draxynnic.3719

> @"Fenom.9457" said: > > @"draxynnic.3719" said: > > There is a vague basis for speculation that it might be, since it's supposed to be Primordus' power specifically that's Jormag's weakness and jotun fire magic apparently works, but that could be just a matter of it requiring sufficiently intense fire magic and Primordus is the best known source of such. > > > The latest release also had a new hint that Jotun fire is tied to Primordus in some way I must have missed that one - where was it?

Yeah, PoF has the Awakened that pop up Protection and so on. Still, I think there's potential value in having more boonplay in general, and in some ways it can _help_ with making trashmobs somewhat threatening without doing so in an annoying way. For instance, most PvE mobs are set up so that they either have boons or they don't - you don't see many instances of PvE mobs steadily mightstacking during a fight, for instance. This could allow them to have enemies that are relatively nonthreatening early in a fight (unlike those darned pocket raptors which can down you in seconds if a pack or two of them catch you by surprise due to that insane flanking damage they do), but can build up to become a threat if you let them. But if you boonstrip them, you reset that counter. Drop a Well of Corruption or a Null Field or the like on them, and you can keep that counter on 0 for several seconds. This could make for mobs that are more fun to fight, because they're not a cakewalk, but they're also not dishing out big damage right from the word go, and you don't get the issue you can get in some PoF regions where you're fighting one dangerous opponent and then another wanders in and drops some big damage effects on you before you can react (this happens a lot with the djinn bottle in Crystal Oasis with the hydra wandering nearby, for instance). Even in PoF, boons are something you generally only really notice against specific mobs. Now compare that to any competitive mode, where it's virtually _guaranteed_ that any opponent you're facing is going to have some boons. There's a pretty big disconnect there. It might not be one desirable to make PvE as boon-heavy as PvP, but it would be nice for boonstrip and boonsteal to be more useful in PvE without relying on shortcuts like "skill does extra damage to targets without boons" or "skill will grant you Quickness even if the target has no boons to steal." The reason we HAVE conditional modifiers like that is because those skills weren't useful enough in PvE without them.

> @"Opopanax.1803" said: > > @"choovanski.5462" said: > > I think y'all underestimate how good heal warrior is right now. it's the meta healer in spvp right now with tempest, and it was just nerfed last patch. it's a better support than any guardian, druid or rev centaur build right now, even after big nerfs. > > > > warrior is also meta on minstrel shout heals for boon strip and support in WvW too. > > > > adding more support to this class is just going to make it overkill, and either the spec or tactics will have to be gutted for the sake of balance, as support warrior right now is already so strong it's basically the only way to play the class in PvP modes. as for PvE, everyone already knows about banners no need to go over them. > > > > a mobility utility spec with pistols would be far better. you know something that might let warrior play damage on side node in PvP again. a support spec that would be so broken it would have to be nerfed on launch or break the game is really NOT what we need. > > You folks keep calling warrior with banner in pve "Support". This is not accurate. It is a dps spec that slots group buff utilities. > > In no way is a banner slave a support in any sense of a minstrel or harrier firebrand, renegade, druid, or tempest in pve. > > You don't play them or gear them like support, you gear and play them like dps...because they are. This. I've been playing bannerslave in raids lately because the regular bs we started with started having other obligations. The playstyle is that you drop the banners in the best spot you can find and then DPS until it's time to refresh the banners. Usually the only difference between a bannerslave and a pure DPS berserker is that the utility slots that would have had banners have rage skills instead, and in the power variant you swap Smash Brawler for Last Blaze because you have the extra rage skills to use. The pure DPS builds even keep the Doubled Standards trait, because the assumption is that you'd never play them unless there was already a bannerslave in the squad.

Gotta say, it'd be awesome if they did dust off all those polearm concepts. I'm not holding my breath, but if they did... > @"MatyrGustav.6210" said: > > @"Opopanax.1803" said: > > I think one of the challenges will be: > > > > How do they make a support spec not be OP when combined with Tactics and Defense? > > > > Shout heal is not incredibly strong and can't run in pure pve as a heal support. But if you add another support line on top of it, would it be too much? > > > > I dont think so. You can't equip them all. It would just be more customization/Variety for people who play support warrior This, really. Guardian is already in that sort of space. So many supportive utility skills, but you can only pick three. The other skills you _could_ take don't really contribute to the power of the build you've got right now. What they do provide, though, is versatility (if you need a different kind of support, you can bring different skills) and insurance (if one of your support skills gets nerfed, you might find that swapping it out for one of the others results in less of a performance drop than keeping the one that got nerfed). I can understand the feeling that support is not really what warrior is about, but let's face it: six out of nine professions now have a supportive elite spec. _Most_ of those elite specs can also get good damage output if you build for damage rather than support. A hypothetical warrior support elite spec could provide support options, while still having just as much potential to be aggressive as a firebrand or renegade.

