Doghouse.1562

> @"Dmon.2089" said:

> Can anyone else with this problem check if the achievement has disappeared from their list?

I have the same problem - only on my second rotation, but several of the chests are already visually open, and are not interactable. The achievement is visible in the achievements pane, I'm able to track it, and the chests I'm having problems with show as not yet completed. But I did the chests in a somewhat arbitrary order the first time through, so I can't say how those which I can/can't open correlate to any past activity.

> @"DeanBB.4268" said:

> As Mr. Cedo says, good luck. Anet holds their cards close, they've been burned too many times to talk about future plans until they are coming out in the near future.

>

> I'm guessing no new races, ever.

My guess as well. If I were ANet, it would be WAY down my list. It's all about income stream and manpower - if they have a choice of spending manpower on either reimplementing huge amounts of existing stuff for a new race, or adding new content, it's easy to see which is more likely to push peoples' buttons and bring in the income.

> @"Sleepwalker.1398" said:

> So every season will now have its own Portal Tome?

> Why can't they just be combined all into one?

Or at least upgraded.

Let's be real - I don't mind for a minute having to pay a premium for each new tome. I wouldn't for a minute mind paying to upgrade my existing tome to take the new scrolls. But the whole purpose of something like this is to **share it** - and that means putting it into a shared inventory slot. And whilst I don't mind paying for those either, they're limited in quantity, and I **do** somewhat take exception to having to take up an ever-increasing number of my precious slots with different versions of, basically, the same item, that I've already paid for - or being forced to decide which scrolls/tomes to share, and which to retire and not be able to use, without some work, after all.

Not clever, ANet. Sorry.

> @"Doghouse.1562" said:

> > @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > I'm guessing that this is why we'll never see build templates. ANet stands to make more money with players purchasing so many slots.

> >

> I could be the exception, but I honestly doubt that most true altoholics do it for any reason related to having different builds readily available for play (more because they can - in my early GW2 days, for example, I made a point of having at minimum a DPS and a Condi build for each profession, even if they were - frankly - rubbish on occasion). But in WoW, when I could swap builds easily, I was still an altoholic. If I was actually doing all the things that would need all those different builds, I probably wouldn't be investing so much time in new characters.

> @"kharmin.7683" said:

> I'm guessing that this is why we'll never see build templates. ANet stands to make more money with players purchasing so many slots.

>

I could be the exception, but I honestly doubt that most true altoholics do it for any reason related to having different builds available (other than, perhaps, because they can - in my early GW2 days, for example, I made a point of having at minimum a DPS and a Condi build for each profession, even if they were - frankly - rubbish on occasion). But in WoW, when I could swap builds easily, I was still an altoholic. If I was actually doing all the things that would need all those different builds, I probably wouldn't be investing so much time in new characters.

(deleted duplicate post)

> @"Danikat.8537" said:

> Maybe you don't care what your character gets called, maybe a lot of people don't care, but clearly some people do care - enough to ask for it to be changed. (And no, this is not the first time this has come up.)

>

Yes, I care what my character is called. Up to a point. But it's not, honestly, a big deal. Plus I worked in a development environment for two decades, and it's simply not something I see happening at this stage. If someone had suggested it during design, maybe - but, however much you ask, however many times, not now. Not only would this be a purely cosmetic (and rather obscure) change that, in my opinion at least, most people would be frankly indifferent about, but it's probably deeply embedded in **way** too much code for it to be trivial. It's certainly not something I could ever envisage ANet targeting as a feature for a future patch. And on the pragmatic level, not only could it could easily be significant effort, but also it would be wasted effort, because it would bring them in precisely **zero** extra revenue unless they made it something purchasable, whilst diverting manpower from other work - and, at the end of the day, ANet are a business, not a charity. So it's the sort of feature that, at best, someone might decide to just casually investigate the next time they have the appropriate piece of code open - and consider doing if and only if it turns out to be a couple of lines of code at most and absolutely trivial. Otherwise, the investment in time and effort (including testing) is ludicrously out of proportion to the payback, and simply isn't worth the candle. And frankly, too, there are many other more useful things I suspect that the broad community would rather see ANet do first - such as extra content to keep this ageing game that we all enjoy alive. If that means putting up with sub-optimal naming, most people are likely to be way more than happy.

