Illconceived Was Na.9781

Dulfy's Video Overview of the RacersDulfy's Preview iImages only) — two of each, except for Griffon (three) and Beetle (four)Wiki(For those who really hate math: if you want 5+ skins, it's more financially sensible just to pay for the 15-pack to guarantee you get them all.)

Some tickets will take longer to answer than others, for a variety of reasons. The backlog is still severe, employees are still being trained. (We know this from a few recent dev posts touching on this indirectly.) There is a queue, they answer everything in it. If you are creating duplicate tickets, that can send you ticket back to the end of the queue, depending on who gets the duplicates and how long it takes them to merge all the details. For example, if the text is identical, it's probably pretty easy for them to merge and they'll start working on it at that point. If one post is a rant about how the game ate an item and the second is a more respectful recitation of the events leading to a lost item, then they'll just combine and sort it later, perhaps much later. Especially if it's not an urgent issue. Regardless, posting here isn't going to speed things up. If it did, everyone would post in the forums to bypass the queue. I'm really sorry that you've waited so long and are still waiting. I think it's bad that ANet didn't seem prepared for some predictable surges in support needs (exacerbated by unpredictable surges). I think it's unfortunate that they aren't keeping us updated with the status of the queue, if only to set our expectations. But none of that will change the fact that we still all are going to have to be more patient than any of us think is reasonable.

How can you be so sure that some other build wouldn't make it seem easier? I accept that active combat is challenging for you; I find it hard to believe that it's not worth your time trying some of the suggestions. Alternatively, if you're convinced that it's you & not your build, why are you so convinced this is a change of direction for the game? The tier 1-3 encounters are virtually unchanged from 4 years ago, and yet we have new skills, gear, & specializations to fight them. Maybe it's just that there's always been parts of GW2 that don't appeal to you.

It honestly doesn't matter whether any of us responding think the Gauntlet is too hard or too easy or just right; what matters is that the OP is finding it hard. Likewise, though, people who think it's too hard should also consider the possibility that a new approach might make it feel easier. So instead of arguing with those offering suggestions, try out the ideas, see if any work. As players, we can make adjustments to our build/style right now, whereas even if ANet agreed with the OP, the Gauntlet won't change this year. (Plus, there's good reason to doubt that they'd agree.) And if adjusting doesn't appeal, that's okay, too. There simply will always be content in the game that doesn't appeal to everyone. There's no need for people who hate parkour to bang their head against JPs. Not everyone has to learn to fly a griffon well enough to complete an adventure. There's plenty going on in the Festival without running the Gauntlet. There's nothing wrong with enjoying a certain style of gameplay and not wanting to adjust that style to fit different content, whether it's new or recycled. But that doesn't mean that the game should change to suit that style.

I was listening to Wooden Potatoes talk about the Gauntlet. And he pointed out that there is easily a prof/specialization that pairs nicely with each fight. Now admittedly, WP is far better than a lot of players. He picks up new things faster, gets good faster, and generally has little trouble adapting to changes. However, the principle is the same: if what you're using in the Gauntlet isn't working for you, try something else. Don't worry about other people saying what's easy or what's hard; none of that matters. Worry about what works for you, while being willing to adjust. So I suspect rather than particular fights being too challenging for the OP, there's probably another way to approach them. Instead of saying that there's a problem with the game's difficulty (which might be true or not), ask for advice (and be willing to try it). I can't promise that the fights will be easy or that you'll manage them all. But I think some will be easier, and more fun.

You'd be surprised at how often it happens that this happens. There's no way to be sure what a player has tried yet unless they describe it.

On the contrary, it's because a developer thinks highly of the players that it doesn't have one.

