Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Trejgon.9367

Members
  • Posts

    1,532
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Trejgon.9367's Achievements

  1. In PvE, it would seem so. WvW and PvP they still need to charge it manually, with animation intact.
  2. ESO has been pumping those houses for years now which is primary reason why they have so many of them. Additionally, most of "houses" are simply a single room that reuses asset of "small room" within specific style. Not to mention the part where ESO sells single house instance for prices higher than whole expac in GW2. And the sheer amount of instances to start with is not even the most praised part of the ESO housing system, it's the robust furnishing system, that enable people to make some crazy things inside those instances. On which department.... GW2 introduces "furnishing" system that is flat out superior to the furnishing system of ESO, on all the highly praised elements of the system. ESO system does not support rescaling elements, you can only move and rotate them around. the precision movement axis are also stuck in single mode, instead of being able to move it within instance universal xyz axis, or moving it alongside decoration's own axis. and 1000 decorations limit straight out blows up the ESO technical capabilities out of the water. ESO for reference, has separate limits for different categories of furnishing, that in some cases feel arbitrary in what things get under which limit, that depends on the size of the home, but even largest type without paid sub, amounts to total 415 unique pieces. 830 with paid sub.
  3. more like this: https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Foefire_armor or this: https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Etherbound_armor or that: https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Ice_Reaver_armor that as well: https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Water_Dragon_armor I'd say you are couple years late with your disbelief.
  4. That is much more than I expected. By the looks of it seems like homesteads were aiming to outdo ESO housing in what you can do (with only missing thing would be sheer amount of potential homes to get).
  5. Mesmer mantras: cast time for big effect, 2 charges of smaller affect, applies in one nice uniform radius around the mesmer. Firebrand mantras: charging cast time does nothing outside of refreshing the ammo count, first 2 charges is weaker effect, final charge is the strong effect. Applies in longer distance in a frontal cone, and very tiny radius outside of that cone. They were designed like that specifically to make them "different" so that people do not complain how guardian is getting copy-paste of mesmer skills, but that come with an issue, where doing the important "big" skill is effective punishment, because you don't just put whole thing on cooldown, but you also then have to spend time in combat doing literally nothing, just to regain your changes. Mesmer mantras are meant to be used for big effect first, then have some additional instant cast charges of utility, firebrands are meant to have some utility first and the bug effect at the last charge, should they choose to put whole thing on cd. Also on side note, this is not the first time they made firebrand mantras instant recharge in pve, it is a "rework" they did some time ago, then backed off of, and now they are partially getting back to it. if you think mesmer mantras are not where they should be, feel free to ask for charge time reduction, or improvement of the big initial effect.
  6. As QueenKeriti.5176 have said I was speaking of thematic feel of "raiding" into an enemy fortress, and nothing about playerbase being hostile. So raids fullfill this fantasy for those players, specifically because they require preparations, and involve sequence of encounters (not all bosses), and single boss encounter is simply to short to fullfill that fantasy. any time I needed to do strikes I had no issue getting group for one single strike and just doing that one I needed. That is much shorter than trying to do whole 1 wing. Sure alot of groups are doing all of them in single run, but those are usually also not the people that would claim they don't do raids due to time commitment issues.
  7. In my personal opinion moa was huge problem in both pvp and wvw since game launch, it's just it took AN 11 years to agree to that for some reason 😉
  8. I think the "no one" of Konig's was not meant as "literally no one ever" but more along the line of people being in the know with the lore at the time, generally agreed about existence of Mordremoth from the very beginning. It is even reaffirmed this way with this statement: Which clearly states that some discussions on whether Mordry was a real deal or not could happen during the period, were just not the big drama Dean claims to be a fact. That being said, the thread @Dean Calaway.9718 linked does not truly support his position of "lore maids doing bit mental gymnastics to deny mordremoths existance". It is a thread, speculating the meaning of the mordremoths tooth attack of subject alpha and it's lore implications to be sure, but it does not feature any big lore nerd name "debunking" it anyhow. The only thing this thread can hope to achieve is to disprove the very literal interpretation that "nobody ever" doubted mordremoth's existance, but even taking that statement from Konig's all posts away, you still have alot more to deal with even to get to the point of only countering all the evidence Konig levied against your original