Sir Vincent III.1286

The reward track is a bonus and the Eternal Ice you get from it is extra -- it is still better than zero.It terms of opportunity cost, it's better to go with a different reward track. All of the reward tracks are better than zero.According to Wiki, they actually increase the Ice Shard reward quantity by doubling the amount from Raven's Gift (tier 3 and tier 5).

The reward track is a bonus and the Eternal Ice you get from it is extra -- it is still better than zero.

I agree, but...what would you do about DE double stealing? I would remove quickness from spvp. Ouch! EDIT: By the way, you do know that double stealing is not just about the Quickness right? DE Condi build: Steal ->Binding -> Mercy -> Steal -> Binding/Mercy (whichever refreshed first). Heck you can even Steal ->Mercy ad infinitum. Set Improv to inherit steal's cooldown but not the mechanics that influence steal (so it would change w/traits reducing steal CD, but wouldn't like...give boons and stuff xD)? This would have the same effect as removing the cooldown for most builds while ensuring Mercy could not be abused.That's just a horrible idea. For the sake of Improv, you want to nerf Mug (no dmg, no heal), Sleight (no daze), Serpent Touch (no poison), Bewildering (no confuse), BQoBK (no quickness), etc. No, thank you. Just delete Improvisation please.

I think they want you to actually explore the map and gather it from the nodes. The node gives way, way more.

I have never seen any official count of active players from launch until today. Fine, here:https://inanage.com/2018/02/05/estimating-gw2s-population/ Quote from that article: "Look, the numbers and the quotes can be massaged to basically say whatever you want. What is considerably more objective is what ArenaNet does." It begs the question; Does $44M means 44M players spending $1 each OR 44 players spending $1M each? Bottom line; the "data" you've provided doesn't support your claim. One fact is true, based solely in my observation; If the content is fun to play and very rewarding and it's not a complete waste of time (i.e. Dragonfall), players will stay and play that content. It really has nothing to do with the "fundamental problems" the main topic had specified. Despite the poor options in builds and the existence of Elite specs, players still play in Dragonfall, which means, those aren't "fundamental problems". The context for that discussion was about trying to extrapolate the exact number of active players now based on current revenue, not trying to prove that there was a large falloff after launch, which there obviously and factually was. At any rate, just because some commenter said that doesn't mean it's true. Again, we can extrapolate reasonable conclusions from reasonable data points. Suggesting that a revenue dropoff that large is because of players continuing to play but spending that much less vs way fewer players playing and therefore not spending anything is an absurdist position. You people really like grasping at straws. You provided that source, not me. Now that I pointed that it doesn't support your claim, it suddenly became "doesn't mean it's true". You then just debunked your own argument by using a source that you claim to be not true. It does support my claim, and I never suggested otherwise. But I don't really need any support for my claim anyway because this isn't a court case. It's not my problem if you can't see that something that is obviously true is true. What's not true is your reason for the falloff and the thinking that players will suddenly return if ArenaNet made the changes you proposed. I used to be part of a big guild and they all left the game prior to the HoT expansion, which means, they left for other reasons other than what you're saying. The most common reason I've got when trying to bring them back is that, ArenaNet nerfed their character. The nerf bat just hit this game too soon, meaning not enough time to adapt, and way too often, meaning they swing the nerf bat as soon as you adapt to the change. It's not about balance, it's about nonsensical changes. The next reason I've got is the way ArenaNet monetizes the Living Story episodes. If they miss it when it's live, they pay. That aspect of the game is a deal breaker to them. This has nothing to do with game balance. Remember the Living Story Season 1's two-week fiasco? Many players I know left the game because of that and refused to return because there is no way to experience it anymore. Season 1 is very important since it is the season that introduced the players to the members of Dragon's Watch. So your proposed changes will not bring back theses players because you based it on a bad interpretation of data. You can have the best balance in game and the best combat experience, but balance and combat are not the fundamental problem of GW2, it is the poor replayability and their predatory monetization practices, just to name a few.

