Revamp aquatic combat

[Astralporing.1957]

@Oxstar.7643 said:

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@Oxstar.7643 said:So you want them to add HUNDREDS of new skills? I'd rather they start with the utilities that can't be used, give it more of its own identity, and THEN think about more weapons.Well, obviously currently disabled utilities would need to be made useable as well. But if you want to compare things like that, then - sure, fixing utilities is probably easier and requires less work. It also has far less impact and is unlikely to change the current situation in any significant way. Compared to stuff like weapons it is a minor issue.

Regardless, the fact of the matter is that if every weapon was available underwater and worked the same way then it would not do anything to giver underwater combat its own identity.It was not me talking about allowing all the weapons uderwater. I was just talking about the current underwater weapon setup not being enough. We need enough good weapons to cover all main overland roles the classes can have. They can be different weapons (or the same weapons, but with different skill sets - which, btw, would allow for things like land spears), but they need to offer an equivalent amount of choices and synergies to overland weapons, so there's no problem with build synergy when transitioning from land to underwater (or in the other direction).

That is not the way to improving it. If they WERE to add every weapon then they would need to function differently.As i said, that's okay for me.

Also, not everyone dislikes it either.Never said that. Still, not many people actively

like

underwater content at this point. Most i guess are ambivalent, and simply do not care about it - they don't actively dislike it, but they still generally avoid it because there's nothing in there they

would

care about. Which is one of the reasons why Anet abandoned the content.

As it currently stands, it's a different experience from land. That should not be lost. But improved.Agreed.

[Astralporing.1957]

@Ayakaru.6583 said:They should remove all underwater traits from the main lines. Make it a separate trait line for uw traits.

Remove all skills from underwater (yes, i know that's a big shock), and create 2 uw healing skills, 3-6 class skills, and 2 elite skills. They can use pre-existing skills as a foundation, but the point is that from the ground up they're designed with underwater synergy in mind.

Then; add an underwater exclusive legend to the revenantThat's a bad idea. First, remember that you don;t have a dedicated underwater traitline setup currently - you use the build you have selected for land. Moving underwater traits from main lines to separate one would have the consequence of noone ever using those underwater traits at all, and all builds ending up broken underwater.

Even if you assumed that a separate trait setup would be introduced for underwater, to work alongside already existing separate skill setup, your suggestion would still not help. You'd simply end up with every class having one or at best two working underwater builds. Builds that would not necessarily represent builds that would be available for that class on land. You don't want a situation where i.e. healing druid, when going underwater, gets changed into either a power dps build (built around spear) or a condi one (built around a speargun)... while still wearing harriers.

And, also going back to this underwater revenant exclusive legend - what build would that one have synergy with? Condi? Power? Support? Heal?

I'd say it should be the opposite - we should aim for the current traitlines to be equally useful both on land and underwater with no need to change traits inbetween.

[Sobx.1758]

@Teratus.2859 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Teratus.2859 said:

@yoni.7015 said:

@Zoid.2568 said:

@yoni.7015 said:

@Zoid.2568 said:

@yoni.7015 said:No thanks, underwater combat is no fun.

They can make it fun with a revamp.No, they can’t and they don’t have to. Just leave it like it is.

So leave ít boring when ít can be fixed??

It will stay boring and the majority of players don’t like underwater content. So why waste resources on something only a very small minority enjoys?

Fair enough, then lets get rid of Raids, PvP, WvW, Fractals and Strike missions then because only a minority of players enjoy those as well.100% focus from here on out only on PvE story..Lets also get rid of the most underused/underpowered classes as well and stop making new specs for them.. since that's a waste of resources as well.

...but he didn't say "remove underwater combat", right? How is this even remotely valid comparison when you're suddenly talking about removing existing content?Now if you want to talk about raids, pvp, wvw, fractals and strike missions in context of "leaving it how it is" then... that's mostly what is actually happening.

And I agree with yoni, I don't like underwater combat and don't want much/anything to do with it. Not even mentioning "underwater only especs" or mass underwater skill rework, while the regular skills AND traits still need the revamp.

Already explained it in my last post in reference to what Yoni said was a "waste of resources"

Didn't notice that before, but after reading that explanation -which I'm not sure I understood correctly- you've pretty much agreed that it's an irrelevant comparison ("Removing the classes would be a waste though" and removing IS what you were talking about), right? Ok then.

It's fine if you don't like underwater content, though if you don't mind answering, why don't you like it?Do you just dislike the concept of it? or do you just not find it fun because of the lack of build diversity and skills and weapons you can use there?.. too restrictive etc.

It feels bad, out of place and I don't see the reason for it in most cases other than some limited cheesy content that you might get into once in a while at best, for which current version of aquatic combat is enough. I doubt reworking traits/weapons/adding 5 (<- random number :D ) more skills that are currently unavailable per class would change anything about that.If people want to push for weapon/skill/trait reworks, then push for the land versions, because some of them are outdated, bugged, unusable or intentionally gutted to -maybe- wait for a rework.Why would you want or need aquatic combat? Just for that vertical movement that in reality changes nothing?

[Teratus.2859]

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Teratus.2859 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Teratus.2859 said:

@yoni.7015 said:

@Zoid.2568 said:

@yoni.7015 said:

@Zoid.2568 said:

@yoni.7015 said:No thanks, underwater combat is no fun.