> Names get into interesting territory. My grandfather's first and last names were valid names in 'the old country' but his last name got changed at Ellis Island to 'americanize' it. While his first name was not legally changed most people called him a common english name so his name on most paperwork would have been unrecognizable as one of their descendants if he had the ability to talk to his ancestors a few generations back. Basically my point is names are strange.

>

And technically, here in the UK, your name is, basically - whatever you're called. "The artist formerly known as Prince" would have fitted right in. Common Law still holds. Want to change your name? Start insisting on being called something else. Job done. The need to prove that you are who you claim to be, for the purposes of bank accounts, passports and so on, has moved us more in the general direction of a "legal" name than at one time - but we don't actually have one, let alone a formal prescription of how that name should be structured. It's all, in the end, convention. Even the well-known (here) "changed his name by Deed Poll" is actually just about a more formal way of telling everyone that you've decided to be called something else.

> @"Menadena.7482" said:

> > @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said:

> > How will the game know what is a surname and how will it handle other name? Let’s say a char is named Frivolous Nancy. Will the NPC call her Frivolous? What if the char is named I like To Ride Mounts. What will the NPC call that char?

>

> Exactly, plus in some cultures the surname comes first. You would need to designate a full name and a shortened name. Plus to make the most sense the shortened name may not always be exactly your 'first' name. William Tell maybe having a shortened name of Bill for example.

And some cultures don't have surnames at all. Myanmar, for example. Or - take that well-known pacifist and philanthropist, Gaius Julius Caesar. He's something akin to "Gaius of the Caesarian family from the Julian clan". In fact, "Julius Caesar" is as near as he comes to having a surname as we'd recognise it.

> @"Renegade.6240" said:

> I like rolling characters with surnames instead of just one name (I think it's OK with the Sylvari and the Asura to roll just one name though, lorewise) but I really don't like the fact that some NPCs who are supposed to be my besties call me with my surname too.

> Can't you add an optional surname mechanic, so the when you talk to NPCs they will call you only by your first name but your character will show his/her surname above their beautiful heads. LOTRO does this well ^^

I understand where you're coming from, up to a point - when I rolled a Human Character and did the PS chapter "Ashes of the Past", there's a point where you can read a gravestone with the inscription: "Three joys gave his life meaning: his wife, his country, and above all, his child. May the gods bless and protect our beloved ((Montgomery Simpson, or whoever))." And having "my" parent supposedly talking about "me" by "my" full name jarred, and felt downright weird.

It's not going to happen - WAY too much investment for something basically cosmetic at this point. Heavens, we don't even get to permanently name our ranger pets. But it's interesting to thing about. Probably the easiest solution would be to allow characters to have a unique character name field, and then a second name field to be used in dialogues, rather than trying to work out whether or not the character actually has a surname, and if so, what it is. But it's definitely non-trivial, because *names* are non-trivial.

Read [the following article](https://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/06/17/falsehoods-programmers-believe-about-names/ "https://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/06/17/falsehoods-programmers-believe-about-names/") if you think names are easy - the list of common, but false, assumptions is... instructive. And if you get bored - at least skip to number 40.

> @"Echoherb.6528" said:

> I can't conceive of how someone can have that many characters. How do you even decide which one to log into?

