suialthor.7164

> @"Fleabite.7528" said: > On a Saturday afternoon just a few weeks after DRM launch, and almost noone is grouping for the new content. Reward-to-play incentives are surely putting people off. Too much hassle for too little benefit. Four changes could I think immediately be made to incentivise people to play DRMs more: > > * Significantly increase the droprate for the Volcanic Stormcaller weapons. Nobody I've run DRMs with has ever received one, reflected in the 300-400g TP price - valuing this collection (complete with Mastery point) at an insane 4,800-6,000 gold. So please double, or even triple, the present pitiful drop rate. > * Change the Prismatium Crystals home node drop to 3 a day like every other node, not the present 2. > * Having Prismatium Crystals account bound is probably fine - but forcing players into a glacier-slow daily grind is not. Each of the 16 Dragon Slayer weapons takes 30 crystals. That's 480 crystals in total needed for the collection. Just relying on the daily node (if you can afford the 50g upfront) would take eight months of grind. Even adding the (capped) crystals from daily DRM runs will still take you more than 30 days of tedious grind. Again, consider boosting the DRM drop rate - or give an extra bonus for running three a day (whether regular or CM) > * Allow craftable Prismatium Ingots to be sold on the TP. Players should be abler to grind for profit, if they choose. > > What else would incentivise you to run more DRMs? You could do all of this (which are good suggestions) and I'd still barely play them. The problem is many of us do not find them enjoyable. Making people feel like they "need" to do them for the incentives leads to burnout. I finished the new ones and felt like I spent nearly the entire time avoiding never ending aoe spam. They need more strategy and less aoe spam.

The commander tags lack contrast and are often way to low (even if normalizing all models). Squad object markers can be more effective due to being multi colored but they do not always work well in combination with the commander tag and they can still suffer from being too low (lack the height of ground markers).

I'd like to see a new map that caters to blobs. A smaller, more linear map (without camps etc....), that lets organized groups hammer away at each other with fewer distractions and less downtime.

> @"kash.9213" said: > > @"suialthor.7164" said: > > > @"kash.9213" said: > > > > > > Right, you've never seen. I explained why you're either making that up or why you haven't seen that. At some point you might have to spend some money to transfer or something. > > > > Overall I'm happy with my server. Sure they ignore objectives at times for blob fights but that is better than some of the alternatives. > > > > You seem to take it personally that some servers prefer commanders who can provide utility to the group they lead (since they expect everyone to run meta builds). Even in the groups that don't care about meta builds, thief's are not a high priority for the few balanced parties that might be possible. It simply is not a good choice in large scale fights. It is however, exceptionally strong at small scale which attracts players who tend to be less interested in supporting others. > > Go back and read your previous comments, those are taking things personally. I don't care what thieves and commanders are doing, but you keep doubling down on ridiculous claims. > > > @"kamikharzeeh.8016" said: > > nah, thief command just isn't a good idea. the tag classes are nearly only pretty bulky things, for a reason. > > > > i also never seen that seriously. some clown tags, may have been thieves, but that way u can also tag up on a core ranger... > > Of course it's not a good idea, but sometimes a blob aren't being super serious and still clean up. People in game don't take things half as serious as people in this forum who will flat out lie because they're butt hurt about a class instead of a skill or mechanic. You admit leading with a thief isn't a good idea. Yet can't imagine servers being smart enough to avoid making it a thing.

> @"kash.9213" said: > > Right, you've never seen. I explained why you're either making that up or why you haven't seen that. At some point you might have to spend some money to transfer or something. Overall I'm happy with my server. Sure they ignore objectives at times for blob fights but that is better than some of the alternatives. You seem to take it personally that some servers prefer commanders who can provide utility to the group they lead (since they expect everyone to run meta builds). Even in the groups that don't care about meta builds, thief's are not a high priority for the few balanced parties that might be possible. It simply is not a good choice in large scale fights. It is however, exceptionally strong at small scale which attracts players who tend to be less interested in supporting others.