They can make it fun with a revamp.No, they can’t and they don’t have to. Just leave it like it is.

So leave ít boring when ít can be fixed??

It will stay boring and the majority of players don’t like underwater content. So why waste resources on something only a very small minority enjoys?

Fair enough, then lets get rid of Raids, PvP, WvW, Fractals and Strike missions then because only a minority of players enjoy those as well.100% focus from here on out only on PvE story..Lets also get rid of the most underused/underpowered classes as well and stop making new specs for them.. since that's a waste of resources as well.

...but he didn't say "remove underwater combat", right? How is this even remotely valid comparison when you're suddenly talking about removing existing content?Now if you want to talk about raids, pvp, wvw, fractals and strike missions in context of "leaving it how it is" then... that's mostly what is actually happening.

And I agree with yoni, I don't like underwater combat and don't want much/anything to do with it. Not even mentioning "underwater only especs" or mass underwater skill rework, while the regular skills AND traits still need the revamp.

Already explained it in my last post in reference to what Yoni said was a "waste of resources"

Didn't notice that before, but after reading that explanation -which I'm not sure I understood correctly- you've pretty much agreed that it's an irrelevant comparison ("

Removing the classes would be a waste though

" and removing IS what you were talking about), right? Ok then.

Yeah but only removing the classes part, the reason still stands for everything else I said to jokingly get rid of as they require resources to keep in the game.. server costs etc so their existence by the same logic Yoni was using is a waste of said resources because only a minority of players enjoy them.

It's fine if you don't like underwater content, though if you don't mind answering, why don't you like it?Do you just dislike the concept of it? or do you just not find it fun because of the lack of build diversity and skills and weapons you can use there?.. too restrictive etc.

It feels bad, out of place and I don't see the reason for it in most cases other than some limited cheesy content that you might get into

once in a while

at best, for which current version of aquatic combat is enough. I doubt reworking traits/weapons/adding 5

(<- random number :D )

more skills that are currently unavailable per class would change anything about that.

A lot of why it feels bad though is because of how limited it is, how few weapons you can have and how a number of skills or even entire class mechanics are crippled and unusable there.Good example of that is Revenant which can't access 3 of it's total Legend's while it's underwater including the exclusive Renegade Legend which is ridiculous.

Another issue is the lack of big content there which is linked to the above problem.. can't exactly have big awesome world bosses and bounties etc there when the combat is so lacking compared to the land.

If people want to push for weapon/skill/trait reworks, then push for the land versions, because some of them are outdated, bugged, unusable or intentionally gutted to -maybe- wait for a rework.Why would you want or need aquatic combat? Just for that vertical movement that in reality changes nothing?

Pushing for weapons and reworks benefits both land and water combat, one of the things many including myself have asked for is for more land weapons to become usable underwater which would greatly improve the combat there, if this ever became reality it would work in reverse as well with Spear and Trident becoming possible new land weapons.People are always asking for more new weapons types like spears and polearms but it's impossible to start throwing whole new ones in at this point in the game, but making some water ones usable on land would be a way they could do that and have a wide array of skins available for them.

As for me I like the atmosphere of underwater regions, it's different and a change of pace from always being stuck on land.I like the combat there and as far as underwater content goes and by extent vertical combat in general there are no MMO's out there that do it anywhere near as good as Gw2 does.Gw2 by far has the best underwater system in any MMO.. and it's painful to see that it doesn't take advantage of that.No underwater world bosses.. a crippled build system and far too many pointless limitations.. it has so much potential but Anet have not brought it out.And considering the fact that one of this games main antagonists is a gigantic water dragon.. and we'll be going after it soon, it will be a major disappointment if the Water content continues to get so neglected.

[Sobx.1758]

@Teratus.2859 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Teratus.2859 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Teratus.2859 said:

@yoni.7015 said:

@Zoid.2568 said:

@yoni.7015 said:

@Zoid.2568 said:

@yoni.7015 said:No thanks, underwater combat is no fun.

They can make it fun with a revamp.No, they can’t and they don’t have to. Just leave it like it is.

So leave ít boring when ít can be fixed??

It will stay boring and the majority of players don’t like underwater content. So why waste resources on something only a very small minority enjoys?

Fair enough, then lets get rid of Raids, PvP, WvW, Fractals and Strike missions then because only a minority of players enjoy those as well.100% focus from here on out only on PvE story..Lets also get rid of the most underused/underpowered classes as well and stop making new specs for them.. since that's a waste of resources as well.

...but he didn't say "remove underwater combat", right? How is this even remotely valid comparison when you're suddenly talking about removing existing content?Now if you want to talk about raids, pvp, wvw, fractals and strike missions in context of "leaving it how it is" then... that's mostly what is actually happening.

And I agree with yoni, I don't like underwater combat and don't want much/anything to do with it. Not even mentioning "underwater only especs" or mass underwater skill rework, while the regular skills AND traits still need the revamp.

Already explained it in my last post in reference to what Yoni said was a "waste of resources"

Didn't notice that before, but after reading that explanation -which I'm not sure I understood correctly- you've pretty much agreed that it's an irrelevant comparison ("

Removing the classes would be a waste though

" and removing IS what you were talking about), right? Ok then.

