Echo), players will often swap legends when they have depleted their energy."

Main wording "an energy cost".

"Initiative is a skill cost mechanic unique to the thief profession. It replaces recharge on the thief's weapon skills with a pool of twelve points which are spent when the skills are used and gradually returns over time. Using initiative the thief is able to tactically attack an opponent with their own chains and bursts of damage until they run out of the resource."

Main wording... "a skill cost" and " resource"

"Life force is the necromancer's resource that fuels Death Shroud and Reaper's Shroud. Life force is gained when players or NPCs die nearby (providing 10% life force per death, approximately within a range of 1,200 units) and through certain skills.[1] Death Shroud depletes life force and ends when it reaches zero."

Main wording... "resource that fuels"

Again, to be helpful... Recharge is an "interval of time" and... Resources are "an energy cost", "a skill cost" and "resource that fuels".

And for this... "fact is City of Heroes, while having great
build
diversity, had very low
gameplay
diversity. The playstyles were very same-y. The same cant be said for GW2."... Nice of you to acknowledge that a game (launched in 2004) with a common resource had greater diversity than GW2 after saying "you lose a lot of diversity and design space". But again, you don't know what you are talking about here... " The playstyles were very same-y"... As if a stalker and tanker playstyles were "same-y", or a mastermind and controller were "same-y" or a defender and a dominator were "same-y"... yeah...

The only one lying here is you. Again, if I had edited a comment like youre claiming, why is it that none of my comments show that little "edited X:XX AM/PM" bit, huh? Are you trying to say that I hacked into the forums, somehow altered the code so that the edit would not be visible, all to then later try ot claim I didnt edit it? Yeah not thats stupid, you know its stupid, yet you continue to lie about it. Do try to realize when its time to quit the lie, yes?

Semantics dont help your point. Fact is, cooldowns are a resource. You dont have a cooldown cost, but hey, if it was that easy, then you could just redefine any bar as the inverse (like say, Holosmiths heat bar which gets increased by any of the skills you use, and once you hit 100 youre locked out), and boom. They all suddenly arent resources anymore. Of course, thats silly. Because the original point is silly.

Greater
build
diversity. Which is a very different thing from
gameplay
diversity. Its easy to have large build diversity, just have minor variations of the same skill 100 times and boom, you have thousands upon thousands of builds (ironically, this isnt too far off from what CoH did so). But gameplay diversity is harder. You need to have the classes feel distinct to play. Something CoH failed to accomplish. And yes, the classes felt same-y. Different animations, slightly different things they did, but you wouldnt be able to tell from playing them because boy you played them basically the same way. CoH was a minmaxers dream. But for regular players, the fact that everything felt the same was boring. So it failed.

You deleted your original post and made a new one then. I read it and didn't have time to respond. You can attempt to lie to readers on the forums, but you can't lie to me or yourself.

It's unfortunate that you seem to think a recharge timer is a resource, really puts things into perspective, to put mildly, on the topic.

Is that a joke with the "gameplay diversity"? Build diversity adds to "gameplay diversity"... Tank roles, melee roles, ranged roles, healer roles, buffer roles, debuffer roles, cc roles, hybrid roles... al using the 1 common resource for classes... You seem to know zero about CoH compared to GW2, and completely ignoring the fact that Massively OP's writers disagree with you. And judging by your understanding of a skill recharge timer as a "resource", I guess I can understand where you level of thought is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Swagger.1459 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:@UNOwen.7132 'Maybe you missed this too...

And just a reminder...

“lowers gameplay diversity”"you lose a lot of diversity and design space for absolutely no good reason at all"“You have yet to bring up a single, solitary game that supports your point”...

“ Brianna Royce (@nbrianna, blog): Fun fact: I still remember when “holy trinity” meant tank, healer, and mezzer – the DPS players were a given, the warm bodies that filled out the rest of the group, and not part of the trinity back in the early pre-WoW days of MMO group content. The fact that this shifted over time really says all you need to know about how MMO class and combat design have changed, and not necessarily for the better.