There is a vague basis for speculation that it might be, since it's supposed to be Primordus' power specifically that's Jormag's weakness and jotun fire magic apparently works, but that could be just a matter of it requiring sufficiently intense fire magic and Primordus is the best known source of such.

Yeah, the offspring is... we don't know the name, but if we were introduced, we'd know who she was. And the Tengu are showing up later in the episode according to the trailers. I suspect one limitation is that they'll avoid characters who died during the game. Scarlet _might_ get a pass, since that's content that people can't play any more anyway, but otherwise, it'd be a bit jarring fighting against someone whole channeling their legend. That's probably why Joko has been implicitly ruled out in a way that also shows that he _is_ significant enough to count (and while he was still, well, animate, too) - if they ever used Joko as a legend, at some point someone's going to use his legendary stance to fight him. It'll happen. Guaranteed. Sooner or later, someone will do it just for the irony factor. (It'd be me, if someone doesn't beat me to the punch.) Scarlet, though... I'm not sure how they'd go about making a legend around. Her main feats were being a good engineer, forming ridiculous alliances, and waking up Mordremoth. Incidentally, in Ventari's case, it's worth noting that while Ventari wasn't all that important in GW1, his teachings define sylvari culture (those who don't follow them are defined by their rejection of them). It's no coincidence that all of the abilities linked to his stance are based around the Tablet. Most of the GW1 legends don't have that sort of legacy. We don't even _know_ what happened to Vekk.

Asymmetric models could be a problem, although it might not be too difficult to just mirror-flip them around. Might be worth having a close look at the one-handed weapons to see how they've done it with those, come to think on it. The back-end differences in their treatment would probably be more significant, though.

Could possibly use the descendent of Talon that led the tengu to what is now the Dominion. Hard to judge what their legend skills would be (possibly something related to winds, travel, and/or walls?), but then, we probably wouldn't have predicted Kalla's either.

Vekk was awesome, but I can't really see him as a legend. He was essentially a sidekick to the GW1PC (although he'd obviously never admit it), he was a pretty straightforward elementalist, and as far as we know there's not really anything he's done that's so impressive that a legend could be built around it. Oola and Snaff are a bit more legendary, but in both cases they're mostly known for their breakthroughs in golemancy, and I can't really see a golem legend working well mechanically. The best asura option that we currently know the name of might well be Zinn - that little guy did a _lot,_ so they probably could find a few things to base a Zinn legend off that aren't simply golem summons.

> @"Infusion.7149" said: > I'm pretty sure when players made a warrior they didn't intend for it to be a healer. > Leave healing to guardian (virtue of resolve sharing , wings of resolve , mace mainhand), tempest (soothing mist + especially staff), druid (it has a staff that heals + Celestial avatar), scrapper (not really in PVE , but med kit) , revenant (fringe healer on staff + ventari). Wouldn't really count scourge as healing in the traditional sense , more of a barrier spam class. One does wonder how many people rolled ranger before we started getting HoT reveal expecting druid. There's also the potential for it to be a 'commander' type setup rather than a healer per se, focusing on boons and other buffs rather than straight healing. Could be risky from a PvE balance perspective, though, since it's probably not desirable to have people deciding that _two_ warriors are a requirement in raid groups, one for banners and one for other support.

> @"RyuDragnier.9476" said: > > @"draxynnic.3719" said: > > So, by this precedent, a Togo legend wouldn't HAVE ritualist skills. Maybe a couple, but it would also be expected to focus on what he did. And what did he do? He taught. He made peace. We already _have_ a pacifist teacher among the legends. > Perhaps we should be looking elsewhere for the Legend. Assuming they don't go for one from Factions, then let's look at other heroes. Perhaps Prince Rurik, Trahearne (just to troll the playerbase), or maybe even Snaff could work? Personally, I ascribe to the school of thought that we have legends significant to charr (Kalla), sylvari (Ventari) and human (the rest, pretty much) history, so it'd be good to see a legend associated with the norn or asura.

