Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Iiridayn.6109

Members
  • Posts

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Iiridayn.6109

  1. Indeed, and that is what I did. 30 minutes of disengaging, mind-numbing tedium.
  2. These two responses amount to a frame challenge - that instead of proposing changes to the game, that I choose to not engage with the content and/or game which presents frustrations. This is a valid perspective, and one I outlined in my original post (paragraph 2 sentence 11). However, I suggest that replies that amount to "then don't play" may not lead to a healthier game. In general, exclusionary communities do not grow, and growth is valuable for a MMOG like GW2 which delivers value according to Metcalf's Law. While I appreciate the responses, I feel they do not add much value beyond the original post.
  3. I've identified three other players who've dropped them at events I've been in, and I often drop them after metas I participate in. I'm sorry that you have not yet had the opportunity to find these in the open world - I can confirm that they are dropped, however. Also, "social gameplay" does not exclusively consist of "socializing". It is gameplay where players can benefit each other, where seeing another player is a good thing - not merely neutral, or negative. Socializing certainly requires other players and is one form of social gameplay, but it is far from the only form of it.
  4. I agree, but decided there was less risk by making the issue public and presenting arguments to not make a change instead of having to overcome resistance to change something a second time. ANet employees play the game, so the public nature of the crafting stations was inevitably going to come to ANet's attention, if it had been overlooked.
  5. - ArenaNet Every day I do the festival dailies. This earns me around 100 points towards the festival weekly. If I then want the unique skins locked behind the full festival weekly, I must grind 100 additional points worth of Halloween events each week. I don't skip days, I log in every single day and every single day I do the festival dailies. I do not appreciate GW2 "fall[ing] into the traps of traditional MMORPGs" and "suck[ing] my life away and forc[ing me] onto a grinding treadmill" to get those skins. The trap is the "engagement" KPI. Yes, I now "engage" more with the festival. However, KPIs are proxies for the underlying things that you really want to measure. Is the player having fun? Will they invite their friends? Most importantly, will they spend money, allowing us to continue making this game that we love? Increasing "engagement" by doubling the amount of events I have to participate in is not healthy for the game. I am not engaged in that content, I am grinding it out to complete a goal. It is not fun. It makes me less likely to recommend the game to friends, not more. The unpleasant grind makes me reconsider the value I place on completing skin collections - one of the major driving factors leading to my actual engagement in the game at present. If "engagement" leads me to disengage, perhaps this method of increasing "engagement" needs to be reconsidered. It is a trap many dead MMOs have fallen into.
  6. Gw2Launcher has not been able to launch multiple accounts for me of late. Healix is great, but likely overwhelmed, so I built my own thing to run multiple GW2 accounts on a Linux box using Linux tools based on Healix's feedback. https://github.com/Iiridayn/gw2-linux-multibox-launcher - if you're a Linux user with multiple accounts (yes, all 3 of us) feel free to check it out. It works great for me, and I've been using it occasionally for the last month or so, but it's likely not 100% finalized yet and the documentation is probably imperfect, so please let me know if it doesn't work for you and why.
  7. Wife has same issue on her account, also pre-ordered. I'm glad I saved the chest till after release to fill gaps.
  8. I'm not suggesting ANet dedicate resources to this - rather the opposite. I'm requesting they spend no resources on changing the current behavior. Would you mind sharing why you might feel the current behavior is "just no"?
  9. An open letter to ArenaNet. Earlier today I traded for a Permanent Mobile Crafting Station and have been experimenting with it, and have been updating the wiki to answer some of the questions I had before acquiring it. Testing revealed that players who are not in party are able to access it, like other current portable crafting stations. In my opinion this is a very good thing, and encourages and promotes social gameplay. I am motivated to drop this after open world metas so other players can access their bank; my understanding is that the current Permanent Bank Access Express is limited to just the owner. Because of this positive social feature, it is natural that this use of the Permanent Mobile Crafting Station would come to ArenaNet's attention (if nothing else, ArenaNet employees play the game too!), and I feel it is important to have an open discussion before a patch comes out to change this behavior. If I am wrong and the current behavior is not in the best interests of the players, the community, and ArenaNet, a public venue is the correct place to correct this notion. I recognize that as the owners and operators of the game, if ArenaNet judges it not in their best interests, as consumers of the game we have no recourse but to accept any level of convenience in the tools that we are permitted. ArenaNet: Please keep the current behavior of allowing other players bank and crafting access via the Permanent Mobile Crafting Station. Although this may run contrary to prior decisions such as to make the Permanent Bank Access Express personal, I feel this promotes and encourages social gameplay, and will ultimately increase (rather than decrease) demand for the item despite being an extremely rare gemstore chance-based drop, due to increased exposure. The player benefits from the item, the community benefits from the item instead of it being selfishly personal, and ArenaNet benefits by increased demand for Black Lion keys to acquire the item, due to increased visibility and the effect of altruism.