Don’t mistake me; I no longer believe we need or must respect a trinity of either type. But what I truly resent is the loss of class variation and combat flow that naturally accompanied the demise of the classic trinity, specifically the fact that crowd control, buffing, and debuffing classes have all but disappeared in the modern rush to make nearly everyone a damage-dealer, even the healers and tanks.

As an example, I can still think of none better than City of Heroes, which offered all of the old trinity and new trinity class types (and then some) but made none of them actually mandatory to clear content. Yes, tanks and healers and CCers and buffers and debuffers and damage dealers all existed, but it was completely possible to get through the game with no healers, or all healers. With a scrapper tanking ahead of a fleet of corruptors. With a stalker and four controllers. With three bubblers and three tankers. Whatever. I don’t want to see strict trinity MMOs, but I’m even grumpier about the “everyone deeps” MMOs even more, especially when the end result is kitten combat where nobody ever has control over the fight. It didn’t have to be that way, but modernish devs keep reinventing the wheel, convinced they can do better. Maybe someday, they will, but so far, nah.”

Holy wall of text. Well, Im not gonna read all of it, mainly because that is too much effort, and I remember CoH anyway. Yes, CoH had less gameplay diversity. Having many different sets of numbers didnt change the fact that the moment to moment gameplay boiled down to the same basic concept for (almost) all characters. And of course, the design space was much,
much
narrower. Thats why so many skills were just variations of the same basic concept (or even just the same skill with different damage values).

So what we know... You edited out where you agreed about the issue with Necro. There are indeed examples of games that have common core designs. We learned that recharge timers are not “resources. And we also learned that there are games that use a common class foundation, but offer way more unique play styles, more unique roles and more unique skills than in GW2.

And you can try to deny those above facts with misinformation, spin doctoring and editing, but it won’t make what I brought up as incorrect... Only makes you look like you are here to argue for the sake of arguing because you don’t have a good grasp of things.

Except as you might be able to tell by the fact have that little message saying "edited X:XX AM/PM", I never edited that out, because I never even said it. There are games that have one shared common resource with no secondary resource to distinguish them, but they are in the vast minority, and generally not example of great design. Cooldowns
are
resources. Ironically theyre actually more relevant resources than most resources, given that in just about every game that has mana, its merely a formality youre not going to run out of in any normal gameplay scenario. And no, thats just what you want to believe, but fact is City of Heroes, while having great
build
diversity, had very low
gameplay
diversity. The playstyles were very same-y. The same cant be said for GW2.

I can deny those "facts" by pointing out theyre not facts in the first place. Theyre, at best, your opinion. And it seems that your opinion is not shared by many people. Not here, not in other games, not even in the game industry as a whole. The biggest, most popular and even the most well designed games all follow a paradigm similiar to, if not identical to GW2s. Whereas the only example you gave was a niche game that eventually failed.

Lying about a comment you made, and edited out, that acknowledged the issues isn't helping you here...

Learn the differences before we continue...

"Recharge , alternatively cooldown or CD, is the interval of time (in seconds) after a skill or ability has been used before it can be used again."

Main wording... "interval of time"

"Energy functions similarly to the thief's initiative mechanic, although many of the revenant's skills still have a recharge time. Most skills (except auto-attacks) have an energy cost, ranging from 4 to 50. While out of combat, energy cannot go over 50%, and any energy over 50% is lost immediately upon leaving combat. While in combat, energy is able to drop to 0% and increase to 100%.

Energy is replenished over time as indicated by the arrows to the left and right of the energy indicator. Each arrow indicates how many percentage units are gained or lost per second. When swapping to a new legend, the energy pool is instantly reset to 50%. As this is the only way to regain energy other than natural replenishment (or by using Ancient Echo), players will often swap legends when they have depleted their energy."

Main wording "an energy cost".