Yeah but only removing the classes part, the reason still stands for everything else I said to jokingly get rid of as they require resources to keep in the game.. server costs etc so their existence by the same logic Yoni was using is a waste of said resources because only a minority of players enjoy them.

See... you seem to "admit it's different", but then circle right back into "it's the same logic" -the whole point is that it's by far NOT. ^^It's irrelevant if it's played by minority or not, nobody brought up removal of anything, but you and that just doesn't stand as a comparison at all.

It's fine if you don't like underwater content, though if you don't mind answering, why don't you like it?Do you just dislike the concept of it? or do you just not find it fun because of the lack of build diversity and skills and weapons you can use there?.. too restrictive etc.

It feels bad, out of place and I don't see the reason for it in most cases other than some limited cheesy content that you might get into

once in a while

at best, for which current version of aquatic combat is enough. I doubt reworking traits/weapons/adding 5

(<- random number :D )

more skills that are currently unavailable per class would change anything about that.

A lot of why it feels bad though is because of how limited it is, how few weapons you can have and how a number of skills or even entire class mechanics are crippled and unusable there.

I disagree. It feels bad, because it feels bad. If I had 5 different weapons and a few trap skills (oof) available to pick from, it wouldn't suddenly make that combat "feel better" for me. So no, as I said in my previous post, I don't think that's the issue and subsequentially the way to suddenly make me like it.

Another issue is the lack of big content there which is linked to the above problem.. can't exactly have big awesome world bosses and bounties etc there when the combat is so lacking compared to the land.

Again, I disagree. "Having big content there" is not a way to make me like underwater combat. It's the way to make me dislike that "big content there", which is also why I don't want that content.

If people want to push for weapon/skill/trait reworks, then push for the land versions, because some of them are outdated, bugged, unusable or intentionally gutted to -maybe- wait for a rework.Why would you want or need aquatic combat? Just for that vertical movement that in reality changes nothing?

Pushing for weapons and reworks benefits both land and water combat

I don't think pushing for water combat revamp somehow begefits land combat tbh. Unless you mean removal of the skills that don't work underwater and in this way it influences the land combat, at which point... no, thanks.

one of the things many including myself have asked for is for more land weapons to become usable underwater which would greatly improve the combat there, if this ever became reality it would work in reverse as well with Spear and Trident becoming possible new land weapons.People are always asking for more new weapons types like spears and polearms but it's impossible to start throwing whole new ones in at this point in the game, but making some water ones usable on land would be a way they could do that and have a wide array of skins available for them.

Not much against some of the water weapons becoming available on land for some especs as a stylistycal choice, but I also don't see it as anything absolutely needed, seeing how I think anet already proved they can give any weapon any role/playstyle/mechanic/range they want (I'm also fine with that). So kind of "meh" either way here, but I know some warriors want land spear and who am I to be against that :DThat said, making those available on land has nothing to do with revamping underwater combat. It would -probably- still be a different spear with different skillset in both environments.

As for me I like the atmosphere of underwater regions, it's different and a change of pace from always being stuck on land.

That atmosphere is not enough for me to like a combat system -I'd even want that IF I wanted to go sightseeing underwater, the combat just gets in the way, but apparently it all comes down to personal preferentions, so to each their own :p

I like the combat there and as far as underwater content goes and by extent vertical combat in general there are no MMO's out there that do it anywhere near as good as Gw2 does.

There was aion, I've played it and my opinion about the flying combat (slap wings on underwater combat, get rid of water color filter and you have flying btw) waas similar to underwater combat here. Just didn't like it (but also it might have been even slightly less reliable). I'm no the one to decide whether I'm correct or not, but it didn't seem like a lot of people valued vertical combat as well. For me it's an unneeded gimmick that adds pretty much nothing and has no actual value -whether you run/chase in a straight line or diagonally makes pretty much no difference for the practical ingame combat reasons.

Gw2 by far has the best underwater system in any MMO.. and it's painful to see that it doesn't take advantage of that.

...I don't know about that, I don't see anything exceptional in it?

No underwater world bosses..

Luckily!

a crippled build system and far too many pointless limitations.. it has so much potential but Anet have not brought it out.

Again, I don't see that potential. Adding vertical movement just adds no value for me and that's about most of what underwater combat does. But maybe I'm still missing it, what exactly is that "potential" here? Second weapon/utility skillset? Meh. Add more (actually don't add, just rework whatever aged badly) to land battles where most people spend most of their time.

And considering the fact that one of this games main antagonists is a gigantic water dragon.. and we'll be going after it soon, it will be a major disappointment if the Water content continues to get so neglected.

Well, hopefully it learns how to fly, because I don't want to go down there.

...or at least crawl out on a beach or something?

[Teratus.2859]

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Teratus.2859 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Teratus.2859 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Teratus.2859 said:

@yoni.7015 said:

@Zoid.2568 said:

@yoni.7015 said:

@Zoid.2568 said:

@yoni.7015 said:No thanks, underwater combat is no fun.

They can make it fun with a revamp.No, they can’t and they don’t have to. Just leave it like it is.

So leave ít boring when ít can be fixed??

