Remove forced movement from the game.

[Puck.3697]

4 hours 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. They are to GW2 what Goonsquad is to Eve, except I don't even know that Goonsquad is really harmful to Eve, just noobs

How do you make that out to be?. 

golem bench marks will exist with or without snowcrows, just like they exist in every other mmorpg without snowcrows. 
 

optimal rotations will always inevitably exist lol, it’s pretty wild to think snowcrows created that. Lol

Arena net created that, Anet just makes it public information lol the game would be identical either way

Edited April 10 by Puck.3697

[Obtena.7952]

12 hours 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. 

True, but not for the better. Prior to people measuring DPS benchmarks, people were trying to dictate what was optimal based on excel calculations, which were literally demonstrated to be completely inaccurate and nonsensical when applied to real encounters ingame. 

So the reality is that prior to the existence of Snowcrows/Metabattle, the game WAS much different ... and not in a good way. 

There are ALWAYS going to be people that game the system; in GW2 case, optimizing their DPS. That doesn't make them or the sites that provide that information bad things for the game. What is bad for the game is when people PUSH optimization on unwilling/unknowing players, for their own selfish motives, then turn around and play the victim when people don't conform this optimal way to play. Welcome to metapushing. At least with Snowcrows and DPS meters, an objective argument can be had about the benefits and value of playing meta vs. not.  

Edited April 11 by Obtena.7952

[mirage.8046]

10 hours ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

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?

that sounds more like bad timing or a learning experience than the lack of skill. what people ought to do is reserve 'forced movement' skills for when they need mobility or need to dash back to their group for stacking. every build has its pros and cons. but that does prevent anyone from playing it because of the cons? no, people will play for fun or to challenge themselves.

dare we even argue that one of the pros is 'good mobility' yet the con is 'forced movement' on some of Snowcrow's builds? because that is pointless.

[Gaiawolf.8261]

5 hours ago, Sobx.1758 said:

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.

True, they don't list it as a con because they struggle to deal with it. They only list it as a con because it's not fun to deal with. This is really only a problem if you're one of those weirdos who think games should be fun.

[Shadowpeixera.2918]

12 hours 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.

Worry not, i will.

I was here since the launch, and i remember the meta being 4 Warriors 1 Mesmer CoF P3 runs. It was the worst thing that ever happened to this game. I remember all the other classes forums, specially Necros and Rangers going absolutely insane in their rants trying their best to get a single goddamn run going because the meta shaped itself to such a point where any classes other than Warriors and Mesmers were NOT getting their runs, and thus their dungeon currency.

Metas are something that every game develop. They're a natural progression because everything can be optimized, and people will optimize it. If it's not Snowcrows, it's someone else. It's something that *will* happen, because that's how games work. I'm not saying to be a meta-slave or to bend yourself to how others tell you to play, but there *is* an optimization path, and lots of people take it and that won't change. Going against this tide just because of misguided principles is weird.

My point is: The game and it's players WILL find a way to be exclusive in certain content because that's how these games work. Having actual benchmarks and Anet being forced by player feedback to make everything viable is actually a good thing. It reminds me of WoW Classic in a way, where players were surprised to realize the only viable DPS classes in the game are Mages, Warlocks, Warriors and Rogues, and everything else is a tank or a healer ( and big * there on tank since the best tank is a Warrior ).

If you don't have the information, people will try their best to gather the information with what they have, and that was GW2 for the better part of 2/3 years before the xpacs. I don't want to go back to those times, and you shouldn't either.

[Sobx.1758]

15 hours ago, Gaiawolf.8261 said:

True, they don't list it as a con because they struggle to deal with it. They only list it as a con because it's not fun to deal with. This is really only a problem if you're one of those weirdos who think games should be fun.

Almost as if fun is subjective and in many cases removing obstacles might as well remove the game. Not only that, but we're talking about a benchmark where people tryhard with specific rotations that by no means are needed to complete any content. If it's unfun, you not only have plenty of the other builds that could be fun for you instead, but also you could still have fun with those very same specs by just modifying the build and not trying to min-max the rotation.

