CrashTestAuto.9108

This is only anecdotal, but in my experience I don't think your premise is entirely correct here. Yes a big draw of MMOs is group content, but most players I have interacted with do huge amounts of solo gameplay (probably more than they do instanced). I'm also not even sure it's true that every does some group content. The world of GW2 and the accessibility is a big selling point, and a lot of people might play just to adventure, and maybe chat with guildies/friends, or not at all. Obviously a lot of players do enjoy group content, at least some of the time. But the number of people who log in and farm Drizzlewood whilst streaming in the background, or whatever, has to be comparable. Also, people might want to play with guildies/statics/friends, but they also want to be able to log in in their own time (most guilds I'm aware of run events at specific times, on specific days, leaving most of the week for people to do other things. Yes, I don't mean to oversimplify this. But speaking relatively (e.g. compared to building a new raid, which requires new assets, new mechanics, new rewards etc.) this is still relatively low. I really don't think it would be that niche though. These threads do occur pretty often in my view. I know a lot of players killed Liadri (which is not rewarding, requires building up to, and is kind of hidden and obtuse to access, whilst being unavailable most of the year). We know one player games are popular. Even if it isn't something people log in every day to play (some would), I think it would at least fill a gap for a lot of people when they log in and think "what should I do", or when LFG is empty. Yes I know, and I am sorry for my contributions to this. I don't want to get involved in a separate discussion about this, but let's just say I've tried the "ignore them and they'll go away" approach and it hasn't been very successful.

So without actually knowing the development side of this, I can only speculate on the best approach here, but I think the lightning would be fine (been a while since I did the CM, but it's just a place and drop right?). If so then tweaking the frequency/duration of the effect could add challenge by forcing you to place them carefully. The green circle I agree is currently useless, but they could use the Vale Guardian version where it spawns in a specific location, rather than on the player. Yes, not all of the mechanics would work, but there's no reason to treat the solo-CM and group-CM as equals. In fact they shouldn't. Give the solo version different rewards as appropriate. If it's easier, just give less. At minimum, the titles and achievements should be totaly separate. So this is a point I assume the devs do have info on, and I guess is the reason Liadri is so unrewarding. I'm honestly not sure if this is an issue or not. So long as there is at least one build per class (or ideally specialisation) that is capable of winning the fight reasonably, then I don't really see why this would be an issue. If it isn't, then just drop the difficulty to the point that it is, and the rewards appropriately. This isn't something huge that the game needs to be designed around (unless it does become really popular), just something for players to do when they only have a limited amount of time to play/way to cater to the players who want to do instanced content but really don't want to group up (which is a lot of players).

I suppose that makes sense, if they're farming enough to not need to buy gems. Fair point. Though I'm not sure how this would be a problem given the other points - why would this be more damaging than group strikes? If the worry is draining players from other areas, then just calibrate the rewards to be a bit lower than group versions, or have both rewards available each day - you might even see an uptick in group players because more people have tried them through solo and feel confident to jump into group (or you might not, but that would indicate that a lot of players actually want solo content specifically).

I'm not sure if you have something specific in mind with this, but attracting solo farming players is a good outcome, if they spend money on the game. Even if it wasn't, it would arguably be worthwhile if it was giving lots of other players something they enjoyed (and then they spent money on the game). If the concern is damaging the economy, or draining players from other content, then that would only happen if the strikes were spammable (which strikes tend not to be, due to daily/weekly rewards) and the individual rewards weren't calibrated properly (e.g. if they were for some reason better than doing them as a group).

I agree with you that this needs to be considered. Though I can't think of many mechanics (at least from Normal Mode) where this would be a huge issue. e.g. the sniper mechanic in AH would be fine solo (and actually require people to look at the map, rather than the commander). A lot of other mechanics might even get more interesting because you couldn't just rely on the healer while you tank the damage of a mechanic. As has been said, a lot of strikes are actually soloable already, so you could just adjust the health pools to make them less boring for solo players in a worst case scenario (not my preference, but viable).

You and I are the two highest posting people in this thread. Obviously this conversation is unproductive, and frankly not enjoyable. I do not understand why you are invested in this (either the topic itself, which has little to no effect on you, or discussing it with me specifically), but I am trying to be polite in saying that I do not wish to speak to you. Please can we end this as I am invested in this topic, and don't wish to derail it further. I won't respond to you again.

Noted. Let's end our direct interaction there.

I totally agree for raids. But strikes are based on story missions, which are already soloable. The amount of effort is scalable depending on how much work it would actually take and the perceived benefit (e.g. you could literally just copy paste the story missions to a strike format, or you could adjust numbers to e.g. damage and health, or you could actually add new/group/CM mechanics). Rewards could then also be scaled accordingly.

