DeathPanel.8362
-
Posts
314 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Events
Articles
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by DeathPanel.8362
-
-
Just now, WRay.2391 said:
Not true. If you have legendary gear required, your are fine. They are not removing stats from legendary gear after balance patch. Even if you have no legendary you are fine (flipping between zerker and condi for example). This case is a removal of stat, not a balance case for sure.
I'm not talking about that fringe case. I'm talking about the general player population. The norm, not the exception.
The norm is that each time a nerf patch happens many players are forced to spend currency or time to offset that nerf by getting new equipment or runes/sigils or to change their builds entirely to remain relevant.
-
3
-
-
Just now, WRay.2391 said:
Totally straw man. 3 legs means a serious condition, usually requires medical intervention an is not a normal situation that everybody will take calmly. If you mean that we need to react to remediate this "exception" and tell ANET that it's doing something wrong, then yes, I will agree with you. If you are telling that this "exception" is totally fine, then it's a straw man argument.
You're using an exception fallacy. You're reaching a group conclusion based on exceptional cases, not the norm.
The norm of GW2 is that the vast majority of players don't have all legendary gear on every slot and weapon. So each time a Nerf patch hits what I described happens.
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, WRay.2391 said:
Nonsense. Your claim was totally false, you can't just say it's exception. Otherwise literally anybody can claim this for any argument. Oh, it's just an exception ... Otherwise I was correct...
If I said humans have two legs and you point out that someone was born with a birth defect and had 3 legs that doesn't disprove what I said. Exceptions don't disprove generalities.
-
3
-
-
6 minutes ago, WRay.2391 said:
Any person invested in legendary gear can immediately swap to another build without any issues or tax, so this case is uniquely different.
That's a fringe case. 99.99% of players don't have full sets of all legendary of every armor class, accessories, and weapon type.
-
5
-
-
Weapons are no longer tied to elite specs. So you should be able to use them in pvp.
-
1
-
-
25 minutes ago, idpersona.3810 said:
You are wrong. Every single balance patch does not tax players (in gold or time) to keep the functionality they had the day before.
You are wrong. Nerf patches taxes players in gold AND time because it forces them to change their equipment and builds to offset them which necessitates grinding or spending currency. Sometimes that's not even possible and a build is just straight up dead with no offset. You pretending that this relic patch is somehow uniquely different is just wrong. If anything this has far less impact on many player builds than some of the nerfs that came down recently.
-
1
-
4
-
-
36 minutes ago, Geralt.7519 said:
So, you're saying that a single relic for a single box is enough to cover all the builds of different types and classes people might use during a single play time? That's obviously assuming relics are not char bound because we don't know that yet.
Are you serious?
I'm saying ANET doesn't have to "cover" anything at all if it doesn't feel like it.
-
4
-
-
12 minutes ago, Geralt.7519 said:
Switching to different characters during your playtime is a thing, you know?
You still have to play with only one at any given time.
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, idpersona.3810 said:
After the expansion release, (from the information we currently have) all 16 of them will be lesser than they were the day before. That is a problem
Welcome to every single nerf balance patch ever made.
-
3
-
-
Just now, Geralt.7519 said:
Stop assuming everyone else is like you, we're not all the same and we do not play all the same.
I said: "you're not going to be playing all characters at all times."
Everyone is like me in that they occupy one place in the physical universe at any given time and can't be playing with all their characters at all times. I stated an objective fact.
-
1
-
1
-
2
-
-
Just now, Geralt.7519 said:
since we know nothing about how runes and relics will be actually changed
Release patch notes
1 minute ago, Geralt.7519 said:you get ONE relic at launch for ONE build
.Which you'll use on the character that you run through the SOTO story mode with, then by the time you're done with the story mode enough Relics will be in TP that you can then buy or craft the rest for the other characters you want to focus on playing for the remainder of the patch cycle.
2 minutes ago, Geralt.7519 said:the rest of your builds and chars are screwed until you grind more relics
Again, I pointed out before that you're not going to be playing all characters at all times. There's no requirement that you gear characters that you don't plan on playing with relics immediately. For example, out of 32 characters I have I only play 5-6 characters 99% of the time in each patch cycle and rotate based on what builds are optimal for that patch cycle.
-
2
-
-
Just now, Geralt.7519 said:
That's wasn't every new xpac, that's what I'm saying, they're adding new gear pieces and possibly breaking builds every new xpac, this is likely the new trend and I don't like it.
No builds are getting broken. A build isn't going to all of a sudden stop being viable because has more flexibility to choose better relic effects and rune combos. Not a single build will be less effective with this Relics paradigm because worst case scenario you have the same runes and relic effect as before and your build remains identical in performance.
-
2
-
1
-
-
Just now, Geralt.7519 said:
Key word here is "rare cases", that's not the same as "systematically in new xpacs".
Relics are not different "systemically" than ascended implementation. In fact, it's less because ascended implementation invalidated someone's entire equipment set and forced people to replace their entire loadout.
-
Just now, idpersona.3810 said:
I don't think there is much difference in the reading of that sentence. But it's the internet, and no reason to get caught up on stuff like that.
"not to be expensive" is very very relative. You stated earlier that up to 10g/relic is fine. I think it is decidedly not, especially for players with 20+ builds to fill out. I see no reason there should be a 200g tax on playing in the new expansion, just to get back to where we are today. That prospect seems utterly ridiculous to me.
And again, I really wish we had some sort of official statement so we could stop going around in circles on what's going to happen.
