FrizzFreston.5290

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > > > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > > > Wrong game.

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > No the game is the correct one, it's some players that think they are in the wrong game.

> > >

> > > Seriously, this game built itself on "come as you are and enjoy the game" content. "The player needs to adapt, not the content." has been antithetical to what makes this game a success.

> >

> > Huh. The whole traitsystem and skill selection system is build for adaptability. And gear is fairly easy to obtain. GW2 is building on the whole player actually can adapt easier opposed to most other MMOs. That the max level is stayed the same is another of those points that makes it easier to adapt instead of finding new gear the whole time.

> >

> > I dont see how GW2 is antithetical to player adaptation, in fact a gw2 player is asked to adapt more often than not. The existence of various encouners throughout the games history just proves that.

>

> Their system *allows* for a lot of flexibility, in order to *allow* players to adopt different playstyles, to have more varied and interesting play experiences. But part of that is that the content can't *expect* a certain specific build, because doing so constricts those possibilities. What is the point of having dozens of traits if only one or two combinations of them are "worthy" of being used? The content can't force players to adapt to it, the content has to be flexible enough to accommodate a wide range of player choices, otherwise those player choices become illusory.

>

There is no such rule where the content can't or shouldnt incentivize adaptation. In fact, most if not all games are entirely build on how much a player can adapt to a situation.

This is by no means an argument against an easymode, because the goal can entirely be to adapt a players time schedule to the fastest easiest route and offering that choice. In a way players would have to adapt less to the mechanics and more to devoting their time to a specific piece of content or simply to the fact that its not as rewarding. Ofcourse the content can equally focus players to adapt and figure out how to get past. Player preferences apply as usual.

Either way, allowing players to adapt easier still means my original comment stands. *GW2 is not antithetical to player adaptation.* That doesnt mean players should be required to always adapt either. Alot of the content has leeway build in ofcourse. But theres alot of occasions where this isnt the case. Breakbar mechanics, condition vulnerable foes, skritt running away, enemies with lots of projectiles. If you as a player dont adapt at the situation your facing in any game and just brute force your way through, you will possibly have a terrible time.

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > Wrong game.

> > >

> >

> > No the game is the correct one, it's some players that think they are in the wrong game.

>

> Seriously, this game built itself on "come as you are and enjoy the game" content. "The player needs to adapt, not the content." has been antithetical to what makes this game a success.

Huh. The whole traitsystem and skill selection system is build for adaptability. And gear is fairly easy to obtain. GW2 is building on the whole player actually can adapt easier opposed to most other MMOs. That the max level is stayed the same is another of those points that makes it easier to adapt instead of finding new gear the whole time.

I dont see how GW2 is antithetical to player adaptation, in fact a gw2 player is asked to adapt more often than not. The existence of various encouners throughout the games history just proves that.

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"OriOri.8724" said:

> > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > > @"SkyShroud.2865" said:

> > > > The issue is if maps are not rewarding, even with contents, people will eventually stop doing it.

> > >

> > > Well, my point I guess is that this is a map where people *would* "stop doing it," pretty quickly, but that's ok. I mean they put out a lot of maps that are intended to be replayed constantly, and they should continue to do that, definitely. But this would be one that's just intended to add a little depth to the world at a lowered development cost.

> > >

> > > **It would basically have a lot less work to it, definitely not "no work," but like if the average new map has maybe 3-5 heart quests, 1-2 meta events and a couple dozen smaller ones, all sorts of hidden caves, small communities, NPCs with dialog, etc., this map would have very little of that, Maybe 1 heart quest, or none at all. No meta events, maybe no events at all. no unique mobs or artwork, just repurposed assets from the area around it. No overly complex terrain, just pull mountains and trees out of the draw and slap them around. It may have 1-2 small communities near the edges, but nothing overly complicated there either. They could add NPCs and situations for Current Events or something, but don't have to.**

> > >

> > > I really love the care and attention that ANet puts into most of their maps, and look forward to the next of those, but that wouldn't be the point of something like this, this would just be to give better geographical continuity to the world by connecting the dots, without breaking the bank by requiring the same level of detail that a "core" map has to cover.