I'm not sure you can equate "I don't want X" with "We don't need X" so easily. I know you don't want solo strikes. Others do. I agree, let's you and I stop discussing this directly.

Yes, but those responses obviously didn't convince me, so re-reading them isn't a good use of my time. Specifically they tended to do what you do here, and suggest playing something else (either Open World, which obviously everyone asking for solo endgame content knows exists, and it isn't addressing their concern), or another game entirely. And again, I was responding to responses. You just chose to address me specifically for some reason. Anyway, as you've noted, we've had this conversation before, and it was unproductive. Therefore you can assume any posts I'm making here are not directed at you (unless I'm quoting you), and you don't need to worry about them. It just tends to derail threads otherwise, which hopefully isn't your intention.

We already have strike missions, we already have story, we already have fractals, and we already have raid wings. You can also go replay those. The story missions obviously aren't the same as solo strikes, so even if the above made sense as an argument (which, to be clear, I really don't think it does), it wouldn't apply here. On resources, there is no need for new assets, possibly no need for new rewards (maybe new achieves/titles), and very little need for new mechanics. Everything is basically in he game already, as you said, just not in a difficult/rewarding/easily accessible fashion. Comparing adding solo strike missions to designing a new raid is like comparing decorating a room to building a house. I do also think they should be working on the things you listed. Except possibly raids. I'd like a Wing 8, but really not sure if the audience is there to justify it.

Not everyone on the forum has your commitment to rereading threads. If you don't feel you're getting anything new out of this, no one is forcing you to participate. Besides, I was responding to recent comments. Why choose to question my responses rather than theirs?

Not at all times, and certainly not if you want to practice new classes or Challenge Modes (or even the more difficult normal modes). Sure you can hop into the easy ones relatively quickly and easily (at least the IBS ones, EoD is more hit and miss), but that doesn't help with there being difficult content available. I understand you don't want this. I do not understand why you don't want people who do want it to have it. Unless you think you represent a group of people who are so large and so committed to others not having this that you would stop playing yourself, then I also don't know why ANet should really weigh your opposition into a decision. This isn't like people asking for a solo-expansion, or even a ground up solo raid or strike. The resource investment is (unless there's a glaring issue I'm not aware of) really trivial, so this barely impacts you at all.

The story mode is (1) not difficult, (2) not rewarding, and (3) not quickly accessible or playable. This is not a good alternative. In terms of how many people would play it, obviously that data is hard to get. I can confidently say "At least one", being myself. However, as has been noted, this topic is discussed a lot, so clearly there is interest. Similarly, we can look at the success of one player games, especially difficult ones like the Souls series and Elden Ring, to show that there is a market for this kind of gameplay. Similarly, we know that the most experienced (in terms of time since creating account) players of GW2 have been here for ten years, and therefore due to age are likely to have commitments and responsibilities that make committing to a time or finding a group of ten players who are willing to let them practice difficult. So there is an existing player base, of some size, for whom quickly accessible and low commitment content will be appealing. I know I've logged in plenty of times looking for something quick to do, but nothing in the LFG fit the bill, so I've wound up doing very little and logging out. We also know that Open World (read, playable solo) content is hugely popular within the GW2 community. I believe, though I can't justify that with stats, much moreso than instanced group content. So the players are already there. I know there's a very vocal proportion of this forum that opposes the existence of this, but at least anecdotally, I don't think that reflects the community at large, and at the very least, doesn't prove their isn't a profitable market for this content.

Or, for a very small amount of development work (by simply adding solo strikes, using existing solo mechanics with some difficulty tweaks), the game could attract/keep more players. Why send people who are likely to wind up putting money into the game away?

Thanks for the really detailed and helpful responses, much appreciated! I'll experiment with the suggestions given 🙂 So this is a bit of a weird question to answer, but I hope others will get it and it'll explain what I'm looking for. I don't have an issue with complexity, or inputs per minute, but I don't enjoy worrying about cooldowns or looking at my skill bar. What I liked about Mech was that it made the game feel like action games, where the emphasis was more on reacting to the boss and environment. LI builds do tend to offer something a bit like this, but what I'm looking for isn't about "Press less buttons" so much as it's about "Pressing the right buttons in context, rather than the same buttons in order". Maybe a good example of this is the utility skills on Power Mech. I could run a teleport (Shift Signet), a CC (Force Signet), and then flexibly take more CC, Boon Strip, or a kit in the other slot. Because they weren't just extra DPS in a rotation, they could be used contextually (i.e. in a way that I find more fun). So in summary, "Yes, but not exactly". LI builds tend to overlap somewhat with what I enjoy (and I think probably a lot of players, given how popular mech was), but I'm not specifically looking for something where the inputs are low (e.g. if there was a specific fast combo that you use in certain circumstances, that's cool, but I don't want to be doing that on repeat with my entire skill bar every fight). Similarly, hopping between weapons based on context is fun (for me), but doing it just as part of a memorised rotation isn't. As another way of saying it. I like God of War/Arkham style combat (at whatever difficulty setting), but don't particularly like learning combo strings in fighting games.

