[Would have been better if eveyone died in the end?]

3 hours ago, Kalavier.1097 said:

Why kill a character off?

Why does the commander need a sad ending to EoD?

 

Guess what, retire doesn't mean LITERALLY RETIRE. Rytlock, Braham, Logan, all got this treatment in EoD. They were barely involved, if at all, because their lives and jobs had them be elsewhere.

 

If, and only IF anet was planning to do a Catacylsm level "Redo the entire world to update it" would this make sense, with huge chunks of the character cast dying off.

But the thing is, they aren't. And yes, most of the people came out mostly unscathed because they are skilled adventurers and had support around them. It's not like Braham faced down a horde of void in the middle of nowhere alone.

Why have a sad ending? why kill characters? why not? it's down to personal preference. I, personally, do not like why the story is messy and the characters come and go and seemingly have better things to do than save the world. Why was Logan, the leader of the pact, the force designed around dealing with dragons, so uninvolved until the very end? Why keep are half the members of dragons watch, the guild focussed around dealing with dragons, not involved until the very end? From what I've heard, it involved voice acting scheduling problems or something. That's fine, but it brings me back to my point about having this kaleidoscope of  characters that are set up to be the main focus of the conflict, but instead become this unsatisfying mess.  like i said, it would be fine if they literally retired in a satisfying way like master oogway does, but they don't, and anet keeps treating them like marks on the board to say they were involved at all.

 

The thing is, is that characters are just ideas. I dont know why people need some sort of huge reason for killing a character. They are story elements, and they should be kept as disposable. We, as humans, have limitless capacity for the process of building up new characters, and then moving on to the next one. as long as they're good characters. But anet refuses to move on, because like i said they keep coming back in an unsatisfying way. So why should I move on? I want them to actually be involved, or just end. 

 

Why was trahearne killed? why was tybalt killed? Its a great way of propping up a story. Yes, I say propping up because really how else could you salvage it at this point? Maybe if GW2's characters were good, complex ones, I wouldn't be asking for it. I certainly didn't want tyrion lannister to die. But i still accepted it could happen, because it keeps the story grounded and you get invested for the remaining characters. In my original post, I said EoD would have been a great opportunity to wipe the slate clean and start some new characters. I'm ready for a new group of maybe just 2 or 3 dudes that stick around. Like chief and cortana. or jak and daxter. or ratchet and clank.

[Would have been better if eveyone died in the end?]

25 minutes ago, Fueki.4753 said:

There's no need or reason to kill of major characters.

Just think for a few more seconds and you'll find other ways to retire them.

As long as they are alive, they can come back, if they need to.

maybe if they stayed retired, yes. but anet keeps bringing them back because they're canonically still active. So they have to check the boxes for like 10 - 15 characters. The story itself takes place over like what... 10 years? and characters have been in their current positions for what, 6 or 7 at the most?  maybe retiring in your 40s is common in tyria, who knows...

 

I think the argument saying there's no reason to kill characters is pretty dumb. There's a lot of reasons to kill them, some of which i outlined. its more like they're making excuses to keep them alive. supposedly, they have come out mostly unscathed against a world ending threat? I think the void incident would be the perfect setting to end not only the dragons, but the rest of the mess too, and give the opportunity for a fresh start.

[Would have been better if eveyone died in the end?]

Pretty wishful thinking on my part, but I was kinda hoping the final battle would just see everyone die in one way or another. The game's cast is a kaleidoscope of characters, to the point that a lot the main guys barely get any screentime anymore. You might think "oh and then everyone died the end" is a bad ending, but imo since the game intends to continue, I think it would be a good way of setting up a fresh start in the story.

 

I think just ending all or most of the cast would solve the whole problem with an army of characters having to be juggled around, and be mostly just strangely absent from current events despite talking up such grand plans to begin with. It really feels like most of the characters are relegated to being simple cameos, just present to give a line or two in some settings and then gone again for another 4 years.

 

I also think it would be a rare chance for a little character development for the player character. Being the last one standing, in a phyrric victory at the end of all things, a melancholy ending to the story would have had much more impact than the disney tier gay wedding ending. Then, years later, you can introduce a new party of heroes in a return to form, with a focused group of heroes. With one key difference - the commander is now a grizzled veteran of an adventurer, still stinging from their loss years ago, with a little convincing, they might just be ready for another adventure...

[Mythical creatures you want in GW2]

gotta say, +1 on the horror angle. no specific mythical creatures per say, but would love to see more stuff like what we got in the bastion of the penitent, with the dark souls - like Samarog and setting. bring on the twisted, horrible monsters i say.