> > >

> > > Again, if it'd be way too much work, I agree it wouldn't be worth it, and this shouldn't *take the place* of a full LW map release, I just have a feeling this is something they could knock together on a budget relative to their other priorities as more of a "Current Events" scale project.

> > >

> > > >Now, for the first case, a non-rewarding map with large content will later on become nothing but a burden to new players because there just isn't enough new players to do them.

> > >

> > > And definitely, anything that would "need to be done" on that map, if anything at all, it should be soloable and also focused to specific areas, because yeah, finding other players there would be inconsistent.

> >

> > I ask you again, what is the point of such a map? No content, no new mobs, no new artwork, no hearts. No reason to visit it. So what is the point of it? There is none.

>

> Geographical continuity. It's to have contiguous land mass between points A and B. Players have been wanting to pass through the gates in Ebon Hawk since launch, and with Highlands it's implied that the connecting map might not be made. I'm just saying, if they have no idea how to make a map "worth it" as a massive, highly detailed, "chock full of adventure" style map, I would really prefer to see a "nothing" map than no map at all. I take it you disagree, but that's ok.

>

Geographical continuity won't be improved by placing empty maps at all. It would be ignored if anything. Just because there's space there physically doesn't mean there's continuity.

Some things are also best left to the imagination.

> @"CptAurellian.9537" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > Even now the people who completed every Arah path is like 27% of gw2eff users. For nearly 6 year old content. Ofcourse the amount of people there who at least completed every encounter in the first raid wing is (probably) like 18% if going by sabetha completions.

>

> Good catch and just another sign that the possible audience for an infantile mode is _very_ limited.

Well I would say the reasons for each of those numbers is very different. Difficulty, time it takes, age of the content. Groupsize is also a big factor. But most arguments get twisted into absolutes of one direction or the other. I really just think the numbers on gw2eff are very interesting more than proving a point. Ill leave unfounded majority minority claims to the people who feel like they need to validate their opinion with unfounded numbers.

Which is like:

At least one lvl 80 character: 97%

Completed personal story: 77%

Complete core exploration: 63%

Killed (harder version of) tequatl: 84%

Killed triple trouble wurm: 54%

Each of fractals (one time completion achieves):

between 71% (Mai trin) and 83% (urban battleground)

Raids rounded down:

Vale guardian - gorseval - sabeth

29% - 23% - 18%

Sloth - trio - matthias

17% - 17% - 14%

Escort - KC - Xera

26% - 15% - 12%

Cairn - mursaat - samarog - deimos

20% - 19% - 18% - 12%

All Dungeon paths:

AC - CM - TA - SE  - CoF - HotW - CoE - Arah

62% - 44% - 41% - 35% - 45% - 36% - 38% - 27%

TA-Aetherpath

24%

I think that on average, not that many people are out to complete everything multiple times and the addition of more content will mostly focus on completing it once rather than multiple times.

So if an easy mode ever would be made or even easier raids or even just content at all, most people would complete it once and be done. Only about 30 to 20% of people is also really out to grind the rewards as well. No matter how easy.

> @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > Again, intent is completely irrelevant. The result is all that matters, and the result is that it was much easier to casually pug a dungeon than it is to casually pug a raid.

>

> You probably never run Arah in the first month (or two) after release, or if you did you don't even remember it.

> And not only Arah, even the burrows part of AC P1 was hard for the average pug. You know when people weren't using frost bows and/or other mass dps skills to kill the burrows in time. Plus, "casually" pugging a raid should never even be possible, even with an easy mode, if it's supposed to have the same mechanics.

> How can you allow a "casual pug" to defeat the Blue Vale Guardian without reliable access to boon stripping? Not every profession has boon strip capabilities, which by default excludes many many team compositions from defeating that content.

