Jump to content
  • Sign Up

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


Lily.1935

Recommended Posts

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

TLDR:

  • Redo the Aggro system so
  • Make Fan favorite builds viable
  • Offer more viable simple builds across more professions and especially core professions
  • Rework many of the Underused or unused skills.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The mesmer is the tank" thing is, like, pretty specific to raid comps.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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

Also, "People try out a tank" lel

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

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

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

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

@Lily.1935 said:And to keep toughness viable

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Taril.8619 said:There has been a general theme with ANets balancing where they keep passive damage builds down so that more engaging builds are used instead (This is likely one reason for Reaper's low damage potential, due to a significant portion of it coming from auto attacks in Shroud which is a very passive source of damage and can be exacerbated through Signets of Suffering + Signet of Undeath for AFK Reaper to just auto attack in Shroud forever...)Well, that's untrue! It's not a general theme at all. I mean, why are Axe/Axe Berserkers able to do so much DPS then? Or Daredevils ... or D/D Deadeyes, Soulbeasts (condi or power), Firebrands/Dragonhunters, etc. etc. I mean, all of these have incredibly passive rotations (some even ridiculously passive: only hitting F1 like crazy, or only pressing 5 every now and then between all the auto-attacks), and doing a lot of DPS with it (far more than a passive Reaper at least) AND be more useful to a group.So, you might think there's a general theme, but ANet has never said or stated such a thing, and evidence shows the opposite!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

While making claims like this, we should remember that one of the things gw2 was based on was the lack of existence of "holy trinity". At this point it's just trying to blame the game for being it's own thing instead of copying other games.

And no, I don't really mind the "holy trinity", but it seems to be way more limiting for the player than the alternative. From what I've seen people ALREADY have troubles with accepting that they're not bound to a single character and usually want "their class" to be able to do everything on the same level as others, I doubt assigning roles to classes would fix anything or add any value.

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

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

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

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

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

Minion/turret builds pretty much "play themselves". They often seem to be problematic, because they either become broken/unfair (passive gameplay combined with high efficiency) or remain almost unusable for endgame pve/pvp content. Which is also why I think they better fit single player games than mmorpgs. Or, well, they might just be good for introcutory safe semi-passive playstyle for new players until they actually understand the game and its mechanics, like they seem to be in gw2.

btw it seems to me you've decided to share your opinions masked behind "new players want/expect/prefer" statements. Pretty sure you have no valid data to make these claims, so why hide your preferences behind them?

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

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

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

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

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Agrippa Oculus.3726 said:

@"Taril.8619" said:There has been a general theme with ANets balancing where they keep passive damage builds down so that more engaging builds are used instead (This is likely one reason for Reaper's low damage potential, due to a significant portion of it coming from auto attacks in Shroud which is a very passive source of damage and can be exacerbated through Signets of Suffering + Signet of Undeath for AFK Reaper to just auto attack in Shroud forever...)Well, that's untrue! It's not a general theme at all. I mean, why are Axe/Axe Berserkers able to do so much DPS then? Or Daredevils ... or D/D Deadeyes, Soulbeasts (condi or power), Firebrands/Dragonhunters, etc. etc. I mean, all of these have incredibly passive rotations (some even ridiculously passive: only hitting F1 like crazy, or only pressing 5 every now and then between all the auto-attacks), and doing a lot of DPS with it (far more than a
passive
Reaper at least) AND be more useful to a group.So,
you
might think there's a general theme, but ANet has never said or stated such a thing, and evidence shows the opposite!

They have to press buttons and therefore are not passive.

Passive means not doing anything.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, so "new players" come to an eight-year-old game and expect the classes to be more like WoW (a sixteen-year-old game). And this can be solved by bolting on a new aggro mechanic that makes it nearly impossible for characters with "support" skills (or just Chrono specifically?) to hold aggro?

IME, you're wrong about the psychology of "I want a paladin!!!" players. The one I've talked to don't just want to "tank," it's that they want to "tank" in a way that defies the game's entire "action-combat" model: with passive stats and long-lasting cooldowns, basically just rolling a defensive rotation instead of reacting to enemies in the moment. That's really hard to reconcile with every other aspect of the game. The Chrono didn't steal their niche — their niche doesn't exist in the game at all, and they wouldn't actually be happy if you painted Distortion yellow or blue and said "here you go, champ! tank that raid boss for us!"