Can't speak for the OP, but in my case it's whatever characters I'm levelling, and then down to what I'd trying to do. I have go-to mains I enjoy playing; I have a few of varying professions I regularly play as utility characters when I'm on with RL friends, that come out according to need; I have crafting toons; I have some that, in all honesty, are mostly just there because they're a combination I was lacking (I almost never bring out my rangers from choice, for example). And whilst all of my L80s are equipped for at least PoF content to a basic level, some are better-equipped than others. So dailies tend to get done on whoever's most useful in context (often a mesmer if there's a JP involved); new content tends to start on my "cheat mode" necro's; joint sessions according to what we're planning to do, and what other classes will be there. Other content (when I do it - I spend most of my time in solo PvE) according to need. And the rest of the time - it's probably my latest character, until until I've filled out both of their elite specs.

(I have a spreadsheet of who's done what. It's not always perfectly correct, but it's reasonably comprehensive in terms of who's done what stories and been where. I can say fairly confidently that I've likely done all of the different PS episodes once or twice, for instance - when I have to make a choice, I go look at which ones I've done least so far. And when I fancy a change, I often go look at that sheet and fill in a few of the boxes. I could spend months extending my map and story completions if I wanted to, for example.)

> @"archive.8406" said:

> Hello Anet & fellow GW2 players!

>

> I am back with a similar request I made sometime last year, as I am still hopeful this will happen. I am a complete alt-o-holic, and I am looking to reach a cap that will make my collection of characters complete. Last time I made a thread about this subject, someone proposed bumping the character limit to 90 - giving the possibility for every race/gender/profession combination. This would be absolutely perfect, and I would be so grateful to have those extra 20 slots!

>

> I have been told just to make a second account so I can create more, but I would prefer to keep everything on the same account I have put so much into, and anything over 90 I think would be too much (I hope...). Creating new characters have always been a passion of mine, and making complete sets is satisfying, but currently I am 2 slots short of having my full 8 sets of every profession.

>

I have 45 toons, spread across 2 accounts (two race/profession combo's missing as yet, with a couple of duplicate mesmers I needed for utility at one point). Having 2 accounts is actually quite useful at times - I double-head my monitors, and most days I run a copy of the game on both for a short while at least. And there are definitely situations where it's really useful to be able to party up with yourself, and give yourself a helping hand (so to speak). The down side is account-bound stuff, obviously (gems are a pain; I like to buy when they're low and build up a stock, but 2 ccounts mean I have to plan ahead more for what I'm going to spend on) and the occasional double hit when ANet launch something new or useful. Overall, I think it's worth it - but I wouldn't go to a third one.

What **I'd** like would be the chance to tell ANet "These two accounts are both mine - treat them as one for account-bound purposes." But I don't see that happening (and I can see plenty of reasons why it won't).

> @"RoseofGilead.8907" said:

> > @"yoni.7015" said:

> > The statement doesn’t say anything :-1:

>

> It said that the episode is close to being ready, that they are fixing up some issues that popped up, and that the trailer will come once those issues are handled. That says plenty.

Actually - it depends on whether you view it as: the devs factually and impartially bringing you up to speed; Anet management placating the player base with an upbeat holding position; or some combination of the two. "Discovered issues" and "the last few details" mean nothing unless you're on the inside and know how big those issues are, and how long they actually expect it to take.

(ANet have mostly been pretty open on such things, historically, so I tend more towards the first or last, rather than the middle one - but then again, I worked in software development for a multinational for decades, and I have a healthy cynical edge as well. Basically, the only release date you can believe is the one that happens.)

*Edit: And Anet have now announced that LWS4 will continue as of next week. So - academic, really.*

> @"Dennis.6952" said:

> I've watched a couple of Youtube videos and the one that seems to provided the best guidance had three in a party to complete. Also appeared that the helpers knew the location of the chests, which would help immensely.

As I recall one of the NPCs will/can put flags on your map showing where they all are, which makes it pretty simple.

* Way too much unskippable exposition dialogue, throughout.

* Too many mobs with wide pathing and/or aggro radius out in the wild. Being near-unable to find anywhere to stop for a few seconds and have a RL break was very frustrating. I shouldn't have to die (or leave the map) every time my phone rings.

