Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Obtena.7952

Members
  • Posts

    12,789
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Obtena.7952

  1. This way, there is literally no reason to improve anything in this game. If improving underwhelming/useless builds to be more useful and practical is not big enough reason to make them better, then there is no valid reason you will be satisfied with ever. Your arguments do not come from experience with the class, but rather from being convinced that "people who want something to be better, want it to be better just beacuse and they are wrong". We already mentioned reasons (in more detail than just simplified "to be better"). I really think that lack of class knowledge and not realizing how this change would have impact on the class itself is the main reason why you are unable to focus more on balance point of view instead of reasons why to implement such change. That doesn't make sense. Anet changes things in the game because they have reason to ... not trivial ideas about how nice it would be or just because it's better. They have actual reasons; they have told us what they are for lots of changes many times. If you can't think of any non-trivial reasons to make FH baseline, then what makes you think Anet will take the idea seriously? There isn't anything underwhelming or useless about builds that don't use Discipline. Again, I'm just repeat it: If Discipline and FH are SO GOOD, that everything other choice pales in comparison to it, then that's an indication they need a massive nerf, not a global baseline buff for the class. You better be REALLY careful about how you present your ideas about this topic if you want to push for positive changes. It's absolutely ridiculous to say Anet should take the awesome things from a trait line and make them baseline because they are so good, nothing else is meaningful as a choice, for whatever reason you could think up. You are literally asking for OP'ed things to be made baseline. Give your head a shake.
  2. Well, I haven't seen a good reason presented for Anet to do it yet. Again, the burden of proof isn't on justifying the current implementation. That simply doesn't make sense. "Because it wouldn't hurt to do" or "it would be nice" isn't a compelling reason for Anet to do all the work required to not only make FH baseline, but to backfill the now empty trait spot. You people need to think a little more about why this needs to happen.
  3. Is that a serious comment? Check my sig if you think we never hear anything from the devs about class redevelopment. I mean, I'm pretty baffled that you feel that way, or think that somehow, Revenant is somehow unique enough to get a roadmap for players to scrutinize. That's not how Anet has worked EVER.
  4. Then the argument from the OP that FH should be baseline because of more 'fluid' play is also flawed, because any arguments based on 'fluid' play are related to CD's and rotations, not build variety. Put it this way ... if swapping weapons isn't about affecting rotations and the 'feel' of faster play, then this is simply a thinly veiled attempt to get access to on swap procs. I'm still not seeing the 'build diversity' argument either ... because I can say for a fact that no one is taking Discipline ONLY because of FH. Even if they nerfed FH into the ground OR made it baseline, people would STILL take Discipline. If you REALLY want to go into a build diversity argument, Anet is going to have to nerf more than just FH to make people think what else they should choose.
  5. As I've mentioned already ... if FH is so damn good that it's the reason people are taking Discipline and that leads to lower build diversity, then do NOT assume the only answer to that problem is to make FH baseline for all warriors. If anything, that's an indication that FH is too good and needs a nerf. If you want to justify a change, you have to explain why it's needed. That's not a new concept here. I'm willing to bet that if you polled warrior players and asked them what kind of changes are NEEDED, FH baseline wouldn't even be on the radar. I don't think it's needed (as I've already explained) because there isn't anything broken with how FH works now. It's a minor trait in a line that promotes weapon swap. It's appropriate the way it is already implemented. Again, it's not necessary for me to justify it's current implementation ... it's necessary for you to explain why it needs to change. There are literally dozens of things that would make warrior more enjoyable so why is baseline FH THE buff that warriors should hang their hat on to make that happen?
  6. We told you XY times, that making Fast Hands baseline, is to give warrior more build variety. Except that's not really true. Do you NOT swap weapons even if you don't use Discipline? Of course you do .... that's the whole basis of the OP's argument for making FH baseline ... so it's not about diversity in builds. Diversity doesn't change because you have a 5 vs. 9 second weapon swap ... The big change is the rotation and I'm not even sure it's that significant because most weapon skill CD's are much longer than 5 seconds, or even the 9 seconds from regular swap rate. That's why I can't wrap my head around the justification for this baseline FH proposal as being more 'fluid'. Access to the Weapon skills isn't limited by swap rate for the most part ... it's the CD on the skills themselves.
  7. Which is why I said "part of...". Well ... it's not 'part of' either ... lots of classes have weapon swap so it certainly can't be considered 'part of' the unique Warrior mechanic.