claim. Personally I do not recall Mordremoth as 6th ED being big issue, may be tied to the bit Konig stated that by 2013 (the year when I started my forum activity, apparently by being pro-ranger activist going by the archive content), general public was already acknowledging that theory as true, I do remember the big lore drama of whether or not sylvari are dragon minions or not. Personally I tried to keep up with the lore of GW very closely for long since GW2 release, (even if my old forum activity does not have that much to show it for pre-2013 period specifically) and while I do remember debate on implications of Crucible of Eternity layout and later skill names, I definitively do not recall "big discussion" about it happening, nor any sort of complex argumentation against Mordremoth as an Elder Dragon. Personally at the time I believed that people put too much weight on a skill name of the boss, but not to the point of denying any merit to the mordremoth theory. Sylvari as dragon minions was much more prominent and much more vividly discussed subject. On barely related note, checking out my own 2013 posts on old forums archive is a trippy experience for me personally. Funny how kitten changes over 11 years. As for the actual topic of this thread: I think it was sufficiently explained despite Deans shenanigans of lore hate, it is very possible that the intent of writers have shifted over the years, but in the end it seems sylvari commander wyld hunt was to get rid of them all. Question from me at this point would be if sylvari commander ever mentions their wyld hunt past the mordremoth? One would think they maybe should have a comment on that subject after Soo-Won dies?
  9. I'd appreciate if you spoke for yourself, instead of trying to speak for "literally everybody (else)". Looking just at this forums, there are more people than Beddo who likes the design of new ranger spear, whom do not consider it a pointless weapon. It does introduce new playstyle of interweaving ranged and melee attacks without being restricted to the cooldown od weapon swapping. One does not need to "feel to run damage control for Anet" to be able to observe options this new weapon will provide to the ranger toolkit, and to be looking towards playing around this new weapon.
  10. I see, must have missed it, didn't pay much attention to deadeye patch notes last... couple years.
  11. I am definitelly trying spear/staff ranger, I am definitelly trying spear/staff warrior, I am considering spear/staff guardian, I am considering trying spear on my virt. Other classes spear either does not fit the vibes of my character of said class, or flat out I do not own character of that class.
  12. didn't shadow meld remove revealed debuff ontop of everything else?
  13. I was not super thrilled by the blogpost, but after seeing stream presentation it looks actually nice. The illuminated conditions are simple enough, tho I also find it super fanny that helio rush animation is basically For Honor's lawbringer charge move. What it is missing for full meme would be pushing the enemy along with it. Seeing the thread about alac benders tho, I do not think those fellows are going to be liking the zig-zag mechanics of using helio rush. Going by tooltips - not sure if this was error or intended value, but the knockback from symbol that people already complained about being reverse synergy had listed value of 0. Which makes me wonder how exactly is that different from knockdown again?
  14. Previous titles are irrelevant because gameplay mechanics are completely different and incompatible. And classes in franchises with more than one game, often tends to shift in their identity between entries. In those previous titles, in regard to mechanical differences I already noted, not in GW2. "actually" this exempt only means that at some point of development ranger was build around concept of marksman class, which we know very little about mind you, that got warden themes merged ontop of it. The claim that it was mostly ranged weaponry did hold some water at the time (with sword and greatsword being only melee weapons, axes being thrown, and bows being stacked ontop of that). But even very shortly after release, the best results in terms of dps you'd be getting from 1h sword - a melee weapon. A decade has passed, and during that decade alot has changed. This is no longer relevant argument.
  15. You can't waste your time, except you do waste your time writing up a post that you won't waste your time and baselessly accusing me of lying - which is to everyone to see as you say. Draxynnic stated that ironically enough we are getting to the point where ranger as a class is too melee centric. You then jumped on the name, which Draxynnic did not even mention. I came to comment, that name confusion is not required element to believe that class may be too melee centric to be healthy. Draxynnic even responded to you elaborating, that he did not in fact mean the name connection, because he was arguing with people that ranger does not mean range (distance of engagement) long before your forum account was created. You are seeing argument that not only is not there, but the author of the post where you are seeing it have explicitly told you was not there, and your best retort to being pointed out it is not there is accusing people of lying. And the fact that you are saying that "we can all see what he said" is super ironic, because yes, everyone with basic ability to read English can go to the post, read it, and see for themselves, that Draxynnic did not say anything about name implication.
×
×
  • Create New...