Generally speaking, when I come across 'dual shields', it's in the context of guardians or both rather than Warriors specifically, so I was talking in generalities. Warriors do have an issue that most of the non-spellcaster weapons are already taken. My observations still apply, though, and like Dadnir points out, there may be technical considerations in play. Personally, I'd still consider pistol or staff to be better options, although the exact approach might well depend on the theme of the elite. (Incidentally, the weapon that you're currently supposed to combine with shield for a 'brawling' style is probably mace, since MH mace gives you a daze, a block, and the adrenaline skill is a stun.)

> @"Aerick Blackmoore.8167" said: > Where as I do agree with Draxynnic regarding Revenant and Ritualist, it also got me thinking: > The Legendary Aspect, could be Togo, with the Aspect skills changing into 'Ashes of... ' https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Item_spell > Scourge and Engineer to a certain extend already covered the Spirits part of the Ritulaist. What's left are the direct spells and the Ashes of skill-line. Would fit with Revenants in a way that the are the only class to get bundle skills, since gameplay and thematically they wouldn't fit anywhere else as much. Although one could argue the Elementalist Conjure Skills are similar. Personally, I generally consider conjures and kits to be the equivalent of ashes. GW1 didn't have full-on skillbar changes like GW2 does, but the general effect was to replace your weapon, modify some of your skills, and provide you with another skill in reserve as the drop effect, with the general tradeoff being that you lose your autoattack in exchange for boosting your spells. The GW2 equivalent would probably just replace the weapon skills rather than modifying them. Maybe as a nod to GW1 ashes, they'd behave like conjures and the skill 5 would consume the ashes for some significant effect (similar to how some environmental weapons have skills that consume the weapon, even if those weapons have other skills) but, basically, I'd expect ashes to have a similar mechanic to weapon conjures. Which is... _problematic_ when it comes to the revenant. Five ashes skills working in this fashion, plus weaponswap, plus legend swap is probably just too many skills on one build. Sure, an elementalist that loads up as many conjures as possible can probably still get more, but that's someone doing it deliberately just for the memes. Alternatively, there could only be one or two ashes... but in my opinion, it'd be a pale imitation of the ritualist if there's only one or two ashpots you WILL have and that's it. The revenant mechanics fundamentally block you from having the degree of customisation and the ability to fit different skills together into a build that a ritualist _should_ have. And that's without considering that, even if this did all somehow work, spirits would be locked behind a _different_ elite specialisation. You won't have a ritualist. You'd have two separate pieces of ritualist that can never be fitted together, bolted onto a melee-oriented setup (if your other legend is anything other than Ventari) or a healer (if your other legend is Ventari). Which is why I say that any genuine attempt to recreate the ritualist needs to be based off a profession that has a regular utility bar. You need to be able to have the freedom to choose all ashes (or ash substitutes), or all spirits (or spirit substitutes), or some combination of the two. Necromancer _could_ do this, especially if the death shroud replacement has a ritualistic flair - minions can stand in for mobile spirits, so the six utility skills that non-revenant elite specialisations get can go to offering a wide range of choices of ashes. And then the other ritualist skills could come out of the ashes. Togo is an idea that's been floated before, but I don't think it fits. First, because I don't think he's significant enough - his primary accomplishments are helping to defeat Shiro (we already have Shiro, and I don't think that story is powerful enough to fuel two legends) and making a peace with the Tengu that started falling apart less than a decade after his death. The second, more important, reason is that I consider it a waste of the revenant's potential to have a legend which is basically "let's pretend to be some OTHER profession". While some of the legends did have regular professions in life, all of them have some or all of their skills coming out of significant deeds they performed, not simply an echo of the skills they had in life. Shiro, probably the legend that closest resembles Shiro's own fighting style, has a mini-Jade Wind. Jalis's skills aren't the warrior skills he used in life, but are manifestations of the dwarven spirit. Ventari's skills revolve around his tablet, and Kalla's around the warband that helped her bring down the Flame Legion. So, by this precedent, a Togo legend wouldn't HAVE ritualist skills. Maybe a couple, but it would also be expected to focus on what he did. And what did he do? He taught. He made peace. We already _have_ a pacifist teacher among the legends. I understand the lore reasons why people look to revenant as the ritualist's successor, but while the two do have similar power sources, they're further apart from each other than monks and guardians. People looking to the revenant to be the successor to the ritualist will never be satisfied, because the base mechanics of the revenant mean that it will _never_ play like a ritualist. Trying... _again_... will only alienate the people who like the revenant for what it actually _is_ rather than for its imagined potential to replicate a beloved GW1 profession.