  10. This is not a new issue with the new dailies system. My wife and I bought HoT + PoF when I started the game, and progressed through the story without spoilers or early unlocks. There were many days where we could not do the dailies in the old system due to requiring us to go places which would spoiler content. Eventually we got to HoT which helped a lot, and finally got to PoF which enabled us to do the rest of the dailies.
  11. Turns out I can't find a "relic that has the special effect of [my] current rune set". So, perhaps I've lost more than "nothing". Though, perhaps you consider Scholar a "niche rune effect".
  12. Yes. https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/API:2/characters/:id/core
  13. I really want a real healing spec for my warrior, something like Druid was for Rangers. Right now healing warrior is considered significantly underpowered, in part because to provide its critical boon (quickness) requires using utility slots, and to provide healing (shouts) uses... utility slots. It was almost effective w/the shoutsworn since you could recover shout ammo more often, but ANet (probably rightly) nerfed that, noting that they don't like instant heals. Fine, I don't need instant heals - I just want a useful healing build for my warrior. Re weapons, I think an ideal healing spec for warrior would provide scepter to pair w/warhorn. Put some heals on the mainhand weapon to take pressure off of the utilities for healing. Probably do some boon application like protection and resolution for the Burst skill. Seems simple and clean, and will probably alienate 90% of warrior mains in the game who just want more ways to "unga bunga DPS".
  14. After the Coherent UI update I tried reinstalling the game on my faster machine - huge mistake. I've been trying off and on for months since to get it to install without any success. The Lutris installer doesn't work at all (CoherentUI crash). The manual method didn't work. Today I finally got the game to install using the manual method, which renews my hope. System: ArchLinux, wine-GE-7.31 (from AUR), GTX 970 w/proprietary drivers, various packages installed including from multilib. Installation steps: - `WINEPREFIX=~/ssdgames/gw2 WINEARCH=win64 wine64 winecfg` - `WINEPREFIX=~/ssdgames/gw2 WINEARCH=win64 winetricks fonts corefonts` - `WINEPREFIX=~/ssdgames/gw2 WINEARCH=win64 winetricks fonts tahoma` - `cd dxvk-1.10.3/` - `WINEPREFIX=~/ssdgames/gw2 WINEARCH=win64 ./setup_dxvk.sh install` - `cd ..` - `WINEPREFIX=~/ssdgames/gw2 WINEARCH=win64 wine64 ~/ssdgames/Gw2Setup.ex e` This time the installer did _not_ crash. Game runs great, though ArcDPS causes a crash on load, so I'll track that down another time.
  15. I have to admit I'm a bit confused. The OP says, "hey, this is really fun, everybody else should have fun on their favorite class too". Replies are mostly along the lines of "no, we don't want it and we don't want you to have it either". Why nerf mech if it's fun to play? Why not bring other classes up to the same standard? One poster even pointed out that mech doesn't even bring top DPS, even though it's fun to play. Maybe Mech is so popular not because it's OP, but because it's fun? (setting aside confirmation bias and that the Mech model is ridiculously attention grabbing). Is that really such a bad thing in a game? I main Warrior. I admit, when I want to do dps, I play Warrior. When I want to chill and have fun, I've been reaching for Mech more and more often. I also wish Warrior had a similarly fun and chill build I could enjoy when I don't have to maximize my DPS.
  16. I thought it useful to provide additional perspectives which might not have been realized here. I'm honestly surprised at the question. I briefly stated here in response to a common theme I saw in the Discord conversation, that "I'm focused on the effects outside of raids more than inside of raids." See also my last pre-rebuttal: this shouldn't impact elite raiders at all. My goals, restated from the OP: Make Toughness not a trap stat. Yes, it will never contribute to top DPS. However, it should not actively interfere with multiplayer group content. This matters because 21 of 41 stat combinations available in PVE include some toughness Provide a gearing progression for new players moving from strikes to raids as they are more confident they can handle mechanics. If players want to start with gear including toughness and swap out for Berserker as they grow, then yes, it contributes to the player economy. If they would like to go straight to Berserker and not contribute to the player economy, then yes, they also have that choice. Currently, yes, you could feasibly use gear including Toughness all the way up until you start raids, at which point there is a sudden hard cutoff. My proposal would make that more mild, that players can swap out their Toughness gear as they go all the way. Also, the way things are now, Toughness has a special place of hate because it disrupts tanking mechanics. When this hate effects more than half of all equipment drops, there is a problem in the game design. Using Toughness to tank was clever, but had the undesirable knock-on effect of (as explained in the OP) making it undesirable for all PVE content. You have indeed mischaracterized me :). I am one Gorseval kill away from completing the first part of the collection, and it is exactly because of (what I feel to be) the high cost of stat swapping ascended and buying multiple sets of exotic armor that I am so focused on getting legendary armor. I have been learning exactly how the game as a system works, and as someone who knows a little bit about game design, have noticed the problem of the Toughness stat because of this. As an aside, not related to the main point of the post in any way: I have heard multiple times from multiple sources now, "exotic is cheap, character slots are cheap, stat swapping ascended is cheap, equipment templates are cheap, you should have a lot of those". I'm sorry, but at 2 gold a day, the cost of 1 g per piece of exotic armor + weapon and another ~6 g per trinket means it takes around 22 days to afford to gear a character for a role. For full Diviners, last I checked (around a month ago) it was around 100g for exotic alone - that's almost 2 months (50 days). I'm sorry, the cost may be "cheap", but it remains "significant", as I state in the OP. That said, I am in no way talking about the cost of gearing a character; as you noted, my proposal may in fact increase interaction with the player economy. That is not my focus - just a side note in response to frequent feedback. My focus is on allowing Toughness gear to not impact raid tanking mechanics, which would allow it to compete with other gear sets on its own merits (or lack thereof) instead of having a special position of interfering with tanking mechanics in raids.