"Initiative is a skill cost mechanic unique to the thief profession. It replaces recharge on the thief's weapon skills with a pool of twelve points which are spent when the skills are used and gradually returns over time. Using initiative the thief is able to tactically attack an opponent with their own chains and bursts of damage until they run out of the resource."

Main wording... "a skill cost" and " resource"

"Life force is the necromancer's resource that fuels Death Shroud and Reaper's Shroud. Life force is gained when players or NPCs die nearby (providing 10% life force per death, approximately within a range of 1,200 units) and through certain skills.[1] Death Shroud depletes life force and ends when it reaches zero."

Main wording... "resource that fuels"

Again, to be helpful... Recharge is an "interval of time" and... Resources are "an energy cost", "a skill cost" and "resource that fuels".

And for this... "fact is City of Heroes, while having great
build
diversity, had very low
gameplay
diversity. The playstyles were very same-y. The same cant be said for GW2."... Nice of you to acknowledge that a game (launched in 2004) with a common resource had greater diversity than GW2 after saying "you lose a lot of diversity and design space". But again, you don't know what you are talking about here... " The playstyles were very same-y"... As if a stalker and tanker playstyles were "same-y", or a mastermind and controller were "same-y" or a defender and a dominator were "same-y"... yeah...

The only one lying here is you. Again, if I had edited a comment like youre claiming, why is it that none of my comments show that little "edited X:XX AM/PM" bit, huh? Are you trying to say that I hacked into the forums, somehow altered the code so that the edit would not be visible, all to then later try ot claim I didnt edit it? Yeah not thats stupid, you know its stupid, yet you continue to lie about it. Do try to realize when its time to quit the lie, yes?

Semantics dont help your point. Fact is, cooldowns are a resource. You dont have a cooldown cost, but hey, if it was that easy, then you could just redefine any bar as the inverse (like say, Holosmiths heat bar which gets increased by any of the skills you use, and once you hit 100 youre locked out), and boom. They all suddenly arent resources anymore. Of course, thats silly. Because the original point is silly.

Greater
build
diversity. Which is a very different thing from
gameplay
diversity. Its easy to have large build diversity, just have minor variations of the same skill 100 times and boom, you have thousands upon thousands of builds (ironically, this isnt too far off from what CoH did so). But gameplay diversity is harder. You need to have the classes feel distinct to play. Something CoH failed to accomplish. And yes, the classes felt same-y. Different animations, slightly different things they did, but you wouldnt be able to tell from playing them because boy you played them basically the same way. CoH was a minmaxers dream. But for regular players, the fact that everything felt the same was boring. So it failed.

You deleted your original post and made a new one then. I read it and didn't have time to respond. You can attempt to lie to readers on the forums, but you can't lie to me or yourself.

It's unfortunate that you seem to think a recharge timer is a resource, really puts things into perspective, to put mildly, on the topic.

Is that a joke with the "gameplay diversity"? Build diversity adds to "gameplay diversity"... Tank roles, melee roles, ranged roles, healer roles, buffer roles, debuffer roles, cc roles, hybrid roles... al using the 1 common resource for classes... You seem to know zero about CoH compared to GW2, and completely ignoring the fact that Massively OP's writers disagree with you. And judging by your understanding of a skill recharge timer as a "resource", I guess I can understand where you level of thought is.

Cute theory, but no. I never deleted or edited a post. Either you mistook me for someone else, or you made the whole thing up. Dont know, and frankly, dont particularly care.

It doesnt. Build diversity is easy to make. Again, just have hundreds of skills that are very slightly different. You have millions of distinct builds, so insane build diversity, but, well, they all play the same. Great build diversity, and no gameplay diversity. Also, why would I care what some writers think, especially given that they seem to specifically lament the absence of build, but not gameplay diversity. And mate, I dont care if you dont like it, but cooldowns are a resource. Thats just game design 101.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@UNOwen.7132 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:@UNOwen.7132 'Maybe you missed this too...

And just a reminder...