It will stay boring and the majority of players don’t like underwater content. So why waste resources on something only a very small minority enjoys?

Fair enough, then lets get rid of Raids, PvP, WvW, Fractals and Strike missions then because only a minority of players enjoy those as well.100% focus from here on out only on PvE story..Lets also get rid of the most underused/underpowered classes as well and stop making new specs for them.. since that's a waste of resources as well.

...but he didn't say "remove underwater combat", right? How is this even remotely valid comparison when you're suddenly talking about removing existing content?Now if you want to talk about raids, pvp, wvw, fractals and strike missions in context of "leaving it how it is" then... that's mostly what is actually happening.

And I agree with yoni, I don't like underwater combat and don't want much/anything to do with it. Not even mentioning "underwater only especs" or mass underwater skill rework, while the regular skills AND traits still need the revamp.

Already explained it in my last post in reference to what Yoni said was a "waste of resources"

Didn't notice that before, but after reading that explanation -which I'm not sure I understood correctly- you've pretty much agreed that it's an irrelevant comparison ("

Removing the classes would be a waste though

" and removing IS what you were talking about), right? Ok then.

Yeah but only removing the classes part, the reason still stands for everything else I said to jokingly get rid of as they require resources to keep in the game.. server costs etc so their existence by the same logic Yoni was using is a waste of said resources because only a minority of players enjoy them.

See... you seem to "admit it's different", but then circle right back into "it's the same logic" -the whole point is that it's by far NOT. ^^It's irrelevant if it's played by minority or not, nobody brought up removal of anything, but you and that just doesn't stand as a comparison at all.

No I didn't.The "same logic" here is that Yoni's argument is based on revamping and upgrading underwater gameplay is a "waste of resources" because "only a minority enjoys it"The other comparison's I made are based on the exact same argument.. they cost resources to exist and only a minority enjoys them.. therefore they should be removed from the game to save resources, an overall net gain in the long term.The only difference between those forms of content in the context of the argument is that underwater content does not require additional resources to exist because it's directly tied into commonly used PvE maps, it would cost more resources to remove it, same as removing professions would.. ergo an overall net loss.

It's fine if you don't like underwater content, though if you don't mind answering, why don't you like it?Do you just dislike the concept of it? or do you just not find it fun because of the lack of build diversity and skills and weapons you can use there?.. too restrictive etc.

It feels bad, out of place and I don't see the reason for it in most cases other than some limited cheesy content that you might get into

once in a while

at best, for which current version of aquatic combat is enough. I doubt reworking traits/weapons/adding 5

(<- random number :D )

more skills that are currently unavailable per class would change anything about that.

A lot of why it feels bad though is because of how limited it is, how few weapons you can have and how a number of skills or even entire class mechanics are crippled and unusable there.

I disagree. It feels bad, because it feels bad. If I had 5 different weapons and a few trap skills (oof) available to pick from, it wouldn't suddenly make that combat "feel better" for me. So no, as I said in my previous post, I don't think that's the issue and subsequentially the way to suddenly make me like it.

That's fine then, although "it feels bad" isn't a very descriptive for why you dislike it.It seems your stance is simply you don't like it and you don't want to like it.. and honestly I can respect that because I do the same thing with a lot of things I don't like as well, it's a normal, natural response to things you find unpleasent.Although the bitter reality with that attitude is often your opinions end up being disregarded on those subjects.. I've been there plenty of times myself as well so I get it.

Another issue is the lack of big content there which is linked to the above problem.. can't exactly have big awesome world bosses and bounties etc there when the combat is so lacking compared to the land.

Again, I disagree. "Having big content there" is not a way to make me like underwater combat. It's the way to make me

dislike that "big content there"

, which is also why I don't want that content.

Maybe not for you but it would for others, the point is though that it doesn't exist.. at least with Raids and Fractals and WvW etc people can try it and then say yay or nay based on whether they like it.Underwater however has not been given the same fair shot.The sad part is it was apparently supposed to, the Vanilla game did get a chunk of content cut and one of the things that was apparently cut was an underwater world boss.There were also supposed to be Manta enemies or creatures in the game too

https://imgur.com/TiYlqVl

which share a lot of similarities with the Skimmer mount so it's a fair assumption this design was repurposed or used to inspire the Skimmer's design.

If people want to push for weapon/skill/trait reworks, then push for the land versions, because some of them are outdated, bugged, unusable or intentionally gutted to -maybe- wait for a rework.Why would you want or need aquatic combat? Just for that vertical movement that in reality changes nothing?

Pushing for weapons and reworks benefits both land and water combat

I don't think pushing for water combat revamp somehow begefits land combat tbh. Unless you mean removal of the skills that don't work underwater and in this way it influences the land combat, at which point... no, thanks.

As I went on to mention the addition of land weapons becoming usable underwater would require a change to certain things in the game that could swing both ways.It is extremely unlikely this change would ever happen if the focus was on giving underwater weapons to land builds, but it would be likely to happen if it was a large project to improve the underwater combat.

one of the things many including myself have asked for is for more land weapons to become usable underwater which would greatly improve the combat there, if this ever became reality it would work in reverse as well with Spear and Trident becoming possible new land weapons.People are always asking for more new weapons types like spears and polearms but it's impossible to start throwing whole new ones in at this point in the game, but making some water ones usable on land would be a way they could do that and have a wide array of skins available for them.

