Remove forced movement from the game.

[Sobx.1758]

6 minutes ago, Micah.3789 said:

Removing automated movement/aim is the exact opposite of reducing the skill level. In fact, it would further widen the skill gap. Unskilled players would be missing constantly without assisted aim forced movement, while skilled players would be able to control their characters with finesse. 

Someone complaining about willbender or dd testing their nerves is rather clearly a skill issue and a request to make easy builds even easier. Pretending that OP made this thread in order to make it harder to utilize the specs he's complaining about is so weird (and evidently wrong).

Edited April 9 by Sobx.1758

[Micah.3789]

5 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Someone complaining about willbender or dd testing their nerves is rather clearly a skill issue and a request to make easy builds even easier. Pretending that OP made this thread in order to make it harder to utilize the specs he's complaining about is so weird (and evidently wrong).

While it's clear by the exaggerations and melodrama that OP is likely lacking the skill to effectively cope with forced movement issues, that doesn't invalidate their complaint. I'm not pretending anything. I'm choosing not to focus on OP's credibility, and am instead addressing the complaint itself in good faith. OP specifically suggested more control over movement that is otherwise unwieldy. I agree and note that this would remove auto-aiming features of these skills which would make them harder to land, but smoother to use.

It's embarrassing that anyone is taking this as an opportunity to dog on someone, even if it means arguing in bad faith that compensating for janky forced movement is healthy skillful gameplay. Like, can we move on from the fact that OP was raging a bit and just discuss this reasonably?

[Sobx.1758]

10 minutes ago, Micah.3789 said:

While it's clear by the exaggerations and melodrama that OP is likely lacking the skill to effectively cope with forced movement issues

Glad you understand that. So -again- perhaps you could stop pretending it's about anything else when it obviosly isn't.

10 minutes ago, Micah.3789 said:

I'm choosing not to focus on OP's credibility, and am instead addressing the complaint itself in good faith.

Are you though? Because I play what he listed there and I don't see the issue that isn't solved beyond "just play it a little more and understand those skills' behavor", which is also exactly what's being pointed out here.

10 minutes ago, Micah.3789 said:

I agree and note that this would remove auto-aiming features of these skills which would make them harder to land, but smoother to use.

OP complains about those movement skills literally because they make it harder for him to land them. What you're saying here isn't correct at all. If anything is embarrassing here, I'd say it's what you're making up here, for the sake of pretending OP's proposal is something it isn't and would achieve something it wouldn't.

Edited April 9 by Sobx.1758

[Jedrik.3109]

20 hours ago, Micah.3789 said:

 

 

Edited April 10 by Jedrik.3109
I have nothing of value to offer anyone.

[Micah.3789]

24 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

OP complains about those movement skills literally because they make it harder for him to land them. What you're saying here isn't correct at all.

This is a strawman to try to justify your stubborn rejection of the criticism. I've reread OP's posts and they clearly state they're struggling with being propelled into danger by forced movement pursuing a target, not failing to hit. 

28 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

I play what he listed there and I don't see the issue that isn't solved beyond "just play it a little more and understand those skills' behavor"

I play them as well, and can very skillfully manage their behavior. I can also recognize that isn't desirable or healthy design, though. 

It seems you have a vested interest in continuing to push this as exclusively a skill issue. I suspect you get some degree of ego out of your ability to cope with poor design. So, dogging on others and arguing that this is good design simultaneously signals your skill and superiority.

37 minutes ago, Jedrik.3109 said:

We can control our characters with finesse. Your point seems extremely counter intuitive and opposite to a learning experience. Aim assist should not be a default setting. The sooner player adjust the quicker thier skill floor rises. Dropping the entire skill floor for an overly power crept game leaves less room for skill expression and extremely detrimental to the skill ceiling. 

You're being obtuse and misunderstanding to justify your condescension. Forced movement as it exists now IS aim assist: tracking and pursuing targets with no additional input from you. The issue (as stated by OP as well) is that this sometimes forces you into danger which you can only mitigate by not using the skill at all. This maintains low input skill aiming and movement at the cost of more precise skill expression.

[Jedrik.3109]

On 4/9/2024 at 1:41 PM, Micah.3789 said:

 

 

Edited April 11 by Jedrik.3109
Opinions of people like myself should be disregard at all times.