“lowers gameplay diversity”"you lose a lot of diversity and design space for absolutely no good reason at all"“You have yet to bring up a single, solitary game that supports your point”...

“ Brianna Royce (@nbrianna, blog): Fun fact: I still remember when “holy trinity” meant tank, healer, and mezzer – the DPS players were a given, the warm bodies that filled out the rest of the group, and not part of the trinity back in the early pre-WoW days of MMO group content. The fact that this shifted over time really says all you need to know about how MMO class and combat design have changed, and not necessarily for the better.

Don’t mistake me; I no longer believe we need or must respect a trinity of either type. But what I truly resent is the loss of class variation and combat flow that naturally accompanied the demise of the classic trinity, specifically the fact that crowd control, buffing, and debuffing classes have all but disappeared in the modern rush to make nearly everyone a damage-dealer, even the healers and tanks.

As an example, I can still think of none better than City of Heroes, which offered all of the old trinity and new trinity class types (and then some) but made none of them actually mandatory to clear content. Yes, tanks and healers and CCers and buffers and debuffers and damage dealers all existed, but it was completely possible to get through the game with no healers, or all healers. With a scrapper tanking ahead of a fleet of corruptors. With a stalker and four controllers. With three bubblers and three tankers. Whatever. I don’t want to see strict trinity MMOs, but I’m even grumpier about the “everyone deeps” MMOs even more, especially when the end result is kitten combat where nobody ever has control over the fight. It didn’t have to be that way, but modernish devs keep reinventing the wheel, convinced they can do better. Maybe someday, they will, but so far, nah.”

Holy wall of text. Well, Im not gonna read all of it, mainly because that is too much effort, and I remember CoH anyway. Yes, CoH had less gameplay diversity. Having many different sets of numbers didnt change the fact that the moment to moment gameplay boiled down to the same basic concept for (almost) all characters. And of course, the design space was much,
much
narrower. Thats why so many skills were just variations of the same basic concept (or even just the same skill with different damage values).

So what we know... You edited out where you agreed about the issue with Necro. There are indeed examples of games that have common core designs. We learned that recharge timers are not “resources. And we also learned that there are games that use a common class foundation, but offer way more unique play styles, more unique roles and more unique skills than in GW2.

And you can try to deny those above facts with misinformation, spin doctoring and editing, but it won’t make what I brought up as incorrect... Only makes you look like you are here to argue for the sake of arguing because you don’t have a good grasp of things.

Except as you might be able to tell by the fact have that little message saying "edited X:XX AM/PM", I never edited that out, because I never even said it. There are games that have one shared common resource with no secondary resource to distinguish them, but they are in the vast minority, and generally not example of great design. Cooldowns
are
resources. Ironically theyre actually more relevant resources than most resources, given that in just about every game that has mana, its merely a formality youre not going to run out of in any normal gameplay scenario. And no, thats just what you want to believe, but fact is City of Heroes, while having great
build
diversity, had very low
gameplay
diversity. The playstyles were very same-y. The same cant be said for GW2.

I can deny those "facts" by pointing out theyre not facts in the first place. Theyre, at best, your opinion. And it seems that your opinion is not shared by many people. Not here, not in other games, not even in the game industry as a whole. The biggest, most popular and even the most well designed games all follow a paradigm similiar to, if not identical to GW2s. Whereas the only example you gave was a niche game that eventually failed.

Lying about a comment you made, and edited out, that acknowledged the issues isn't helping you here...

Learn the differences before we continue...

"Recharge , alternatively cooldown or CD, is the interval of time (in seconds) after a skill or ability has been used before it can be used again."

Main wording... "interval of time"

"Energy functions similarly to the thief's initiative mechanic, although many of the revenant's skills still have a recharge time. Most skills (except auto-attacks) have an energy cost, ranging from 4 to 50. While out of combat, energy cannot go over 50%, and any energy over 50% is lost immediately upon leaving combat. While in combat, energy is able to drop to 0% and increase to 100%.