> Same is true for every single encounter in Raids, while in dungeons and T1 fractals you can probably beat most without any specific builds, even though some of them are considerably harder without specifics (thief skips are a thing for a reason)

Even now the people who completed every Arah path is like 27% of gw2eff users. For nearly 6 year old content. Ofcourse the amount of people there who at least completed every encounter in the first raid wing is (probably) like 18% if going by sabetha completions.

Since they have this whole zones take place in their own timespan thing going on this really wouldnt do much. Also, why make a large empty map in locations that can be possibly used in the future.

I dont know how much time it would take, but even then, it seems like wasted effort.

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > > @"nia.4725" said:

> > > >Anyway. Don't you think it's extremely easy to get exotic equipment with the correct stats? What I mean with correct is: a DPS player who does not use toughness and vitality stats.

> > >

> > > The thing with casual players is, they probably aren't aware of what the "correct" stats are for the class they're playing, there are *dozens* of stat combinations in the game, and no clear guide as to which would be best, *inside* the game itself. Toughness and Vitality can help to take some of the edge off in a fight, let you take a couple more hits when you aren't loaded up with outside buffs. If the content is going to be casual friendly, it has to be accepting of many of the players "building wrong." That is the game the developers made.

> >

> > The content intended to be casual-friendly does just this. It doesn't matter what kind of bad gear you're wearing. You can kill everything in anything. Luckily, the game was never meant to be casual-friendly everywhere. There were explorable dungeons which were intended to be hard - and for a while were. There were later fractals which scaled with their level, and the top tiers were never casual-friendly. So you're outright spreading misinformation here. The game ANet made always had its casual-friendly parts and its non-casual-friendly parts.

>

> Dungeons and lower tier Fractals were *always* casual friendly. I was there from the start. I cleared all the Fractals in the first weeks. Yes, there were elitists that would insist on meta builds to make their runs *faster,* but you could still fairly easily clear them even without those meta builds.

>

I wouldnt class your experience with the content as a clear indication that it was intended to be casual friendly.

Even these days, stuff like Arah and even CoE is hard when people dont pay particular attention or have non optimized builds.

Not to mention its basically the same argument that people here use for raiding. "its easy for me thus its casual friendly".

> @"ReaverKane.7598" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > > @"ReaverKane.7598" said:

> > > For open world i like the Hearts+ Events system that GW2 has.

> > > Personal Story works very well as an overarching story beat, and some of the Current Events Achievements tell a great story.

> > > The problem is, when they tell them as achievements/collections we can't replay that, and that's a major loss.

> > > So i'd like to see more small quests like "Knight of the Thorn", "Transfer Chaser", and especially "Burden of Choice", but have them handled in a way that allows for us to replay them, if nothing else once per character, instead of once per account.

> >

> > Basically any achievement-lead story or exploration bit that sometimes are accountbound suffer from this one time unlock forever done thing. Even parts of the mastery learning, especially for mounts, can be felt a bit lackluster because you can only do it once.

> >

> > Ofcourse, where it makes sense character bound is great. Accountbound usually isnt great.. imo.

>

> I don't mind utility Masteries like mounts being account bound, since they are quite useful for new characters as well as old ones.

> In a way i understand your point as in the sense of exploration is very different with and without masteries, and sometimes it's hard to resist the reflex of using them consciously.

> It would be interesting for challenges and just for the sake of a renewed experience if we could toggle masteries per character. But i wouldn't change masteries or mounts aside from that.

>

> But when it's achievements that tell stories (which, lets face it, masteries don't, not even mount ones), its very frustrating and reductive to tie those to account bound achievements.

Yeah, I suppose its not technically story with the mount masteries. I found it quest related as it is still fairly questlike how you can unlock those mounts. As in, go to the respective heart task, do it and then youre able to get the mount. Which just really means that you sort of progress as you travel. But yeah, I can understand most people just want the ability and dont care for that specific progressive experience.