> @"kash.9213" said: > Your lying. If you're not lying, you don't do enough anywhere to weigh in if that's your claim, especially since you've likely leeched off of zergs commanded by thieves because everyone has. I've never seen a thief command outside of small group ppt.

> @"Jugglemonkey.8741" said: > > So, according to you, outside of using voice comms and perma-stealthing behind an enemy tag so your tag always knows where they are, hiding in towers and recapping solo so your tag can focus on the enemy, cutting supply lines so the enemy cannot sustain an attack, keeping enemy players from contributing to their zerg by forcing them to hunt the thief or lose the objective, and downing backliners in open field fights to provide targets for your tag to bomb, thief has no use. Gotcha. > > Fyi, something doesn't become useless just because you can't see a use for it. Where is this rare communicative thief and how can we get them to server transfer? I've only played along side ones looking to use stealth as a crutch for ganking.

Around mid season for 3-4 days and then the last few days, matchmaking was awful/broken. I don't mind getting beat, but after dropping so much I should stop facing the same people (often same pairs) over and over.

The xp/loot is horrible compared to when I am playing damage. The loot issue is more annoying than a real problem. Earning a fraction of the xp compared to when I play damage is a problem. More xp means higher ranks that eventually translates to quicker skirmish rewards. As for gameplay, tomes are limiting. I enjoy support but after a while it gets boring. So why not play something else that is more rewarding and you don't have to hear people whine about cooldowns on stability.

> @"Jekkt.6045" said: > > It's less about map design and more about game mode. The only map where customized builds were ever relevant was old skyhammer (and old spirit watch.. but eh..) where fear necro, hammer guard, focus mesmer and wire thief were played. You could argue about thief/mes in old times where they were almost mandatory on khylo and temple. Or sword for bunker guard on khylo. These days it really doesn't matter anymore. Djinn's is probably the worst thief map in the game but nobody cares anyway. > > I'm not aware of what is meta in wvw, but don't forget, wvw balance is different and they have runes/foods/sigils/stats that are not available in pvp. > > I've been playing stronghold for the past couple of days and i can confidently tell you stuff that's good in conquest isn't necessarily good in stronghold (and vice versa). Turns out, standing on a node 90% of the game is quite build limiting. I should have included map objective because what you said is absolutely true. However, I think things like the size of the control point and line of sight around (or potentially in) them can also impact balance of builds. Imagine if all control points were the size of Foefire's center. Many builds that depend on trapping and/or stacking aoe in a small control point will be less efficient even if they become more strategic in how they use those abilities. Some builds that can easily knock people off small control points will struggle to do the same in a larger one. Now start adjusting line of sight in and around those larger control points.

> @"Jekkt.6045" said: > > reworking stuff does result in nerfs/buffs but not in the same way as if you would directly nerf or buff them. something different can be better or worse than what it used to be, that is undeniable. > > more complexity is a buff too, even if the skill keeps the same power level. more complexity more often than not means more ways to use something, therefore you have more choices to make which automatically makes it better than a skill that is bland and has only one use. > > but is that bad? > > we have many bloated skills currently that do too much and don't require big brain plays to get maximum value. the goal should be skills that do multiple things under different circumstances, making them strong when used correctly instead of just... making them strong. I think there might be a disconnect between what people mean when they say nerf/buff. Some view it as only tweaking existing numbers. Others view it as also including abilities/skills/complexity etc.. When talking about abilities/skills it will indirectly impacts other classes and builds. Sure it is complicated but the end result, as you mentioned, is still nerfs/buffs. I belong in the second group but don't see the point in calling it something else. While talking about all this complexity and different circumstances then why is no one addressing map design? There is a reason builds in WvW and PvP are different. What works in one doesn't always work in the other due to different map objectives and team sizes.

> @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said: > More meaningful means a variety of things, but even that basically breaks down into doing reworks of the abilities and systems in the game to give everything more meaning...and in particular more meaningful interactions with other skills. > How does reworking abilities not result in nerfs/buffs for classes? If all you do is give more complexity you are still buffing many builds.