Energy is replenished over time as indicated by the arrows to the left and right of the energy indicator. Each arrow indicates how many percentage units are gained or lost per second. When swapping to a new legend, the energy pool is instantly reset to 50%. As this is the only way to regain energy other than natural replenishment (or by using Ancient Echo), players will often swap legends when they have depleted their energy."

Main wording "an energy cost".

"Initiative is a skill cost mechanic unique to the thief profession. It replaces recharge on the thief's weapon skills with a pool of twelve points which are spent when the skills are used and gradually returns over time. Using initiative the thief is able to tactically attack an opponent with their own chains and bursts of damage until they run out of the resource."

Main wording... "a skill cost" and " resource"

"Life force is the necromancer's resource that fuels Death Shroud and Reaper's Shroud. Life force is gained when players or NPCs die nearby (providing 10% life force per death, approximately within a range of 1,200 units) and through certain skills.[1] Death Shroud depletes life force and ends when it reaches zero."

Main wording... "resource that fuels"

Again, to be helpful... Recharge is an "interval of time" and... Resources are "an energy cost", "a skill cost" and "resource that fuels".

And for this... "fact is City of Heroes, while having great
build
diversity, had very low
gameplay
diversity. The playstyles were very same-y. The same cant be said for GW2."... Nice of you to acknowledge that a game (launched in 2004) with a common resource had greater diversity than GW2 after saying "you lose a lot of diversity and design space". But again, you don't know what you are talking about here... " The playstyles were very same-y"... As if a stalker and tanker playstyles were "same-y", or a mastermind and controller were "same-y" or a defender and a dominator were "same-y"... yeah...

The only one lying here is you. Again, if I had edited a comment like youre claiming, why is it that none of my comments show that little "edited X:XX AM/PM" bit, huh? Are you trying to say that I hacked into the forums, somehow altered the code so that the edit would not be visible, all to then later try ot claim I didnt edit it? Yeah not thats stupid, you know its stupid, yet you continue to lie about it. Do try to realize when its time to quit the lie, yes?

Semantics dont help your point. Fact is, cooldowns are a resource. You dont have a cooldown cost, but hey, if it was that easy, then you could just redefine any bar as the inverse (like say, Holosmiths heat bar which gets increased by any of the skills you use, and once you hit 100 youre locked out), and boom. They all suddenly arent resources anymore. Of course, thats silly. Because the original point is silly.

Greater
build
diversity. Which is a very different thing from
gameplay
diversity. Its easy to have large build diversity, just have minor variations of the same skill 100 times and boom, you have thousands upon thousands of builds (ironically, this isnt too far off from what CoH did so). But gameplay diversity is harder. You need to have the classes feel distinct to play. Something CoH failed to accomplish. And yes, the classes felt same-y. Different animations, slightly different things they did, but you wouldnt be able to tell from playing them because boy you played them basically the same way. CoH was a minmaxers dream. But for regular players, the fact that everything felt the same was boring. So it failed.

You deleted your original post and made a new one then. I read it and didn't have time to respond. You can attempt to lie to readers on the forums, but you can't lie to me or yourself.

It's unfortunate that you seem to think a recharge timer is a resource, really puts things into perspective, to put mildly, on the topic.

Is that a joke with the "gameplay diversity"? Build diversity adds to "gameplay diversity"... Tank roles, melee roles, ranged roles, healer roles, buffer roles, debuffer roles, cc roles, hybrid roles... al using the 1 common resource for classes... You seem to know zero about CoH compared to GW2, and completely ignoring the fact that Massively OP's writers disagree with you. And judging by your understanding of a skill recharge timer as a "resource", I guess I can understand where you level of thought is.

Cute theory, but no. I never deleted or edited a post. Either you mistook me for someone else, or you made the whole thing up. Dont know, and frankly, dont particularly care.