* Needs decent metas. Unlike HoT, beyond levelling alts there's no real incentive for me to go back.

* Too many story points where instance boundaries and sizes shifted without warning. Not a problem when you're doing content solo, but we "lost" party members on multiple occasions because the active instance suddenly changed size and then kicked them. **Very** annoying when you're trying to play together.

* Tuning/content when doing the PS in group, in general. GW2 never seems to be able to make up its mind about groups in PS, or find that right "middle ground". On the one hand, we've had instances in the past that absolutely demanded groups (original version of the final episode of the basic PS; final episode of HoT). On the other hand, at the opposite extreme, PoF in particular brought us **way** too many stories where there was effectively nothing of significance for players other than the instance owner to do. There's a happy medium somewhere between the two - but trying to find it always seems to be an afterthought, for some later patch, if it gets any attention at all (by which time, I'm sure it's too late for most people likely to be affected).

And two specifics.

1) The first fight in "The Departing" is OK the very first time you do the content - but it's simply an annoying, unnecessary and counter-productive grind after that.

>! Basically, the story as it stands requires you to **almost** win the fight, before snatching that away from you. Dramatic when you don't know it's coming - if somewhat contrived - but once you've done it once, any dramatic impact and story need is gone; all that's left is an extremely annoying grind, that you're forced to complete in the way that the game wants things to go before it will let you progress. You **know** that you're going to lose the fight, and die - but not only will the game not let you, it's going to actively prevent it. *"You **will** die on script, and **not** before."* Downed for the 27th time? Balthazar still on 86% health? Tough. *"Get back up and fight, you pathetic little excuse for a hero!"* So - especially if you're not on a particularly strong character - you've got to slog on, and on, and on, until you finally get Balthazar down to his last few percent - and only **then** have "victory" snatched away. And let's be clear - this is to **start** the story. The **important** story point is that Balthazar kills you - not that you "almost" beat him, or that he could clearly have killed you at any time but wouldn't let you die until that point; frankly, that's window-dressing, and it loses any point after a single play-through. Beyond the simple fact of your death, the fight is a mere gating event for the real meat of the story, which is that you actually manage to come **back** from the dead. **Really** annoying. If you're being repeatedly downed, the game should recognise the fact, have Balthazar kill you, and let you move on.

I've done "The Departing" four times now, and that's already at least two too many. Once was on mains on each of two accounts; a third, effectively spectating, in a group with a friend leading who couldn't then manage the final fight in the story (not his fault; the fight mechanics meant that the group was actively making it harder for him, something we didn't understand until after); the fourth immediately after, with the same friend in "my" copy of the instance, to get him to story completion. By the final one I was beginning to lose the will to live, and seriously considered not bothering; it was only because of the circumstance that I kept going. It's hard to imagine choosing to go back and do it again solo of my volition.

2) I didn't like having the two big story instances at the end "back to back" in the way that they were. Whilst I can see why it was might have been chosen to be implemented that way, doing them in a group with friends *(see previous point, above)*, we didn't get any obvious chance to swap the player in control of the instance. I'd taken the lead through the first part, having done it before, after a couple of failures where we lost players yet again to changing instance boundaries *(see previous... ...well, you get my drift)*; having successfully got through, though, everyone was then left with me in charge again for the final part - which was neither what we'd planned, nor (after the event) what I would have preferred. A couple of people definitely ended up with the feeling of having been "carried" through the story, which was a pity.

> @"battledrone.8315" said:

> lol...so i spent the last 17 years in the wrong genre?

> my first mmo was a hardcore sandbox title. earth&beyond..that withered and died

> second was wow..even had full PVP gear on my main toons

> city of heroes, perfect world, aion ,tera, STO ,SWTOR ,APB , WoT, WoWS,FF ARR..and thats just the big ones

> i know good gaming when i see it

> and those stories are ruining the game

Hey - *you're* the one complaining that you can't get through content that's been pretty much the same for 5 years, and that most of 11 million players seem perfectly happy with. OK, "wrong genre" doesn't apply in your case - but you're certainly dragging *some* sort of baggage with you, that's stopping you getting to grips with even the basics of this particular game. Perhaps you should take a look at you assumptions, and see which ones are flawed.

