Obtena.7952

That's a nonsensical take. Seems pretty obvious to lots of people here that the mobility the sword is offering is doing exactly the thing you think we don't have much of. You might not be aware but that kind of effect has been on people's wish list for a long time. In otherwords, Swords are giving something the class lacks AND something people wanted.

I'm not dismissing anything and maybe you wouldn't call people out for being ignorant; I don't have that hang up. I'm simply recognizing that the claim Soto doesn't 'expand' the game for many people, just because they don't think they get good loot from it or don't need leg armor is pure nonsense. The fact is that content Anet adds to the game is more than just the loot that drops from it, so to say things like 'didn't add anything for lots of players' ... makes NO sense. Funny you mention that this is a benefit in the SAME post where you state the game didn't 'expand' anything for 'many' players because 'loot bad' and in the same sentence, pretend like no content was added in Soto. So you RECOGNIZE that not having a gear ladder is a benefit and at the SAME time, complain that everything Soto has to offer EXCEPT loot isn't 'adding' anything for 'lots' of players. That simply does not make sense. But you know here is the best part. People shouldn't buy things that don't 'expand' the game for them, especially if those 'many' people are simply going to turn a blind eye to EVERYTHING Soto has to offer and boil everything in the game down to simply 'getting loot' just so they can make contrived, empty claims it doesn't expand the game for them.

Yup I did read their post. Essences are useless for people who don't need Leg armor? Good thing not alot of people have leg armor then. People complain about the grind to get OW leg armor? They are awfully ignorant then. They didn't think OW Leg armor would be a grind? I guess they aren't paying too much attention to how ALL the other endgame items are implemented in the game then. But here's the funny thing to me. The OP is basically saying: Content is good but loot is bad for people that essentially already have full BIS endgame kit. Think about what that ACTUALLY means instead of concluding there is a problem with that.

I would actually think that the life costs for the sword leap skills are going to be very expensive compared to the amount you can leech. If they aren't, then it makes executing those skills with life costs to not have much consequence as a choice. In otherwords, if the life costs are low, then the leap is a 'freebie' you use all the time because it's simply better than trying to run to where you want to be. There needs to be a consequence of use that matches the impact of use. That could be lots of things like CD for instance, but the obvious one here is the life cost. Personally, I don't think MH sword will be all that interesting, considering what it competes with in that slot. On the other hand, OH sword at least offers something other OH's don't and probably matches pretty well with at least Dagger MH.

Imagine that ... Anet creates something most of the player base wants and someone has the audacity to call it a flop. Cope harder.

Weird reply to me ... what I said has nothing to do with what warriors are super stoked about, your desire for a melee condi 'cleave' weapon (which isn't that far off from ranged condi weapons that possess AOE/piercing/bounce effects) or needing a GM trait to work either. I really don't get your 'oh please' response ... Necro has had some of the most GOAT condi weapons and traits in this game (and still do). People not understanding how effective condi Necros are in this game, or the fact that ranged weapons are JUST as effective in melee range, is the only reason I can think of that those people keep asking for melee condi weapons.

The melee condi camp is just being weird. Any ranged condi weapon (of which we now have two, one being absolutely GOAT) can be used in melee range. No melee condi weapon Anet could give us was going to compete with what we already have. As for the theme, it will be interesting to see how OH sword pairs with MH dagger. Looks like it's going to give players lots of choice for how they play and control the fights.

Morning News ... doomposter randomly posts quotes from Anet.

News at 6 ... players decide to not play a game. Also in the news, players convince themselves doomposting is effective way to get game changes.

Chances Anet go back and increase difficulty in OW content = 0%. It's a non-value add proposition. The game can't cater to any particular individual's ideas of what is hard or easy.

I don't ... but someone might.

Sure, I get that. I also get that what a player wants has little to do with how something functions in this game. I mean, putting aside what a person does or doesn't know about how the game works, if the consequence is that people don't see whole squads because they have one person blocked in that squad ... they better be MUCH more careful with who they block or accept the fact that they are going to miss out because of whatever their sensitivities are to these individuals they blocked.

I would think it is all very obvious because if you block someone, that intuitively means you don't want to interact with them, in any way. The block function works the same for everyone. It absolutely IS a user problem that people are interpreting the tool having different results for themselves. Again, the reasons people have to block someone are irrelevant here. The block function can't work in different ways because people have different reasons to use it. We don't need a funded expedition deep in the Amazon to figure out how it works.

You can PRETEND there aren't ways to determine how something works if you like. 🤷‍♂️ Weird how your inability to determine how the block tool works is SOMEHOW a design issue with the how the block tool itself works. I don't see that connection but somehow you convinced yourself otherwise. The other counterintuitive thing is that SOMEHOW people are questioning how the block tool is a feature to limit, by personal choice, with who that player interacts with. I mean, if I were to block someone, it's because I don't want to have ANYTHING to do with that person. Seems pretty obvious to me.

I don't know and frankly, completely irrelevant to my point. The block tool is going to work how the designer intended, not how a particular player wants it to work.

Well, this isn't going to age well with some people but ... blocking has consequences, regardless of the reason you use it. If someone misuses a tool available to them, they can't really complain they aren't getting the result intend from the design of the tool. The tool doesn't bend to an individuals will to fulfill their own intent.

I don't see a problem here. If someone you blocked someone, clearly you don't want to have anything to do with them. Why would you need to see their squads if you have no interest in interacting with them?

You like playing it.

That might be true, but it doesn't have anything to do with what I said. Day 1 was a clown fiesta? OK ... what does that have to do with what we are talking about? More complex class build combos? So it's your opinion that complex class combos aren't something a casual person can understand while hardcore players master them to increase the gap? That's pretty weird because core class has those combos too, it's just fewer of them.

Knowing when something happens in an encounter and what to do when it happens isn't a new thing in this game. That's existed since day one, everywhere in the game ... so that 'gap' between casuals and hardcores is still the same as it ever was. If anything, there is MORE access to toolsets for the casual player to mitigate the effects of NOT doing the things that need to be done when certain events happen in an encounter ... so I would argue the gap is actually shrinking. The only thing that has really changed is that Anet has introduced a whole new level of challenge for the hardcores with CM content that few casuals could even touch.

It makes no sense to complain about power crept DPS numbers that most people who play PVE would never achieve and likely doesn't affect you anyways .... ... but OK. 🤷‍♂️

Any video you want to find doesn't change the fact that the thing that matters here (players choices ingame) isn't something you can capture in a video or determine from 'math' in the first place.

Nothing about this video suggests there is a problem here though. A problem only exists when it's in game and it it doesn't see equivalent usage with its peers in its relevant roles. Again, what a build does in it's own bubble against the golem isn't indicative of any issue it may have in game along side other builds in real encounters.

Again ... goes to relevance. You bashed a golem ... good for you. Maybe for YOU the game is about hitting a golem. I'm pretty certain most people do more than that. Again, what is relevant here isn't how well QBerserker hits a golem. It's how it is considered for use by players INGAME against its peers. That simply is NOT measured by hitting a golem.

Don't mistake my responses to you as some kind of dissuasion from giving feedback. Give whatever feedback you like. Like you, I'm giving feedback that the approach being taken here to pre-emptively nerf the proposed changes based on a calculation are questionably relevant to how the game works in the first place. What is fun about this thread is when I take my time machine back 9 years to when people were calculating DPS outputs before we had ARCPDS, claiming necro was the worst and resulting in people outright refusing to team necros. Man, were THOSE people wrong. TLDR why do I care? because the kind of feedback you are giving here is inaccurate to how the actually game works.