Fipmip.7219

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.

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.

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.

overall anet does a better job on many fronts than on release. I don't really care about what they decide to title their latest idea for challenging group content, I just want it to be fun. A lot of stuff gets left behind, but i dont really see a reason to get so hung up on it. The new ideas keep the game fresh and they're probably as hit or miss as they would be if they were released as new dungeons or fractals. Playing release content has its charm but i cant deny the new stuff is fun and more polished.

To keep fighting games fun, characters should usually be fun to play against as well as play as. Idk why this thief is doing so little damage, but it seems to me like he's in a spot where he can only dent the player but he can also reset indefinitely. From just this video, it seems to me like thief needs a lot of work to give them more damage but less reset potential, i.e. buffs and nerfs in a number of places.

Sorry you don't like jumping puzzles, I can understand that, but it doesn't mean they're bad. It means theyre not in your field of interest. I dunno where to place Jumping puzzles in the Gaming universe, but at least they are unique, as far as I know. And I enjoyed every single one of them. Doesn't mean everyone does of course, especially as I can navigate and explore those not as random cliffs and jumps better than some. (Definitely not the best but still good enough) and more than anything I can deal with falling to my death many many times before getting frustrated if I get at all frustrated. Dealing with failure or falling or even dying in GW2 jumping puzzles is a must. Griffonrook Run is a perfect example of that. You need/can to drop down by running or jumping off cliffs, where jumping off might kill you and running off doesn't, or take a slower path. Something you can only know if you failed first. If you can't handle that, then you will not have fun with GW2 JPs for alot of the time. I think you should realize my take is a little more nuanced than that. But this thread has gotten to the stage where most of the new comments are behind the point of discussion. I didnt see that post was over 2 years old. :( Also read your other posts now, which make a much clearer picture of what you mean. Your first post isnt that nuanced, so yeah... Anyway, I still think JPs in this game are simply of another caliber than your normal platforming game. Its a side activity that are fabricated with the limitations of this game's engine are imo clearly the Devs having fun with it. Lots of them arent as polished, but I have always looked past that as it never bothered me. Then again, trying to jump on weird geometry is something I still do ingame right now. the fact this thread was necroed from 2 years ago has no impact on the number of comments it has. My original point is that while I didnt say I disliked jumping puzzles (which I clarify later), I think that they could have been built better and more frictionlessly with the games core controls and visuals interface. To simply say 'oh its just another sort of caliber' is akin to baking a cake with eggshells as a main ingredient, using too little flour, and calling it innovation. It is not a new, interesting reinvention of a familiar concept. it is a familiar concept done carelessly. The fact that some people actually like eggshell cake too little flour has little to do with it. It's funny because literally the opposite can be said right back at you. So many people don't have a problem with these jumping puzzles along with its learning process and actually like them that the fact a few people -like you- dislike them is akin to the few people that argue the eggshell cake is better because they like it.You literally take your opinion about small part of mostly optional content and then claim that anyone that likes it is weird. Well... "No, u". :D Also there's a varying degree of difficulty levels among the JPs, so pick the ones you're comfortable with and leave those "too hard for you" for people that enjoy them, just like those people don't try to claim that easy jumping puzzles somehow should be redesigned to be much harder "because it's an eggshell cake". There's the tiny problem of ignoring textbook game design principles, Apparently the only "textbook game design principle" here is "whatever I prefer".I can't make the jump? Bad design! I don't enjoy this type of side-content? Bad design! Just... no. I will call it that, because that's exactly what it is. And just like with "eggshell cake", because I guess that's your preferred way of posting:call it ignoring textbook game principles, call it bad design, whatever makes you feel better about your own opinion. No, not really. Not "pretty much every" (like you initially wrote) and not "many". In fact, barely any are even "problematic", let alone somehow "making you fight the game" or working against your opening piece of trivia about "pinpoint accurate jumps not working in 3d environment". Sorry but you're doing nothing except spit my words back at me. You can stop now. I've given examples of camera fighting, unclear cues, intentions not functioning or no longer functioning, and awkward geometry causing headbanging and sliding, often also causing aforementioned camera fighting. In any case this thread has served its purpose and should be left to die. The few jumping puzzles that have come since HoT have been a step up and that's all I could really ask for.