Having a lot of characters doesn't mean you'll be playing with all of them all the time. It's not a requirement to totally equip all of them with relics at all times. I have 32 characters and frankly, most of them are parked at gathering locations for farming purposes and I only rotate characters I feel like focusing on playing for the patch cycle which is maybe 5-6 characters. That's the case for most people that I know who have a lot of characters.
-
1
-
-
33 minutes ago, Geralt.7519 said:
It's actually the 2nd xpac in a row, the jade bot core was another new piece of equipment they introduced in EoD, gives a lot of vitality and it's necessary because they nerfed survivability across the board to account for it.
You know, if the relic was *really* just a new piece after 11 years I would have nothing to complain about, but since it's the second in a row I do, because it means it's highly likely the next xpac they'll "invent" another one.
Jade bot is only relevant in certain game modes like open-world PVE. People also adjusted just fine to it. So why would this new relic slot be any different?
Vertical progression isn't always bad in GW2. It was implemented in limited ways and in rare cases. People have always adjusted to them just fine and relics will be no different.
-
25 minutes ago, idpersona.3810 said:
You literally have no basis for this claim.
But even "not expensive" will add up very quickly when players might have to gather up dozens of relics. Either in time or gold. And all of this just takes away from the time spent playing/enjoying the game.
I said "likely" not to be expensive. It's speculation, not a claim.
-
12 hours ago, Geralt.7519 said:
So they make grinding new gear a goal in a game that's always been sold as no gear treadmill? Did they suddenly forget why many people play GW2 instead of WoW?
It's just a single slot and will likely not be expensive. It's not like in WoW where each new level cap increase completely invalidates every existing gear you have. A single new equipment slot after 11+ years is not that big of a deal. Similar complaints were voiced when ascended gear came out and people adjusted just fine.
-
Just give everyone that has 6+ legendary runes a legendary Relic at release.
Problem solved.
-
10
-
1
-
1
-
2
-
-
2 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:
What's a "change to the fundamental design" that can't happen here are you talking about (in the context of what people actually expect in this thread and not some "revert the whole thing" that you mentioned and yet nobody really asked for here)?
What do you mean what am I arguing here? I'm pointing out that you're diluting what people say and turn towards generalizations or literally changing what people want in order to have an easier time dismissing what is being said in this thread. Was anything in my previous post unclear to you? I can re-explain, but first I need to understand what was unclear there.I made myself clear already. Near release I don't expect ANET to make any large adjustments, maybe small tweaks, unless showstoppers are found. What part of this do you find objectionable?
-
1
-
5
-
1
-
-
Just now, Sobx.1758 said:
It doesn't matter what exactly anyone thinks the "showstoppers" are, because pre-release changes happen regardless of them being "showstoppers" or not.
I already said previously that tweaks might happen but no changes to the fundamental design happen this late. So what are you arguing here?
-
7
-
-
Just now, Ashen.2907 said:
Particularly as ANet has made it clear that they recognize the issue is of sufficient concern to enough players to warrant being addressed. Based on past behavior they are 1) able to make changes within the time frame available, and 2) not inclined to address feedback that they consider to be just a few disgruntled players.
Consider what percentage of players have all legendary runes, then consider what percentage of that percentage is unhappy with the changes and compensation, then consider what percentage of that percentage of that percentage is willing to quit over the changes and you'll find out exactly how it's not an issue for ANET to prioritize addressing this issue in the time frame remaining, particularly since there are far more possible issues which affect a far bigger portion of the player base that need to be addressed.
-
1
-
5
-
-
1 minute ago, Sobx.1758 said:
Stop trying to dilute a specific complaint into a general "if they'd care about any player being disguntled..." again. This is not about "any player being disgruntled", I'm not sure there's a reason not to respond specifically according to what this thread is about other than maybe because turning specifics into this generalisation makes it easier for you to automatically dismiss anything that was said in this thread.
Not what was being discussed. You were trying to dilute the term "showstopper" to make it sound like it can be totally subjective when it really isn't.
The bottom line, what's being discussed here aren't showstoppers and I've explained exactly why that is in my earlier posts.
-
1
-
5
-
2
-
-
42 minutes ago, Pifil.5193 said:
It's pretty clear what the term means although we've usually used the term blocker in the companies I've worked in.
What constitutes a showstopper or blocker varies hugely from company to company and project to project and as you probably know the cheapest time to fix a defect or other flaw is in design, after that it's in development and once it gets out into the wild it tends to be a lot more expensive both in terms of engineering cost and customer goodwill.
One would hope that they're not currently planning on coding this expansion right up to 11:59 on the 21st of August and will have scheduled time to address issues and feedback now as it will save them a lot of grief in the future. At least from my own experience it will but then I've been working on agile projects for the last 20+ years or so so making (hopefully) minor changes a couple of months from release to address feedback or shifting customer priorities is nothing new to me.
From Rubi's post they appear to be working on something anyway we'll have to see what that is and whether or not it requires changes now or additions in the future or is just a few more boxes of relics.
Whatever variation of the definition you want to use none of those include "few people might be disgruntled" because we made the changes. If that was the case then every single balance patch where Nerfs happened would be showstoppers.
-
7
-
1
-
-
Just now, Sobx.1758 said:
"Reverting their decision on shifting effects to relics" is not really what people expect here though, it's about the proper treatment of players who spent 2k+ gold on runes just to have their functionality cut from them.
That's why I said they might tweak things like giving additional relic boxes to those players.
-
1
-
5
-
So Relics will be vertical progression, power creep and pay to win? [Merged]
in Secrets of the Obscure Discussion (Archived)
Posted
I was using an analogy.