Not much against some of the water weapons becoming available on land for some especs as a stylistycal choice, but I also don't see it as anything absolutely needed, seeing how I think anet already proved they can give any weapon any role/playstyle/mechanic/range they want (I'm also fine with that). So kind of "meh" either way here, but I know some warriors want land spear and who am I to be against that :DThat said, making those available on land has nothing to do with revamping underwater combat. It would -probably- still be

a different spear with different skillset

in both environments.

But it would be the same weapon therefore it would have access to all the existing skins, that is largely the main problem regarding Anet adding in entirely new weapon types despite years of people asking for Polearms, Spears and Scythes etc.. you'd have an extremely small list of skins to chose from compared to all the old weapons and that gap would never close, Anet simply do not want to do that.

The way Gw2 is setup right now crossing the weapons can't be done.. something about underwater and land weapons functioning different or something I guess, i'm not an Anet dev so I can't say for sure but Devs have said in the past that it would take a lot of work to cross the weapons like that and they just don't have a good enough reason to do it which is why they haven't done it.That's why it's unlikely to happen just for Warriors to get land Spear's even though it's a great weapon choice for them to have and a lot of people want it.

It would need a big reason to justify that kind of thing see, that's why if the focus was to add and expand the underwater content with a ton of land weapons it would be far more likely to happen as the same changes that would allow for you to use a Sword or a Dagger underwater would also allow for a Spear or Trident to be used on land with a lot less effort involved.

As for me I like the atmosphere of underwater regions, it's different and a change of pace from always being stuck on land.

That atmosphere is not enough for me to like a combat system -I'd even want that IF I wanted to go sightseeing underwater, the combat just gets in the way, but apparently it all comes down to personal preferentions, so to each their own :p

Aye it's mostly a preference thing.Although the combat is the same.. really the only difference mechanically is the vertical aspect as you yourself said before.

In terms of actual combat gameplay the lack of skills plays a lot into why underwater content turns many away.The easiest way to give an example of that is to just imagine if your favourite class only had 2-3 land weapon sets..

Lets use Warrior for an analogy here.. what if Warrior only had a Hammer and a Rifle.. with the same skills and stats etc etc it does now and couldn't use anything else.. but all the other classes are exactly the same as they are now?People would completely trash the warrior class, call it garbage and useless and they would hate playing it because there would be just too big a difference between a Warrior and all the other classes.That is pretty much the exactly what happens when people compare Underwater and Land combat in Gw2, There's just to big a gap between the two because one has been so heavily neglected while the other has had years and years of attention and refinement.Sure there will always be those who just hate the concept of the Warrior and would never play it even if it got upgraded to be on par with the other classes but there are a lot of people who would be willing to give it that chance.

I like the combat there and as far as underwater content goes and by extent vertical combat in general there are no MMO's out there that do it anywhere near as good as Gw2 does.

There was aion, I've played it and my opinion about the flying combat (slap wings on underwater combat, get rid of

water color filter

and you have flying btw) waas similar to underwater combat here. Just didn't like it (but also it might have been even slightly less reliable). I'm no the one to decide whether I'm correct or not, but it didn't seem like a lot of people valued vertical combat as well. For me it's an unneeded gimmick that adds pretty much nothing and has no actual value -whether you run/chase in a straight line or diagonally makes pretty much no difference for the practical ingame combat reasons.

I played Aion as well.. and yes while Vertical combat was a thing there it is no contest between which game did it better lolGw2 is far more modern though and has one of the best combat systems of any MMO on the market today so it's not really a fair comparison.Aion really didn't go into the vertical stuff much either, the vast majority of the game had flying and vertical combat disabled which was such a shame in a game that was literally advertised on you being able to fly.

Gw2 by far has the best underwater system in any MMO.. and it's painful to see that it doesn't take advantage of that.

...I don't know about that, I don't see anything exceptional in it?

Again I would blame that on it's potential not being tapped.It's really the same as the land combat, has all the same potential.. if only it were tapped.If you love the land combat in Gw2 then really you're looking at what underwater could be if it had the same care put into it.

a crippled build system and far too many pointless limitations.. it has so much potential but Anet have not brought it out.

Again, I don't see that potential. Adding vertical movement just adds no value for me and that's about most of what underwater combat does. But maybe I'm still missing it, what exactly is that "potential" here? Second weapon/utility skillset? Meh. Add more (actually don't add, just rework

whatever aged badly

) to land battles where most people spend most of their time.

It's the same as the land combat, the strength of GW2's combat system is in it's build system.. how you set your traits, what skills and weapons you use, how you customise your stats and gear and all of that designed to work together with your skill as a player to make you a force to be reckoned with in the world.The underwater content is crippled in that regard because of the lack of weapons and skills you can use, that in turn diminishes the effectiveness of some traits or in some cases makes them completely or nearly completely redundant.Overall it strongly restricts the effective build diversity potential you have access to in this content and that is one major reason why Underwater content is looked down on compared to land content.. it's just "not as good" but it's the same combat system, the potential is there it's just untapped, the land combat proves that.You could have the same level of combat quality underwater in Gw2 as you can on land, and that's what we want and why so many of us keep calling for these underwater reworks.Now has never been a better time to do this either since we're finally going to be dealing with the Deep Sea Dragon in End of Dragons.And that will be a major disappointment if it ends up being fought and killed on the land.