Sorry you don't like jumping puzzles, I can understand that, but it doesn't mean they're bad. It means theyre not in your field of interest. I dunno where to place Jumping puzzles in the Gaming universe, but at least they are unique, as far as I know. And I enjoyed every single one of them. Doesn't mean everyone does of course, especially as I can navigate and explore those not as random cliffs and jumps better than some. (Definitely not the best but still good enough) and more than anything I can deal with falling to my death many many times before getting frustrated if I get at all frustrated. Dealing with failure or falling or even dying in GW2 jumping puzzles is a must. Griffonrook Run is a perfect example of that. You need/can to drop down by running or jumping off cliffs, where jumping off might kill you and running off doesn't, or take a slower path. Something you can only know if you failed first. If you can't handle that, then you will not have fun with GW2 JPs for alot of the time. I think you should realize my take is a little more nuanced than that. But this thread has gotten to the stage where most of the new comments are behind the point of discussion. I didnt see that post was over 2 years old. :( Also read your other posts now, which make a much clearer picture of what you mean. Your first post isnt that nuanced, so yeah... Anyway, I still think JPs in this game are simply of another caliber than your normal platforming game. Its a side activity that are fabricated with the limitations of this game's engine are imo clearly the Devs having fun with it. Lots of them arent as polished, but I have always looked past that as it never bothered me. Then again, trying to jump on weird geometry is something I still do ingame right now. the fact this thread was necroed from 2 years ago has no impact on the number of comments it has. My original point is that while I didnt say I disliked jumping puzzles (which I clarify later), I think that they could have been built better and more frictionlessly with the games core controls and visuals interface. To simply say 'oh its just another sort of caliber' is akin to baking a cake with eggshells as a main ingredient, using too little flour, and calling it innovation. It is not a new, interesting reinvention of a familiar concept. it is a familiar concept done carelessly. The fact that some people actually like eggshell cake too little flour has little to do with it. It's funny because literally the opposite can be said right back at you. So many people don't have a problem with these jumping puzzles along with its learning process and actually like them that the fact a few people -like you- dislike them is akin to the few people that argue the eggshell cake is better because they like it.You literally take your opinion about small part of mostly optional content and then claim that anyone that likes it is weird. Well... "No, u". :D Also there's a varying degree of difficulty levels among the JPs, so pick the ones you're comfortable with and leave those "too hard for you" for people that enjoy them, just like those people don't try to claim that easy jumping puzzles somehow should be redesigned to be much harder "because it's an eggshell cake". There's the tiny problem of ignoring textbook game design principles, which is the case im making here. call it subjective, call it biased, whatever makes you feel better about your own opinion. Many of the old jumping puzzles make you fight the game rather than the puzzle. I'm willing to bet more people dislike them as opposed to like them for mainly this reason.

Sorry you don't like jumping puzzles, I can understand that, but it doesn't mean they're bad. It means theyre not in your field of interest. I dunno where to place Jumping puzzles in the Gaming universe, but at least they are unique, as far as I know. And I enjoyed every single one of them. Doesn't mean everyone does of course, especially as I can navigate and explore those not as random cliffs and jumps better than some. (Definitely not the best but still good enough) and more than anything I can deal with falling to my death many many times before getting frustrated if I get at all frustrated. Dealing with failure or falling or even dying in GW2 jumping puzzles is a must. Griffonrook Run is a perfect example of that. You need/can to drop down by running or jumping off cliffs, where jumping off might kill you and running off doesn't, or take a slower path. Something you can only know if you failed first. If you can't handle that, then you will not have fun with GW2 JPs for alot of the time. I think you should realize my take is a little more nuanced than that. But this thread has gotten to the stage where most of the new comments are behind the point of discussion. I didnt see that post was over 2 years old. :( Also read your other posts now, which make a much clearer picture of what you mean. Your first post isnt that nuanced, so yeah... Anyway, I still think JPs in this game are simply of another caliber than your normal platforming game. Its a side activity that are fabricated with the limitations of this game's engine are imo clearly the Devs having fun with it. Lots of them arent as polished, but I have always looked past that as it never bothered me. Then again, trying to jump on weird geometry is something I still do ingame right now. the fact this thread was necroed from 2 years ago has no impact on the number of comments it has. My original point is that while I didnt say I disliked jumping puzzles (which I clarify later), I think that they could have been built better and more frictionlessly with the games core controls and visuals interface. To simply say 'oh its just another sort of caliber' is akin to baking a cake with eggshells as a main ingredient, using too little flour, and calling it innovation. It is not a new, interesting reinvention of a familiar concept. it is a familiar concept done carelessly. The fact that some people actually like eggshell cake too little flour has little to do with it.

