Mizhas.8536

In my opinion Shared resources + Cooldown increase + Page cost increase will just destroy any fun the spec had left and people will just simply stop playing it. Any of the 3 proposed changes could be enough on their own. All at once? No chance. In WvW/GvG poeple will most probably just switch to Core build (since aegis will still be neccesary) and find some alternative stab sources like Revenant or Mesmer to fill the gaps. With an smaller reduction to the stability output capabilities of the FB + some improvement to some other specs to compete in this area it would have been enough. The only thing this change will lead to is to people switching to the next best viable build for the role OR to people stacking more of these to make up for the nerf. (I feel like they have forgotten about how this game was played at the beggining with 2 guards + 2 warriors per party and almost no room for other classes.) Regarding PvE, I am not that familiar with it but as other people have mentioned, it would just make the versatility of the build to disappear. A DPS will just lose the capabilities of switching to a certain tome at some point since it would mean a big DPS loss to do so.

After some days dicussing this with support GMS, yeah, here is one more affected by this BS. It is insane that people that have invested such time and effort on crafting several armor pieces do not get anything. This is a terrible way of implementing new features for veteran players who have been supporting this game for a long time. I would be mad if they would not had compensated to anyone but this? This is just stupid. Does it really take that much to confirm the situation of the account and to send an email with something to make it up to the players? really? I can not undertand how it is a good bussiness decission to make your players angry Anet...

I might not agree with all the sugestions from the OP but its true that WvW requires of some of those mechanics.WvW needs mechanincs for... ...preventing zerg stacking. 15, 20 or 25 are decent numbers for ZvsZ fights. Fights between bigger number zergs are quite brainless. ...preventing people following squads they do not belong to. Speed reductions, more damage incomes or whatever idea you can think about. The goal is that people should be forced to play all around the map and not in one single point. ...effective or active population balance (this point would be where Alliances come in)...decent rewards. Who doesn´t like shinnies? Would it be so trully difficult to add some nice rewards to the reward tracks, ticket vendors or final match scoring system? If players would have a reason for winning every week, more players would be dragged into the gamemode. Of course if you always reward the same gamemode (pve or the shop) with new decent armor/weapons/items, people will always be playing that content since other contents (WvW or PvP) do not reward nothing interesting. Many, really many of the players I know. They love WvW but eventually they go to Fractals/Raids/Farming for getting gold for their shinies. Would not WvW be much more active if Anet would not force those players to go to PvE for gold or the skins they like the most?

Do not doubt for a moment, alliances are being posponed on purpose due to the lack of new competitors on the WvW gamemode. We are stuck here

In my opinion they have lost a huge opportunity of doing something radically different and potentially awesome in this episode. When they first announced this episode, they said a WvW like map. That made my hopes up on some kind of mix between the actual pve and wvw.When I started playing the episode it looked like it would involve our character in some struggle about the reasons of the war and if it would really be justified. Suddenly I dreamed about the possibility of taking active part on the decission of supporting one or other side of the war in this episode. That decission could have led into a completely different type of episode for once. I though about the possibility of 3 sides, players who decided to support the char alliance to stop bangar those who decided to support bangar and those who decided to not support any kind of civil war that encouraged chars to kill other chars. The idea of 3 different ideas fighting over the control of a map, combined with some pve npcs (like in other games like For Honor for example) got me really interested. Sadly I realized quite fast that Anet has lost all capability do anything unexpected. We got another map built around a big meta event which when played in a full map becomes ridiculous. The goodThe upgrade system got my attention. As a WvW player, I liked the possibility of gathering resources and being able to use them for something else other than just repairing. Many WvW players consider that the automatic upgrading of the objectives in WvW needs a change. I am not saying that copying the PvE implementation would be good, but it could be the base for creating a much more rich and enjoyable system. The uglyVO... These days, saying that it was imposible to record some audio for the dialogs... I just can not believe that. Having to read all the dialogs was VERY unconfortable. The badThe missed chance. We got another meta event, another map and another really short story piece. Anet really must start doing things different if they really are expecting people to buy their next expansion. If these episodes were supposed to contain "Expansion level content" (or something similar which made us, the players, expect great things from thi LS season), they are really being quite a dissapointment for many of us.