There is no walkthrough included in that thread...In fact, there is. I was careful to link the subthread that makes it more difficult to see anything other than the developer's comment... and even that includes a spoiler (mild though it might be). I hate Reddit as I find it painful to navigate.The warning wasn't meant for people who hate Reddit; it was meant for anyone who happened to be reading. The whole idea behind this particular "easter egg" was that it was fun for its own sake. I am sure that many would prefer that everyone posting in this thread to be as cautious as possible about adding anything other than, "there's an undocumented 'quest' that starts near a shipwreck," so that everyone can enjoy the journey as much as you. Especially since this thread isn't tagged as

It is not an achievement. Non-spoiler remark by the dev: (Don't follow the source if you want to figure it out by yourself.)

The extremes for penalizing death are: You have to restart entirely, and pay some sort of penalty, whether repair costs, reduced damage/health, or easier-to-down (or a combination). This is close to how it was when the game launched.You suffer a minor inconvenience and an ugly icon. This is close to how it is now.People complained about the high-penalty extreme and now (other) people complain about the low-penalty annoyance we have now. What I have yet to see is someone offering a middle ground that makes the game game feel more satisfying. The requirements are: It hurts to die, but not so much makes fights become increasingly difficult.It's intuitive enough, so that the vast majority won't need an explanation.It's simple enough that it can be implemented as part of some feature update.It is more fun for more people than the current mechanic, and the one we had at launch.Like @Danikat.8537, I like that there's some sort of penalty. Like others posting, I don't notice or care very much; it's a minor inconvenience. And yet I can't think of a system that would be different enough to make it worth anyone's time to design, test, implement.

Great, @Wentworth.6901. Once you've had a chance to practice, let us know how it works out for you. (And if you have trouble staying alive while glassier, don't hesitate to come back to ask for rotation/style/technique suggestions to help you make the transition.)

(emphasis is mine)

@Tommo Chocolate.5870 said:Interesting, Renegade runes give Condition Damage and Ferocity, which seems like a weird combination. Is it really better than Berserker runes? Sure, zerker's runes can be a good choice, depending on build and team comp.The point I was trying to make is that there's a reason certain combinations are meta. If there's a good reason to deviate, by all means, don't follow the meta blindly. But in the absence of a specific reason, remember the reason these builds are popular: because they are extremely efficient at what they do (terms & conditions apply, of course).

What's fair got to do with it? If a franchise re-uses characters, then I only care about three things: Integration: Is it important to the story? Would it have been equally (or more) interesting if a new character was invented to fill the role? Or is it just fan service? Canon: Is it true to the original character? Or does it ignore everything we already know about them?Implementation: Ignoring the above, how good a job did they do? Is the character part of the fun? Is their script moving or dull? Does the voice acting make it better still or undermine the character|story?On that basis: Joko: 3 points. Definitely important to the story, true to his character, and (on the whole) more fun than using a new villain. Super fun, too; great lines and wonderfully acted.Lazarus: 0 points. Fan service, not true to what we know about it, and would have been just as interesting if Balthazar had impersonated anyone else. Livia: 1 point. Fan service, but true to her personality in my opinion. The actual use of her in the story? A waste (and plus: where is she now? No credit for introducing or re-introducing important characters and then ignoring them.)Koss: 3 points. Well integrated to the story; it wouldn't have been the same with someone else. Fit his personality to a T. And even though I didn't love the VA, I thought they supported a good script.

If you just DC'd, please include your location (country & state/region/province) and (if known) the map IP address that you were on (most won't have any idea). Are you NA or EU? Also mention your internet service provider. This could be something happening between ANet and you, rather than a problem at ANet's end. (Or it could be an Amazon Cloud issue... or sure, a problem with ANet.)

Working for me. Location: US west coast, ISP = ATT. NA region.