But no, things "are bad" because they can be min-maxed and since they can be min-maxed... you totally have to do it, just to then subsequently complain about them, that's not weird 🙃 

Edited April 11 by Sobx.1758
are

[draxynnic.3719]

15 hours ago, Supernova Starr.2069 said:

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.

Part of it is also that dragonhunter is a bit weird in that it has that trait, and then it has traps (which you want to be in melee for) and simply being a guardian, which favours melee. The trait feels more like it's making you less disadvantaged at ranged combat rather than actually making you want to fight at long range.

Better examples might be the ranger longbow auto and the mesmer greatsword auto, although mesmer greatsword also has a bit of the dragonhunter effect, since Mirror Blade often rewards being close to the target instead.

14 hours ago, Sobx.1758 said:

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.

I'd say the point of cons is to show things that players need to be aware of generally. Someone pointed out being melee is a con... which it is! In certain combats that punish melee, it's a pretty big con! In others, it's not a big deal. The same can be said of forced movement - some fights it's really not a big deal, in others, it has a high chance of being lethal.

I think quickscrapper being forced to use such skills in order to do their main job is definitely problematic, however. Pretty much everyone I know who's played it complains about it. 

10 hours ago, mirage.8046 said:

that sounds more like bad timing or a learning experience than the lack of skill. what people ought to do is reserve 'forced movement' skills for when they need mobility or need to dash back to their group for stacking. every build has its pros and cons. but that does prevent anyone from playing it because of the cons? no, people will play for fun or to challenge themselves.

Oh, so we are playing the "not having every single boss's rotation memorised, including in cases where it's at least semi-random, is a skill issue" card?

10 hours ago, mirage.8046 said:

dare we even argue that one of the pros is 'good mobility' yet the con is 'forced movement' on some of Snowcrow's builds? because that is pointless.

Well, there's the problem. If you're forced to use your leap skills just to do your job, and therefore don't have them available when you actually need the mobility, are you really "high mobility"?

Edited April 11 by draxynnic.3719

[Sobx.1758]

6 hours ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

I'd say the point of cons is to show things that players need to be aware of generally. Someone pointed out being melee is a con... which it is! In certain combats that punish melee, it's a pretty big con! In others, it's not a big deal. The same can be said of forced movement - some fights it's really not a big deal, in others, it has a high chance of being lethal.

Yup. Does that have a different meaning than what I wrote about them being listed to provide a quick clear overview of what to expect from the build? I don't think it does. I also think that it's clearly reaffirming cons aren't listed there "because they make it not fun" (which is what Gaiawolf claimed), it's just part of the build's playstyle to be aware of.
That's exactly the point and your earlier mention about "listing a con meaning snowcrows players must not be good enough" simply doesn't make sense because that has nothing to do with the reason those cons are listed there in the first place.

Edited April 11 by Sobx.1758

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

On 4/6/2024 at 5:59 AM, Sindust.7059 said:

None of the suggestions I made would take away the leaps from you. Looks like you need to read one more time.

According to whom? Because not according to how they are used in the game in reality. This is why they are poorly designed, and that's why the person who came up with that design should be fired. Go to snowcrows, you know, the site where everyone takes their builds from, and look at the pros and cons columns for the affected builds (for example condi willbender), and never is the "forced movement" put in the "pros" column. Literally everyone who actually plays the game hates these skills and just finds a way to cope with this anti-feature instead of enjoying using it when they actually need the movement, since 99.9% of the time when you use the skill, you're doing it for something other than its supposed "primary aspect".

Then you should support suggestion 4, since that would deliver on this design intent that you imagine. As it stands, this is only true for things like Shift Signet or Blink, since those will only be used when movement is needed, or the movement synergizes with the secondary effect (i.e. stun break, since usually it's used to get out of AoE in the first place). But Rocket Charge and Energizing Slam are rarely if ever used for their movement, and their other effects have 0 synergy with the movement. The movement on those skills is a hindrance to their de-facto (rather than de-jure that you talk about) primary purpose.