And considering the fact that one of this games main antagonists is a gigantic water dragon.. and we'll be going after it soon, it will be a major disappointment if the Water content continues to get so neglected.

Well, hopefully it learns how to fly, because I don't want to go down there.

...or at least crawl out on a beach

or something

?

Hahaha that's exactly what I don't want to happen XDGoing deep down in the ocean and having full water maps is way too much as well, as much as i'd personally enjoy them there does have to be some limits.But they could do some really awesome things with this dragon involving both combat styles and I so hope they do.Fighting it just on land would be such a disappointment.. it's a water dragon, it should have something water combat related.. that should go without saying really.

[Linken.6345]

@Teratus.2859 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Teratus.2859 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Teratus.2859 said:

@Sobx.1758 said:

@Teratus.2859 said:

@yoni.7015 said:

@Zoid.2568 said:

@yoni.7015 said:

@Zoid.2568 said:

@yoni.7015 said:No thanks, underwater combat is no fun.

They can make it fun with a revamp.No, they can’t and they don’t have to. Just leave it like it is.

So leave ít boring when ít can be fixed??

It will stay boring and the majority of players don’t like underwater content. So why waste resources on something only a very small minority enjoys?

Fair enough, then lets get rid of Raids, PvP, WvW, Fractals and Strike missions then because only a minority of players enjoy those as well.100% focus from here on out only on PvE story..Lets also get rid of the most underused/underpowered classes as well and stop making new specs for them.. since that's a waste of resources as well.

...but he didn't say "remove underwater combat", right? How is this even remotely valid comparison when you're suddenly talking about removing existing content?Now if you want to talk about raids, pvp, wvw, fractals and strike missions in context of "leaving it how it is" then... that's mostly what is actually happening.

And I agree with yoni, I don't like underwater combat and don't want much/anything to do with it. Not even mentioning "underwater only especs" or mass underwater skill rework, while the regular skills AND traits still need the revamp.

Already explained it in my last post in reference to what Yoni said was a "waste of resources"

Didn't notice that before, but after reading that explanation -which I'm not sure I understood correctly- you've pretty much agreed that it's an irrelevant comparison ("

Removing the classes would be a waste though

" and removing IS what you were talking about), right? Ok then.

Yeah but only removing the classes part, the reason still stands for everything else I said to jokingly get rid of as they require resources to keep in the game.. server costs etc so their existence by the same logic Yoni was using is a waste of said resources because only a minority of players enjoy them.

See... you seem to "admit it's different", but then circle right back into "it's the same logic" -the whole point is that it's by far NOT. ^^It's irrelevant if it's played by minority or not, nobody brought up removal of anything, but you and that just doesn't stand as a comparison at all.

No I didn't.The "same logic" here is that Yoni's argument is based on revamping and upgrading underwater gameplay is a "waste of resources" because "only a minority enjoys it"The other comparison's I made are based on the exact same argument.. they cost resources to exist and only a minority enjoys them.. therefore they should be removed from the game to save resources, an overall net gain in the long term.The only difference between those forms of content in the context of the argument is that underwater content does not require additional resources to exist because it's directly tied into commonly used PvE maps, it would cost more resources to remove it, same as removing professions would.. ergo an overall net loss.

It's fine if you don't like underwater content, though if you don't mind answering, why don't you like it?Do you just dislike the concept of it? or do you just not find it fun because of the lack of build diversity and skills and weapons you can use there?.. too restrictive etc.

It feels bad, out of place and I don't see the reason for it in most cases other than some limited cheesy content that you might get into

once in a while

at best, for which current version of aquatic combat is enough. I doubt reworking traits/weapons/adding 5

(<- random number :D )

more skills that are currently unavailable per class would change anything about that.

A lot of why it feels bad though is because of how limited it is, how few weapons you can have and how a number of skills or even entire class mechanics are crippled and unusable there.

I disagree. It feels bad, because it feels bad. If I had 5 different weapons and a few trap skills (oof) available to pick from, it wouldn't suddenly make that combat "feel better" for me. So no, as I said in my previous post, I don't think that's the issue and subsequentially the way to suddenly make me like it.

That's fine then, although "it feels bad" isn't a very descriptive for why you dislike it.It seems your stance is simply you don't like it and you don't want to like it.. and honestly I can respect that because I do the same thing with a lot of things I don't like as well, it's a normal, natural response to things you find unpleasent.Although the bitter reality with that attitude is often your opinions end up being disregarded on those subjects.. I've been there plenty of times myself as well so I get it.

Another issue is the lack of big content there which is linked to the above problem.. can't exactly have big awesome world bosses and bounties etc there when the combat is so lacking compared to the land.

Again, I disagree. "Having big content there" is not a way to make me like underwater combat. It's the way to make me

dislike that "big content there"

, which is also why I don't want that content.