Most XP grind tied to the masteries I dont find as interesting however.

> @"ReaverKane.7598" said:

> For open world i like the Hearts+ Events system that GW2 has.

> Personal Story works very well as an overarching story beat, and some of the Current Events Achievements tell a great story.

> The problem is, when they tell them as achievements/collections we can't replay that, and that's a major loss.

> So i'd like to see more small quests like "Knight of the Thorn", "Transfer Chaser", and especially "Burden of Choice", but have them handled in a way that allows for us to replay them, if nothing else once per character, instead of once per account.

Basically any achievement-lead story or exploration bit that sometimes are accountbound suffer from this one time unlock forever done thing. Even parts of the mastery learning, especially for mounts, can be felt a bit lackluster because you can only do it once.

Ofcourse, where it makes sense character bound is great. Accountbound usually isnt great.. imo.

Yeah, lets argue that gw2efficiency isnt an accurate representation and then apply an arbitrary bias to it to prove the opposite.

> @"Chaith.8256" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > Plus it comes across as or can come across as "You're all bad, you don't know what youre talking about, so please don't accuse anyone of what you don't know."

>

> I'm not complaining about the infinitesimal sliver of real hackers and all the match manipulators because they're pretty mainstream, and ironically a big reason for all the false-positive hysteria.

That is my point. It may be a small amount of people, but they have a big influence. While complaining about people using false accusations mostly just ignores if not distracts from the actual problem.

While the request is honorable (Don't be toxic), the only thing that is going to stop such accusations is time to forget that some idiots in the higher tiers of the game, during monthly automated tournament are doing idiotic and stupid things that give top tier players a bad reputation. Whether that's deleting rewards, playing on other accounts or other practices that are frowned upon.

So while ofcourse, asking that being conservative with accusations is nice and all, looking in the mirror and also at people who do such reputation ruining actions is also important. Lead by example and all.

Plus it comes across as or can come across as "You're all bad, you don't know what youre talking about, so please don't accuse anyone of what you don't know." Rather than acknowledging some very disturbing behaviour is giving better players a bad rep to begin with.

Guardian isnt really a condi class, so it doesnt really need a ranged condi weapon.

Though it could be an idea for a next elite specialisation. I would like to see a direction that goes more into the ritualistic/spiritualistic side of the guardian. That could deal with confusion/blind and/or weakness.

> @"Ashantara.8731" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > The tome skills are all very similar. Out of the top of my head:

> >

> > [...]

> >

> > Ofcourse all tied to their respective virtues.

> > [...]

>

> What does this have to do with my complaint about the skill icons? I still want replacements so that I do not have to learn by number instead of icon.

>

> I have stopped playing Firebrand because of this, it is giving me a headache (especially in WvW where I have to be as quick as possible when casting support).

Just saying, thats how I (try to) remember them. I thought it could be helpful to those who find it harder. I also have a very visual memory and certainly have my troubles still. And while it is definitely a good idea to update the skill icons.(which I also said but you didnt quote) If they never do or if it will take a while to make, any additional memory tips and tricks certainly can help. Well only to those willing to accept said help anyway.

> @"Oldirtbeard.9834" said:

> Why revamp Under Water Combat if they don't have Future Under Water Content planned?

>

> I think there's probably going to be an Under Water Raid and Fractal this Summer to get everyone used to the new Combat and to test out new Under Water mechanics.

>

> Next Expansion will be Water based, every expansion has focused on a Mastery Feature and Map Type.

>

> Heart of Thorns was vertical and focused on Gliding. Path of Fire was more horizontal with maps but had unique terrains for mounts. Water expansion will be vertical again but will focus on water currents and different types of water mounts depending on the ocean depth?

I somehow dont think raids and fractals are a nice way of introducing underwater content. If anything those could come after or maybe during.