  8. Buffing something has nothing to do with knowing how big a difference it is in play. That's a ridiculous notion. I don't understand how you can't see that something being better isn't a reason to buff it; that reason can be used for ANY buff you want to propose so it's a meaningless reason. The idea that a 9 second weapon swap breaks warrior as a class is just nonsense and sensational. Then why is it that vast majority of builds used in PvP/WvW include Discipline traitline?They use it because it's good .. but that's not relevant to why something should be buffed. I mean, I'm just going to keep saying it: Being better is not a reason to buff something. That's literally true for EVERY buff anyone could propose. I have not argued not about how would FH baseline make warrior overpowered or broken at all. I'm saying there hasn't been a good reason presented for why FH should be baseline. "Being better" or "I miss it when I don't gorge out on Discipline for hundreds of hours" are not valid reasons. You're completely missing the point of why we choose traitlines and traits in them. If we don't have meaningful choices to make, they become trivial. leading to poor class performance in competitive game modes because of predictability ... that's even MORE important on Warrior because of the limited number of available 'actions' to them. Making FH baseline trivializes our choices. If FH is so good that it literally breaks non-Discipline builds, then it needs to be MADE non-trivial with a massive nerf so that Discipline is less of a default traitline.
  9. Burst is the unique Warrior mechanic, not weapon swapping.
  10. Buffing something has nothing to do with knowing how big a difference it is in play. That's a ridiculous notion. I don't understand how you can't see that something being better isn't a reason to buff it; that reason can be used for ANY buff you want to propose so it's a meaningless reason. The idea that a 9 second weapon swap breaks warrior as a class is just nonsense and sensational.
  11. It does affect the flow of the profession though. Put a few hundred hours in on a build that always uses fast hands (which is most builds) then go play a build without it. Having an increased CD on something you use that often doesnt feel good when playing the profession. These aren't reasons to make FH baseline. Of course if you play with FH for hundreds of hours then play a build that doesn't have it, it feels different. That goes without saying. I just don't see any reason to make it baseline for this reason. Simply put, you got used to something and it feels deficient when you don't have it. The fact is that non-Discipline builds are not deficient because they don't have FH. It doesnt just feel different it feels worse, which is an important distinction. Non-Discipline builds ARE deficient though or else a vast majority of builds wouldn't need it. The only unique profession mechanic warrior has is a single burst skill per weapon where as most professions have multiple special skills or whole other sets of skills. As a weapons master profession it wouldn't be far fetched for part of their built in class mechanics to include weapon swapping. You havent really presented a reason not to do it other than "there is no reason to do it" but there is. Yes, it's a buff, but not a significant one. It wouldn't make warrior over perform, it would just make them more fluid.Of course it feels worse. Again, that goes without saying that 9 second weapon swap when you are trained by 100's of hours of 5 second swap is worse. 'Worse' and 'not fluid' aren't reasons to make it baseline. Of course I don't need to present a reason to not do it ... I don't need to for it to stay the way it is. If you really want one, here is one: because it's no work for Anet to leave it the way it is. here is another: because it's fine the way it is. I mean, you have obviously convinced yourself this needs to happen; it's your job to make a compelling reason for the rest of us to believe you, including Anet, if you want it changed. So far, I don't think gorging yourself on 5 second weapon swap buffet for hundreds of hours then thinking it feels bad when you go on the 9 second swap diet really does that.
  12. It does affect the flow of the profession though. Put a few hundred hours in on a build that always uses fast hands (which is most builds) then go play a build without it. Having an increased CD on something you use that often doesnt feel good when playing the profession. These aren't reasons to make FH baseline. Of course if you play with FH for hundreds of hours then play a build that doesn't have it, it feels different. That goes without saying. I just don't see any reason to make it baseline for this reason. Simply put, you got used to something and it feels deficient when you don't have it. The fact is that non-Discipline builds are not deficient because they don't have FH.
  13. Don't get lost in semantics here; how anyone defines 'roaming' or 'ganking' is irrelevant. The mounts simply encourage players into a way of playing that is more inline with the objectives of WvW. I can be certain Anet didn't sit around a table and say to themselves they needed to introduce mounts because of 'ganking' because frankly, that doesn't make any sense in the first place given all the abilities and possibilities for how Warclaw works and how complicated it is as a solution to 'ganking' to begin with.
  14. Well, considering you don't pay for anything, I would say you will never be 'compensated' because of mounts introduction. Not even sure it's due to mounts to be honest. Seems like another mount hate thread ...