It doesnt. Build diversity is easy to make. Again, just have hundreds of skills that are
very
slightly different. You have millions of distinct builds, so insane build diversity, but, well, they all play the same. Great build diversity, and no gameplay diversity. Also, why would I care what some writers think, especially given that they seem to specifically lament the absence of build, but not gameplay diversity. And mate, I dont care if you dont like it, but cooldowns are a resource. Thats just game design 101.

Actually, you did.

You use terms like "gameplay diversity" as an empty talking point and can't articulate what it means.

You don't understand game design then, nor simple gaming terminology, even when provided quotes from the game.

And btw, I can now understand why you are worried about initiative being changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Swagger.1459 said:

@Swagger.1459 said:@UNOwen.7132 'Maybe you missed this too...

And just a reminder...

“lowers gameplay diversity”"you lose a lot of diversity and design space for absolutely no good reason at all"“You have yet to bring up a single, solitary game that supports your point”...

“ Brianna Royce (@nbrianna, blog): Fun fact: I still remember when “holy trinity” meant tank, healer, and mezzer – the DPS players were a given, the warm bodies that filled out the rest of the group, and not part of the trinity back in the early pre-WoW days of MMO group content. The fact that this shifted over time really says all you need to know about how MMO class and combat design have changed, and not necessarily for the better.

Don’t mistake me; I no longer believe we need or must respect a trinity of either type. But what I truly resent is the loss of class variation and combat flow that naturally accompanied the demise of the classic trinity, specifically the fact that crowd control, buffing, and debuffing classes have all but disappeared in the modern rush to make nearly everyone a damage-dealer, even the healers and tanks.

As an example, I can still think of none better than City of Heroes, which offered all of the old trinity and new trinity class types (and then some) but made none of them actually mandatory to clear content. Yes, tanks and healers and CCers and buffers and debuffers and damage dealers all existed, but it was completely possible to get through the game with no healers, or all healers. With a scrapper tanking ahead of a fleet of corruptors. With a stalker and four controllers. With three bubblers and three tankers. Whatever. I don’t want to see strict trinity MMOs, but I’m even grumpier about the “everyone deeps” MMOs even more, especially when the end result is kitten combat where nobody ever has control over the fight. It didn’t have to be that way, but modernish devs keep reinventing the wheel, convinced they can do better. Maybe someday, they will, but so far, nah.”

Holy wall of text. Well, Im not gonna read all of it, mainly because that is too much effort, and I remember CoH anyway. Yes, CoH had less gameplay diversity. Having many different sets of numbers didnt change the fact that the moment to moment gameplay boiled down to the same basic concept for (almost) all characters. And of course, the design space was much,
much
narrower. Thats why so many skills were just variations of the same basic concept (or even just the same skill with different damage values).

So what we know... You edited out where you agreed about the issue with Necro. There are indeed examples of games that have common core designs. We learned that recharge timers are not “resources. And we also learned that there are games that use a common class foundation, but offer way more unique play styles, more unique roles and more unique skills than in GW2.

And you can try to deny those above facts with misinformation, spin doctoring and editing, but it won’t make what I brought up as incorrect... Only makes you look like you are here to argue for the sake of arguing because you don’t have a good grasp of things.

Except as you might be able to tell by the fact have that little message saying "edited X:XX AM/PM", I never edited that out, because I never even said it. There are games that have one shared common resource with no secondary resource to distinguish them, but they are in the vast minority, and generally not example of great design. Cooldowns
are
resources. Ironically theyre actually more relevant resources than most resources, given that in just about every game that has mana, its merely a formality youre not going to run out of in any normal gameplay scenario. And no, thats just what you want to believe, but fact is City of Heroes, while having great
build
diversity, had very low
gameplay
diversity. The playstyles were very same-y. The same cant be said for GW2.

I can deny those "facts" by pointing out theyre not facts in the first place. Theyre, at best, your opinion. And it seems that your opinion is not shared by many people. Not here, not in other games, not even in the game industry as a whole. The biggest, most popular and even the most well designed games all follow a paradigm similiar to, if not identical to GW2s. Whereas the only example you gave was a niche game that eventually failed.