Yeah, I know mech is still viable, it has just tipped below the bar for me by being just a bit less fun and a bit less strong (it feels sluggish, I guess would be the word). Shortbow renegade is interesting. I've been running that in WvW for ages (mostly out of habit), is that the condi build?

So up until the last patch I was really enjoying Power Rifle Mechanist, but the last one has basically pushed it into a place where it is less fun and less effective, so I'm looking for alternatives. So I specifically hoping to receive suggestions from people who also liked the old mech, and have found something that they also like (read - this is not intended as a debate thread, or requesting suggestions to learn classes that do not feel like the old mech 🙂 ). The things I liked about the old mech: 1) Damage was "good enough" for pretty much all content. 2) Shift signet teleport. 3) Didn't need to focus on rotations too heavily, could focus on the actual game, and play reactively (I want to look at the world, not constantly keeping my eyes on my cooldowns). 4) Ranged. 5) Nice CC. 6) Decent "cleave" - not sure what to call it for ranged. I've tried Virtuoso because of (2) and (4) primarily, but it feels like a lot of looking at skill bar still to check when things are off cooldown - if that's worth persisting with, happy to continue there. So yeah, I know I'm not the only one who was really enjoying the "feel" of mechanist a couple of months back, has anyone found something that they similarly enjoy?

It's actually even less reflective than tha, because the sample is "People who use emojis on the forum". Just looking at a random recent thread (to count easily), the "Hiss emote" thread currently has 30 emojis on it, with 322 views. It's also entirely plausible that there's a correlation between "inclination to post emojis" and "negativity". At a minimum, if you agree with a post, then there's less to add by responding by default. At least anecdotally, the forum definitely feels unreflective of the player base, being both less friendly and more elitist (the latter to be expected, as the more casual a player is, the less likely they are to bother going to a related forum). So we're on a biased subsample of a biased sample, with a poor sampling method.

Haha 😄 I think if you're assessing truth based on the number of emojis on an internet forum, then maybe I'm not the one who doesn't know what they're talking about.

I don't think you can assume delusion (I'm not saying that poster is right, no idea). It's entirely possible for 90% of people to be wrong about something, and that's especially true if the sample isn't randomly selected. I've also seen plenty of confused emotes on posts that are close to objective fact, or at least just neutral (not even a statement that could be subject to true/false assessment). Even on this page, someone has said that they post confused emotes just to "counter" perceived slights.

I would focus on replayable content, with an eye to improve the experience for most player types, including (and in order): 1) Solo strikes, NM and CM. Generally difficult and rewarding solo content being the top priority. 2) Guilds. Make the halls more useful, and add more missions/upgrades. 3) Fractals. I think these are in a good place, but it would be good to emphasise that this is still a core element of endgame by adding 3 more (not Sunqua style). 4) Raid wing 8. 5) HoT and PoF strikes. I think solo content should be priority because (1) it's probably the least resource intensive, requiring no new assets, and a lot of the mechanics are already in game and (2) it would give a lot of people something they'd enjoy without the hassle of grouping and (3) it would provide practice opportunities and act as a soft "DPS indicator" that would alert people to their builds being undertuned. Guilds come second because I think the social aspect of the game is one of its strongest selling points, but it's being heavily underutilised. Random grouping to stack on the same boss you've killed every week for the last six months and then saying "ty" and leaving doesn't really hit the mark for me as social gameplay.

I like the idea. There's quite a few options available: 1) Open as a shield 2) Sword/Mace for melee 3) Staff/Scepter for the Hagrid/Aerith cosplayers 4) Open or closed as a rifle, Kingsman/Penguin style

Okay, to follow the analogy through, it would be like the kids arguing and drawing silly faces with each other, but then when you try to have an adult conversation, the kids are also there, and they start drawing faces on you as well. I do think it breaks down before that, and obviously it isn't that bad. But I do think the emojis foster a particular atmosphere and encourage/discourage specific types of posters to stay. I think it's relatively uncontroversial that the forums are not as friendly as the GW2 community overall, and I suggest the emojis as a hypothetical contributor to that (possibly a very minor one).