Sorry you don't like jumping puzzles, I can understand that, but it doesn't mean they're bad. It means theyre not in your field of interest. I dunno where to place Jumping puzzles in the Gaming universe, but at least they are unique, as far as I know. And I enjoyed every single one of them. Doesn't mean everyone does of course, especially as I can navigate and explore those not as random cliffs and jumps better than some. (Definitely not the best but still good enough) and more than anything I can deal with falling to my death many many times before getting frustrated if I get at all frustrated. Dealing with failure or falling or even dying in GW2 jumping puzzles is a must. Griffonrook Run is a perfect example of that. You need/can to drop down by running or jumping off cliffs, where jumping off might kill you and running off doesn't, or take a slower path. Something you can only know if you failed first. If you can't handle that, then you will not have fun with GW2 JPs for alot of the time. I think you should realize my take is a little more nuanced than that. But this thread has gotten to the stage where most of the new comments are behind the point of discussion.

I'd like to point out that classes like warrior, guardian, etc. seem to follow the DnD design in which only a select few powerful individuals actually meet the requirements to be classed in such a way. Most people, e.g. the npcs you fight, are a sort of lesser version of these archetypes, and are simple mercenaries, guards, troops, traders, and so on. Only heroes like the player are the actual real deal. I'll admit this isn't something that is explicitly clarified, and there isn't much in the way of gameplay to differentiate other powerful npcs like rytlock and marjory from enemies, but it seems implied from the few times we see scripted abilities from characters other than the player. in any case, it's probably not feasible to recruit things like squads of guardians or armies of deadeyes. I would encourage you to read my other posts in the thread as well as some others, as the point of discussion has moved past most of what you have said. I don't think this is actually the case. From what we see in both games, and the books and other underlying fluff, members of spellcasting professions are actually reasonably common in military service, at least among humans. For instance, in Drizzlewood Coast alone, we see several Seraph Mesmers casually maintaining portals in tactically useful positions, and the map is dotted with Dominion Snipers. Now, there's certainly going to be variations in actual level of skill - the PC is supposed to be one of the strongest fighters on Tyria, and the average Seraph mesmer or Dominion sniper is not going to be on the same level as a PC mesmer or deadeye. On the other hand, there are certainly some floating around that are quite powerful, even before the associated specialisation was available to PCs, such as the Pale Reavers. Such variance in individual ability is, I think, part of what keeps the norn relevant - while for a figure at the stature of the Pact Commander their race isn't a significant influence in their strength, the lifestyle of the norn means that the average norn is significantly stronger than the average strength of other races. Consider that, among the norn, accessing their racial elite skills is considered a fairly normal thing, while for a lot of other races, it's probably considered exceptional to have access to elite skills at all. Re: @"hugo.4705" - I don't think it actually follows that asura and charr are clearly the most powerful races militarily. (Charr probably are, but humans seem to be close enough to be able to stalemate them.) With the asura specifically, they certainly have the most powerful magitech, but I think there are three things holding them back: 1) Most of their magitech is essentially hand-made, rather than being industrially produced like the charr do. This hinders their ability to out-produce an enemy. 2) The asura don't really have an organised military like the charr, humans, and (arguably) sylvari do, instead having a few groups that are essentially armed police backed by golems (and see #1). 3) From ingame observation, while asura produce a lot of magitech, they don't seem to have many spellcasters who are individually powerful like humans, sylvari, and occasionally norn do. When you run into a particularly dangerous asura, what usually makes them dangerous is the golem suit they're in or some other technology rather than their magical power as an individual. This fits with comments that ArenaNet have made that asura have a very scientific approach to magic, while humans and other races have a more intuitive approach - asura were the first race to really embrace magitech, but they might not actually be as innately talented with magic as some other races (not that they'd ever admit it) - their scientific approach, in fact, might be in part a response to this. Asura have a higher proportion of spellcasters compared to most races (probably largely coming from their robust education system), but they don't tend to produce individuals that can shake the world through sheer magical prowess. The first two would probably be solved if the Inquest took over (although there would be other costs, likely including a certain stifling of innovation as the Inquest assumes direct control), while the