  17. I've had a running setup (lutris-GE-Proton7-14) since before and after the patch, but the TP had problems (worked only the first few times per restart, then a blank screen, but occasionally would flash the contents w/an upper-left origin). AMD Radeon, vulkan-radeon drivers, i3, updated Archlinux, etc. My DXVK version was outdated (1.10-2); installing the update (1.10.2) made the TP work fine for me again. Adding `export DXVK_HUD=devinfo,fps,version` to the Lutris generated launch script enabled me to check my installed DXVK version (but may have interferred w/ArcDPS, so I removed it afterwards).
  18. Okay, rebuttals from Discord explosion: You shouldn't bring Toughness into raids anyway unless you're tanking (and maybe not even then, a +5 should be fine). This is because mechanics will kill you dead with or without toughness, so you should focus on DPS. Players should focus on mechanics/visuals instead of gear stats, but should follow prescribed gear builds. Players should have many gear sets for each content they'd like to engage with - the gem and gold cost is not a factor (buy more character slots instead of equipment templates, and gear with exotics). We're used to this, and the only benefit of changing it would make it easier for new players to bring Toughness gear to raids, which would be a change for the worse. Toughness doesn't need a purpose in PVE if it's useful in WvW and sPVP
  19. Yeah, my apologies for not replying quickly. I spawned a huge realtime discussion on the guild discord. I'll get back to your points.
  20. Floated the idea by some raid leaders who've been training me. They are opposed, though their reasons appear to summarize to "you shouldn't bring Toughness into Raids anyway, unless you're the designated tank". I'd like to clarify quickly here as well that I'm focused on the effects outside of raids more than inside of raids.
  21. Ironically, this change could result in more gear changes. As things stand, players get a single set of endgame tier armor, and rarely need to change it. Allowing toughness in endgame armor would result in players who choose to use it changing their endgame armor twice - once to a survivable variant, and then replacing pieces with the full DPS build as they feel more comfortable with mechanics.
  22. Oysters Gnashblade gives -10% Incoming Damage. This is valuable, because it protects characters without increasing their Toughness. GW2 has 9 basic stats, and of the 41 stat prefixes available in PVE, 21 of them (more than half) increase Toughness. This should not be a bad thing - an easy way to mix in some survivability to your build. However, in practice these prefixes are a bit of a trap. We should fix player choice traps as we prepare to release on Steam to minimize frustration for the expected bounty of new players. Open world PVE is a fairly low bar; so, when gearing a character, players often focus on endgame content. Switching gear stats has a significant cost, so players want to choose gear which will be useful in as many contexts as possible. Because 9 of 25 raid encounters (in 6 of the 7 raid wings) use a top Toughness tanking mechanic, new players are strongly disincentivized from choosing gear which would increase Toughness and thereby increase their survivability, for all endgame content. This way as they work their way up to raids, they will not need to change their gear stats, which as I mentioned, has a significant cost. A simple change to those 9 encounters to support single use assigned tanking would suffice to make gear which increases toughness an acceptable choice for learning players. This would result in the same tanking mechanics for these fights. As far as I am aware, no other content uses a toughness based tank. Pre-rebuttals: Assigned tank means tank can be full Zerker and have higher DPS! In organized groups, the tank can have full Zerker and bump toughness a tiny amount w/a consumable. The DPS difference should be negligible. ANet doesn't have time for big changes! This shouldn't be a complicated change; the AI code would need to change target prioritization to an assigned target instead of checking toughness. The interface could be a special action key, or whoever kills Xera's clone, etc. This doesn't allow for fallback tanking! Whatever interface can use a priority list - first, second, third, etc. If three tanks die, the fight is likely a wipe anyway. If the developers need a full well ordered list of players, they can assign remaining non-volunteer tanks based off their internal player ID. Who cares, this is raid elitism! I am not an elite raider, I am just learning. It is common to gear for PVE based on top tier PVE content, with the intention of eventually reaching it. This would directly impact the elite raiders the least, only making it easier for new players to join their ranks.
×
×
  • Create New...