Lying about a comment you made, and edited out, that acknowledged the issues isn't helping you here...

Learn the differences before we continue...

"Recharge , alternatively cooldown or CD, is the interval of time (in seconds) after a skill or ability has been used before it can be used again."

Main wording... "interval of time"

"Energy functions similarly to the thief's initiative mechanic, although many of the revenant's skills still have a recharge time. Most skills (except auto-attacks) have an energy cost, ranging from 4 to 50. While out of combat, energy cannot go over 50%, and any energy over 50% is lost immediately upon leaving combat. While in combat, energy is able to drop to 0% and increase to 100%.

Energy is replenished over time as indicated by the arrows to the left and right of the energy indicator. Each arrow indicates how many percentage units are gained or lost per second. When swapping to a new legend, the energy pool is instantly reset to 50%. As this is the only way to regain energy other than natural replenishment (or by using Ancient Echo), players will often swap legends when they have depleted their energy."

Main wording "an energy cost".

"Initiative is a skill cost mechanic unique to the thief profession. It replaces recharge on the thief's weapon skills with a pool of twelve points which are spent when the skills are used and gradually returns over time. Using initiative the thief is able to tactically attack an opponent with their own chains and bursts of damage until they run out of the resource."

Main wording... "a skill cost" and " resource"

"Life force is the necromancer's resource that fuels Death Shroud and Reaper's Shroud. Life force is gained when players or NPCs die nearby (providing 10% life force per death, approximately within a range of 1,200 units) and through certain skills.[1] Death Shroud depletes life force and ends when it reaches zero."

Main wording... "resource that fuels"

Again, to be helpful... Recharge is an "interval of time" and... Resources are "an energy cost", "a skill cost" and "resource that fuels".

And for this... "fact is City of Heroes, while having great
build
diversity, had very low
gameplay
diversity. The playstyles were very same-y. The same cant be said for GW2."... Nice of you to acknowledge that a game (launched in 2004) with a common resource had greater diversity than GW2 after saying "you lose a lot of diversity and design space". But again, you don't know what you are talking about here... " The playstyles were very same-y"... As if a stalker and tanker playstyles were "same-y", or a mastermind and controller were "same-y" or a defender and a dominator were "same-y"... yeah...

The only one lying here is you. Again, if I had edited a comment like youre claiming, why is it that none of my comments show that little "edited X:XX AM/PM" bit, huh? Are you trying to say that I hacked into the forums, somehow altered the code so that the edit would not be visible, all to then later try ot claim I didnt edit it? Yeah not thats stupid, you know its stupid, yet you continue to lie about it. Do try to realize when its time to quit the lie, yes?

Semantics dont help your point. Fact is, cooldowns are a resource. You dont have a cooldown cost, but hey, if it was that easy, then you could just redefine any bar as the inverse (like say, Holosmiths heat bar which gets increased by any of the skills you use, and once you hit 100 youre locked out), and boom. They all suddenly arent resources anymore. Of course, thats silly. Because the original point is silly.

Greater
build
diversity. Which is a very different thing from
gameplay
diversity. Its easy to have large build diversity, just have minor variations of the same skill 100 times and boom, you have thousands upon thousands of builds (ironically, this isnt too far off from what CoH did so). But gameplay diversity is harder. You need to have the classes feel distinct to play. Something CoH failed to accomplish. And yes, the classes felt same-y. Different animations, slightly different things they did, but you wouldnt be able to tell from playing them because boy you played them basically the same way. CoH was a minmaxers dream. But for regular players, the fact that everything felt the same was boring. So it failed.

You deleted your original post and made a new one then. I read it and didn't have time to respond. You can attempt to lie to readers on the forums, but you can't lie to me or yourself.

How exactly did he delete his own post?tbh it's hilarious you insisted he edited his post, but when proven wrong, you start claiming he must have deleted it and rewrote it altogether. wtkitten, that's a new one :lol:

  • Confused 1
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...