> @"Fueki.4753" said: > > @"draxynnic.3719" said: > > Of course, focus skins also have the problem that most focus skins don't look like they'd make decent conventional weapons _or_ bucklers, so I wouldn't consider dual-wielding focii to be a suitable approach either. > > With that line of thought, hardly any weapon would made a _decent conventional weapon,_ with all the over-sized skins and all the floaty parts. > I don't think real life conventions, other than "this is one-handed and this is two-handed", should be applied to fantasy games. Eh. I don't disagree that some of the skins are a bit over-the-top, but I think there's a distinction between hitting someone with a sword, even if it's a sword that's comically overlarge, held together only be magic, or overengineered to the point of being completely impractical in real life, and using something like a bell, cup, doll, scroll, or flower as your primary weapon. The focus class is pretty much a grab-bag of pretty much anything that could be held that doesn't fit into another category - the point is that while there are certainly some focuses that have a buckler-esque look which can work well if you want a 'mage knight'-esque look, I wouldn't build an elite specialisation around the idea that focuses are bucklers. I _might,_ however, see a specialisation built around the idea of daggers being defensive weapons, and give them a few skins that are essentially weaponised bucklers.

> @"Arheundel.6451" said: > > @"draxynnic.3719" said: > > > @"Yasai.3549" said: > > > They just do some wonky "AoE nerf" on everything **BUT** the problem, and leave it as is when everything has been hammered down, leaving many builds in a crippled, barely functional state. > > > > Yeah, this has been a problem going back to GW1 days. They nerf everything that _supports_ the problem rather than the problem itself, sometimes rendering those supporting states into a level where they're now _only_ useful when used to support the problem, and when they eventually grudgingly address the problem directly, the supporting skills they nerfed along the way are left in a subpar state. > > > > At least we don't have professions being nerfed because of what some _other_ profession is doing using their skills as a secondary profession > > Balance in GW1 would deserve a Nobel Prize for development compared to GW2, do remember that many core devs left Anet since then..... I don't disagree, but the point was that the tendency was still there: the GW1 balance team also had a tendency to avoid nerfing the key skill of an overperforming build, nerf all the supporting skills instead, finally admit that the key skill needs to be nerfed after all, and then leave the supporting skills with nerfs that they probably didn't deserve when considered outside of that specific overperforming build. > @"Jski.6180" said: > > Finally, we're making changes to encourage more variety in boon-based support builds. **To start, we are opening up select skills for different professions that will allow them to share boons directly with up to ten allies.** In addition, we'll be reducing which boons mesmers and their specializations can apply since chronomancer is currently stifling other options due to its ability to easily apply all boons with Signet of Inspiration. Our goal here is to give value to different professions and specializations by making them all adept at applying specific boons to their allies so that multiple professions are needed in order to cover all boons." > > Read that. To play devil's advocate, one change contradicting another could be a matter of something that they thought was a good idea at the time turning out to have negative consequences they didn't foresee. It is worth noting that, in this case, the nerf only really applies to WvW. sPvP rarely hits the limit anyway, while in PvE it was buffed to _always_ be 10-man without the need for a trait.