[Warrior Rifle Improvements]

mad respect for maining rifle on warrior, i dont remember the last time i've seen one of those.

[SA changes have ruined my special build]

people dont read the second paragraph because they have such a massive hard on for punching down on the perceived whiners. its a bait post people, just read.

[ArenaNet have broken my Thief/Deadeye]

Imagine making a game and any attempt at balancing it spawns a five page thread about how you cant permastealth while doing nothing but harvest resource nodes, from an 18 month player that still doesnt know what combos are. You're asked if you're regarded as a lower class of player? like, yes dude. you are.  your playstyle should not be regarded when it comes to balance changes. at all.

[(PvP) Remember when this class was played by actual warrior mains?]

"Meta abusers"

 

Why bother maining anything in this game? Out of 3 trillion potential builds 3 are good at any one time. You want people that made a _insert currently bad class here_ to stay there? Nah ima have fun. cope and seethe about it

[Suggestion for Movement in Action Camera Mode]

I'd like to add that there should be a solution for AoE targeting raised surfaces above the viewline for action camera. currently, if you point your camera at a surface that is above your character, you cannot place an AoE ability on it.

 

My solution for this would be to place an AoE where the camera is pointing like normal, but only when first activating the ability. then you can translate the AoE marker over the surface of the terrain by panning the camera up and down, not in a raycasted fashion (where your AoE marker is always at the place your camera is pointing), but in a linear fashion such that the AoE will slide over raised surfaces.

 

It would still take a bit of getting used to, since you still wouldnt be able to see a surface above your characters head when trying to aim at it, but you would at least be able to target the surface and develop a feeling for it.

[nerf or remove stuns in pvp]

mace + shield = 2 stuns, switch into hammer for 3s knockdown + knockback, get hit by burst move for another 3s stun, get bull charged for another 3s knockdown. that's 6 CC moves on warrior.  One might be inclined to take stomp as well for another CC move as well as a stunbreak. now take rune of the mesmer and sigil of paralyze. Its a bit like getting comboed in street fighter

[Heavy armor fashion issue + suggestions]

My main problem with heavy armour is the lack of fully visored plate helmets without horns or spikes or wings

[We need more Metal Legion.]

id like to see some other racial bands that do other music genres. And not just the obvious ones like asurans doing synthwave. I mean like off the wall, subversive niche genres. I wanna see an asuran band that does british new wave, a norn band that does 2000s linkin park rock music, a human band that does rap...

[My honest feelings about map mob difficulty in PoF]

imo the damage and the abilities of the mobs are fine but the aggro range is not. There's really no gameplay reason to make open world traversal so annoying. I also think the mob density breaks immersion since the mob placement is a very archaic, 'place mobs equidistantly over this area' sort of design. I'd like to see Anet cluster mobs together in small nooks and crannies and make small territories for mobs, like a family of boars in a forest, or a couple of sand eels patrolling the dunes, rather than try to completely paint the map with aggro radii. It's not like these mobs are meant to be farmed anyway, so why put so many resources into 100+ mobs roaming the map as much as possible? just limit dense mob packs to places like enemy camps and meta events.

[Guild Wars 2: End of Dragons Discussion Thread: Skiffs and Fishing [Merged]]

seems like you have to sit down while the skiff is moving? was hoping to be able to walk on it while it moves, since that would be a sign of larger ships to come. god i need to quit this copium...

[Rather confused about the Charr]

5 hours ago, Hannelore.8153 said:

The story tends to be Human-centric at times (except for that period when it was Sylvari-centric) so its easy to forget that Humans are basically nothing in Guild Wars universe now. Their Gods are gone, they've lost three of their kingdoms and the last kingdom (that we can visit) has been nearly destroyed by outlaws, Centaurs and White Mantle, and essentially the only thing that keeps Humans relevant in Tyria is that players easily identify with them.

 

Maybe there's still a strong Human kingdom left in Cantha--we don't know how things have gone there. But Ascalon is completely gone, Orr is not only gone but everyone was turned into monsters, and Elona was nearly completely destroyed by Joko and what wasn't was subjugated to the point of seeing the Awakened as angels.

 

Meanwhile you're asking why a race that controls the entire eastern side of the Tyrian continent, of which we've visited maybe one-third of their lands, has technology far superior to Humanity--who mostly live on farmlands now just to survive--doesn't want a ceasefire especially when at the start of the game they have many enemies to contend with including the Ascalonian ghosts, Branded, Flame Legion and Renegades.