(I won't say more than that - like I said - I wasn't trying to have an argument, simply make a few points.)

> @"battledrone.8315" said:

> > @"Coulter.2315" said:

> > Every single instance is designed to be solo'd, you might need to look at your setup, playstyle and build. Have you bound your dodge key? Have you bound all important skills to easy to use keys? Are you using level appropriate weapons? Have you looked at all weapons, traits and utility skills to help you?

>

> i used the skills and build i felt comfortable with, if i cant do that, then there is no real purpose in playing

> if some builds arent good enough, then it is horrible design ,and they should mark those builds as unsuited for endgame

> i see where this is going , i had the same argument on SWTOR forums

> ill just get my fun somewhere else

>

I don't see it as an argument, but I feel I should make a point about your position, games in general, and GW2 in particular.

Having all content do-able by any build a player slaps together is an approach that's appropriate (and necessary) for games where a player's build choices are permanent or long-lasting (it's usually balanced by placing an emphasis on equipment, to allow players to compensate for the most egregious errors). GW2, by contrast, is the exact opposite - a game where player can fully respec on a whim. Within the limits of the skills you know, you can reset your build at any time, and the further you progress into the game as you progress, the wider those limits become, until by level 80 you have access to every possible build within the original game.

In the original Guild Wars, a huge part of making progress in the game was making sure you equipped appropriate skills before leaving the cities and entering the instanced content - and as you progressed through the game, the "right" skills were, increasingly, elite ones that you had to actually go out and adventure to acquire. Guild Wars 2 hasn't made quite such a big deal of skills, but it definitely shares that basic ethos with its predecessor. You have a raft of skills (some now called "specializations"), each of which has its pluses and minuses, and many of them will be useful in some situations and not others. And - whether you like it or not - the game is still, at its heart, designed around an assumption that players will make at least some attempt to find a build that's at least vaguely suitable to the content they're doing. Your choices are much wider than they were with GW, and lots more will work - but whenever you have a choice of what build to run, there will always be ones that are out-and-out **bad**, and you need to recognise that. ("They" aren't going to mark builds as such - what works and what doesn't shifts over time as the game is tuned, and it's us players who, ultimately, find out what works and what doesn't. If you want opinions, read the forums; maybe post a build there.) But when all specs are available to everyone, the alternative, frankly, is content that's so lacking in challenge that most people are complaining about how "easy" the game is - and if that's the sort of game you're looking for you, then (a) GW2 isn't it, and (b) I seriously wonder what MMO is - or who would publish it and expect to make money.

My suggestion would be two-fold.

1. Loosen up a bit, and give a different spec a try. My experience is that modest tweaks to my build rarely make a difference to my play style - but they can make a big difference to how well my character copes with content.

2. Take a good hard look at the professions, and consider whether you're actually playing the right one. Ignoring profession "titles", they have a wide range of "feels" about them, and some are way more suited to some play styles than others. It may simply be that you're trying to fit a square peg into a round hole, and a different profession would fit the way that you want to play much better.

(That doesn't mean to say that there haven't been times when some types of builds for some professions have been out-and-out poorly served - where, say, you wanted to play a particular profession with a condition-damage build, but there really wasn't one available that worked. Such things are are rarely deliberate on the part of the developers, but they do happen, in any game - it's not a problem unique to GW2. But tbh - and this is a purely personal viewpoint - if you **really** feel that you ought to be able to slide through the content with any profession, any old build, any old equipment, any old play-style - then, yes, you're probably playing the wrong game. Maybe even the wrong genre entirely.)