Good luck playing quick scrapper without the skill that does half your quickness application. As for minding my surroundings... Kinda hard to do when the boss is there when I press the skill, then teleports away, and my char starts hopping towards the edge of the arena, or into a hole. No amount of "minding my surroundings" would help, since there is only a few seconds time window before quickness starts falling off. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Thing is that snow crows is not part of the game. That’s a “metagame” which means you are playing a “game outside of the game” by definition…your complaining about the wrong thing.

it’s like this: if you are told to play some build by some build-crafter, that in reality tends to get you killed in combat, then the build-crafter of that build did a poor job assessing the usability of the build in a practical setting. That tends to happen with build-crafters that fail to take into account, playability aspects of builds and how it feels to play it.

[draxynnic.3719]

13 hours ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Yup. Does that have a different meaning than what I wrote about them being listed to provide a quick clear overview of what to expect from the build? I don't think it does. I also think that it's clearly reaffirming cons aren't listed there "because they make it not fun" (which is what Gaiawolf claimed), it's just part of the build's playstyle to be aware of.
That's exactly the point and your earlier mention about "listing a con meaning snowcrows players must not be good enough" simply doesn't make sense because that has nothing to do with the reason those cons are listed there in the first place.

The point is that it IS a major downside of the build, that will have an effect in some, but not necessarily all, content. There is content where the forced movement doesn't matter, so the forced movement doesn't matter, and therefore the build is viable. And then there is content where it can yeet you into an early death, possibly sabotaging the entire pull if you had an important role.

It's just like melee-only builds, in that there is some content you really don't want to take a melee-only build to. The distinction is that in most cases, a melee-only build can be converted into having some ranged capability fairly easily at a small DPS loss. Quickscrappers, especially quickDPS scrappers (I think a healscrapper can get out of it using shortbow, but that has other downsides), are locked into that forced movement.

[draxynnic.3719]

9 hours ago, JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

Thing is that snow crows is not part of the game. That’s a “metagame” which means you are playing a “game outside of the game” by definition…your complaining about the wrong thing.

it’s like this: if you are told to play some build by some build-crafter, that in reality tends to get you killed in combat, then the build-crafter of that build did a poor job assessing the usability of the build in a practical setting. That tends to happen with build-crafters that fail to take into account, playability aspects of builds and how it feels to play it.

The builds ARE part of the game, though, Snowcrows and other build sites are just assessing which ones are good. It wasn't Snowcrows that decided that quickscrapper should be reliant on leap finishers to do its job. Someone at Arenanet did. Snowcrows et al are just figuring out the best ways to make things work within the constraints set by what's in the game.

I mean, Snowcrows COULD theoretically post a build that doesn't exist in the game, maybe as an April Fools or something, but obviously nobody's going to be able to actually play it...

[ShadowKatt.6740]

20 minutes ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

The point is that it IS a major downside of the build, that will have an effect in some, but not necessarily all, content. There is content where the forced movement doesn't matter, so the forced movement doesn't matter, and therefore the build is viable. And then there is content where it can yeet you into an early death, possibly sabotaging the entire pull if you had an important role.

It's just like melee-only builds, in that there is some content you really don't want to take a melee-only build to. The distinction is that in most cases, a melee-only build can be converted into having some ranged capability fairly easily at a small DPS loss. Quickscrappers, especially quickDPS scrappers (I think a healscrapper can get out of it using shortbow, but that has other downsides), are locked into that forced movement.

The difference I see there is that while you're right I haven't seen anyone calling for swords to have a 240-360 range because melee-only builds are too vulnerable as opposed to the original premise of this whole thread.

[Koensol.5860]

On 4/7/2024 at 11:51 PM, Sindust.7059 said:

While quick scrapper is the worst example with its 3s animation lock and the skill being mandatory, it really affects a lot of builds.

You've always been able to cancel scrapper hammer 3. Just swap to a kit during the animation and then press the weapon swap button to go back to hammer. Easy. Most builds use at least one kit so it's not a problem at all. If I use hammer 3 for movement, I do it 100% of the time in pvp right before the animation ends, to remove the aftercast slowing me down. Makes it a lot smoother.

Edited April 12 by Koensol.5860

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

58 minutes ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

The builds ARE part of the game, though, Snowcrows and other build sites are just assessing which ones are good. It wasn't Snowcrows that decided that quickscrapper should be reliant on leap finishers to do its job. Someone at Arenanet did. Snowcrows et al are just figuring out the best ways to make things work within the constraints set by what's in the game.