I personally don't think it's trash. However, for the effort, it's just as easy to setup a Viper's build and easier to setup Berserker's. And both are much, much more fun to play, once you get used to active defense rather than passive.(And again: it's easier to learn how to do that when you're glass.) The one place that I think Celestial sometimes shines is WvW. There are builds now (and have been others in the past) that make use of multiple stats. Durability is important because against human opponents, glass is too brittle. If you have two ascended sets, I'd want one to be Viper's + Renegade and the other Zerk + Scholar's (or Strength). If you have three already made, sure, hold on to celestial for now. Or if you have just two sets now and no immediate plans for the second, then leaving one celestial while making the other Viper's is okay, too. Again, I encourage you to drop yourself in the deep-end with glass, even at melee range.

As a generic rule of thumb, rephrase the question: Power: why wouldn't you take Berserker's prefix plus Scholars suffix?Condi: why wouldn't you take Viper's gear plus (most of the time) Renegade runes? (Trapper + Nightmare for some)Similarly, it's worth asking, "why not run one of the many builds recommended by Snow Crows, Discretize, or MetaBattle? For any exception (for which there are plenty), there's always a good reason; if you can't think of it, then those are always good or great choices. (With more experience, some of the reasons become obvious and some are obvious in hindsight, after someone mentions the idea.) One common exception: budget. Strength runes are a cheaper|weaker version of Scholar's (although the price difference is minor these days) or when people are in a situation in which they know their health is less than 90% too often. Similarly, Rabid is often a decent budget option for exotic gear, while people are saving up to finish an ascended Viper's set.

+GDPR. They had to deal with the spam of information requests. (reddit) Good point. I'm sure that generated a lot of hard-to-parse tickets.

Regardless of the circumstances, I would hope that ANet would take 5 minutes each week to post the current status, even if it's just, "nothing has changed. We hired and are hiring more staff, training them, and working on the backlog." In theory, it often takes 3 months to clear a 1-month backlog, after hiring enough staff (which can take ages all on its own). In practice, though, to us as customers, it just looks like this is the new normal. I'm sure that they are aware of how horrid this is for all of us (ANet & the community), that they are doing as best they can in trying times, and that they do have a plan to return to the old 1-3 day turn around. I'm not asking for any promises; I would just like for them to take a little time to acknowledge the situation. I'm very sympathetic to how difficult this is for ANet (I have been in those shoes). I'd like to see some public sympathy for how difficult this is for players.

I strongly discourage you from running celestial in T4 Fractals for a DPS role. If you have trouble surviving, work on learning the mechanics better or doing better on your footwork (being at the right place). Celestial is a major reduction in offensive stats. While of course it's true that a live wet noodle does more damage than a dead glass cannon, neither is something that other PUGs want to see in challenging, instanced content. If you really feel that you need some extra defense while working on mechanics/footwork, then swap a few trinkets (as few as possible). Technically, the "optimal" choice is using the lesser pieces of armor, but then you'd have to spend extra on runes, whereas trinkets are easily replaced through LS3 maps (and the infusions can be recovered for a modest cost using the infusion extractors). So for Sword Weaver, for example: Zerk armor + scholar runes (or strength, if you're not at 90% HP often), zerk weapons, zerk trinks except maybe Valk or Soldier accessories.

If ANet was going to invest on population alone, then they woudn't add a data center in Sydney or Melbourne; they'd put it in Jakarta. Obviously ping would be a lot better, but it would still be roughly as bad as someone from ANet playing in the EU region. But obviously, national population isn't the important criterion. It's how many new players and new sales would they get. And it doesn't take much research to learn: there aren't these massive gamer populations just waiting to spend money on GW2 if only the ping was more reasonable. Sure, adding a server local to Australia would mean more people; it just won't be enough more to justify the cost. So yeah, ping is bad for those on the other side of the world from ANet HQ. And yeah, more people would play if it that delay could be reduced. But in the end, it's still a business decision that ANet has thoroughly researched: for now, it remains too costly for too little benefit to too few people to justify the decision. The good news is that ANet does keep trying to figure out better ways to transfer data, to decrease the costs of starting up servers and maintaining them. And they've made some progress. So it could happen. It just won't be soon.