meerfunkuhtron.9725

I have tried guard once upon a time, but couldn't get the hang of it. I definitely might try these builds, even if to just learn how to possibly counter them. Just wanted to see if there's something I'm missing/can be done. This is kind of reassuring though, at least perhaps I'm not that bad >_<

That is what I was afraid of. Which at this point, I'm not sure really what to do? I run Untamed/ranger mainly, and use the boon strip from my pet whenever I can (traited it to where it turns 2 boons into damage and stripping another 2), but that doesn't seem to do much. With Willbenders especially, I can try to disengage but they're porting and constantly putting in pressure that they strip my health off pretty quickly anyhow. The combo fields from eles are definitely really strong, especially when they're in a group and all they're doing is healing their mates. Nigh unkillable. I'm running cele gear at the moment doing conditions, but also have a power build that haven't helped my situation. Is there no hope? lol 'Cause I'm finding that they can put a ton of pressure on me while having all this passive protection, but I can't do the same. Is there a way to overcome or are some of these classes just that strong at this time?

I wasn't really sure where to post this, but since I've only been seeing this in WvW, I'll ask here. I didn't play for a few years but have started being active again recently. So I know there's a lot of changes I've missed, and just not familiar with the new classes. I've noticed that there's instances when I'm not damaging enemy players at all; specifically, I've seen this on Willbenders, but have also seen the same against auramancers. Now, typically, when a damage is being negated, the game tells you, right? Like if they're blocking, invuln, or evading, etc. But I'm not seeing those in this particular instance--they are simply not taking any damage, both from melee and ranged projectiles. With Willbenders, I noticed they have what looks like a light aura during this time, but I was looking at their kit and didn't see anything about light aura or anything else completely negating damage (except for their heal skill which only negates one attack, from what I gathered at least, and not multiple attacks lasting for what feels like 10 seconds). I am also not blinded during these situations, which is the only other thing I was expecting that would make my attacks miss. Any help here would be great! I'm not enjoying the fact that I'm not seeing the typical flying texts or other animations that accompany such powerful skills. But the next best thing is to figure out what possible skills are at work so I can plan my fights better. Thank you in advance!

This is actually an interesting thing to point out 'cause I was talking about this with a guildie the other day... My theory is that Maguuma has enough players within its server that, even though they might get paired with other servers, their playstyle still takes over. So yes, I think Maguuma is one of those servers that have kept a part of their identity intact, which is why they're pretty much (for lack of a better phrase) a "force to be reckoned with". They have an over-arching purpose, which guides how their players behave. This makes them stronger against others who are scattered. Which is a big part of the problem, IMO, with the way that WvW has become... because the rest of the servers either don't have enough numbers to drive their own goal (so server pairings are essentially working against each other/not putting their resources together), or it's filled with people who only care about PPT which leads to incredibly stale "matches", or it has way more new players than veterans so they don't know much about what to actually do (again, no goal to strive for). Honestly... it sucks, but I share your sentiment. Case in point: Our t3 keep in our home bl was attacked, by a 30-ish enemy zerg. We had about 20+ people. It should have been a good time to defend, and yet I had to argue and convince people to stay and defend. We had enough, but apparently unless it was a sure win, no one was going to stick around. Anet needs to come up with a way to encourage people to actually play the kitten game mode. Because at this point in time, from what I'm seeing, it's treated like a giant sPvP map with just zergs. People just want to cap points, then circle the map for other easily capped points. Players need to be incentivized to guard and defend their terrain, otherwise, just take away all these structures and replace them with a circle because that's how it's being treated anyway. So I feel like, unless this also changes when the alliance update comes around, then things might not come out any differently. I'm assuming they're hinging on alliance leaders to motivate their members enough, so that the focus on just PPT wouldn't be the norm? To me, that's not enough. They actually need to change the way people are rewarded so that we're more encouraged to play the different aspects of the game, and not just abuse one aspect of it.

So, I can only speak from personal experience of course, but that was never the case for the server I was on. Our popular commanders were multiple, and they belonged not only to the big guilds, but also the small ones. When changes or important topics were being discussed, we had a round table that included all the guild leaders and commanders so each one of them had a a voice... making it so it's not just one person "holding it together". When a few inevitably left, we lamented their leaving, but that definitely didn't cause our server to decay. 'Cause afterwards, other individuals stepped up to take that person's place, and we moved on. I think there's still a good difference between server and alliance identity, but for me, at this point it's largely conjecture and it will only be clarified once it goes live. I am curious though, 'cause I've been given different answers before and couldn't find the actual answer on the game's wiki... Are alliances shuffled from time to time still? Or are players free to pretty much keep the alliance they want for as long as they wanted?