Maybe not for you but it would for others, the point is though that it doesn't exist.. at least with Raids and Fractals and WvW etc people can try it and then say yay or nay based on whether they like it.Underwater however has not been given the same fair shot.The sad part is it was apparently supposed to, the Vanilla game did get a chunk of content cut and one of the things that was apparently cut was an underwater world boss.There were also supposed to be Manta enemies or creatures in the game too

https://imgur.com/TiYlqVl

which share a lot of similarities with the Skimmer mount so it's a fair assumption this design was repurposed or used to inspire the Skimmer's design.

If people want to push for weapon/skill/trait reworks, then push for the land versions, because some of them are outdated, bugged, unusable or intentionally gutted to -maybe- wait for a rework.Why would you want or need aquatic combat? Just for that vertical movement that in reality changes nothing?

Pushing for weapons and reworks benefits both land and water combat

I don't think pushing for water combat revamp somehow begefits land combat tbh. Unless you mean removal of the skills that don't work underwater and in this way it influences the land combat, at which point... no, thanks.

As I went on to mention the addition of land weapons becoming usable underwater would require a change to certain things in the game that could swing both ways.It is extremely unlikely this change would ever happen if the focus was on giving underwater weapons to land builds, but it would be likely to happen if it was a large project to improve the underwater combat.

one of the things many including myself have asked for is for more land weapons to become usable underwater which would greatly improve the combat there, if this ever became reality it would work in reverse as well with Spear and Trident becoming possible new land weapons.People are always asking for more new weapons types like spears and polearms but it's impossible to start throwing whole new ones in at this point in the game, but making some water ones usable on land would be a way they could do that and have a wide array of skins available for them.

Not much against some of the water weapons becoming available on land for some especs as a stylistycal choice, but I also don't see it as anything absolutely needed, seeing how I think anet already proved they can give any weapon any role/playstyle/mechanic/range they want (I'm also fine with that). So kind of "meh" either way here, but I know some warriors want land spear and who am I to be against that :DThat said, making those available on land has nothing to do with revamping underwater combat. It would -probably- still be

a different spear with different skillset

in both environments.

But it would be the same weapon therefore it would have access to all the existing skins, that is largely the main problem regarding Anet adding in entirely new weapon types despite years of people asking for Polearms, Spears and Scythes etc.. you'd have an extremely small list of skins to chose from compared to all the old weapons and that gap would never close, Anet simply do not want to do that.

The way Gw2 is setup right now crossing the weapons can't be done.. something about underwater and land weapons functioning different or something I guess, i'm not an Anet dev so I can't say for sure but Devs have said in the past that it would take a lot of work to cross the weapons like that and they just don't have a good enough reason to do it which is why they haven't done it.That's why it's unlikely to happen just for Warriors to get land Spear's even though it's a great weapon choice for them to have and a lot of people want it.

It would need a big reason to justify that kind of thing see, that's why if the focus was to add and expand the underwater content with a ton of land weapons it would be far more likely to happen as the same changes that would allow for you to use a Sword or a Dagger underwater would also allow for a Spear or Trident to be used on land with a lot less effort involved.

As for me I like the atmosphere of underwater regions, it's different and a change of pace from always being stuck on land.

That atmosphere is not enough for me to like a combat system -I'd even want that IF I wanted to go sightseeing underwater, the combat just gets in the way, but apparently it all comes down to personal preferentions, so to each their own :p

Aye it's mostly a preference thing.Although the combat is the same.. really the only difference mechanically is the vertical aspect as you yourself said before.

In terms of actual combat gameplay the lack of skills plays a lot into why underwater content turns many away.The easiest way to give an example of that is to just imagine if your favourite class only had 2-3 land weapon sets..

Lets use Warrior for an analogy here.. what if Warrior only had a Hammer and a Rifle.. with the same skills and stats etc etc it does now and couldn't use anything else.. but all the other classes are exactly the same as they are now?People would completely trash the warrior class, call it garbage and useless and they would hate playing it because there would be just too big a difference between a Warrior and all the other classes.That is pretty much the exactly what happens when people compare Underwater and Land combat in Gw2, There's just to big a gap between the two because one has been so heavily neglected while the other has had years and years of attention and refinement.Sure there will always be those who just hate the concept of the Warrior and would never play it even if it got upgraded to be on par with the other classes but there are a lot of people who would be willing to give it that chance.

I like the combat there and as far as underwater content goes and by extent vertical combat in general there are no MMO's out there that do it anywhere near as good as Gw2 does.

There was aion, I've played it and my opinion about the flying combat (slap wings on underwater combat, get rid of

water color filter

and you have flying btw) waas similar to underwater combat here. Just didn't like it (but also it might have been even slightly less reliable). I'm no the one to decide whether I'm correct or not, but it didn't seem like a lot of people valued vertical combat as well. For me it's an unneeded gimmick that adds pretty much nothing and has no actual value -whether you run/chase in a straight line or diagonally makes pretty much no difference for the practical ingame combat reasons.

I played Aion as well.. and yes while Vertical combat was a thing there it is no contest between which game did it better lolGw2 is far more modern though and has one of the best combat systems of any MMO on the market today so it's not really a fair comparison.Aion really didn't go into the vertical stuff much either, the vast majority of the game had flying and vertical combat disabled which was such a shame in a game that was literally advertised on you being able to fly.

Gw2 by far has the best underwater system in any MMO.. and it's painful to see that it doesn't take advantage of that.