No, the second is a different kind of bonus exp. For example, a Bandit is worth 100 exp, but this particular bandit has not been killed for days. So killing that bandit will grant you 100 exp, plus bonus exp depending on how long this bandit had stayed alive. In your kill, the 1303 exp you received already included that booster's bonus exp.

There it is. No facts, just an opinion about someone's feeling. Others' opinion is as good as yours. Even if ArenaNet makes the changes you've suggested, there is no guarantee that players will suddenly flash mob playing GW2. What's guaranteed is, the current players who like the game as is will surely stop playing. Just look at the number of people who disagree with you here -- those players surely don't want to play the game you've envisioned. Might as well make a new game (GW3?) and leave GW2 alone.

I have never seen any official count of active players from launch until today. Fine, here:https://inanage.com/2018/02/05/estimating-gw2s-population/ Quote from that article: "Look, the numbers and the quotes can be massaged to basically say whatever you want. What is considerably more objective is what ArenaNet does." It begs the question; Does $44M means 44M players spending $1 each OR 44 players spending $1M each? Bottom line; the "data" you've provided doesn't support your claim. One fact is true, based solely in my observation; If the content is fun to play and very rewarding and it's not a complete waste of time (i.e. Dragonfall), players will stay and play that content. It really has nothing to do with the "fundamental problems" the main topic had specified. Despite the poor options in builds and the existence of Elite specs, players still play in Dragonfall, which means, those aren't "fundamental problems". The context for that discussion was about trying to extrapolate the exact number of active players now based on current revenue, not trying to prove that there was a large falloff after launch, which there obviously and factually was. At any rate, just because some commenter said that doesn't mean it's true. Again, we can extrapolate reasonable conclusions from reasonable data points. Suggesting that a revenue dropoff that large is because of players continuing to play but spending that much less vs way fewer players playing and therefore not spending anything is an absurdist position. You people really like grasping at straws. You provided that source, not me. Now that I pointed that it doesn't support your claim, it suddenly became "doesn't mean it's true". You then just debunked your own argument by using a source that you claim to be not true.

I have never seen any official count of active players from launch until today. Fine, here:https://inanage.com/2018/02/05/estimating-gw2s-population/Quote from that article: "Look, the numbers and the quotes can be massaged to basically say whatever you want. What is considerably more objective is what ArenaNet does." It begs the question; Does $44M means 44M players spending $1 each OR 44 players spending $1M each? Bottom line; the "data" you've provided doesn't support your claim. One fact is true, based solely in my observation; If the content is fun to play and very rewarding and it's not a complete waste of time (i.e. Dragonfall), players will stay and play that content. It really has nothing to do with the "fundamental problems" the main topic had specified. Despite the poor options in builds and the existence of Elite specs, players still play in Dragonfall, which means, those aren't "fundamental problems".

That claim is neither obvious nor universally known. That claim is so subjective that it can easily be debunked by another subjective observation. For instance, I can also make a claim that your claim is false because there were tons of players in Dragonfall participating in the event at the same time a large group of players doing the Maguuma HP runs. Without an official numbers from ArenaNet, we can only speculate. .......................................................................no. Apart from anecdotal evidence and common sense, there are also a ton of data points that can be referenced to piece together a reasonably accurate conclusion. That's how science works. It's called inference. Ugh I get so tired of this nonsense in these threads.Care to share where are these "tons of data" so I can also use it as reference? The problem here is that you're making claims without evidence. If you've provided evidence to support your claim, I would personally review it and may even agree with you. As far as your posts go, it's all subjective.

With the new patch, a 2000 gemstore griffon skin came out that is supposed to look like a pegasus. It has horse back legs and a horse 'face' but it came out looking really weird. https://i.imgur.com/c8leOGr.png Those back hooves are split and look like cow hooves, not horse. Horses have a solid, non split hoof. That's the main reason why Tyria has no horses, they are butt ugly.