[Sobx.1758]

23 minutes ago, Micah.3789 said:

This is a strawman to try to justify your stubborn rejection of the criticism. I've reread OP's posts and they clearly state they're struggling with being propelled into danger by forced movement pursuing a target, not failing to hit. 

No, this is responding to the provided "argumentation", which is... you know... the opposite of strawman? 🤔

If they're being propelled into danger instead of hitting the target then your claim about that movement/assisted aim making it easier to hit a target (and changing it into lack of forced movement making it an increase of skill level) is obviously false.

23 minutes ago, Micah.3789 said:

I play them as well, and can very skillfully manage their behavior. I can also recognize that isn't desirable or healthy design, though. 

It seems you have a vested interest in continuing to push this as exclusively a skill issue. I suspect you get some degree of ego out of your ability to cope with poor design. So, dogging on others and arguing that this is good design simultaneously signals your skill and superiority.

Talk about making a strawman when I'm the one addressing what I'm quoting while you're reverting into "umm that's your ego!". No, it's not, it's a simple fact that OP tried to jump into another easy build and since it plays differently, now it needs to be changed so OP can have it even easier. There's no need for that, those specs are doing fine with just a bit of experience and understanding of them. If he doesn't like those movement skills, he can play specs which don't utilize them. Nothing here is about my ego.

Edited April 9 by Sobx.1758

[Gaiawolf.8261]

1 hour ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Someone complaining about willbender or dd testing their nerves is rather clearly a skill issue and a request to make easy builds even easier. Pretending that OP made this thread in order to make it harder to utilize the specs he's complaining about is so weird (and evidently wrong).

If you want to make willbender easier, all you have to do is mount your monitor to a spinning fan while playing.

[Sobx.1758]

2 minutes ago, Gaiawolf.8261 said:

If you want to make willbender easier, all you have to do is mount your monitor to a spinning fan while playing.

I don't get it

Edited April 9 by Sobx.1758

[Jedrik.3109]

On 4/9/2024 at 3:07 PM, Micah.3789 said:

 

 

Edited April 11 by Jedrik.3109
Was baiting. Apologies. I desire an end.

[Micah.3789]

I've made my point on the actual topic clearly in my first comment on this post. I'll leave it at that and stop engaging with this drama. 

[Jedrik.3109]

18 hours ago, Micah.3789 said:

 

 

Edited April 10 by Jedrik.3109
I add nothing to humanity.

[Leo G.4501]

2 hours ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Someone complaining about willbender or dd testing their nerves is rather clearly a skill issue and a request to make easy builds even easier. Pretending that OP made this thread in order to make it harder to utilize the specs he's complaining about is so weird (and evidently wrong).

 

1 hour ago, Micah.3789 said:

While it's clear by the exaggerations and melodrama that OP is likely lacking the skill to effectively cope with forced movement issues, that doesn't invalidate their complaint. I'm not pretending anything. I'm choosing not to focus on OP's credibility, and am instead addressing the complaint itself in good faith. OP specifically suggested more control over movement that is otherwise unwieldy. I agree and note that this would remove auto-aiming features of these skills which would make them harder to land, but smoother to use.

It's embarrassing that anyone is taking this as an opportunity to dog on someone, even if it means arguing in bad faith that compensating for janky forced movement is healthy skillful gameplay. Like, can we move on from the fact that OP was raging a bit and just discuss this reasonably?

I think you are sort of talking past each other. Micah is right, it would widen the skill ceiling and skill floor by making skills more complicated than "push the button and get the effect" gameplay. It's a more complicated scheme by having the player select the distance they can move with a movement skill because often times, you want movement skills to occur immediately or as quickly as possible and that would be hampered if you had to not only direct the skill but select its distance. Even if it was all at once, it's still more difficult and prone to more errors because there are more points of failure. Then it wouldn't just be getting the direction and distance messed up, but misclicks, lag, premature ani-cancels, etc would make it more prone to screwing something up. But so long as it's one of the options available in the menu to turn on and off, I wouldn't care if it exists or not.