Moreover, the thing about "human psychology" is that you could give people the exact old thing they're missing, and they might still be unsatisfied because the thing they were missing was also, in itself, unsatisfying in some fundamental way — perhaps it was even the thing that drove them away from a previous game they were playing. The least adaptable players tend to be the worst about this, because they're not really analyzing the game mechanics they encounter, just sticking a square peg into a round hole and hoping for the best; they notice when the peg just doesn't fit altogether, but have a harder time understanding when a smaller failure of expectations-vs.-reality is the source of some ongoing frustration or failure.

I point this out because what we actually have right now is a game where the Guardian is an amazingly versatile, durable, multifaceted class. When you play a Guardian, you're absolutely spoiled for choice in terms of builds and you're basically always welcome in group content. And, if you let go of the old and narrow idea of "the tank," you can have some veeeeery tank-like active gameplay on Healbrand: canceling out encounter mechanics with reflection or a well-timed Aegis, pulling enemies into place with Tome 1-3 and axe, carefully managing your position because there's basically a little "keep people alive" zone around you, just generally turning a messy and chaotic fight into an ordered and manageable one for your comrades — that is very much the traditional tank's bread and butter, it's just handled in a much, much more interesting way by a "support" build with a wide variety of team buffs and situational abilities (a very wide variety, thanks to the Tomes) instead of the old "i stand here and get hit, sometimes i pop a block or some big self-heals" lump. I really want players lamenting that they can't tank on Guardian to try Healbrand — it's an absolute blast to play, you can easily anchor a whole PUG group, and it doesn't have any of the clunky hide-in-the-back/watch-the-party-window-and-not-the-fight aspects you might have hated about a 'traditional' MMOG healer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Taril.8619 said:

@Taril.8619 said:There has been a general theme with ANets balancing where they keep passive damage builds down so that more engaging builds are used instead (This is likely one reason for Reaper's low damage potential, due to a significant portion of it coming from auto attacks in Shroud which is a very passive source of damage and can be exacerbated through Signets of Suffering + Signet of Undeath for AFK Reaper to just auto attack in Shroud forever...)Well, that's untrue! It's not a general theme at all. I mean, why are Axe/Axe Berserkers able to do so much DPS then? Or Daredevils ... or D/D Deadeyes, Soulbeasts (condi or power), Firebrands/Dragonhunters, etc. etc. I mean, all of these have incredibly passive rotations (some even ridiculously passive: only hitting F1 like crazy, or only pressing 5 every now and then between all the auto-attacks), and doing a lot of DPS with it (far more than a
passive
Reaper at least) AND be more useful to a group.So,
you
might think there's a general theme, but ANet has never said or stated such a thing, and evidence shows the opposite!

They have to press buttons and therefore are not passive.

Passive means not doing anything.

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Kodama.6453 said:

@Taril.8619 said:There has been a general theme with ANets balancing where they keep passive damage builds down so that more engaging builds are used instead (This is likely one reason for Reaper's low damage potential, due to a significant portion of it coming from auto attacks in Shroud which is a very passive source of damage and can be exacerbated through Signets of Suffering + Signet of Undeath for AFK Reaper to just auto attack in Shroud forever...)Well, that's untrue! It's not a general theme at all. I mean, why are Axe/Axe Berserkers able to do so much DPS then? Or Daredevils ... or D/D Deadeyes, Soulbeasts (condi or power), Firebrands/Dragonhunters, etc. etc. I mean, all of these have incredibly passive rotations (some even ridiculously passive: only hitting F1 like crazy, or only pressing 5 every now and then between all the auto-attacks), and doing a lot of DPS with it (far more than a
passive
Reaper at least) AND be more useful to a group.So,
you
might think there's a general theme, but ANet has never said or stated such a thing, and evidence shows the opposite!

They have to press buttons and therefore are not passive.

Passive means not doing anything.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Taril.8619" said:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Kodama.6453 said:

@"Taril.8619" said:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

They should do something about them.

Will they do something about them? Probably not.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Taril.8619" said:

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Kodama.6453 said:

@"Taril.8619" said:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

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

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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...