I mean, Snowcrows COULD theoretically post a build that doesn't exist in the game, maybe as an April Fools or something, but obviously nobody's going to be able to actually play it...

Builds are not part of the game. Skills are. Players are the ones that create builds which is the purpose of us players playing it.

 

You can run any allowed combination of skills you want in this game, nobody is holding a gun to your head to use hammer 3.

good example : on staff daredevil, the rotation as per snowcrows is to spam staff 2. It is the highest dps rotation to spam it on cooldown. However this skill locks you into the animation, and ironically can easily get you killed. When analyzing other components of the build I found that just auto attacking on staff 1 is about a 1-2k dps decrease (30k dps at the time which was like 3 years ago) to by an exponentially easier comfort level to use the build.

guess what…turns out dying zero times is a dps increase than dying several times in a fight.

 

Edited April 12 by JusticeRetroHunter.7684

[Bleikopf.2491]

7 hours ago, JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

Builds are not part of the game. Skills are. Players are the ones that create builds which is the purpose of us players playing it.

I'm confused. Are you arguing that builds are not part of the game? The thing that consists of Traits, Equipment, Runes and Sigil and nowadays Relics? 

Or are we talking about Rotations? 

Do we include Rotations in our definition of Builds? 

[Sobx.1758]

8 hours ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

The point is that it IS a major downside of the build, that will have an effect in some, but not necessarily all, content. There is content where the forced movement doesn't matter, so the forced movement doesn't matter, and therefore the build is viable. And then there is content where it can yeet you into an early death, possibly sabotaging the entire pull if you had an important role.

It's just like melee-only builds, in that there is some content you really don't want to take a melee-only build to. The distinction is that in most cases, a melee-only build can be converted into having some ranged capability fairly easily at a small DPS loss. Quickscrappers, especially quickDPS scrappers (I think a healscrapper can get out of it using shortbow, but that has other downsides), are locked into that forced movement.

A build having a con or potentially increased risk in certain content/situations doesn't make it not viable in that content. Yes, it's still worth being pointed out as a con, especially considering why that site with shared builds even exists. No, it still doesn't mean that cons are listed "because snowcrow players can't handle it" or w/e you tried argumenting in your initial post.

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

5 hours ago, Bleikopf.2491 said:

I'm confused. Are you arguing that builds are not part of the game? The thing that consists of Traits, Equipment, Runes and Sigil and nowadays Relics? 

Or are we talking about Rotations? 

Do we include Rotations in our definition of Builds? 

By definition no, builds are not part of the game, in that they aren’t an element that the game ships with. What exists in the game are just skills (the choices you listed are just generally classified as the games skills) and the ability to assemble them.

Players create builds which is arguably the point of playing this game, a game that offers you many choices of elements to select from and assemble into many different ways, for many different reasons and purposes.

Likewise rotations don’t exist in the game either, it’s a player creation…again, it’s our part as the players to create them as a function of our purpose in playing this game. So yes you should include the definition of rotation in with builds, as player created constructs.

Edited April 12 by JusticeRetroHunter.7684

[draxynnic.3719]

On 4/12/2024 at 10:29 AM, ShadowKatt.6740 said:

The difference I see there is that while you're right I haven't seen anyone calling for swords to have a 240-360 range because melee-only builds are too vulnerable as opposed to the original premise of this whole thread.

Because most melee-oriented builds can swap in a weapon or two, maybe even a specialisation, and do decently in a ranged situation. Quickscrapper... kinda has that option now with shortbow, but DPS quickscrapper doesn't really have much choice.

On 4/12/2024 at 11:07 AM, JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

Builds are not part of the game. Skills are. Players are the ones that create builds which is the purpose of us players playing it.

 

You can run any allowed combination of skills you want in this game, nobody is holding a gun to your head to use hammer 3.

good example : on staff daredevil, the rotation as per snowcrows is to spam staff 2. It is the highest dps rotation to spam it on cooldown. However this skill locks you into the animation, and ironically can easily get you killed. When analyzing other components of the build I found that just auto attacking on staff 1 is about a 1-2k dps decrease (30k dps at the time which was like 3 years ago) to by an exponentially easier comfort level to use the build.

guess what…turns out dying zero times is a dps increase than dying several times in a fight.