The only reason server identity has been null is because it was literally killed by Anet through world linking. Of course people don't care about it now, what's the point of holding on to something that Anet says should no longer matter? However, the reason "server identity" has been brought up, even if it no longer exists, is because some of us recognize that things were better when it existed. Not to say that things were perfect before, but simply that having server identity was one of the things Anet should've kept through all these changes. We can look at server identity as something else--a basic, quasi-stable community. It worked because it gave people more motivation to play outside of just getting points. It meant actually caring about losing some structures, about defending and building them up, about fighting and being good at it so that you can actually win against stronger opponents instead of just caring about ppt. It meant that WvW wasn't just a way to get fights, even though that's a big component of the game mode. It made people care about strategies and working within their community, instead of just jumping wagons towards the winning teams. So yeah, you're partly right in that server identity is no longer a thing, but it is neither a myth or a joke to many of us who played WvW from the beginning (though obviously your mileage may vary as it could differ between each player and server) and saw how this game mode took a nosedive after it was nuked. I completely understand why the subject is brought up when it comes to 1-why WvW sucks atm, and 2-possible things we could do to make it better (by possibly bringing a version of it back).

The whole thing, Sahne, the whole thing. What's the last part of the comment I sent you before that last one?

Dude, do you kittening read.

It is what you keep bringing up though, but let's move on. Tell them to stop doing that then. Let one tick go by. I know you somehow think that's ridiculous but we've all managed and become successful in the game just using that method, at least until we've gotten more experience. Plus I already offered thoughts in favor of this concern of yours, which is this:

That can be accurate if people actually tried a bit more than just going in a few times, dying, then quitting (I'm basing this on what you said people were doing). You can have all the resources for someone, but if they don't bother actually learning or at least trying to, then that's a problem on their end. Not the game, or anyone else's. Again, I'm not saying that nothing can be improved based on new player's feedback. I think you can stop making the assumption that that's what I'm implying. What I'm saying is, let them learn about the game more, and if they still feel similarly after learning more about it and its various resources, then their feedback should be given weight. Not anytime before. That's my only point. I can agree that part of this is true. Any mmo needs new players to survive, and that's across game modes. However, there's other things to consider beyond just looking at new players. WvW's population bombed after their changes in 2016. 70% of my server left, many of them still come out to check whether the fiasco has ended, then they dip back out after finding that it's only gotten worse. If we want to not only entice new players, but also bring players back, AND retain them (both new and veteran), then we need to see what actually drove people out in the first place and why the game mode has felt lackluster for a majority of people. IMO, it's this long string of changes, starting with big ones that didn't need to be made in the first place, that brought us to WvW's current state. Not the combat or visuals, even though I agree that those things can also be improved upon.

I said I wouldn't worry about them because of this: I think there's value in letting people experience the game a bit more and letting them use the resources it already provides. Their feedback then becomes more accurate. And they might learn that what's already in game is actually enough, like many of us have. And if not, then they can offer a more nuanced criticism other than just "well, I quit after I died because I didn't know what was going on and I didn't bother to look into it more." No one's going to take that seriously, let alone any dev who'd have to put the time to make the changes they're asking for.

Honestly, if a person quits pvp because they died soon after they joined without them making much of an effort to learn the game mode, I wouldn't worry much about them. They'll either come back later when they're ready to try again, or they'll find that pvp in this game is simply not for them, and that's ok. Not saying we shouldn't improve on things, of course, but I don't think "I hate pvp because I died easily as a beginner" is a good reason to start making changes on their behalf. However, I did have an image in my head of the status effects we get when you were talking about them earlier... wherein we have them looking meaner based on whether they surpass a threshold against your health pool. Normal tick, normal looking indicator. If it's a higher damage tick, then make it more fiery if it's a burn, more bloody looking on bleed, etc. I stand by my thoughts that this isn't necessary, but I don't think it'd hurt the game either.