On the other hand, saying the current forced movement is janky or that a more complicated aiming mechanic would be smoother seems like an oversimplification. The current "forced movement" isn't janky, it's janky when you either screw up or something doesn't go right. In at least 80% of the times I use movement skills, it does exactly what I need it to do baring certain movement skills that are bugged. The other 20% could be lag, human error, AI or janky pathing. So having a few times a skill does something weird earns it the label of janky? Well if a new mechanic like the OP suggested were added as an option, it probably would be just as janky and prone to error but just in a different way but apparently a hypothetical mechanic is labeled "smoother to use" despite not knowing any of the code behind it? Seems like a reach to me. But more options can't be bad...until someone complains about some other minute aspect of the game to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

[Jedrik.3109]

 

18 hours ago, Leo G.4501 said:

 

 

18 hours ago, Leo G.4501 said:

 

 

Edited April 10 by Jedrik.3109
People like myself should not communicate with others.

[Puck.3697]

Active mobility is important to many aspects of the game

also scrapper hammer swings are target based, if you target the mob you will dash towards the monster always.. if your doing that with a gaping hole in the floor in front of you that sounds like a experience issue 

[draxynnic.3719]

6 hours ago, Puck.3697 said:

Active mobility is important to many aspects of the game

also scrapper hammer swings are target based, if you target the mob you will dash towards the monster always.. if your doing that with a gaping hole in the floor in front of you that sounds like a experience issue 

Is it a skill issue if the monster was right in front of you when you pressed the button, but teleports to the other side of the gaping hole right after you press the button (from your perspective, the server might think it was the other way around)?

I guess some people do think things like memorising the cooldowns of monster skills is part of 'having skill', but that's probably not a level that should be expected just for the basic operation of a build.

Snowcrows, one of the sweatiest guilds in the game, lists forced movement as being a bad thing in a build. I guess even they're just not gitting gud enuff?

[Supernova Starr.2069]

I don't know if it's topic related, but I think it's horrible to have 900-1200-1500 range when you need to stack for boons

[ShadowKatt.6740]

2 hours ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

Snowcrows, one of the sweatiest guilds in the game, lists forced movement as being a bad thing in a build. I guess even they're just not gitting gud enuff?

As I said above I think Snowcrows is one of the worst things to happen in this game. GW2 would be a completely different game if it wasn't for them and their golem benchmarks. They are to GW2 what Goonsquad is to Eve, except I don't even know that Goonsquad is really harmful to Eve, just noobs.

1 hour ago, Supernova Starr.2069 said:

I don't know if it's topic related, but I think it's horrible to have 900-1200-1500 range when you need to stack for boons

The weird thing is that it's not. Something that I hate but I'll acknowledge is that there's zero penalty to using your ranged weapon at point blank, in-your-face range. So you can use a pistol/rifle/bow AND stand in the stack for everything. I think that's a design oversight, maybe they just didn't care.

[Bleikopf.2491]

33 minutes ago, ShadowKatt.6740 said:

As I said above I think Snowcrows is one of the worst things to happen in this game. GW2 would be a completely different game if it wasn't for them and their golem benchmarks.

Something something blame the player, not the game. 

[ShadowKatt.6740]

1 hour ago, Bleikopf.2491 said:

Something something blame the player, not the game. 

Well, the way I see it, you can blame one of two things: #1 You can blame them for focusing on the meta and bending the game to the absolute limits OR #2 you can blame the devs for actually listening to them. And I suppose if we're going to be fair the blame really falls on the devs and the balance team for listening to them at all. BUT here we are. Doesn't really matter because either way you want to go here we are.

44 minutes ago, Supernova Starr.2069 said:

I swear it, I've tried my best to reply this, but every answer lead to not acknowledge this as a troll

So.....gonna tell me how I'm wrong? No? Just gonna stand there and call me a troll? Alright then. I've been reported enough on these forums for my comments that I figure it's time enough to start giving back. If this is the way the forums are going to be then I guess we'll let the mods sort it out.

[Supernova Starr.2069]

16 minutes ago, ShadowKatt.6740 said:

So.....gonna tell me how I'm wrong? No? Just gonna stand there and call me a troll? Alright then. I've been reported enough on these forums for my comments that I figure it's time enough to start giving back. If this is the way the forums are going to be then I guess we'll let the mods sort it out.

Alright, it makes NO sense to punish "point blanket" damage when it's design to be that away, you may have 1500 range but you need stack 0m boss/mobs else you don't get' em sweet buffs that makes DPS go brr.