Definitely think that the mastery system could improve underwater movement and travel alot. Like substreams (like leylines), bubbles working as elevators (like updrafts) or whirlpools for downdrafts. And ofcourse underwater mounts with various abilities. Navigation is definitely one of those things that needs improvement. Anet does seem to have a plethora of ways on land how they did that. And with underwater being one of those areas that basically a deserted waste of waterbody for the most part. Traversing that more easier would make the experience better. Maybe even fun.

> @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said:

> > I'm wondering if this means a new UW map in the next LW update. If so, I might need to look at upgrading breathers...

>

> I doubt it. I'd put money on the breathers being removed entirely.

I suppose they could remove breathers, as part of rebalancing underwater. And to then release a partial underwater map.

My bet is that you can go in many directions with bubbles.

> @"Celsith.2753" said:

> Go to Orr right now. Do it. Go in the water. Swim around and fight things. Did that? Now realize how crap it is and hope it doesn't mean a water expac and wvw map :/

Isnt that why a full rework is needed? I dont think anyone questions the kind of a mess it is now.

I think, that it definitely is and always has been a very ambitious idea. And it will be a very challenging task to make it appealing. Though... and to be perfectly honest, its one of the areas in pretty much the whole game industry, where developers struggle to make something amazing. If Arenanet *can* pull it off it would set GW2 apart from pretty much every other MMO.

Its a huge risk ofcourse. It could also fall apart entirely. If they are going that way to begin with.

Ive been thinking that jokos scarab plague is a form of underwater dragon corruption for a while now.

> @"PyrateSilly.4710" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > Whether you think having the information on the wiki is enough or not, Even I dont read all the wiki related information on gemstore items. In fact, I am probably less inclined to buy something if I cant fully see what Im buying ingame.

> >

> > As in, i need to be really interested to even begin searching outside the game for more information. I think an easy button that links to or shows more information on the details of said item could be really useful. Many online shops have it and while some are better at that it than others, its usually helpful. Also as I automatically distrust it if I dont have easy access to such information.

> >

> > Ofcourse, for the gemstore to link to the wiki would in no way be all useful when the wiki doesnt get updated basically right away by those launching a new gemstore item.

> >

> > So while Anet might not be obligated to write a more clear description, it definitely would come across better if they showed more complete and transparent information. Knowing that this mostly only matters in the more complicated gemstore items like this gardenplot.

> >

> >

>

> You can access the wiki from the chat window. just type /wiki (space) then the name of the item/spell/etc you have questions on. - ie /wiki garden

>

I know. Even better, though not working for all gemstore items, you can type /wiki(space) and shift right click any ingame item to directly go to the wikipage related to that item. (as in pinging an item with shift rather than control so it can be used within a sentence or in this case, with a chat command.

But I was mostly thinking about how it could be streamlined/improved, because even if its so easy to wiki, not everyone knows or does.

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said:

> > > > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > > > >"Rest of the game" is also the Balthazar fight in Path of Fire, Caudecus fight in the Living Story and killing moa in Queensdale.

> > > > >

> > > > > Yes, that's an *excellent* example of how to distract from a rational topic by using hyperbole. Now, if we could talk about raids instead. . .

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > Funny. You said:

> > > > > Since the goal for an easy mode should be that it is in line with the content of the rest of the game, it should be accessible for any well-rounded player of GW2.

> > > >

> > > > And I pointed out that the "rest of the game" has different difficulty ratings and even gave some, intentionally extreme, examples.

> > >

> > > Which is why, in the portion you quoted right there, I said "well rounded player," rather than "anyone with an account." A player who can complete *most* of the game's available content could still not enjoy the struggle of the current raid encounters. Again, we are not talking about being unreasonable here.

> > >

> > > >The difference in the difficulty spectrum of this game is insane, and yet you say to make the Raids like the "rest of the game", without defining what that rest of the game is in the first place.

> > >

> > > I shouldn't have to. I *really* shouldn't have to.