third... may be a racial limitation. Historically, the big contest has been between charr machinery and human magic. In this respect, I think you're miscategorising humans as being a 'static' force. They'll set up siege engines when it's tactically valuable to do so, but compared to the charr, humans seem to excel at more mobile operations, as seen in Drizzlewood and as referred to in descriptions of how Ebonhawke survived the siege (short form - the Vanguard got very good at setting out and destroying charr siege engines before they could do significant damage to the walls). Magic means access to heavy firepower that doesn't require more than bringing a mage with the right skills, reinforcements that don't require more than access to a few bodies, invisibility (experience in hearts and such show it isn't perfect, but you still need to be fairly close to be caught with it, whether by an Ash Legion sentry or an asura security golem), shields that can at least provide a temporary defence against enemy fire, and portals to get out of dodge in a hurry (noting that the in-game limitations of where you can portal to don't seem to apply to NPC mesmers). In a static fight where the asura or charr have the opportunity to get their war machines into position, the more primitive siege weapons of humans would put them at a disadvantage (although humans HAVE been advancing in this respect, and they're supposed to be the best of the races at building fortifications... the fortifications of DR and Ebonhawke are actually pretty ridiculous when you compare them to historical fortified cities, although Ebonhawke's inner keep could have been better designed), but as was stated in the novels, humans are pretty good at not letting charr war machines get into range and remain in operation for long. For all their technology, the charr are probably at a disadvantage when they get portal-bombed by a magic-heavy platoon that portals back out again once they've done the job. Sylvari seem to have similar characteristics to humans in this respect - possibly more so, because while the most common 'regular soldier' profession among humans is warrior, among sylvari it seems to be rangers. I'd also note that the flammability of plants seems to be overrated - in fact, I think sylvari have been said to be no more flammable than humans, and the green plants used in their abilities probably behave similarly in that respect. Sylvari plant manipulation probably allows for more portable "siege equipment" than humans, but they also seem to be a lot less powerful. Norn are probably at the extreme here: they have basically no organised military forces to speak of, but between their stubborn individuality, knowledge of survival techniques, and probably having the highest individual strength on average of the five races, they'd likely represent a pretty mean guerilla force.I didnt say spellcasters weren't reasonably common, I just felt like pointing out that classes as seen from the create a character screen are probably much more powerful than usual. It seems that most dont actually meet the requirements to be a member of the class, due to the ease at which most foes are defeated and only seem to use 1-3 abilities resembling the profession they mirror. I make the comparison to DnD because a similar thing happens with the various redshirt npcs you meet, characters that are only shadows of the classes they represent and have only a small fraction of the abilities offered by that class. That being said, I think theres a vague difference between who actually isnt, for example, a guardian and who actually is but doesn't make full use of the abilities in game (braham). There also appears to be more implication with some NPCs that are actually referred to as their class (the deadeye from s4) vs NPCs that aren't (dominion snipers, forged sharpshooters). In usual anet fashion, this isnt too consistent either (white mantle mesmer, white mantle elementalist). Overall what I'm trying to say is that if all combatants actually were the classes they seem to mirror, combat would look a bit more like pvp does, and so therefore one shouldn't think of what battlefield combat should look like in terms of large numbers of guardians and elementalists and so on. I realize that I'm contradicting myself by making the gameplay be evidence of the lore, and I havent read any of the books so I could be simply wrong, so go ahead and correct me on that front if you can.

I'd like to point out that classes like warrior, guardian, etc. seem to follow the DnD design in which only a select few powerful individuals actually meet the requirements to be classed in such a way. Most people, e.g. the npcs you fight, are a sort of lesser version of these archetypes, and are simple mercenaries, guards, troops, traders, and so on. Only heroes like the player are the actual real deal. I'll admit this isn't something that is explicitly clarified, and there isn't much in the way of gameplay to differentiate other powerful npcs like rytlock and marjory from enemies, but it seems implied from the few times we see scripted abilities from characters other than the player. in any case, it's probably not feasible to recruit things like squads of guardians or armies of deadeyes. I would encourage you to read my other posts in the thread as well as some others, as the point of discussion has moved past most of what you have said.