> @"VocalThought.9835" said: > > @"draxynnic.3719" said: > > I've seen it. I've also seen some very detailed analyses of it. > > > > One large shield is good. Two large shields tend to get in the way of attacking with either, and give you a large blind zone around you that makes it hard to defend yourself. Like I said, a lot of people who haven't trained in fighting with a large shield underestimate how much of a blind spot it can create, especially if you raise it to defend your head. With sword and shield, you can adopt a stance where the sword defends your head until you use it to strike. With two shields, you can't effectively adopt that stance (it relies on using the length of the blade to protect your head when your hand is above and behind your head). > > > > With equal skill, I wouldn't bet on someone with two shields against someone with sword and shield. I don't think I'd even bet on someone with two shields against someone with a sword alone. It might be a long fight, but the sword offers longer reach, greater agility, and a more potentially damaging attack - sooner or later the guy with a sword will find an opening or a blind spot to get a thrust in. > > > > Sure, if you've got one guy who's trained for twenty years with dual shields and another guy who's just picked up a sword for the first time, the guy with two shields could win. But like a lot of exotic weapon combinations, it's one of those situations where the guy who spends the same amount of time training with a conventional set of weapons is still going to be ahead. > > You keep saying "Large Shield" No one is suggesting a "Large Shield". I just said "Shield". Plus the game doesn't even have a shield size option like it does for Bow and Swords, so I don't know what you're referring to. Plus, when ANet introduces a new weapon to a profession, they typically create a new weapon skins, so players can always pick a skins they want, small or large, but it'll still just be a Shield. I'm using 'large shield' to distinguish from things like bucklers - something which I'd hoped would be evident from the context since I talked about weaponised bucklers in an earlier post. Broadly speaking, any shield that reaches the neck in the standard Guild Wars 2 shield stance is big enough for the observations I've made to apply... and that's the overwhelming majority of the shield skins in the game. Meanwhile, there are actually a few _focus_ skins that would make for decent fancy bucklers, like Mist Lord, Stormcaller, and Dark Wing. It's not a matter of "okay, the larger shields are large enough that trying to dual-wield them will create the problems I've described", it's that pretty much ALL of the existing shield skins are big enough to block vision, get in each other's way, and otherwise be more awkward than it's worth. Of course, focus skins also have the problem that most focus skins don't look like they'd make decent conventional weapons _or_ bucklers, so I wouldn't consider dual-wielding focii to be a suitable approach either. Closest thing I could see to 'dual shields' actually making sense would be to use _daggers,_ give them defensive skills, and have a skin that resembles weaponised bucklers. Give the profession special animations so that they wield the daggers the right way up for defensive use rather than icepick grip, similar to how thief and revenant have a special staff grip (this grip could possibly also be retroactively added to elementalists who use daggers purely as casting implements). Historically, daggers, sais, and similar weapons were often used as parrying weapons (particularly in situations where carrying large shields was impractical - a parrying dagger is easier to carry and hide than a buckler, let alone a larger shield), so the defensive skills would still make sense pretty much regardless of which dagger skin you used. And if this was done with a profession which already has a shield offhand, you could still combine it with a large shield in the off hand if you wanted to.

My general thoughts: **Warrior:** Warriors currently have a DPS-oriented spec (berserker) and a tanky/disruption oriented spec (spellbreaker). I think there's room for a 'troop commander' type spec oriented towards support. Such a spec would probably need to be balanced with the knowledge that banners are a form of support that warriors are already in high demand for, but it could be interesting to see warriors being able to take roles that are more 'banners with some additional support' than the current 'banners with an otherwise DPS-oriented build' approach. Possibly even with the potential for the warrior to forego banners to really double down on support: there's no need for warriors to be permanently limited to one per raid squad, after all. **Guardian:** Like many people, I'm hoping that Almorra might be a sign of things to come. Guardian builds at the moment are largely focused around dishing out damage in an area, and their duelling potential generally just comes from trying to keep their opponent trapped in field of bad. That aspect will probably never go away since a lot of it is coming from the core profession, but it'd be nice to see a spec that leans more towards 1v1 than throwing out lots of AoE. **Revenant:** This has been several topics on its own, but my inclination here is to point towards possible candidates for legends. Between norn, asura, and Canthan legends (and I'd personally prefer one of the first two, since there's already a Canthan legend and revenant isn't supposed to be a heavily Canthan-influenced profession), there's plenty of possible sources. One thing I definitely will say, however, is this: _Renegade is already the closest thing you've going to get to ritualist on a revenant base, stop asking. Part of what made ritualist special is the customisability and interplay between wildly different skill types. You're NEVER going to get a satisfying ritualist substitute on a profession that buys its elite skills in packs of five, and which is always going to be expected to spend about half its time using a core legend. Want a ritualist? Find the core profession that requires the least additional skills to resemble a ritualist, and give it an elite specialisation that covers the rest._ **Ranger:** I'm a little light on ranger ideas at the moment, but I am inclined to echo the idea of bringing the bunny thumper back. Possibly something similar to the scrapper and spellbreaker in being something that specialises more on durability and disruption than in straight DPS, since soulbeast seems to be the DPS option for both power and conditions. **Thief:** As much as I know some people don't like it, I think a return to Cantha is an opportunity to pull in the full breadth of magical capabilities that were available to the GW1 assassin. Time for a new weapon that can use the dual wield skill mechanic, and I think the weapon to do that is focus. This could possibly be an option to make support thief something that is no longer a meme. While I know some people prefer to keep magic out of the Thief (even if that horse clearly bolted with the core game...), I think one elite specialisation that focuses on this side of the thief is a reasonable compromise. Daredevil already focuses on the physical side, and deadeye is something of a hybrid, albeit one that focuses on ranged combat. **Engineer:** While it's not the concept I'm personally most excited for, I think the plague doctor/apothecary concept floating around is a good fit for a Canthan expansion, and would provide an elite specialisation that can really bring the support engineer build together (albeit while giving up some of the things that support scrapper currently uses). **Mesmer:** An elite spec bringing back old phantasms would be nice. There's precedent for stuff taken out of the core profession being returned through an elite specialisation (guardian tomes being the clearest example), and since the phantasm rework happened shortly after PoF released, that's not something they've had a chance to do yet. One thing they would need to do is find a solution for the problem of being disincentivised to use illusion-summoning skills once the phantasms are out. **Necromancer:** Personally, _this_ is where I'd put any elite specialisation aimed at recreating the Ritualist. Necromancers already have minions and skills that allow them to drop party support or damage in an area, so they already somewhat replicate attack spirits and aura spirits. This leaves urns and weapon spells. One of these could possibly come through spending life force, while the other could come through utility skills. Anything other than necromancer, engineer, elementalist or ranger, you would need to have summons to fill the utility slots to make something ritualist-esque, and that wouldn't leave much opportunity for other ritualist capabilities. Putting that aside (or, perhaps, making the argument that scourge shades were already the necromancer's bite at that particular apple), the big thing necromancer seems to be missing is a DPS spec that does well in organised play. Reaper is great as a self-sufficient open-world and sPvP spec, but because it achieves that through being able to self-buff a lot, it tends to suffer in organised groups with dedicated support roles. **Elementalist:** Like ranger, I'm a little light on ideas for the elementalist. What we've had so far, though, is a support spec with a secondary role in PBAoE damage, and a melee damage/tanking spec. So something that behaves a little more like a sniper might be a good fit. Let me recreate the playstyle of GW1 air builds but with all four elements - scepter is closest, but doesn't really hit the mark for me. Could be interesting to see a mechanic that rewards spending more time in an attunement (similar to what tempest did), but that might annoy the players who like attunement-switching-heavy playstyles. Actually, come to think on it, you know what could be interesting? Combine an attunement mechanic that rewards staying in an attunement for longer periods of time with a weapon that really _radically_ changes its behaviour when swapping attunements. As in, air attunement is oriented towards long-range sniping, earth attunement turns it into a melee weapon, fire attunement is a close-range area weapon, and water does something support-related most likely. Make it so that swapping attunements is actually as impactful as another profession swapping weapons, but the price is that it's impractical to change attunements as often as core elementalists and weavers do.