> > >

> > > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > > > Since the goal for an easy mode should be that it is in line with the content of the rest of the game, it *should* be accessible for any well-rounded player of GW2.

> > > >

> > > > Funny. I'd say raids *are* accessible to any well-rounded player of GW2.

> > >

> > > Yes, but your perspective on this is skewed.

> > >

> > > Again, the existing raids work fine for *your* definition of "well-rounded," so you're already covered and require no further action. It's clearly *not* fine by most players' definitions of "well rounded" or more players would spend some of their time in raids. This is like a door that's only 5ft high. You walk right through it and go "wow, that was easy," a bunch of people behind you bump their heads, and grumble about the low doorframe, and a bunch of other people didn't even bother because they could see that they'd bump their heads, and you shout back at them "come on through, it's easy!"

> >

> > If it was a game to get to the other side, I would just adjust my height and not bump my head rather than complaining that the door isnt high enough. If it was a regular door there wouldnt be many people calling it a game in the first place.

>

> *Firm* grasp on how analogies work there. Put me in my place.

I'm just applying your analogy on how I see it. You do the same thing as well. I don't see how thats suddenly an issue.

> @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > @"Ohoni.6057" said:

> > > Since the goal for an easy mode should be that it is in line with the content of the rest of the game, it *should* be accessible for any well-rounded player of GW2.

> >

> > Funny. I'd say raids *are* accessible to any well-rounded player of GW2.

>

> Yes, but your perspective on this is skewed.

>

> Again, the existing raids work fine for *your* definition of "well-rounded," so you're already covered and require no further action. It's clearly *not* fine by most players' definitions of "well rounded" or more players would spend some of their time in raids. This is like a door that's only 5ft high. You walk right through it and go "wow, that was easy," a bunch of people behind you bump their heads, and grumble about the low doorframe, and a bunch of other people didn't even bother because they could see that they'd bump their heads, and you shout back at them "come on through, it's easy!"

If it was a game to get to the other side, I would just adjust my height and not bump my head rather than complaining that the door isnt high enough. If it was a regular door there wouldnt be many people calling it a game in the first place.

Whether you think having the information on the wiki is enough or not, Even I dont read all the wiki related information on gemstore items. In fact, I am probably less inclined to buy something if I cant fully see what Im buying ingame.

As in, i need to be really interested to even begin searching outside the game for more information. I think an easy button that links to or shows more information on the details of said item could be really useful. Many online shops have it and while some are better at that it than others, its usually helpful. Also as I automatically distrust it if I dont have easy access to such information.

Ofcourse, for the gemstore to link to the wiki would in no way be all useful when the wiki doesnt get updated basically right away by those launching a new gemstore item.

So while Anet might not be obligated to write a more clear description, it definitely would come across better if they showed more complete and transparent information. Knowing that this mostly only matters in the more complicated gemstore items like this gardenplot.

I really just tend to ask map chat, have a few friends with me or ask my guild. Or even LFG.

At some point expecting everything to get done by a zerg is going to be your downfall. Adapt to the situation and ask for help, join a guild or ask friends. Or try to become a better player, where possible ofcourse. Though having friends willing to help matters a great deal more.

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> > @"FrizzFreston.5290" said:

> > If its a recent buy you can try to ask for a refund of gems for this specific purpose. I have made a request like that before and they did refund my gems and I bought something else I liked.

>

> The OP should definite submit a formal request.

>

> A refund might not be possible, though. I think they can refund gems for items, because the item can be destroyed. I don't think they can revert account unlocks, like the Garden Plot, which means it might not be possible to get a refund in this case. However, it costs the OP nothing to ask.

Ohhh right you are. I didn't think of that at all. Kinda tricky with things that do give benefits as well. Dont want to end up with practices where people buy it, use it and reap the benefits and then want a refund.

Gotta wonder if for such an fairly costly item a one time trial is a solution for in the future purchases.