Wow this topic got revived huh. Reading back, I think that jumping puzzles have improved. There are still some with very unforgiving space for jumps, but overall it seems that these puzzles have gotten tighter, the directional cues have gotten better, and it feels more like I'm being taken on a fun journey through different vistas and scenery rather than choked through some bdsm house course. The jackal portal puzzles have been particularly cinematic and the normal on foot ones seem clearer. It was especially fun figuring out the dwarven ruins puzzle. Still some camera fighting issues but honestly that seems inherent to a lot of the game, not just jps By the way, some people seem to like quibbling about the semantics of 'puzzle.' To be clearer, I define this to mean an encounter whose rules are clear and require mostly just logic to solve. This does not mean obfuscating directions and asking the player to guess which bit of muddy terrain to try and navigate, as the solutions to these are arbitrary and ask the player to read the mind of the developer that made it. I picked Wingnut's revenge as an example because despite being one of the easier puzzles, it still has the problems that I was trying to highlight in the OP and the above paragraph.

Many. His constant whining is too much to collect and quote. He is also disrespectful (see Kormir, for instance) and generally behaves like an [kitten] rather than an adult Charr. It has been toned down these past couple of releases, I have to admit that - but for years he has been going on my nerves. And that voice! Ugh. The constant exhales at the end of each little phrase, like everything around him was annoying him to death. As I said: a whiner. Aggressive against Rytlock? Yes. Whiney? Well, when you have to repeat yourself a million times, you can start sounding whiney. ;) If you want to offer constructive criticism, you should support your argument with examples and offer insight as to what exactly is wrong with those instances. Why should rytlock be respectful to kormir? The charr destroyed their gods and hold no respect for them, and rytlock is a fairly typical charr. In this scene, I think he offers a fairly interesting alternate perspective on the interaction between kormir and the heroes. on one side kasmeer is almost falling over herself in the presence of a god, and on the other, rytlock balances it out with his disdain.

Do you have any particular moments or quotes from rytlock that rubbed you the wrong way? I liked rytlock as a character with a chip on his shoulder and a direct way of handling things, and I don't think he's ever deviated from that. Besides, with rytlock gone, who's logan gonna bro it up with?

what you mean like caudecus and joko and balthazar and bangar? I feel like in those 4 cases, while they gave those villians motivation, they did not make them relatable. In the end, they were all villains that needed put down.Yes I was making a case for there being plenty of plain bad guys

what you mean like caudecus and joko and balthazar and bangar?

I don't know, whenever Braham or Taimi breathe 20 "please kill off x" threads pop up. I feel like that would get worse if the supporting cast was leading the flow entirely. These are the people who by and large dislike pretty much every major character and are perpetually unhappy though. Well yeah, it's hard to like braham when he is written to twist everything you do into a negative, and its hard to like taimi when she spends the majority of S4 making crying child noises, and its hard to like kasmeer and marjory when their entire characters seem to revolve around arguing with eachother about how the other is putting themseves in danger and oh but you didn't check with me first but oh I dont mean to offend you and so on and so forth. It would be fine if there was a better reason for you to dislike these characters. You could say it all paid off when I found myself agreeing with drakkar whispering to me about how much I disliked my party (of course the commander brushed it off with ease as usual, perfect character that they are). With that said, there are still plenty of tolerable characters like logan, rytlock, canach and rox. Idk who writes for Anet these days but there have been interesting characters in the past. In terms of enemies, Joko and Bangar were pretty good in my opinion. I'd like it if logan took the reigns for pushing the narrative, but mostly only because I'd follow that sexy armour into the gates of hell.

I think this should not be so easy to implement. A big part of an MMO is killing mobs for quests or achievements. And if you reduce the number you would automatically make everything even grindier. But I share the opinion that there are many mob placements that make little sense in my eyes. I mean, war zone or not. Where is the sense to spread everything you have over every centimeter of the map?Maybe there is a sense to it that I don't see? you dont reduce mobs, you just put them in places closer together, that make more sense and require more active seeking on the players account to interact with.