 

By now, ArenaNet knows exactly what types of builds they're enabling when they make changes like this. They might not know in advance precisely which traits and gear choices that Snowcrows and other build makers will decide on - and that fine detail is unimportant anyway because good players will adjust them when needed. But they know the general shape of what they're aiming for. They knew, when they switched quickscrapper to need blast and leap finishers, that they were forcing quickscrapper to use Rocket Charge. Especially since I'm pretty sure that change was made before SotO. On hammer quickscrapper, you're just not providing the quickness your team brought you for if you're not rocket charging on cooldown, or at least close to it.

Because if a build comes out that can pull it off without that, it will most likely get nerfed until it does.

[Gaiawolf.8261]

On 4/11/2024 at 6:54 AM, Sobx.1758 said:

I also think that it's clearly reaffirming cons aren't listed there "because they make it not fun" (which is what Gaiawolf claimed), it's just part of the build's playstyle to be aware of.

Just to be clear, I don't think forced movement on support skills was declared unfun by folks at Snowcrows only because it's listed as a con. I think they find the practice unfun because they have flat out said so in their discussions. Although to be fair, they didn't use that word. I believe they called it "cursed" and "masochistic."

It's also not about min/maxing. Forced movement on quickscrapper and alacbender are required to make the entire builds work at all. If you main that class/spec, it's your only option short of learning a new class mechanic. Not everyone has the time or wants to do that.

Personally, I think that cornerstone skills for builds to function should fulfill only one primary function. A forced movement skill should only be required for a  mobility build, not a support build, and vice versa. High DPS probably shouldn't be tied to a forced movement or support skill either.

[Sobx.1758]

50 minutes ago, Gaiawolf.8261 said:

It's also not about min/maxing. Forced movement on quickscrapper and alacbender are required to make the entire builds work at all. If you main that class/spec, it's your only option short of learning a new class mechanic. Not everyone has the time or wants to do that.

No, spamming movement abilities on qscrapper is not required for it to work.

Edited April 13 by Sobx.1758

[Gaiawolf.8261]

18 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

No, spamming movement abilities on qscrapper is not required for it to work.

Alacbender?

[Sobx.1758]

Just now, Gaiawolf.8261 said:

Alacbender?

What a skillful (not really) dodge!
What's problematic about alacbender movement skills?

[Gaiawolf.8261]

1 minute ago, Sobx.1758 said:

What a skillful (not really) dodge!
What's problematic about alacbender movement skills?

Just one movement skill, actually. It is required to share alacrity and cannot provide sufficient boon uptime during downtime or when needing to stay in a melee boonball.

[Sobx.1758]

6 minutes ago, Gaiawolf.8261 said:

Just one movement skill, actually. It is required to share alacrity and cannot provide sufficient boon uptime during downtime or when needing to stay in a melee boonball.

I know how it works, I know how it plays. I asked what's wrong with its movement abilities since f2/3 are (ground)targetted and f1 basically never whiffs.
So again: qscrap doesn't need to spam movement abilities to do its job, as opposed to what you tried claiming and what's exactly problematic about alacbender's movement skills? Note that "boon uptime during downtime" in no way relates to usage of movement skills, it relates to needing an enemy target to stack the boon. These two things are not the same at all.

Edited April 13 by Sobx.1758

[Gaiawolf.8261]

2 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

I know how it works, I know how it plays. I asked what's wrong with its movement abilities since f2/3 are targetted and f1 basically never whiffs. So again: qscrap doesn't need to spam movement abilities to do its job, as opposed to what you tried claiming and what's exactly problematic about alacbender's movement skills? Note that "boon uptime during downtime" in no way relates to usage of movement skills, it relates to needing an enemy target to stacak the boon. These two things are not the same at all.

I never said they were the same. I said people have stated that they find playing alacbender not as fun as it could be due to boon sharing being tied to a movement skill. I happen to agree.