NorthernRedStar.3054

This argument goes both ways - why can't we have both? I don't think it's impossible, considering there is already so much "relaxing" content to indulge in. Many games certainly successfully cater to both audience groups. Pokémon has a cult following around it for the past 30 or so years. I don't follow the connection between competition and guides? Or even speed runs, for that matter. While they certainly can contain competitive elements, they're not inherently such - speed runs, for example, used to be something people did for the fun of it. To engage in a community, improve ONESELF and to play a game they enjoy a lot. If people really thought that, GW2 would have more players. Maybe you're just mirroring GW2 too directly (open world), failing to see the other forms of 'non-stressing' content those games have to offer? Doesn't Final Fantasy have a fractal (raid) tier system that's almost a carbon copy of Guild Wars 2's own? (Sense of) progression is actually a very key component in any game's design. Why do you think people are complaining about the reward structure?

This is why PoF has so much better rewards than HoT btw /s.

It's actually a little baffling as to why they did not implement this alongside specter's release. Would make some difference.

My only real issue with your initial post(s) was that I think you coulda worded it better. I did, however, get the message - and agree, to a fair extent. Guild Wars is a game that relies a lot on players producing their 'own content'. Which is why it's silly that there isn't more support for this, based on i.e. reward structure. If you don't want to have the (initial) initiative, at least incentivize for the player base to take the lead on work on it. The more I think on this, the more I come to believe a soft "guild rework" would be in order - you can offer the carrot on a number of skill floor while "tempting" players to explore different types of content within a "safe space". Heck, you could even utilize some form of LFG alongside or even within the guild. Guild/Alliance interaction!

It really comes down to how you define casual and toxicity, these days and within this game's context. We can also look at the question from the general gaming perspective - where, imo, a lot of these players WOULD be labeled as casuals. That's the definition I'm rolling with. You see this in the social media (and in real life all the time) - people who can't be qualified as "engaged" giving their say in various matters. Heck, it's one of the reasons America has such a bad public figure worship culture.

This is a flaw which, by the way, could be partially fixed with heavier emphasis on the 'GUILD' -portion of Guild Wars. Something as meager as expanding guild mission rewards would help, for starters. Playing in, and interacting within, a guild is the best way to play Guild Wars. Shocking. Another thing is re-designing the early game experience, but Anet has - THANKFULLY - already confirmed they're at it, however small it is going to be. It is still the right direction to go.

This is a fair argument. It's not an issue if the event/chain/quest/thingie in question is of high quality - which, imho, most of the content in the game is. Fully agreed on i.e. (most) node gathering and so on.

I wasn't implying I was merely including the forums on this. Also, have you looked at the "Helping New Players" -section? My empirical experience is in line with this view, too, for whatever it matters.

...? It's a very easy event nowadays.

I'd keybind them in the specific order (in this case, cooldowns?) you desire. Outside from the visual memorization, your muscle memory should catch up fairly fast. Just learn one build at a time. You can use software for quick keybind swaps.

Teapot's mere presence exposes GW2's toxicity, as seen here, folks. He's right on this one, too, btw: the more "casual" GW2 community is incredibly toxic on average. They absolutely cannot take any form of criticism or discuss things in a civil manner. Time and time again, we witness this these days; hence, the controversies as of recent (i.e. EoD Dragon's End meta). Why would you insult Teapot's person, instead of targeting his argument? Does that make for a good exchange in your opinion? And look at the amount of like/dislike ratio this guy has. Amazing. EDIT: also, Teapot's intelligence clearly aggravates people, and his "verbal diarrhea" is actually one proof of his above-average (general, and particularly vs players) intelligence.

It's an intended design con, with shouts offering some of that mid-range support. Not to mention necromancer (and reaper in particular) already has some very decent mobility options. The entire point of the spec, from a competitive balance point of view, is that if they manage to close the gap, and retain that melee distance, you're dead. Not only is this is a good thematic, but it's also notably easier to balance than, say, scourge or harbinger.

And I've seen him humble, admitting he's wrong, etc. Seems genuine to me, I'd call props on not trying to fake who he is.

Also, different kinds of demographics: that's one of Mukluk's main draws (all the respect to him), whereas Teapot is more about execution and discussion surrounding that.

You cannot base an argument around this. You simply cannot. Teapot is right about a lot of things, but - as he himself admits - he's also biased to a degree and most likely wrong about others. He's trying to preserve variety by enabling and motivating more people to try out different kinds of content. That's not exactly what you described. EDIT: I'll also add that I know many people here will get extremely salty about the subject, and that is one of the reasons it is so difficult to commit to improving the game: many of the responses here are EXCELLENT examples of some of his points, in fact. The players themselves are partially responsible for holding the game hostage. Just look at the what folks write here: "Teapot shill", "he's WRONG!!" etc. Not even considering, for a minute, if he does in fact have a point. It's true, and deep down you and me both know it is.

This. Doesn't the greatsword also have some (red-colored) jade tech implemented into it?

I would not use the boost on a "main character" you intend to spend a lot of time and effort on.

Soulbeast's rotation is always going to be more versatile (CC, dps, mobility and adaptable pet merge options). They also suffer less from switching out utility skills to suit the group's needs. To compensate, and due to pet's AI, untamed would need even more damage buffs. CC doesn't cut it in a world with United Legion Work Stations, Basilisk Venoms and Headbutt Berserkers. But the biggest issue, imo, is how bad the combat flow on untamed is. For me, ranger has always had a very fast-paced and smooth flow. Untamed does not feel like a ranger spec, despite the presence of a pet. The ambush mechanic IMO does not synergise with hammer's flatout dual skill set. Focus on one or the other - not both.