I mean, yes, you're right. I definitely find it acceptable. Sure, I found that dying from a bunch of condition damage that I didn't manage to cleanse because I didn't know much about it, was frustrating at first. But I learned that using the resources the game gives me (combat logs, status indicators both for me and my opponent, the tells from their skills, etc.) helps a lot and I enjoy that learning aspect of the game. I like that GW2 tells you enough but doesn't tell you everything. It gives me room to figure things out on my own, and that makes it more engaging for me. I've played ESO for years and I've found that I get bored with its combat, so I'll agree to disagree here because this seems more of a subjective issue.

Ok, so you're talking about their indicators as opposed to how the skills looked, which is what I thought you were saying in the other comment. Which I'm glad you're not because frankly, that would be ridiculous lol. I am trying to think of other games where the status indicators on your bar changes based on how deadly they are, and I can't come up with any. Not that I'm saying they don't exist, but rather give an example? 'Cause I can see what you mean, but I honestly don't think it's that common in other games either. And as much as I think this can be helpful, I feel like there's enough tells in the game for this. If I get condi-bombed, there's a high chance I'm playing against a condi build. If the bleeding tick is removing a good amount of my health, then it's a condi build and I cleanse before it shaves off the rest of my health. Like I said earlier, paying attention to how our health is affected by the statuses we receive is a very reasonable expectation from players in active combat like this. A small amount of experience on the field can help you discern how to properly react to these situations and I feel like learning these things isn't that big of an ask.

Wait. Are you saying that the animation for every skill should change depending on the type of armor being used? I feel like that is a bit too much to ask for. There's so many gear combinations out there at this point, and a comparable amount of skills per class. To ask that each skill should look differently based on whether a person is wearing zerker or soldiers is on unreasonable territory for me. I don't think there's any game out there that has that level of customization, and I think for good reason. Unless I'm misreading what you're implying here? Edit: re-read your thing and I think I did misread but only slightly. You're wanting them to let you know if the skill is coming from a condition build or a power build? Hopefully I'm understanding that correctly this time. Which to me is still too much. Hybrids also exist. I run cele but I'm using power-based weapons and focus on direct damage. I don't think we can expect the game to account for these details more than it already does. And I feel like paying attention to how your health is affected, which therefore lets you know what kind of damage this person is dealing, is a very sensible thing to expect out of players engaged in combat. I still feel like I'm misunderstanding the implication here, if so, I'm sorry. I'm running on low sleep but invested in this topic lol

I tried looking up a list of all the changes they made and have come up short, save for people in forums highlighting comments and some vague announcements. I was hoping I'd actually find it in the wiki (as they typically have changes listed on there, don't they?). In any case, what I'm saying is, it's hard to enumerate all the changes made but we know full well those changes did happen. Big things were the world linking and changes to how match-ups were made. Others were the addition of the reward track (I don't think anyone complains about this one though lol), addition of the desert borderlands, gliding and mounts, changes to siege, pretty sure PPT scoring was changed too (but I can't find any substantial evidence on this one, just something I vaguely remember so take that with a bucket of salt). Some of these were big changes, especially the match ups and world linking, which were meant to address issues that-- as a lot of us tried to point out back then --in the end didn't resolve those issues and actually caused other problems instead. Before HoT, WvW was mainly needing attention. We felt like the forgotten child. The biggest things people wanted were the lack of rewards, and that matches were stale. These at least were the concerns of my server and others we communicated with. There were also bugs to be fixed, of course, that's nothing new. But it was far from feeling like a fuster cluck of messes like it does now, wherein there seems to be so much more issues than Anet can ever try to resolve. I can understand why people feel a roll back to "simpler times", if you will, would be the best way to sort these issues out. Back when the problems were a bit clearer, more concise.

