LetoII.3782
-
Posts
2,480 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by LetoII.3782
-
-
> @"Kaiser.9873" said:
> In all honesty I'm not sure that transferring makes sense anymore anyway, as it just perpetuates the problems.
>
It's not about making sense
It's about making cents
-
> @"Cyninja.2954" said:
>
> EDIT: and that's me as an old time DAoC and Warhammer Online veteran thinking. I'm not even sure where newer players might stand on this issue.
The same way we were before all those disappointments: Overenthusiastic about manufactured hype. Mr. Jacobs tends to bite off more than he can chew, consistently.
-
If CU fails it won't be due to lore.
This supposedly has great story but I get lored to tears after 5 minutes of listening to it
-
> @"Svarty.8019" said:
> > @"LetoII.3782" said:
> > > @"Svarty.8019" said:
> > > > @"Kitta.3657" said:
> > > > Anet has literally buffed defending for years
> > >
> > > Literally? You mean they've polished it but not improved it's functionality? Well yes, at one stage they added some new siege models, but those aren't defending specific.
> > >
> > > I don't believe that they have buffed defending - I don't remember them doing so. In fact, I suspect there have been more changes to the contrary. Let's see your evidence!
> > >
> > >
> > Dude, they just undid one of the hot buffs to upgraded door and wall damage reduction... like Tuesday.
> >
> > Where you going with this?
>
> I don't remember that being a hot buff.
Maybe not :/
Presence of the keep?
-
> @"Svarty.8019" said:
> > @"Kitta.3657" said:
> > Anet has literally buffed defending for years
>
> Literally? You mean they've polished it but not improved it's functionality? Well yes, at one stage they added some new siege models, but those aren't defending specific.
>
> I don't believe that they have buffed defending - I don't remember them doing so. In fact, I suspect there have been more changes to the contrary. Let's see your evidence!
>
>
Dude, they just undid one of the hot buffs to upgraded door and wall damage reduction... like Tuesday.
Where you going with this?
-
They'll take my 35 bucks the moment I feel like giving it to them, that won't change.
Spend 35 bucks if your own to ditch that dead server.
Free-to-play rocks
-
GW2 is game
GW2 is life
Though shalt have no other upon ones ssd
-
You wanna be fast again
They wanna thirty bucks
Who will win?
Maybe both...
-
> @"Svarty.8019" said:
> > @"LetoII.3782" said:
> > > @"Svarty.8019" said:
> >
> > >
> > > The theory is good for PrimeTime, but Off-Peak people are going to have an enormous shake-up where powerful sides just Ktrain everything because it's even harder for weaker sides to defend.
> >
> > Side benefit in disguise.
> > When you can't defend with a handful, you drop tier. The servers with big off-hours get matched together.
>
> I was talking with an off-peak defender yesterday, he said, "If it's impossible, we just won't play - we don't want to backcap empty objectives".
>
> Dropping tiers is fine, losing players is a catastrophe for you, your enemy and Arenanet.
I am an off hours defender.
Holding out thru prime every day til the Aussies/Asians log in... Isn't great.
This is the pain of ripping a band-aid off, a couple bad weeks followed by a new, less frustrating normal.
-
> @"Svarty.8019" said:
>
> The theory is good for PrimeTime, but Off-Peak people are going to have an enormous shake-up where powerful sides just Ktrain everything because it's even harder for weaker sides to defend.
Side benefit in disguise.
When you can't defend with a handful, you drop tier. The servers with big off-hours get matched together.
-
> @"steki.1478" said:
> I cant believe that everyone in these threads is constantly outnumbered by enemies in every single matchup and every part of the day.
Very few servers have significant off-hours presence. We've been talking about it since day 2 of head start.
-
The blob is king
-
> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > @"Randulf.7614" said:
> > > @"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said:
> > > Only a quick update on mount stuff this week: We're adding a 5 second cool down on the Warclaw Mount skill if you dismount/are dismounted for any reason.
> >
> > WvW only I assume? I noticed the jump off dismount change affected pve too.
> >
> Well.... it is a WvW Mount. That’s likely why the coding carries over to keep it different and thus, easier to code changes.
>
> And... it’s a WvW Mount. Honestly, it offers nothing to PvE minus a skin.
>
>
All the mounts are fundamentally the same. Warclaw can't be CC'd because the pve mounts it's cloned from have their own special "freedom of movement" ruleset
-
If someone _was_ using an illegal res, why would they use it when in a 6v1 with no hope of escape?
-
> @"kins.3294" said:
> > @"LetoII.3782" said:
> > > @"Kylden Ar.3724" said:
> >
> > > Exactly like you said, links have allowed the Locust Alliance to go from server to server, steal players from them, and leave them a desolate wasteland. And I believe that ANet encourages it because those Gem sales are the most money WvW ever made.
> > >
> >
> > You know, I just don't get all the shade you personally throw at Mal and Indo. They didn't take anything from Kaineng, there was nothing there _to_ take. That was the reason they moved there in the first place.
> >
> > If anything, they _gave_ you a taste of life not in last place, what it's like on a more organized server.
>
> Where are they now anyway?
Indo took a break
The rest spilt up
> @"Diku.2546" said:
> Please stay on topic & Please edit your post so this thread isn't closed.