That claim is neither obvious nor universally known. That claim is so subjective that it can easily be debunked by another subjective observation. For instance, I can also make a claim that your claim is false because there were tons of players in Dragonfall participating in the event at the same time a large group of players doing the Maguuma HP runs. Without an official numbers from ArenaNet, we can only speculate.

I disagree. What needs to happen is to add a 4th Elite Traitline. This way, you can have your 3 Core traitlines plus 1 Elite trait line. This will expand the professions and create new build diversities. I do like the idea of expanding the weapon skills. Instead of locking the one-handed main hand to 3 skills, they can keep the skill slot to 3, but allow a wide variety of skills to choose from. For example, for a Thief's dual-wield skill #3, then choose either Death Blossom for bleed, Horns of the Ox (GW1) for knockdown, or Nine-tail Strike (GW1) for unblockable attack. Nah. Let other games have that, it doesn't belong in GW2. Although, a secondary profession, much like in GW1, would be nice to have back.

In GW2 vocabulary, a "strike" is an unblocked attack unless it specifically says the attack is unblockable, meaning you have dealt damage. Compare that to Larcenous Strike, it states "Stab your foe and steal boons from them" which should also steal Aegis, however this dual attack is a "strike", thus it specifically says that it is "unblockable" and will steal Aegis. The difference with Steal stealing boon is that steal is not considered as a "strike" -- there is no hit or damage prerequisite. Also, it's been ArenaNet's stance to not allow stealth attacks be unblockable (see Death's Judgement's nerf) which means, Rending Shade will not grant your stealth attack unblockability. EDIT:Should stealth attack be unblockable? IMO, yes and no. Make stealth attacks (and other attacks) unblockable when done at the back or flank, but make it blockable when done in the front. Blocking should not be a 360 degree protection. Aegis, and other skills that block attacks, should only block attacks from the front.

At 1 statuette per chest... Keys (single) sell for 125 gems, so 60 x 125 = 7,500 gems. The most efficient way to buy 60 keys would be: 2 x 25 keys @ 2,100 gems each plus 2 x 5 keys @ 450 gems each, for a total of 5,100 gems. Not 9,000. However, to get 5,100 gems one would have to buy 4,000 @ $50 plus 1,600 @ $20, so $70 with 500 gems left over. So, yes, buying keys to get statuettes to get a wanted item will be over-priced for some, even if you over-stated the amount. A typical MMO player spends $180 a year ($15/mo) to have a chance to WORK on armor/outfit they want that's not even close the to quality of armor/outfit you get from GW2's BLC. In that context, since GW2 don't have monthly fee, $70 for a good looking armor/outfit is a bargain.

...have you just woke up after almost a year? <.< lol, I was just going to ask the same thing. That might have been a very comfortable rock.

I agree, but...what would you do about DE double stealing? I would remove quickness from spvp.Ouch! EDIT: By the way, you do know that double stealing is not just about the Quickness right? DE Condi build: Steal ->Binding -> Mercy -> Steal -> Binding/Mercy (whichever refreshed first). Heck you can even Steal ->Mercy ad infinitum.