 

Not only this, but most Charr casualties were to ghosts who just reform anyway, which was essentially dying for nothing. And this was their price to pay for defeating Humanity in Ascalon, generations upon generations of senseless military deaths just to keep their civilian population alive.

 

You think they're down for more of that?

do charr really own everything east of elona? https://i.pinimg.com/originals/18/ec/70/18ec702c1379f64b928473ac851ce680.jpg

 

I don't know much about the lore of anything east of elona and can't find much about it so some source would be nice. Other than that all I know is that of the playable races, kryta elona and cantha are largely dominated by humans.

[skill suggestion: negate magic]

https://eso-skillbook.com/skill/negate-magic

 

This skill from ESO really helps with battlefield control, allowing players to support their allies by paving the way forward for them. I always wondered why this sort of thing never appeared in GW2? a great deal of complaints comes from how much AoE spam there is when the fighting gets thick. At this stage it's pretty impossible to remove them all, but it feels logical to have one or more skills designed around countering AoE spam.

 

Obviously, this sort of thing would be broken in raids and boss fights, so there would need to be some limitation on what AoEs this would work on. But in PvP, adding a pause in the rain of red circles doesn't seem to be so far fetched. A big field that removes all the fields it touches is easy to read, cleans up the fights and makes fights easier to read in general. I think it would be cool to have something themed around this sort of playstyle.

 

A quick note about spellbreaker, i think its fine keep its boon removal theme as a separate function. AoE and boon removal separate allows players more choice in roles as opposed to dumping the responsibility onto one class.

[traiting for something other than might on crit/heal on might]

Messing around with warrior, I've tried making builds that spam weakness, builds that spam adrenaline, builds built around maximising disables. It seems to me that none of these top the central theme of might is right/forceful greatsword. There are different flavours of this particular setup, like choosing to give might to allies over shout healing for example, but it seems so difficult to escape the need to take greatsword and the strength line. What do you guys have success with when playing warrior?

[Guild Wars 2: End of Dragons Discussion Thread: Skiffs and Fishing [Merged]]

Yeah i was kinda hoping for more than fishing platforms when they announced boats in GW2. I would have liked to actually sail between the continents via a specially made sea map. Possibly with some sort of cargo system in the game. Choose between faster airship travel with less cargo or slower sea travel with more cargo. I was hoping for some sort of sea combat as well. Maybe anet has something more planned but at this stage my dreams look like they'll continue to just be dreams.

[Large world, tiny people - Map Design flaw]

The reason for it has been stated a few times already. It's a common practice in old 3rd person games. take a look at the fable games, or jak and daxter, or ratchet and clank, and you'll see it all over the place. it's to help reduce the amount of camera banging on close surfaces. that being said, I find there's still plenty of realistically scaled streets in divinty's reach.

[Hammer on Guardian Poll - should it be left alone?]

here's what I'd do:symbol of stability on hammer 2, making it the only guard weapon with two symbolshammer 3 pulls enemies towards you in PvE only, stays the same in PvPhammer 4 can hit up to 3 opponentsring of warding no longer roots the caster

This gives hammer much more attractive CC options. the extra symbol hopefully puts it on par with greatsword for dps over a long period of time, while greatsword is still best for bursting.

[If the commander can come back to life so should Trahearne and Vlast]

I still think people are sleeping on logan. While I was fine with trahearne, his death would be cheapened by resurrecting him. Logan is a fairly similar character in terms of his ability to lead (trahearne was apprehensive at first but quickly proved to be just as capable). He also has great chemistry with rytlock. If there's any room for more bro moments in the story, its by using logan more.

[Hammer on Guardian Poll - should it be left alone?]

the problem is the perma symbol relies on constant auto, which isnt fun. I'd like to combo some skills together like I do with greatsword etc. but fact is the best thing to do in terms of both support and damage is to auto 90% of the time. it makes the sight of a breakbar actually exciting. It fares a bit better in pvp since you can throw people around a bit, but I wish it offered some built in stability somewhere so I could actually finish casts.

[Guardian Hammer is useless]

@Heizero.9183 said:

@Buran.3796 said:

@Heizero.9183 said:

Me and my guild love hammer guard so much its not uncommon for us to run 3 or 4 at a time when roaming.