>
> We have a pretty good positive discussion going on...imho
>
> Thank you,
> Diku
-
> @"Kylden Ar.3724" said:
> Exactly like you said, links have allowed the Locust Alliance to go from server to server, steal players from them, and leave them a desolate wasteland. And I believe that ANet encourages it because those Gem sales are the most money WvW ever made.
>
You know, I just don't get all the shade you personally throw at Mal and Indo. They didn't take anything from Kaineng, there was nothing there _to_ take. That was the reason they moved there in the first place.
If anything, they _gave_ you a taste of life not in last place, what it's like on a more organized server.
-
> @"anduriell.6280" said:
> i get your pain and i agree is not fair ventari and fb can heal with no need to sacrifice dps or stats in healing power.
Say whaaa? O.o
FB not only needs every bit of healing power they can get, but also needs all 3 trait lines invested in it
-
-
> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > @"LetoII.3782" said:
> > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> >
> > > And I am honestly glad I am not getting many rings....
> > >
> >
> > Salvage 'em. The stabilizing hoozawotsits are good gold _or_ you can make dancing girls for your guild hall with them, my personal choice
>
> Matrixes. Though the chance from rings is really low...
>
> But yeah... I need em for my heavy armor..
>
> Have light and medium. I shouldn’t have taken that dang break....
There's dancing men too if that's your thing
-
> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> And I am honestly glad I am not getting many rings....
>
Salvage 'em. The stabilizing hoozawotsits are good gold _or_ you can make dancing girls for your guild hall with them, my personal choice
-
And so many of them given.
First time through the track you get every recipe, then it's just this nuisance box that's there again and again and again
-
Spring Fever: When under 900 range, ranger pets of the same species will become unavailable for 2-5 minutes
-
> @"Dawdler.8521" said:
> > @"Reverence.6915" said:
> > > @"LucasC.4016" said:
> > > I'm a new player and as such don't have loads of experience with wvw, but here's one wild idea: what if aoe skills could hit more targets?
> > >
> > > I mean, to promote small scale fights, zerging should be heavily punished in some way... And being able to hit only 5 players with aoe strongly encourages zerging, as players are _safer_ when tightly stacked in a blob.
> > >
> > > Some concerns with this idea:
> > > * wouldn't this get scourge damage just way too out of hand, more than it already is?
> > > * i've found an old forum post that mentions technical problems with this, as it could mean way too much information for the server to handle if 50 players are hitting the other 50 players each at the same time. That would have been the reason the cap exists in the first place.
> > > * defenders advantage would be greatly increased with this, as tight choke points could be exploited
> > >
> > >
> > > Well, consider this:
> > > - aoe damage could in deed get out of hand, _but only if players kept stacking tightly in a blob_. If they spread out, damage would be manageable
> > > - same goes for the server problems... _if players spread out_, there wouldn't be many situations of 50 players hitting 50 players each. Maybe in those choke points, sure, but not on open field.
> > > - as of what i've seen and heard, players don't defend structures that much anymore. And when they do, they are usually vastly outnumbered. This change would mean that a handful of players could actually stand a chance of defending against an enemy zerg. This encourages a more tactical approach to the fight (as good positioning and smart movement would be even more important) and makes way to a smaller team outwitting the opponent instead of battles being won by simply outnumbering your opponent. Also, it could encourage build diversity as the attacking zerg would greatly benefit from having a number of players dedicated to protecting the zerg when going through choke points, with barriers, reflects and such skills. And maybe dps elementalists would have a better place in the game as well (as they need).
> > >
> > > I really don't understand the technical issues in all their technicality, and I'm sure this is not a simple issue, but i'm guessing it's also not that much of a stretch to ask for an increase in the cap, if a cap really is necessary. Zerging is the one thing that turns me off from wvw, and I think the game mode could really be rekindled if zerg vs zerg would become a larger skirmish style battle.
> > >
> > > What do you guys think?
> >
> > We've been asking for this basically since the game was launched. The whole stacking strat came about because of the 5 man max AoE cap on most skills.
> >
> > If you can still find a link to the old forums, you'll find posts asking for AoE cap to be removed since pre-launch.
> And it is still as antithetical today as it was back then when people claim they want "fights". This wouldnt lead to fights, it would lead to zergs getting thanosed out of existance. If 5 players can defeat a 50 man zerg (technically 1 player could against a zerg stacked close enough) that doesnt mean those 5 just magically disappear when a 50 vs 50 meet for a face to face "fair fight" in open field. It would still just be about which group stealthed and instawiped the zerg that stacked first. The only thing limitless AoE would lead to is this: guilds instawiping everything, all PUG commanders quitting and WvW becoming loose blobs of random players that dont want to be near each other.
>
> Yeah, sounds real healthy for the game mode.
You don't have to stack.
Most games (with real AoE) and in real life, piling up in battle is a horrible idea. It's only here where there's safety in numbers from the artillery strike.. A lot of gw2 players are going to have a hard time in the next game.
-
> @"Stand The Wall.6987" said:
> it was obvious from the amount of pve maps that this game was going to be pve centric.
>
It's also obvious from the way Mike O'Brien talks about us.
WvW with Greeks?
in Looking For Guild
Posted
> @"Dawdler.8521" said:
> No one want to WvW with Greeks. I hear they just camp chokepoints and prefer water combat.
I hear they like wrasslin in the buff too