> @"HotDelirium.7984" said: > > > > Jormag has been talking about not being a threat, but all of its minions and actions have been pretty kitten threatening. I mean, sure, Primordus wasn't a surprise - but because of Season 3 which explicitly called them each others' weaknesses. But Jormag has a **_long_** history of not being trustworthy. > > Strategy wise its better to lose the battle to win the war. We should have gone straight to Jormag and killed it and let whatever burn, burn. Primordus is the red herring Jormag keeps deflecting to IMO. Now we have 2 Elder dragons to contend with, Aurene spread thin and once we use all our energy and resources to quell Primordus, Jormag will probly swoop in like we expect it to for "our own good" and commence covering Tyria in ice to preserve it. I think there is a degree to which, if you can only be sure about getting one down, Primordus is the one to take out for the time being. Jormag's triggered enough psychological abuse flags this episode that I think they're going to end up as a different flavour of villain rather than an antihero by the end, but there is at least still the _possibility_ that Jormag might be willing to accept some level of coexistence. Primordus, by comparison, has always been purely about destruction. We may find out, at some point, that there's some complicating factor where Primordus is concerned as well, but at the moment it's a choice between someone you can't trust, and someone you're pretty sure is planning mass destruction. Ideally you'd neutralise both, but accepting the risk of working with the first beats the world being destroyed. Could also be interesting if it turns out that what's actually going on is that Jormag and Primordus are actually one entity split into two opposite but equally malicious extremes, and what we actually need to do is find some way to merge them without killing them to bring them back into balance. Jormag is an emotionless sociopath and Primordus is the unrestrained id, but if combined they might form a balanced entity.