> @"Supreme.3164" said: > > The more you nerf...the more the game stagnate because people will always gravitate toward the "least effort=biggest reward" gameplay , which will always exist in a game with 9 different professions and will continue to do so unless you "virtuall" remove all but a single profession and a single build or...change all professions to a carbon copy of the same profession to give people the illusion of choice ( I tend to believe that this is what people really want in the end). > > The idea itself that you should have always a "fair" fight in a MMO is what has brought us here, the idea itself that a MMO should be treated like a PvP game...it's again: insane. **MMO are all about collaboration between professions/jobs to reach a common goal not for you to have a glorius 1v1**. > > I blame Anet for not curbing this wrong ideology , Anet should have never allowed for this way of thinking to proliferate ........... > > Anyway the game itself is already **unsalvageable** for a good part, the mentality of the playerbase cannot be changed and people will keep asking for nerfs until everything is a "fair fight" in their mind but...there won't be a game to play by that time..truly a shame, this game could have been so much more...but it's far too late for anything now People gravitate to a few builds because they are the most efficient. Then how do you encourage variety without using nerfs/buffs? The only other major factors is number of players and the map objectives.

> @"felix.2386" said: > pvp need stuff to make new player stick and grind so they can be better and eventually the skill gap will be reduced. > Many people defend balancing the game around the top players. Then they wonder why new/average players get frustrated and stop playing. If you want new players to stick around then focus on making the game enjoyable for them. This can range from balancing classes per division, putting forth effort against bots, maps in lower divisions that reduce snowballing either by chance or effect, options to prefer or avoid matches with pairs, etc.... Bribing players to do pvp often translates to torture yourself until the item is completed and then stop playing.

> @"NorthernRedStar.3054" said: > Anet: "Okay, here's a nerf across the ENTIRE CLASS. Not once, not twice, BUT THRICE. You might want to specify what is it, exactly, that thief _is_ allowed to do even _moderately_ well? > > Because currently, it won't be damage. It won't be dueling. It won't be +1'ing. And it most definitely won't be roaming. > > Stealth, no matter how balanced, will never feel balanced to the person who gets blind sided or constantly drops their target due to stealth. They might as well remove it entirely from pvp/wvw and rebalance those classes without it.

> @"Ragnar.4257" said: > If you're at the correct rating, then a roughly 50/50 win-rate is what you would expect. Your mistake is to assume that you should be going up the ladder. This isn't a single-player story-mode where absolutely everybody can "reach the top"; advancing is not guaranteed. A 50/50, even 40/60 either way, is reasonable and normally what I see over a period of time. This past week has been about 10/90 with a few consecutive games facing the same pairs grouped together. Some of the games I can write off as random luck with match making along with lack of ability. But this past week I've noticed an increase in seeing 2 pairs of people on the other team on the same night. They are using some comp that increases the odds of the two pairs being put together, then change to something as soon as they are assigned on teams.

Diminishing returns on all forms of crowd control. It should be tactical not spammable.

> @"Marxx.5021" said: > Having a healbreaker only in one team is like playing a 5 vs 6. Why is such a mayor imbalance not fixed immediately? Healbreaker does no damage, has limited crowd control, and is somewhat helpless at range other than being a damage sponge. It is strongest when you let the other team crowd around it. I assume you mean conquest. At mid to low levels you have two choices. Coordinate crowd control and fight as a group. Or potentially easier (team comp) force their team to split instead of banging your head against a full team at one point. You want to reduce the number of people around the healbreaker. This way it is constantly running between points, outnumbered on a point, and/or it is alone on a point. Then have your ranged classes (900 to 1200 range) focus on the group with the healbreaker. Most of its abilities are limited to a 600 radius, so use that to your advantage and control the fight location. If it is alone then send a class with knockbacks and decent damage/survival. Knock it off point and start claiming while slowly killing it.

> @"Gazt.6851" said: > Saw arenanet admin flying around istan just now not sure if is a good news they checking it or something lol They were probably doing dailies.