Specters are a thief class though. Disengaging in fights is one of their core traits for also being one of the squishiest classes. I know it can be annoying to fight against (thieves and mesmers have been the bane of my wvw existence since launch lol), but that's part of their class mechanics and learning how to counter them isn't impossible either. At least for the moment. There were times when they weren't, but Anet did make necessary changes for those. The game's mobility and fast-paced aspects is one of the consistent praises I've seen regarding this game and it's what sets it apart from a lot of other mmo's that came out around the same time.. ones whose combat was slower and cast times that kept you rooted were the norm. I think even today, the only other game I hear mentioned regarding fast paced combat is BDO. However, I can definitely agree that some qualities have become bloated (re: sustain, cc's). I love the build diversity present in GW2 but I'd definitely like to see some aspects toned down. I'd be interested in how they'd do it though, without paring things down too much. I played FFXIV for a little bit. I didn't play pvp but I did run raids, wherein the population of players in the instance would be comparable with that of zergs in WvW... and I can tell you that they have visual clutter of their own. I had no idea what was happening because it was simply a sea of colors. I will say that there's still a nice difference between how they both look, even though both can be visually cluttery. To me, the colors in GW2 aren't quite right. It's like when you're editing something and put HDR filter on it? That's the best way I can describe it. Things are both dull and too bright at the same time somehow. Their latest graphics update has helped that a lot, but it's still not enough in my opinion. It's one of the big reasons why I'm rooting for a GW3 honestly, because I'd love to see this game world in much better graphics. I've seen quite a few complaints on GW2's clutter from other forums, and actually contributed to some of them lol But they mostly revolved around infusion effects. If we're going to say that red circles shouldn't be a thing or that everything should have animations on them, how do you think they're going to do that without adding even more to the visual clutter that people apparently despise, especially with the current engine? Like you mentioned, the game didn't age well in terms of visuals. I don't think that will be helped by adding more animations unless they get an upgrade. I agree with the original sentiment, but I also don't think we have a good solution to it at this point. Again, unless they do a major overhaul. I just like to imagine this game in something like UE5... I'd be so happy when/if that happens. Then, I think they could definitely do something similar to that of FF14's. Lots of colors, but with a good amount of clarity.

I think Anet's biggest mistake during those HoT days was rolling out so many big changes all at once, coupled up with incredibly unclear communication as to what was actually in store for players. I understand that they had to change things because there were indeed issues, but it would have been smarter if they pushed one (smaller) thing, gave it time to see how players responded and how it affected the game mode, then reacted appropriately (whether it's to continue with the next bigger change, or scrap/tweak the current one, etc.). A lot of people around that time saw the world linking as a beta test. IIRC, they communicated that we were going to test it out, give it time, then decide based on player feedback through another poll whether it should become permanent. That poll never happened and it became permanent anyway. At the time, it felt like there was no room to recognize which solution actually worked and which didn't, because of how many things they did all at once. So yeah, I agree with the sentiment that they should roll back a lot of the changes they've made, and perhaps this time, make more incremental changes with clear communication and actual consideration of player feedback. Though I don't think they'll ever roll anything back that much, I just hope they'll make changes much differently this time around.

I've seen this and it's pretty annoying. I'd just see them standing above the boss where there's a bunch of ice sticking out, just standing there. > @Solvar.7953 said:

I don't want it to go on for even 5 minutes longer though, just a tad. An addition of 2 more minutes shouldn't be that bad?

As in dropping in from another instance to have another go at the chests?I can understand that. I feel like they could keep them up 'til the map actually closes though, since the whole freezing death thing happens only a few minutes after the chests disappear. Or utilize their participation system so that folks can't double dip like that. It's like a punishment for not clearing your bag space fast enough :'(

This is, in particular, about the chests from the final bosses in Drizzlewood. Some of those events spawn a ton of tiny chests, and half of them disappeared on me before the map closed. I saw from a post from last year that they're supposed to be on some kind of 5 minute timer (though it honestly felt much shorter than that). Is there a reason for that? I mean, the map is going to close regardless, why take it away early? I was cleaning my bag space on the spot when this happened, and missed out on quite a bit of chests.

I see. Thanks, that makes a lot of sense.

This is the second time I'm hearing this reasoning. Aren't SB stances when shared useful anymore? I used to run a boon and stance share SB and it used to work quite well back then. Did something change regarding their functionality?

I see. Thanks for giving some info. I used to actually run a semi tanky boon bot power Soulbeast that worked quite well against condis. I'm yet to test it again on whether it has viability nowadays. I'm in the process of continuing to test my build but so far, I'm seeing positive results with me using NM as a power SB. It might depend on how I play in general, so to me, it's always worth at least testing a bit even if it's not the most recommended out there. Would like to add that I understand why it isn't picked up as much though, and I won't recommend it to players who mainly just want to burst things down as quick as possible (which is not how I play).