With respect to the Dominion forces having the power of the lost spirits: It's subtle, but if you pay attention to the dialogue from the lost spirits in the Jormag Rising chapter, they're _still corrupted._ Performing the tasks reminds them of what they _should_ be long enough for them to hold off Jormag's influence and assist you (or Braham), but they _know_ that it's only a brief respite and they're going to succumb again soon. Maybe not several times a day as the shrine events in Bjora imply, but certainly soon enough. So that's where the Dominion forces are likely getting their essence from. Despite the PC getting the Lost Spirits to act against Jormag for brief periods (or are they really? Seems everything up to now has been a Just As Planned from Jormag's perspective), they're still Jormag's thralls most of the time, with nothing stopping them from being used to empower Bangar's forces. Likely with these blessings being withheld from ex-Flame Legion Dominion because Jormag doesn't want to empower fire magic users until they're willing to switch to Frost.

Addendum: Looking at the journal entries for the current chapter, the Commander seems to see pretty much the same thing. As an additional note: Anyone else noticed the similarity between Braham sensing where the Destroyer of the Ironhammer Line was going, and how we tracked down Svanir using Wolf's blessing in GW1?

Zhaitan was the dragon of death and shadow. I'd call it reasonably close to saying that Zhaitan (alone) was the dragon of darkness. Aurene being associated with light is something that I suspect might be similar to Kormir being the goddess of Truth, while Abaddon was the god of Secrets. It's the same domain, passed from Abaddon to Kormir, but Kormir has a different take on it. Similarly, I suspect that light might have always been part of Kralkatorrik's domains, but an aspect that, in his madness, was suppressed in favour of more destructive manifestations. In short, 'Light' is a part of the sphere formerly associated with Kralkatorrik and now with Aurene, not a combination of spheres. In terms of Jormag: Jormag has been described as the 'Dragon of Persuasion', and I think Jormag's behaviour as a supposed ally in the current release shows how Jormag does that, and it's not diplomacy. In fact, it's a pretty realistic depiction of a psychological abuser. Pay attention to what Jormag says to Aurene in the first instance. It's classic 'get your victim to isolate themselves' behaviour. Your friends can't help you. I may have done bad things, but so have you and your friends, so are we really so different? Your friends are holding you back. Your friends may have succeeded thus far, but only out of luck, and that can only hold so far. _You should put your trust in me instead._ And that's without even considering Ryland negging everyone he fights beside. I'm going to hang out on a limb and guess that's coming from somewhere. Jormag's 'persuasion' seems to be coming in the form of breaking down their victim's self-confidence and confidence in their allies until they come to believe that Jormag is their only hope. Heck, this might be exactly where Bangar's belief that Aurene was a weapon to be used against him came from - while Bangar was too proud to contemplate being Jormag's servant rather than the master, his feeling of paranoia and belief that the only road to security was through Jormag seems to be part of a theme that's repeated several times. Started with Asgeir, we saw it with Bangar, and now Jormag and Ryland are trying to do it to Aurene, the Commander, and any of their allies they can get their claws into. Which could well mean we might so some or all of the Arcane Council flip before this is all over. They were already prone to isolationist paranoia beforehand, and this would give Jormag fertile ground. Heck, come to think on it, maybe THIS is the connection with Cantha. _We're not going to deal with Jormag in Tyria._ Jormag will use us to kill or distract Primordus, but a nation which is already known for its isolationist and xenophobic tendencies, and which already has an immense respect for dragons, might be a prime target for Jormag. If Jormag doesn't know about Cantha now, they certainly _will_ if the truce gives them the opportunity to learn some more human and/or tengu history. (And the tengu have been teased as being a future ally faction...)

I store most of my builds as codes on a spreadsheet, so they need suitable identifying names. Usually, I use a combination of purpose, weapon, and a traitline or two to identify them.

I've seen it. I've also seen some very detailed analyses of it. One large shield is good. Two large shields tend to get in the way of attacking with either, and give you a large blind zone around you that makes it hard to defend yourself. Like I said, a lot of people who haven't trained in fighting with a large shield underestimate how much of a blind spot it can create, especially if you raise it to defend your head. With sword and shield, you can adopt a stance where the sword defends your head until you use it to strike. With two shields, you can't effectively adopt that stance (it relies on using the length of the blade to protect your head when your hand is above and behind your head). With equal skill, I wouldn't bet on someone with two shields against someone with sword and shield. I don't think I'd even bet on someone with two shields against someone with a sword alone. It might be a long fight, but the sword offers longer reach, greater agility, and a more potentially damaging attack - sooner or later the guy with a sword will find an opening or a blind spot to get a thrust in. Sure, if you've got one guy who's trained for twenty years with dual shields and another guy who's just picked up a sword for the first time, the guy with two shields could win. But like a lot of exotic weapon combinations, it's one of those situations where the guy who spends the same amount of time training with a conventional set of weapons is still going to be ahead.