...I don't know about that, I don't see anything exceptional in it?

Again I would blame that on it's potential not being tapped.It's really the same as the land combat, has all the same potential.. if only it were tapped.If you love the land combat in Gw2 then really you're looking at what underwater could be if it had the same care put into it.

a crippled build system and far too many pointless limitations.. it has so much potential but Anet have not brought it out.

Again, I don't see that potential. Adding vertical movement just adds no value for me and that's about most of what underwater combat does. But maybe I'm still missing it, what exactly is that "potential" here? Second weapon/utility skillset? Meh. Add more (actually don't add, just rework

whatever aged badly

) to land battles where most people spend most of their time.

It's the same as the land combat, the strength of GW2's combat system is in it's build system.. how you set your traits, what skills and weapons you use, how you customise your stats and gear and all of that designed to work together with your skill as a player to make you a force to be reckoned with in the world.The underwater content is crippled in that regard because of the lack of weapons and skills you can use, that in turn diminishes the effectiveness of some traits or in some cases makes them completely or nearly completely redundant.Overall it strongly restricts the effective build diversity potential you have access to in this content and that is one major reason why Underwater content is looked down on compared to land content.. it's just "not as good" but it's the same combat system, the potential is there it's just untapped, the land combat proves that.You could have the same level of combat quality underwater in Gw2 as you can on land, and that's what we want and why so many of us keep calling for these underwater reworks.Now has never been a better time to do this either since we're finally going to be dealing with the Deep Sea Dragon in End of Dragons.And that will be a major disappointment if it ends up being fought and killed on the land.

And considering the fact that one of this games main antagonists is a gigantic water dragon.. and we'll be going after it soon, it will be a major disappointment if the Water content continues to get so neglected.

Well, hopefully it learns how to fly, because I don't want to go down there.

...or at least crawl out on a beach

or something

?

Hahaha that's exactly what I don't want to happen XDGoing deep down in the ocean and having full water maps is way too much as well, as much as i'd personally enjoy them there does have to be some limits.But they could do some really awesome things with this dragon involving both combat styles and I so hope they do.Fighting it just on land would be such a disappointment.. it's a water dragon, it should have something water combat related.. that should go without saying really.

It will be zhaitan 2.0 instead of airships we got charr submarines and instead of laser cannons we got torpedo tubes we have to press f on.

[Ayakaru.6583]

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@Ayakaru.6583 said:They should remove all underwater traits from the main lines. Make it a separate trait line for uw traits.

Remove all skills from underwater (yes, i know that's a big shock), and create 2 uw healing skills, 3-6 class skills, and 2 elite skills. They can use pre-existing skills as a foundation, but the point is that from the ground up they're designed with underwater synergy in mind.

Then;

add an underwater exclusive legend to the revenant

That's a bad idea. First, remember that you don;t have a dedicated underwater traitline setup currently - you use the build you have selected for land. Moving underwater traits from main lines to separate one would have the consequence of noone ever using those underwater traits at all, and all builds ending up broken underwater.

Now we actually have the opposite problem: all traits are one big soup. That means people have to choose which traits are optimal on land, and which traits are optimal under water. And given there's less underwater content people tend to ignore underwater traits completely. and I don't get your second part. If underwater specific traits were to have its own tree, why would no one use those traits? If anything, people would pay more attention to it as they'd actually be usefull.

Even if you assumed that a separate trait setup would be introduced for underwater, to work alongside already existing separate skill setup, your suggestion would still not help. You'd simply end up with every class having one or at best two working underwater builds. Builds that would not necessarily represent builds that would be available for that class on land. You don't want a situation where i.e. healing druid, when going underwater, gets changed into either a power dps build (built around spear) or a condi one (built around a speargun)... while still wearing harriers.

That.. is hardly any different from what is already happening on land. There are 2 lines of thought:

1. The primary content of the game is so easy, you can choose the worst skills and traits and still beat Balthazar in your underwear. Hence, people would choose the traits they find fun or usefull.
2. Only in raids/high-fractals do people care about optimized builds and even then and there every class is already pushed into 1 of 2 of many existing builds or they're excluded from that content by society vote.

And, also going back to this underwater revenant exclusive legend - what build would that one have synergy with? Condi? Power? Support? Heal?

Good question, I'd vote a middle class actually, one that doesn't focus too much on raw damage or condition, so that it can be used in complement with either a Shiro/Dwarf or the Demon, depending on whichever the player prefers. It's more a case of balanced fairness, in the sense that there are legends which are disabled underwater, then in return there should be a legend thats made for underwater. I don't know on the top of my head which one is disabled, I thought it was Dwarf but don't quote me on that. Maybe in that case, the UW legend should replace that one in functionality.

I'd say it should be the opposite - we should aim for the current traitlines to be equally useful both on land and underwater with no need to change traits inbetween.

The main grasp of my reasoning behind a completely seperate UW combat set-up is simply because there are some skills disabled underwater which completely break the way a player has set-up their character, and their gear, and their traits, etc.For example, the warrior's Headbutt is disabled underwater for no logical reason whatsoever. entirely arbitrary. Yet, the headbutt is an important skill to a warriors function, both in terms of CC and rage genegeration.