I can see how 3-4 of you fighting at the same time with hammers in WvW can make you feel that the weapon is powerful. But that's a hollow feeling, like armwrestling a 7 year old and bragging about winning. There's a reason you don't see hammers in neither PvE nor PvP (aside from Scrappers). They are outdated. They didn't endure the power creep of PoF.

Don't misunderstand, I solo roam with hammer very effectively. We all do. The weapon IS powerful when used properly in WvW. I know it isn't good in PvE and it's PvP application is debatable as well, but that's why I specifically said it was niche. It is very good at what it does where it's applicable. Which is fine imo.

how far do you get with it in ranked spvp? h5 -> judgement was also my favourite strat but it only worked up to a point, basically relying on people to not understand what was happening and hit the wall a few times. or be overwhelmed in a teamfight. eventually you get to the level where most people teleport or break out, and at that point i saw it as the one trick pony it was.

I still think hammer can be buffed while keeping it's current theme, as guild wars is a game where a small change to some function can have a big effect. like having another symbol on hammer 2 for instance.

[Increase reveal time and make it unremovable]

Stealth isnt inherently bad. imo most mechanics can be balanced. its just the implementation that needs constant adjustment. The problem here is that it seems like devs see stealth = survivability = thief class concept. In terms of possible balance paths, this is a sort of local maxima in which thief hard to catch but has a hard time killing. I'll admit, it's fun to flit around, teleport to and fro, stealth in and out, and be a nuisance. But an against it is a huge annoyance. A good fighting character design is both fun to play and play against.

My proposal is that thief's class concept with regards to stealth is that stealth = opportunity. I think that stealth should give a good reward for using it successfully, for example, buffing the damage and being able to restealth when hitting backstab. however, failing to use stealth successfully, i.e. getting caught, carries heavy punishment, e.g. more revealed. Furthermore, free resets and teleports could also be limited, with some being possibly tied to stealth only, increasing the danger of being exposed. All this would lead to thief truly living on a knife edge between the light and darkness, able to kill people quickly but also be quickly killed if caught.

I think the main problem people have when seeing stealth nerf threads is being unable to see past the fact they're losing an essential tool for survivability when what actually needs to happen is for thief to be buffed in other ways. as I said previously, thief is currently being balanced around the wrong idea.

[If the commander can come back to life so should Trahearne and Vlast]

@EdwinLi.1284 said:

@Fipmip.7219 said:In terms of male characters to bro it up with, I do think rytlock and canach are supposed to fill that role. But I do wish logan would be around more to lead things and be bros with me and rytlock and complain about magic and rah rah rah. In fact logan makes for a great replacement for trahearne imo, but doesnt make nearly as much of an appearance. I just wanna follow that gleaming armour into battle and not have to be one that pushes the narrative and solves everyone's problems and character arcs.

I think the Logan not being more involved in the story despite being the new leader of the Pact is due to how they don't want to repeat the same mistake they had with Trehearne. They even provided the lore reason for that before Logan was chosen to make it clear to the player base Logan will not be involved alot unless necessary.

One of the reasons why Trehearne became a focus of stealing credit by players is how he was placed as a constant companion in everything the Commander did. It left a feeling that the Commander was more of a side-kick for Trehearne when Trehearne was meant more to be the side-kick that provided us allies and dealt with the politics every player will hate to deal with while the Commander did the more physical tasks.

Of course now with Trehearne gone, the Commander is stuck dealing with the politics with the physical tasks now. Atleast the Commander does not have to deal with the piles of paperwork that is involved with the politics and approval of missions since the Commander has basically retired from the Pact to be a member of Dragon's Watch. Though by military standards, the Commander still holds the rank Commander due to how a person who retires will retire with the rank they were in.

However, as of now even Dragon's watch is slowly splitting up now as we get closer to the end of the Elder Dragon storyline just around the corner in EoD or the living world after EoD.

Yes, I was more just giving my personal opinion. I'm aware that people didn't like trahearne, but In my first playthrough 4 years ago, before I looked at the forums, I never disliked trahearne and was sad at his death.

I never thought of trahearne as stealing credit. If you think about the original story, he organizes the pact and cleanses orr. The commander is sent on missions by trahearne and is generally used as a beat stick to clear out key objectives and kill high ranking enemies. The backup, the means, the intel, is mostly provided by allies. You get to be the sword that kills the foe, but you were wielded by trahearne. I think perhaps people might have whined due to not getting enough recognition in the dialogue, perhaps being referred to as the dragon slayer might have helped. But I never truly understood it. In any case, I think giving full reigns to the commander wasn't really the right move. the commander at this stage feels more like a plot device than a character.