I'm often wondering why Anet sticks to archaic mob placement. Here's my question, what purpose do mobs standing around on bland, open, textured terrain actually serve? I'm talking about the type of terrain that is meant to be sped past on a mount while en route to another destination, for example the area in istan around the fort with a few motionless corsairs standing around, the area around the water in the elon riverlands with armoured mordant crescent standing stock still in the shallows, and so on.This sort of thing lends itself to typical MMO design, and for what? These mobs arent very difficult, they arent supposed to be farmed (there are anti farming mechanics in the game), they dont drop anything significant that cant be found elsewhere in higher densities... so why? It seems like their only interaction with the player is to annoy them when they stop for a second for whatever reason. It's not that mobs have long aggro ranges and hit hard, its that they are ubiquitous and inescapable. trying to leash just ends up running into more of these awkward mobs just standing there in a field seemingly for the sole purpose of stopping you from mounting. I remember archeage was extremely guilty of this, placing heavily armoured dudes in fields that seemed to exist for no other reason than 'MMOs are designed this way' I think anet should make more effort to put enemy NPCs into groups that require a more decisive effort with on the players part to engage with. They should make sense with the environment, for example making it so intelligent mobs are usually only found manning camps and patrolling routes, and wildlife mobs are put into small herds or occupy small nests or occasionally stalk around wide areas, and in general just make it look like NPCs have more to do.

i miss Trahearne because it was like he was the main character whose story we were a part of. with him gone, we become the main character and I cannot think of a flatter, more boring specimen than the commander. They are like the most immaculate, perfect statue of a person that always says exactly what is needed to move the story along, is perfectly witty whenever needed, is perfectly understanding whenever other characters have a problem, and is perfectly charismatic in the face of whatever dilemma is presented before them. How can the hero have any character development when they are supposed to be a blank canvas for the player to imprint themselves on? It would be better if some other character, perhaps logan, pushed the narrative and had ups and downs along the way.

My point is that there's no reason for this explanation because the Charr are pragmatic and they would surely realize that throwing away this sort of opportunity is shooting themselves in the foot. Also, that is only one example I gave, given such events as the searing and the sword of ascalon, its strange that such races like the more magically inclined humans and of course asura don't seem to have their own magical superweapons on standby. remember when the pacts initial solution to mordremoth was to start shooting with wild abandon into the treetops of a jungle? just straight up shooting cannons into it. Either way, it's besides the point. my argument is that to me this is what 'Modern Tyrian Warfare' would most realistically be like, but this thread is more about what I'd like to see the current standard of disbelief suspension to show us in the future.

Tank General: "We are bringing 1000 tanks into battle to drive a wedge through the enemy lines and take the enemy city!"Elementalist: "The city is gone, I just meteor showered it"Tank General: "... well we still got lots of infantry to deal with!"Elementalist: "Died from the same meteor shower."Tank General: "... enemy tanks?Elementalist: "Who the kitten even brings tanks to a battle where a single person can literally pull meteors from the sky?"Tank General: ":(" I think this basically the short of it. While i think that individuals in the lore have not been typically capable of calling meteor storms on cities by themselves, I don't really see why, for example, the charr couldn't just streamline some sort of ritual to basically call down the searing whenever they please. With that kind of power playing at attack and defense, armies are probably put into occupational and guerilla roles. That being said, anet has no problem handwaving away that sort of reality, as we have seen time and again throughout the story.

I actually really dislike a lot of post PoF maps that resemble muddily textured tundras that are designed to be sped past on mounts as fast as possible. It makes for a miserable experience for players like myself that like to walk through maps and notice all the details that were present in core and HoT maps. I think it's gotten a bit better recently with bjora and drizzlewood, but there's a place for wide open spaces and anet needs to be able to identify them better.

My point about trench warfare is not meant to be hard evidence for its viability (although such in-game evidence does exist). It is simply meant as a background for why such warfare would be cool to see at some point in the future, a method of carrying the suspension of disbelief via a 'reasonable enough' plot development in hopefully the minds of most people. The way actual warfare would be executed is not something that can be calculated outside of whatever anet decides will be the theme of the season. There is already large dichotomy in what happens between large player fights, large NPC fights and cutscenes. the world on screen is a synecdoche of the world in canon. My simple reasoning is that battlefields like those seen in verdun and passchendaele make for exciting, cinematic gameplay areas that, going by what I have outlined in the OP, would fit reasonably well. besides the point, but I'd like to point out that trenches are still used in real-world modern warfare.

Yeah I agree magic protection is what makes melee combat more viable, perhaps not as a stronger alternative, since there's not much lorewise to suggest melee being superior except outside of game mechanics, but as simple preference based on what role is needed. Being able to close the gap over large amounts of terrain more easily is useful as a way of occupying ground and ending battles faster. however, trenches have appeared, with almorra using them against the shatterer and charr using them against eachother, so we can at least point to evidence of their value. It seems that not all types of magic are as ubiquitous and readily available for the rank and file, and simple earth serves as a cheaper and more sustainable barrier than magic shields.