  15. I think it goes without saying that in situations where fast swapping would be good ... FH is good. It's simply not a valid reason to make it baseline. It's the whole point of taking a traitline that gives you benefits for a weapon swapping build. The argument to make something baseline isn't that it would be better .. OFC it will be better. IF we want to maintain a meaningful set of choice then we can't just make everything that would make things better baseline. I also don't think that calling all non-Discipline warriors underperforming is a compelling reason to make FH baseline either. I find it hard to believe that having a 5 vs. 7 second weapon swap is THE thing that's holding back non-Discipline warriors. If anything, that's sort of an indication that FH is too strong and needs a nerf IMO.
  16. I don't get it ... why is everyone assuming the current business model doesn't work for Anet? All these ideas about how to get Anet money and how to change everything so it's 'better' I can assure you, if the business model needs to change, it will be priority one for Anet to do that above everything else.
  17. Here is my proposal for replacement of the OP's idea The current version. I can't see any situation where fast hands as baseline provides more openness to build variation as the OP claims. I mean, it doesn't even have that significant of an impact on builds to begin with ... it is a minor trait after all. Minor traits provide a 'feel of a theme'; they are hardly anything you can actually create a build around ... that's why you get them by default. How can the OP claim not having it adversely affects the 'flow' ... I mean, at 5 seconds you almost get to face roll it. What build is so significantly impacted by a 5 second weapon swap that it affects the flow? What kind of flow do you get swapping and auto attacking? You can't even recharge your cooldowns on most weapon skills with that. The idea doesn't make much sense to me.
  18. Because (as normal), how one class gets balanced is not influenced by what other classes do. Furthermore, the faster that the class gets it's changed, the faster it can get more. Maybe you want to be the class that gets no attention for 8 months? The bottomline is that the changes were completely reasonable and actually almost exactly the changes that some of the more astute players predicted were needed. Whatever. We got the class that gets bent over a barrel first and worst. Yeah, Engi is so bad off >< I don't think you are looking at this objectively here.
  19. Because (as normal), how one class gets balanced is not influenced by what other classes do. Furthermore, the faster that the class gets it's changed, the faster it can get more. Maybe you want to be the class that gets no attention for 8 months? The bottomline is that the changes were completely reasonable and actually almost exactly the changes that some of the more astute players predicted were needed.
  20. So you were inactive for 8 months because of balance issues, and claim that you will play this game no matter what, but nowWvW is ruined because of the mount? :confused: Quality Troll post. :+1: :trollface: In addition ... these balance issues have been in the game since day 1 ... In fact, anyone sitting in the wings 'waiting' for balance just hasn't been paying attention to the game. my favourite part is that the poll is worthless. Whether people like mounts or not in WvW, they are here to stay.
  21. All good necessary changes. Scrapper is still going to be a go to WvW class boys, so relax.
  22. Hey, if you have deep emotional ties to the class, then it's performance shouldn't be a problem for you. I think there is still problems with how you think about what the class should do and those aren't going away because it's not how Anet designs the game. It's also pretty dishonest to accuse everyone of trolling your thread ... it's just sensational to start out saying Tempest is trash level to begin with. You set yourself up for a fight; what more could you expect?
  23. Most training runs are done incredibly inefficiently to begin with so they are not even learning scenarios because instead of picking up a few trainees with some degree of competency and being grown in skill withing a group of mentors, what you have is maybe one or two mentors and then a disparate group of people with wild gaps in skill competencies being recycled around where the group members aren't even the same throughout several training sessions, so every new training session you're dealing with different problem players stretching the group training thin. In essence you get a person who needs practice with the final phase of Matthias but in the 2 days of training the consistency in getting to that phase for his or her practice is nonexistent since that person's practice is being held back by other people who aren't even prepared to make it past the first phases. And since the spots in existing statics are usually so few and often quite stringent beyond just having 3-4 kills on a boss, these people may train and get a kill but rarely move on to grow the raiding community because they find that they can't consistently raid outside of PuGing which has even more outrageous barriers to entry so they quit altogether. This game is absolutely atrocious in getting the average player to a baseline of competency for raiding/fractals because for most of its published content no degree of competency or thought into viable builds is encouraged as it allows zerging to completely overshadow individual contribution tests via open world PvE being its main form of content. At least GW1 did a much better job in training people across story missions first, then optional objectives adding further challenge and ultimately elite missions. But all of them had zero zerging involved and emphasized the individual contribution of each group member by limiting group size. So much this. Especially the highlighted sections. It's