It's like saying the "executioner" trait is bad because it increases the damage only when the target meets the threshold. Sounds stupid, don't you think? Executioner makes sense. The weaker a target gets, the easier they are to kill. I suppose Ferocious Strikes could take a similar approach... do extra damage to targets above 50% health, and take less damage from enemies under 50% health... due to the targets being so damaged, their attacks are no longer as powerful. But that's what Lotus Poison does, it weakens your target that they fumble their attacks. To add damage reduction would significantly turn their weapons to pillows. Now imagine if you're on the receiving end... If someone wants to run Crit Strikes and deadly arts, more power to 'em I say. Right. But the Dev designs their traits with that in mind so even a slight possibility that a DA/CS/x will dominate, they will not do it. And yes, there are existing builds that take both trait lines. I can't recall anyone really caring about speculation on what the devs will and will not do as a means of enabling or shutting down discussion. It's a good idea, and I am all for enabling off meta builds. Also, Lotus Poison has 40%. 10% across the board when below 50% health will not have near the impact you're making it out to potentially have. The point is, the effect being proposed is no different than what DA already offers. The target is weakened via Lotus Poison, then you deal more damage when their health go below 50% (Executioner). Which means, the idea for Ferocious is redundant. In GW1 there's a condition called Cracked Armor that can be used in conjunction with Ferocious Strike which makes a whole lot of sense. When they drop below 50%, their armor is reduced by X amount. Which means you dealt enough crit hits that reduces the durability of their armor. Also, CS is the best trait line to add Deep Wound condition on crit hits. Lotus Poison applies regardless of health threshold. Traitlines are allowed to have some overlap. If that is true, we should have seen this proposed change to Ferocious by now. They've reworked the traits, yet this never happened. There's no 'if this is true', you can check it yourself. https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/170805715013730304/669312220546465792/unknown.png You may be thinking of Panic Strike's 50% requirement. Note: "proposed change to Ferocious" which is "do extra damage to targets above 50% health, and take less damage from enemies under 50% health" I don't follow. Anet not doing something isn't exactly a good guideline for...anything, really, considering how much they've left undone over the years (PW still doesn't say it evades in the tooltip).It's ok, the proposed idea is not going to happen anyway.

It's like saying the "executioner" trait is bad because it increases the damage only when the target meets the threshold. Sounds stupid, don't you think? Executioner makes sense. The weaker a target gets, the easier they are to kill. I suppose Ferocious Strikes could take a similar approach... do extra damage to targets above 50% health, and take less damage from enemies under 50% health... due to the targets being so damaged, their attacks are no longer as powerful. But that's what Lotus Poison does, it weakens your target that they fumble their attacks. To add damage reduction would significantly turn their weapons to pillows. Now imagine if you're on the receiving end... If someone wants to run Crit Strikes and deadly arts, more power to 'em I say. Right. But the Dev designs their traits with that in mind so even a slight possibility that a DA/CS/x will dominate, they will not do it. And yes, there are existing builds that take both trait lines. I can't recall anyone really caring about speculation on what the devs will and will not do as a means of enabling or shutting down discussion. It's a good idea, and I am all for enabling off meta builds. Also, Lotus Poison has 40%. 10% across the board when below 50% health will not have near the impact you're making it out to potentially have. The point is, the effect being proposed is no different than what DA already offers. The target is weakened via Lotus Poison, then you deal more damage when their health go below 50% (Executioner). Which means, the idea for Ferocious is redundant. In GW1 there's a condition called Cracked Armor that can be used in conjunction with Ferocious Strike which makes a whole lot of sense. When they drop below 50%, their armor is reduced by X amount. Which means you dealt enough crit hits that reduces the durability of their armor. Also, CS is the best trait line to add Deep Wound condition on crit hits. Lotus Poison applies regardless of health threshold. Traitlines are allowed to have some overlap. If that is true, we should have seen this proposed change to Ferocious by now. They've reworked the traits, yet this never happened. There's no 'if this is true', you can check it yourself. https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/170805715013730304/669312220546465792/unknown.png You may be thinking of Panic Strike's 50% requirement.Note: "proposed change to Ferocious" which is "do extra damage to targets above 50% health, and take less damage from enemies under 50% health"

With the addition of gliding, this is no longer the most deadly thing. In my experience, ALT-TAB is the most deadly. I don't even know what happens most of the time.

lol, you can't really call it an MMO without the grind and GW2 also has a grindfest (i.e. Masteries). Albeit it's not as grindy as other MMOs, but it's still a grind especially the HoT masteries -- a lot of useless masteries, waste a lot of my time. Everything from PoF and beyond are all acceptable grind, even the Griffon and Skyscale mount. GW2 is lacking gear progression, build depth, and rich story telling that other MMOs have. Of course, this is a subjective topic. If you enjoy GW2, then you found your MMO. I play other MMOs so I tend to bounce around. Last-last weekend, I was playing GW1 and last weekend I was playing BDO. There's nothing to do in GW2 until the next update.

