Jump to content
  • Sign Up


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Recent Profile Visitors

3,662 profile views
  1. That's where player skill comes in ... at some min distance, Spear won't miss. Just like Eng mortar skills ... they tend to miss from far away but in melee range, they don't. I have no doubt it's designed like that on purpose .. including Spear.
  2. Because we don't want another raid content scenario. I actually WANT people from all segments of the playerbase to enjoy the content, not just the 'caring' people as you describe them. I think the fact that they bring Mai Trin back into a strike is a good sign that Anet wants to bring more players into the story that they didn't experience in the Fractals content. This underlying idea that "the game doesn't have the right players, so the content needs to adjust to get them" just doesn't make sense and many of your posts imply this idea.
  3. None of that makes sense. Instanced group content won't shift the demographic to the people 'who care' (raids didn't do that, there is no reason to think strikes will either). As for the raid content revealed ... it's good Anet is moving away from 'stand in the fire, get a reward' philosophy because that is pretty bad game design. Again, if the content is just too hard for people, they aren't going to do it and it's possible it's going to be another 'raids' scenario ... too small an interest to justify the development. If anything, we all better hope the content is easy enough for t
  4. These posts are just weird. Anet has a business model that works and the content is reasonably priced while giving players choices (and considering the fact that you can buy these with gems ... is actually a very GRACIOUS thing for Anet to offer). They are going to change it because you think there is a problem you have to pay for content directly? I mean, ... 200 Gems is less than THREE US DOLLARS ... what is the problem here?
  5. The quality of these posts sure is something to be desired. it's very hard to understand what (if anything) you are trying to express here. Putting the CC on the spear to increase it's chances to hit its target is an idea that won't work. The CC has to be applied BEFORE the spear hits the target, not during or after.
  6. Everyone has an opinion, but some are more informed than others. Don't Anet have any ideas for new legendariers? Yes, they do ... the ones they showed us. I think the biggest negative comment I have on Gen 3 is that the forms are too similar between the various skins. I still voted no because I don't really care though ... because I already have hundreds of skins to choose from.
  7. I don't think it makes sense to view The Alliance spec as a damage dealer OR a Healer ... it's designed to use both and you CAN use both. It's a weird take to disregard a significant portion of what the spec does ... then claim the remainder is deficient. The advantage of Alliances is the design around 5 targets and its broader access to useful features that are BOTH DPS and sustain. If think about using the spec to do things it's not specifically designed to do, then it's pretty easy to conclude it doesn't do those things very well. The two issues the OP mentions ... not really co
  8. Well, that's a complicated question because it depends on you weapon of choice. You have to be build specific.
  9. No problem ... I know that view that players should get rewarded primarily for winning and being successful in a competitive game mode isn't just 'arguing just to argue' ... that's a VERY reasonable view to have.
  10. Yup ... so that should tell you something about the problems that are in that game mode. Let's be clear here ... it's a competitive game mode so rewards should be based on ... being competitive and winning, not making people feel good if they aren't.
  11. Actually, no ... no good game should ever account for the differences between varying group performances in competitive game modes though some mechanic ... that's the WHOLE POINT of these modes being competitive. Rewards should not be given primarily for participation in these modes (or at all depending on who you talk to)
  12. I read those posts ... I get you want more competition at the meta level. But things don't compete there ... they are meta or they aren't. So complaining something is meta to get a buff to non--meta builds to 'compete' but not necessarily be meta doesn't make sense. Hence, this fallacy between the relationship between meta and balancing triggers the metapushing alarm. Likewise, complaining some builds are OP and need a nerf BECAUSE they are holding meta positions ... another non-starter because it establishes meta as a standard for balancing. In short, you will LIKELY see me in any thre
  13. Well, no offense but ... yeah ... because the 'discussion' here isn't new and we know what the result is anyways. The "hey, 3 classes are meta, FIX IT" isn't exactly a message that's going to have much energy ... and you know why right? I mean, I'm sure you don't want to hear my 'why meta isn't a reason for class changes' diatribe again do you? You don't seem in the mood.
  14. Hey, these threads generate lots of discussion because people are passionate about the game ... and that IS what having a forum is all about. If it requires 75 posts so I'm not misunderstood or my words don't be misrepresented ... I'm going to do that. As long as I'm not breaking the rules, that's what the forum is all about.
  • Create New...