I may not been clear on my first comment and that's on me, why I liked to say is that boons should be spread party wide in a range space most encouters has (raids/fracs), so that ranges can range properly

[Puck.3697]

5 hours ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

Snowcrows, one of the sweatiest guilds in the game, lists forced movement as being a bad thing in a build. I guess even they're just not gitting gud enuff

Professions having pros and cons is a good thing. lol. 
 

it labels strict melee builds being a con too, shall we delete melee combat entirely to add? 
 

They’re not realistically made to be put as bad things, more they’re labelled to be things to be warned of, same as those that have high skill ceilings under cons 

it’s listed due to having a impact on potiental difficulty and skill cap, not as something bad as such

Edited April 10 by Puck.3697

[ShadowKatt.6740]

20 minutes ago, Supernova Starr.2069 said:

Alright, it makes NO sense to punish "point blanket" damage when it's design to be that away, you may have 1500 range but you need stack 0m boss/mobs else you don't get' em sweet buffs that makes DPS go brr.

I may not been clear on my first comment and that's on me, why I liked to say is that boons should be spread party wide in a range space most encouters has (raids/fracs), so that ranges can range properly

Actually it makes perfect sense. In a better, more robust game you would want to reward players for playing at their optimal range. Usually this means damage falloff for exceeding it and generally accuracy penalties for being too close. Of course, then you can have skills that can negate or even capitalize on those conditions, like a Longshot to fire from beyond range, or a Point Blank Shot to deal more damage from inside the range. But GW2 doesn't have that, and so there's really no reason to use a melee weapon unless you just want to use that weapon.

I THINK, but I'm not sure about this, that melee weapons do a small amount of damage more than ranged weapons but how much that affects your decision is up to you. And I say this through experience because my fiancee plays a ranger and she's always using her longbow in melee, always calling down a Barrage right on top of herself. Drives me up a wall but that's the game.

This isn't really specific to Guild Wars, this is just general game design 101. If you're going to have weapons you want to diversify them otherwise they're all just skins on the same weapon. So first you divide up into melee and ranged and generally make them ineffective and the other. Obviously melee weapons don't work at range....because they don't reach (excluding skills like Throw Sword and the like; they are exceptions that prove the rule), and so you need to balance that by making your ranged weapons ineffective or at least less effective in melee. Far as I know and if there is something I'd love to be corrected on this, GW2 doesn't do that.

It's not technically all bad though. There are some niche cases where this actually works in our favor. The most obvious is Elementalist and Engineer who do not have weapon swap and so are often forced into using their ranged weapons in melee. In particular I've called the Mesmer Staff a "Total" weapon because it's a ranged weapon that kinda wants you to be at melee range as Winds of Chaos bounces between targets and so using it in melee means it both conditions your target AND boons yourself. But again it is the exception. As it is there's really no reason not to and so weapon choice is purely down to preference, which means that you can stack with any ranged weapon you want as well. I personally feel that this does cheapen the game a bit because while this does offer more choice to the players and more flexibility in your build I feel that it makes those choices far less impactful. But, that's just how I feel and I'm sure there will be a LITANY of confused emojis and arguements to tell me how I'm wrong. God help me if they ever saw the games I've developed, they'd probably find where I live and burn my house down.

[Supernova Starr.2069]

4 minutes ago, ShadowKatt.6740 said:

Actually it makes perfect sense. In a better, more robust game you would want to reward players for playing at their optimal range. Usually this means damage falloff for exceeding it and generally accuracy penalties for being too close. Of course, then you can have skills that can negate or even capitalize on those conditions, like a Longshot to fire from beyond range, or a Point Blank Shot to deal more damage from inside the range. But GW2 doesn't have that, and so there's really no reason to use a melee weapon unless you just want to use that weapon.

Dragonhunter have trait that does exactly this, which I can't link right now due wiki being off, but it has 15% overall damage bonus when you're in the max range, which falls off  as you get closer to your target, but getting this max bonus is a DPS loss since you need to stack.

 

I read the rest of your message and you're missing my point which is regardless your weapon of choice, you'll be mele since you need to stack on your group for boons.

[Sobx.1758]

6 hours ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

Snowcrows, one of the sweatiest guilds in the game, lists forced movement as being a bad thing in a build. I guess even they're just not gitting gud enuff?

The point of pros and cons is to provide a quick clear overview of what to expect from the build for people who netscrape them. Just because something is listed as a con doesn't mean benchmarking players are struggling with it.