I agree, but...what would you do about DE double stealing?

It's not an afterthought. Trahearne's wild hunt points towards studying the dead, undead and Zhaitan. To study the dead, he needs to be a Necromancer. Necromancy grants him abilities to manipulate conditions and immunity to certain conditions while digging through carcasses.

It's like saying the "executioner" trait is bad because it increases the damage only when the target meets the threshold. Sounds stupid, don't you think? Executioner makes sense. The weaker a target gets, the easier they are to kill. I suppose Ferocious Strikes could take a similar approach... do extra damage to targets above 50% health, and take less damage from enemies under 50% health... due to the targets being so damaged, their attacks are no longer as powerful. But that's what Lotus Poison does, it weakens your target that they fumble their attacks. To add damage reduction would significantly turn their weapons to pillows. Now imagine if you're on the receiving end... If someone wants to run Crit Strikes and deadly arts, more power to 'em I say. Right. But the Dev designs their traits with that in mind so even a slight possibility that a DA/CS/x will dominate, they will not do it. And yes, there are existing builds that take both trait lines. I can't recall anyone really caring about speculation on what the devs will and will not do as a means of enabling or shutting down discussion. It's a good idea, and I am all for enabling off meta builds. Also, Lotus Poison has 40%. 10% across the board when below 50% health will not have near the impact you're making it out to potentially have. The point is, the effect being proposed is no different than what DA already offers. The target is weakened via Lotus Poison, then you deal more damage when their health go below 50% (Executioner). Which means, the idea for Ferocious is redundant. In GW1 there's a condition called Cracked Armor that can be used in conjunction with Ferocious Strike which makes a whole lot of sense. When they drop below 50%, their armor is reduced by X amount. Which means you dealt enough crit hits that reduces the durability of their armor. Also, CS is the best trait line to add Deep Wound condition on crit hits. Lotus Poison applies regardless of health threshold. Traitlines are allowed to have some overlap.If that is true, we should have seen this proposed change to Ferocious by now. They've reworked the traits, yet this never happened.

It's like saying the "executioner" trait is bad because it increases the damage only when the target meets the threshold. Sounds stupid, don't you think? Executioner makes sense. The weaker a target gets, the easier they are to kill. I suppose Ferocious Strikes could take a similar approach... do extra damage to targets above 50% health, and take less damage from enemies under 50% health... due to the targets being so damaged, their attacks are no longer as powerful. But that's what Lotus Poison does, it weakens your target that they fumble their attacks. To add damage reduction would significantly turn their weapons to pillows. Now imagine if you're on the receiving end... If someone wants to run Crit Strikes and deadly arts, more power to 'em I say. Right. But the Dev designs their traits with that in mind so even a slight possibility that a DA/CS/x will dominate, they will not do it. And yes, there are existing builds that take both trait lines. I can't recall anyone really caring about speculation on what the devs will and will not do as a means of enabling or shutting down discussion. It's a good idea, and I am all for enabling off meta builds. Also, Lotus Poison has 40%. 10% across the board when below 50% health will not have near the impact you're making it out to potentially have.The point is, the effect being proposed is no different than what DA already offers. The target is weakened via Lotus Poison, then you deal more damage when their health go below 50% (Executioner). Which means, the idea for Ferocious is redundant. In GW1 there's a condition called Cracked Armor that can be used in conjunction with Ferocious Strike which makes a whole lot of sense. When they drop below 50%, their armor is reduced by X amount. Which means you dealt enough crit hits that reduces the durability of their armor. Also, CS is the best trait line to add Deep Wound condition on crit hits.