Eme.2018
-
Posts
166 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Events
Articles
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by Eme.2018
-
-
@MarshallLaw.9260I partly agree, you can't quantify the effort meaning you cant say "Running 10 miles a day requires no effort." but you can say something like "Running 10 miles a day requires no effort compared to running 50 miles a day." which is exactly what I am saying.
@"MarshallLaw.9260" said:Besides, you are comparing apples and pears. Skins are created to provide funding through potential gem sales so their purpose would not be comparable.Now you are falling out of the subject. Maybe skins weren't the perfect example (even though not all skins are created for gem sales), but my point still stands and I will continue to use the skin example because I think it is not totally irrelevant.
What is the point of updating the game? To keep it fresh and new. The means to achieve that, do not really matter in the grand scheme of things.So about all that comparing "apples and pears", no. I am comparing the time and effort different updating mechanisms need.
About you being "unbiased", the fact that you claimed to be unbiased makes you biased by definition.
-
@"MarshallLaw.9260" said:
- "little time and effort" - actually I don't think you can quantify this, perhaps it would take a decent amount of coding to make this work (I mean the whole dueling system, not the invite/avoid mechanic).
- "absolutely worth the result" - perhaps for you and a handful of other dueling enthusiasts. I'm not saying I wouldn't try it, but for myself, like many others it won't really be game changing.
My suggestion to you is make some research (maybe a poll) into how much of the population would actually want this, vs how many people (like myself) are indifferent.
You misread my post. I wrote "Dueling as a function of Time and Effort", you examined every factor separately. As a function of time and effort dueling is worth the result because it requires no new resources and simultaneously it adds a new and fresh mechanic in-game.
Don't bring the subjective argument to the table . Of course it will require "a decent amount of coding" but that's nothing compared to let's say making a new skin. At the same time dueling adds many more possibilities and rejuvenates the game a lot more than one skin does. (That's just an example, I am sure someone else can think of a more effective and delicate way of putting it.)
-
@"Steve The Cynic.3217" said:Conclusion: it could be made to work. It would require some game mechanical changes and a "not me, thanks" automatic decline toggle, but overall I don't think it's the best use of Anet's time.
Dueling as a function of Time and Effort is ABSOLUTELY worth the result because with little time and little effort you have a game-changing result (game-changing meaning unlocking many new possibilities in-game).
-
Haven't read a single serious argument on an anti - duel post. Many want it and if implemented, it won't be a problem for those who don't want it implemented.
- Saying you don't want it implemented because you don't want to duel, is extremely selfish.
- Saying you don't want it because of spam doesn't make sense either. Not only there are easy solutions to eliminate spam; spam isn't even a thing in the first place (not in WoW, not in ESO).
-
@LastCrysis.1934 c'mon dude, it's not even that much time. If you tried to like it maybe you'd end up enjoying it.
Now if you really can't stand WvW and PvP in general then you are not worthy of the GIft of Battle.
-
@Batel.9206 said:[...]if you want to try jumping puzzles with this charr (or any character), smaller is better. A very large/broad character will often get in the way of the camera angles, which can mess with perception in difficult jumping puzzles.
I wouldn't recommend using charr for jumping puzzles in general, they are kind of clunky.
-
Almost everyone is maxing out their height. That means that the average would be something a little shorter than the max and a lot higher than the middle option.
I always go for max.
-
@OriOri.8724 said:I really don't see the need for new weapon types in this game. I mean, even warrior, the class who can currently wield the most weapons in the game, still has 6 open weapon slots, allowing for 6 more elite specs before he runs out just with the current weapons (or 5 if he gets dual pistols in a single spec like he got dual daggers). Even at that point though, assuming GW3 isn't out yet, there's nothing preventing a new warrior elite from re-using a weapon a previous one used. Nothing stopping the new one from re-using torch for instance.
Plus, on the other hand, we already have plenty of open "slots" for weapons. Scepter could be adapted as a second hand weapon for an elite spec, torch/focus/warhorn could be adapted as mainhand weapons for some elite specs (and shield too as a stretch for an extremely defensive oriented spec). There's just no need for new weapon types, and no matter how they would be implemented it would have huge drawbacks ("wasted" dev time by creating skins for them for every existing set and recipes for making them, despite it not being new content. Or having an extremely limited set of skins for these new weapons, which you can bet real money on would definitely kitten off a lot of players who play fashion wars).
Not every weapon type makes sense for every profession. A new weapon type will be rejuvenating for the game for sure.
In Crystal Oasis, in the demo, there was an off-duty cavalier fist-fight taking place inside the casino. They were using animations I don't think I have seen before implemented in-game.These animations could easily be used for the creation of fist weapons. Plus, a lot of focus skins look like fist weapons. From the point I am standing, this doesn't even look like a hard job.
-
The spear and the trident are the realistic options here. For some reason tho, I dont think they will ever implement completely new weapons.
[Poll] Weapon for the next Engineer Elite Specialization
in Engineer
Posted
Scrapper 2.0?