I'd like answers to all those questions too however this Subfee subject has been a very common one on these forums.While there may be a lot of people who would like one there is also very clearly a lot of people who would not.. and would even go as far as to stop supporting the game entirely if one was added.. optional or not. If funds are one of the issues contributing to this problem then I would like Anet to confirm that.At least that way people who do want a Subfee can go and throw 20 Euros into the gemstore every month and pretend like they are paying for one.Many people have pointed this out in the past as a simple counterpoint to pushing a subfee on millions of other players who got into this franchise specifically because it had an anti-subfee business model. The thing is that it does not have to be a requirement but perhaps something like a crowdfunding . They just need to give some extra rewards to those who invest some money and that is all. I do believe that they should be fixing this problem no matter the cost without us having to pay for it. However, I would be open minded for any other possible solutions if that would garantize at least that I could play WvW without skill lag everytime 3 +30 groups meet on the same spot of the map. I remember the time when this kind of lag it was only in SM on EB map when 3 sides went into the lord room. I could say, OK, I understand. Now it is impossible to play anywhere where 80+ players gather for fights. Another funny thing is when you can detect that you have an incoming only just because of the lag that is created on the enemy zerg approach. It is ridiculous.

The debuff would affect everybody, not just squad members. Like I said, this mechanic would be first used to troll the comanders for sure but after some time, people would get used to it and hopefully would go and roam on their own or tag up and create another group. I specially like this idea since it would also help to mitigate outnumbered situations in a real way. The actual outnumbered buff does absolutely nothing in this matter.

In fact, expertise is considered optional. It is just a good spot to spend spare stats nothing else. So in reality we are comparing the need of 3 different stats against the need of 1. THAT is the key.

And ... you say, remove the boon, well, with which of my many skills should I do that? To reiterate it, not every class can do that. It is actually quite limited. A zerg being attacked by a few players should have no problem dealing with the few players by fighting back. They are outnumbering them after all. But if the attacker plays better than the zerg, what's the problem with them being able to take on the zerg successfully? To me that sounds like a "well played" case. Skill beating mass sounds fine to me.If ranged meta is too powerful by itself, then that's a different issue altogether, though curently I feel like it isn't really.And that's not because of retaliation eating some classes alive. As I said, luckily fewer zergs have perma-retaliation around, despite that, it's still an issue. Like I stated at the beggining, get yourself a healer friend. Lets put the example in this way.You and your friends (15) fight a zerg (30). You try to burst them and they pop retaliation. It is easy to understand that the max number of targets you would be getting retaliation damage from is determined by you max target capabilities from your skills. So, the ammount of damage you will be taking from retaliation should be quite similar no matter if you hit 30 or 50 players. This means that no matter if you fight in equal numbers or outnumbered, the potential damage to be taken from retaliation might be quite similar.Now since WvW is all about teamwork, you might be bringing the DPS (lets say you are an staff DPS elementalist) but probably another members of your team (warriors, necromancers, mesmers) should be bringing the boon removal. If those teammates do their job correctly, retaliation would have a high chance of being removed before you strike. In addition, we assume as well that you guys are focusing your actions into the same subgroup of enemies since no matter if you fight outnumbered, one of the first lessons of WvW combat is to focus the actions of all your team players into the same bunch of players on the edge of the enemy zerg (instead of throwing everything in the middle and allowing them to mitigate easier since they have more players) To be honest I find quite amusing that elementalists or DHs for example complain about retaliations when they have the potential to bring groups of players from 100% to 0% Hp with one skill/rotation. I mean, what should be the counter for that if retaliation gets nerfed? Would aegis be the next boon to be asked for nerf?In WvW you often see elementalist running marauder or berserker gear hitting meteor showers of +5k to minstrel guardians or +10k to necros. All this from 1200 feet + teleport. Is that balanced when average Hp is 20k? So, from my point of view, ALL is related with teamwork. The whole purpose of retaliation is to discourage mindless AoE dps spamming. WvW is based on group fights therefore, you should be thinking about group sinergy necessary to overcome problems other than just asking for nerfs.

Reduce squad to 25 and add a debuff that reduces DPS output by 10% and increases DPS input by 10% per every 5 extra players around the tag (starting at 25 ofc). With this and by removing downstate you might achieve something. Especially removing downstate is one of the most effective solutions since downstate only favors the bigger team since they can keep DPS while 1-2 rez their downed. I know that these changes might result in a lot of hate at the beginning but in the long run, people would understand that stacking is not the solution.