1. You can solo legendary enemies w/ thief in open world and instances. Any choice between daredevil, deadeye and specter will do - albeit most high-end bosses "demand" condition builds. Power's sustain also got trashed recently. You can still solo many champions with power - albeit it will be harder than w/ condition. 2. Both power DPS daredevil and condi DPS daredevil are viable at high-end PvE, such as raids and strikes. Alacrity boon condi specter is also very potent ever since EoD came out. You can also opt for support specter if you want (less optimal). All in all, it is easier than ever before to find a group as a thief. I will say, though, that you need to optimize a lot of small things to reap output that equals many other classes - thief has a high skill cap, generally speaking, due to its creativity, stolen skills, and lack of weapon skill cooldowns. These same factors, in a sense, give it a low skill floor, too. But, regardless of content (PvE included): the difference between average thief and GOOD thief is MASSIVE.

There's a purist liutenant spawning at the higher floors of Old Kaineng once you enter through the North Lab (Bori Ward), from the west. Near the point of interest Aetherblade Camp.

1. Buy exotic gear from the trading post. Alternatively, just level the armorsmithing craft as you progress in levels and zones. Eventually you'll be able to craft a full set. Farm strike missions for ascended gear (a tier above exotic). Strikes are accessed from Eye of the North (you get a free teleport item there on each character). 2-3. Both warrior and ele are viable in all modes of play, albeit warrior is somewhat more restricted when it comes to generally accepted (read: "viable") builds. Warrior is also extremely good in open world, with one of the strongest non-elite specialization performances. They're very good for solo gameplay. Elementalist has a higher skill floor, but are more flexible and capable of filling out more roles (damage, support, hybrid). They're not quite as efficient in solo open world content, but shine in most instances and group play. Overall, you'll learn the basics very well on warrior thanks to access to good damage, mobility, blocks and reflects, evade frames and CC. In the later stages of the game, you might find yourself preferring elementalist thanks to the variety it provides. Warrior has traditionally been difficult for Anet to balance, leading to a select few "safe and secure builds". 4. Farming nodes isn't meant to be a task in and out of itself. You do it while performing other chores, moving from point A to point B and doing events. Later on you get the option to trade gold and other currency for every type of farm node resource. Don't stress it. Enemy drops also yield those, as does salvaging items. 5. They're soloable for experienced players, and not very difficult if you have the expansions. For core players, they can pose a challenge - but some are still soloable. There are guides all over the wiki and Youtube, just search up the dungeon name. 6. You can complete EoD or PoF first story chapter to access raptor (and springer for EoD). Otherwise, outside rental, no. 7. Leveling your crafting (armorsmith for warrior) to 400. It allows you to craft a back piece with exotic-level stat selection. 8. There are dedicated RP guilds. From my experience they tend to recruit around starter areas.

I could see this (soft rework) happening if I didn't believe the next ranger e-spec will be focusing on a more command-esque pet gameplay. With a rifle equipped.

Personally, I think Guild Wars 2 generally executes the deconstruction of gender roles fairly smoothly. You never end up questioning it, either; because the attaché of survival of the fittest is baked deeply into every racial culture within the game: ability, norn and charr; magic and talent: humans; intelligence: asura. And the sylvari are hardly bound by the flesh-bound rules. The traditional MMORPG benefits also apply here. Guild Wars 2 is at its finest at this while the writers do not try and force it. The reason, in my opinion, Kasmeer and Marjory are one of the better (the best?) same-gender couples in-game is because Anet never goes out of their way to make a number out of it - just like what I said about gender roles above. Because if you do go and put things like "beat up the bigot" in the actual gameplay, you end up hurting and potentially breaking the immersion. Also, regarding OP's point on Rytlock and Crecia (and, to an extent, Canach and Anise): they chose to put themselves in those roles. It is consistently established within the lore and interactions that Rytlock does not enjoy playing the leading role. He's a self-made "man of action". Canach and Anise are from two wildly different settings, so applying the usual hierarchy setting between them does not really work out as simply as that. Regarding Rama: his case is the same as Rytlock's - he could choose to rise in ranks (he's had chances over the years, judging by the dialogue), but chooses not to. Also, how do we judge "capable" in this context? Are Anise and Jenna more capable of taking on the dragons than we, the player character (potentially male) and all the roster (Braham, Canach, Rytlock etc.) are? Probably not. We can safely say, however, that they most likely are more apt inside the sub-context they're given. I do agree that purists were, in a way, a missed opportunity. Not a major one, but - despite what people would seem to imply here - they were never displayed as this "morally dark" organization even in GW1. Was their leader morally corrupt and evil then? For sure. But the ideology around which they were founded yields for moral grey area leeway. It's a wholly another matter whether they want to explore such moral ambiguity, though. I'd say OP's issue - and the one I tend to agree with - is actually with the characterization and writing in general - i.e. forgiving key characters too easily to drive the plot forward. Anet is good at writing "one-shot", short-term character arcs and appearances - but their dedication long-term is lacking to say the least. I also agree they tossed much subtlety out of the window when it comes to matters of political correctness with EoD. It didn't bother me; but, compared to the narrative before, I did take notice of it. Lot of these issues could potentially be fixed with a slower plot progression and fleshed out characters driving said plot. This couldn't really be done that effectively with the dragons as main antagonists; and whenever there was an alternative antagonist, it got rushed through fairly quickly. TL;DR: Guild Wars universe has great world-building when it comes to "gender equity" (if you want to call it that), but their character writing and tendency to focus on plot (and "key moments") sometimes ends up hurting the established lore and immersion.

The EoD strikes "go on for too long" because your average player's DPS is TRASH. Anything above that and they're not that long. Good DPS and they're hardly that much longer than IBS.

Often performing worse than no KP ones. Funny how that works out.