so frustrating to lead a training raid, even with a core group of experienced raiders when the group of people you train is so wildly different in skill. Why not run multiple training raids then? Because we neither have the manpower to do so, nor enough people willing to train others 24/7. It boils down to 1 training raid for new players and 1 training run for experienced players per week, and even filling those can be a pain. The performance and presence of some of the new raiders is terrible in general. This leads to essentially half a session of training, and half a session of running wing 4 b1-3 at the end so people remain motivated (ending with 4-5 boss kills for new players for the week). The most enjoyable trainings are with more experienced players where people at least know their class and have some experience with how raids work, but even there you have some disparity. Some go out and raid on their own with PUG groups and get weekly kills and experience, others only do the bare minimum and it really shows when tackling bosses which haven't been cleared for a while. In theory yes, you won't get good practice on a heal necro since you skip a ton of mechanics. In reality though: unless you are working on the top end of the spectrum, that support is needed on almost all levels. Last week during training we killed VG with 5 people (basically the experienced part of the group) and moved on. This week, where I had said we would do a set amount of training on VG no matter if it gets killed first try, no actually new player showed up. The best one can do currently is try to get people involved and interested in raids so they set out to practice and train on their own (my old raid static required people to test new builds or classes in PUG raids before being allowed to play them in the static group or to improve if one was lacking performance. That's just not something you see with many new raiders, and would also be to hardcore for a completely new player given the way how PUG groups operate). Anything beyond that is not at the level of new players entering raids but cannibalizing on already experienced players for advanced statics. This game is terrible at preparing players for group content. See the sad state how people are able to deal (or rather not deal) with even basic normal T4 fractals. There rant done, sorry had to just vent. Sometimes it gets really frustrating trying to explain to people even basic game mechanics. That's certainly something other MMOs do way better be it via the innate trinity or some type of achievements. No, that has nothing to do with easy mode raids but rather with getting people to understand HOW this game works.I'm going to bump this because it's not just true now, it's been true since the beginning, even with dungeons. I can't agree more; Anet has done the worst job at preparing people for what they will encounter in endgame instanced content. As a capable player, it's such a turn off to try to explain to people why they actually have to learn something to be successful in this game, because the PVE experience they have had treats everyone at the lowest common denominator (i.e. NO SKILLS) and rewards them for it. I hate to say it, but if Anet wants players more involved with the game at large, we need scrub-level raiding.
  24. If you don't like the risk/reward or effort/reward profile of the class, I have to wonder why you play it. If you don't think Tempest is good outside some specific way of playing it, that's not a problem either ... ALL classes have things they are and are not good at doing. They aren't designed to be good at anything you decide to do with them. There are lots of contrasting posts that indicate the problem isn't with the Tempest here. It's simply how you use it. Choose your class wisely based on your playstyle and taste.
  25. I want a solid reason to pick Ele over the other classes I have. Because Ele's the one I've put the most time and gold into developing, yet it's not performing half as well as any of the other classes I have, both in PvP or WvW. And since we're on the topic of PvE, maybe we can address the abysmal CC Ele has compared to other classes. If I had to ask for just one thing, I'd ask for wash the pain away's healing power to be put back to the strength it had on HoT's release. There's no need for it to stay nerfed anymore, Firebrand exists. Well, that's not a role, that's for sure. No other classes need roles to be solid reasons to picked over others, ESPECIALLY in PvP/WvW. Healer.I don't get your response to me ... what you are asking for in the previous post is simply a buff or give Ele some exceptional ability (which won't fix your desirability as a class BTW) ... That's not a role. Besides, I would question the idea that Ele isn't already filling the role for being a good healer, or that being a good healer is what will 'differentiate' Ele as a class to make Ele desirable in PVP/WvW. Those ideas just don't mesh with how the game or the class works. The role that you have as an Ele is conceptual, because it's linked to how the class is designed ... the idea your an Ele with 4 unique elements to swap around ... not the idea that you are a 'healer' or a 'DPS' ... or whatever. GW2 is not like other MMO's where you get handed a label and told that's what your class does. Anet avoided that intentionally in this game. It's going to be a massively hard sell to get Anet to think they have to throw that idea out the window 6+ years later because Ele just doesn't bring it for you. I think you have meshed two very different ideas: being desirable as a class (to play or to team with) is not necessarily linked to a 'role' for the class. Ele's have ALWAYS been desirable team mates; this is not a problem that needs to be fixed. It's also true that no matter what the problem you are trying to solve, giving Ele a 'role' isn't a solution that is inline with the game design either.
×
×
  • Create New...