Neither scrapper or tempest have access to aoe burn/weakness/cripple etc etc while supporting. Maybe just maybe shared stability should be very very limited and devs should force people to bring at least one form of personal stability instead than monopolize the game with the only class capable of multiple source of shared stability. Can we have some variety in this game after 8 years? They nerf the roaming scene at every corner...but it's fine to have the same 2-3 classes dominating the rest of the game mode since launch, if they want "variety" in the roaming scene which is absurd to start with...can we have some variety maybe in the main attraction of the gamemode which would be zerging? Nothing but melee trains of guardians/necros or pirateship with guardian/necros or boonmeta with guardian/necro or condimeta with guardian/necro for 8 years straight....kitten for real Well, tempest DO have access to AoE burn, weakness and cripple while supporting so I think you are being quite unreasonable. Besides, is not like all those extras that you mentioned were actually broken or something. Actually I doubt any decent player is taking (for example) weakness into a guardian build for example. There are a lot of far better options. Like I said in my previous post, I am all in for more variety but this does not have to necessarily come in the form of destroying one class to make another one viable. The other classes are the ones that should be getting some love in order to allow some kind of shift in the meta.Anyway, I think you should try to analyze you complain and check that the problem relies much deeper on than what your "nerf guardians and necros" argument suggests. The real problem is related to how the stability has such a big impact in WvW zerg gameplay and therefore how the classes who more effectively give and remove it are the key of the meta since launch.

To be honest, Guardians have always been the backbone of any WvW setup since beta. The problem is not actually the Firebrand spec itself but the lack of other real useful support specs. Decent access to AoE stability + decent support has always been key and will probably always be. Now, deleting Firebrand would only shift the balance into bringing more revenants probably since it is the next class with easier access to AoE stability. On the other hand, Guardians, warriors, necros have been in the WvW meta from the beginning. In fact, actually you can see a lot more variety in the classes used. Engineers, revenants, elementalists and event thieves are usually present in the class composition of the WvW guilds. If only rangers and mesmers would get a little more love, they could be brought into them as well. So, there is no problem with the firebrand itself other than the need for balance against what other classes have to offer.

The people that complain about retal are obviously people that are trying to fight solo against bigger numbers. From my perspective, the solution is easy: Get yourself a healer friend.To be honest, I can not think about an excuse to complain about retal in a 1v1 situation. It is similar to when warriors block/endure pain or thieves dodge. You just need to l2p and stop hitting when the enemy has retaliation or strip the boon. Of course, people should stop complaining about trying to nuke solo and entire zerg. Jeez, just think about how WvW would be looking like if any elementalist, revenant, DH, engineer, the ranger could nuke zergs from 1200 - 1500 without getting damage. THAT would be a problem. Basically, nobody would be able to go in melee range ever again since those classes would jsut kite, CC and nuke you down from 1200 feet. Imagine a 30 player zerg surronded by 10 elementalist meteor-showering... THAT would be a nonsense and would bring the game into a massive pirate wars meta once again. Retaliation, as it is now it serves its purpose perfectly.

In my opinion, CU is becoming quite greedy.It is taking them too long to release the game while they keep focusing on performance about hundreds of people playing together. My questions are: Is that even close to be realistic expectation? Are they really expecting to maintain hundreds of players playing at the same time in the same map spot to be their main core feature of their game?What will happen 1 year after the release when half of the player leave (it always happens) and you end up fighing 50 vs 50 on an engine develop to sustain 400? Isn´t that a waste of resources?

I think you are failing to realize why those games succeeded while RvR/WvW did not. In Battle royales, you can perfectly play solo or with a few friends. In GW2 WvW you eat shit if you go out alone. WvW/RvR type of games are about communities. You need at least 15 people to start being able to go out and play the content as whole.If you are more focused on single player, roaming is your only option which limits you to camps and some eventual undefended/poorly defended tower.On the other hand, Battle royales have a beggining and an ending. It might take 15min or 1 hour. WvW/RvR based games usually are all about the never ending conflit. It is easier to start playing Fornite than it is to start playing WvW. Even though both type of games have similarities, they are completely different. From what I have heard, Crowfall was trying to implement a gameplay system that could be something in between BattleRoyales and traditional WvW by setting "seasons" or something similar where an encounter had a defined start and end. My point is that, getting GW2´s WvW as it is and putting it as a separated game would never work. However, If you could get the best things out of it, wrap them with some fresh ideas and give it the support that any PvP based gametype needs (balance every month, events, pvp encouraging mechanics) maybe you could get something that could work.