> @"JohnWater.5760" said: > > @"draxynnic.3719" said: > > > @"Opopanax.1803" said: > > > > @"Lan Deathrider.5910" said: > > > > > @"Opopanax.1803" said: > > > > > > @"VocalThought.9835" said: > > > > > > > @"Fueki.4753" said: > > > > > > > > @"Delita Silverburg.8632" said: > > > > > > > > We need a unarmed/clawed monk profession imo. > > > > > > > Maybe warrior gets another melee specialization that uses dual Foci as fist weapons. > > > > > > > Imagine punching people while dual-wielding Binding of Ipos! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dual Shields!! > > > > > > > > > > I know this is probably a joke, but I've heard the dual shield thing crop up a few times, usually in a single line like this. > > > > > > > > > > I've never understood how you could make a dual shield look good, or have good animations. > > > > > > > > > > If you want this, could you explain why? > > > > > > > > There is a Martial Arts style the uses two shields. I can't find a reference right now, but I've seen it. Think of it as more like very large metal boxing gloves attacking the the edge of the shield. > > > > > > I could see small buckler style shields for something like that. > > > > > > The problem is that most shields in game right now just seem too big for that to look good, imo. > > > > Pretty much this. People in real battles used weapon and shield, not shield and shield, for a reason. Particularly since a one-handed sword with a good guard, if used well, can protect a surprisingly large area without blocking the wielder's vision (an often overlooked problem with large shields among people who haven't actually trained with one). A one-handed sword with a good guard combined with a good-sized shield is probably the best combination you can get. Two shields... is better than a shield and a bare hand, to be sure, but risk blocking off too much of your vision and allowing the enemy to strike somewhere that isn't blocked by the shield because you can't see the blow coming. > > > > I've seen the Dark Souls dual tower shield thing. Now imagine, when the wielder does that dual plant move, the attacker just angles a sword or spear to stab down over the top of the shield. Or sidesteps and stabs the dual shield wielder in the back. In the 3rd-person-view of the game, this isn't a problem, but if it was a realistic first-person-view, what you should have on the screen when using that move is the backs of your shields and maybe a bit of sky at the top. Unless your Toph from Avatar, you have no idea what your enemy is doing. Now, if you have friends, you can form a line of shields... but if you have friends, you can do that with one shield apiece, and in your other hand you can have a spear or a sword... good for, y'know, stabbing over the top of the enemy's shield line. > > > > The only 'dual shields' I could see actually being practical would be, essentially, weaponised bucklers. Take a pair of bucklers and add blades to them, or just sharpen the edges to make a blade. You wouldn't have the reach of a sword (which is probably why, historically, bucklers were usually paired with a thin-bladed sword like a rapier or smallsword, rather than doing this), but you'd have a pair of reasonably portable weaponised bucklers that you could defend yourself with if attacked while maintaining a means of disabling your attacker. However, the end result of that would be something like the Claw of the Khan-Ur, Guild Wars 1 split chakrams, or wind and fire wheels with additional hand protection, and would probably therefore be counted as _daggers._ > > Dual Shield has the same energy as dual Scepter. > Doesn't fit GW worlds Dual scepter works better, IMO, but for three out of four professions you can get a similar effect with scepter/torch. Scepter/mace would probably also work, but none of the scepter professions currently have access to offhand mace. (For the record, none of this is to say that I support dual scepter, it's just... less bad than dual swords. And there is at least one NPC who goes dual scepter.)

> @"otto.5684" said: > @"snoow.1694" I do not agree that GS is badly designed. It works well in PvE. I know that is a bit beside the point. I and many others used to play it all the time when core guardian power was meta, and it was pretty effective. What made it work was high damage. It is easy to avoid, but so punishing if you do not. > > The point is we do not need to recreate the wheel on something that we know can be resolved in PvP by adjusting the numbers up. And we should not rework a weapon that works well in PvE. The only thing that should be reworked is removing the projectiles from GS2 and rolling them into the skill. I disagree on removing the projectiles - they're part of the flavour of the skill. What I _could_ see happening is making the projectiles start at the edge of the central hitbox, so that small hitbox targets can't be hit with both the whirl _and_ by projectiles at the same time, and therefore the whirl damaged can be balanced without assuming that the target is also eating most of the projectiles.