*Edit: There's also the other big difference between, say, WoW and GW2. No "Holy Trinity". Which means that there are some basics of plays tyle that you can't ignore. You need to take responsibility for some sort of healing; some sort of condition removal; some sort of damage delivery; some sort of damage reduction. And that places a big emphasis on movement. If you think that, say, you can just put on the best armour you can currently afford, and go slug it out with whatever comes - you're going to die.*

> @"Tomoko.4071" said:

> I hate to be that guy but as a new player, I am unable to even finish the vanilla story chain, let a lone the new expansions. I bought all the new content, excited and ready to dive into it, found out all the content is designed for groups, but as a new player I can't find any groups or parties. I've been through four guilds and had to leave every single one because of toxic members and trolling. I really want to play this game but I'm sick of sitting around major cities, posting in map chat and getting ZERO response outside of people trolling me or heckling me for asking in map chat. This community is garbage, making this game not new player friendly. If anyone is lurking the forums to think about buying this game don't buy it unless you already know people playing. New players are not welcome here.

Are you sure that you and I are playing the same game? I really don't recognise your description. Especially regarding attitude to new players - GW2 has its share of idiots like any game, but the community is largely the most welcoming, helpful and tolerant that I've experienced.

Firstly - **if you're in need of a group, DON'T sit in a city posting in map chat**. That may be what you did in *Another Game * - it's what I remember from GW, even - but **that's not how GW2 works**. GW2 has a decent LFG tool (default key binding "Y") that everyone uses. Very few people sitting around in a city are likely to be there waiting for someone to invite them to do something out in the open world - let alone help someone out with their Personal Story - so you shouldn't be entirely surprised that the vast majority of responses you've been getting are heckles from the more moronic portion of the community.

Secondly - I don't know why you're struggling, but **the vanilla Personal Story is most definitely NOT designed for groups** anyway. On the contrary. Solo PvE is almost the only mode I ever play in, and I've fully competed the PS 8 times, on 7 different professions. The only parts that have ever remotely required grouping up have been (a) historically, the final episode ("Victory or Death") - which USED to be tuned for 5 players, but was retuned and reworked for a solo player when Heart of Thorns launched, and (b) the (purely optional) story dungeons (if you want to do **them**, use the LFG tool, and make sure you go for "story mode" - see above). And above that I have a further 12 characters (including the final 2 professions) who have done everything except that final episode - because they got that far before it was retuned and I've been too busy doing other things to go back and finish it. Beyond that - some paths through the final sections of the story get maybe a **little** more challenging for some professions and builds, but certainly there's nothing there that a character with merely moderate gear and a so-so spec shouldn't be able to handle. *(I'm an alt-oholic; I have 45 characters to date, including 41 level 80s; I keep detailed records. It's the only way to stay on top of all of them.)*

If you want to breeze through your PS, and levelling in general, I'd suggest a couple of things.

1. **Have a build in mind**, and don't spend HPs frivolously. Ideally, each time you unlock the chance to have a new Specialisation (levels 21, 45 and 71) , you want to be in a position to pick one that will help you and train all of it. You almost certainly won't be able to do that for the first unlock - but you can go quite a long way towards it. For my part, if that means my running around at lower levels with mere racial skills in my utility slots - that's what I do. (If you want ideas for a build, go look at, say, the "Fractal" section of your profession on Metabattle.com, and pick a damage build; it won't be perfect for your needs - and it will probably use skills that are more party-oriented than you need - but it will be way better than nothing. The key is to have something vaguely reasonable to aim at, and to steer you. And you needn't be concerned that you're locking yourself in to a build you won't want, because as you level you'll increasingly have the points to let you respec to any build that takes your fancy).

2. **Keep your gear up to date** . It's no good running around at level 40 in kit that you picked up at level 5 and expecting to find things easy. What stats you have on your gear is probably not vitally important, but something broadly aiming towards whatever the spec needs won't take you far wrong. But don't spend over the top; Anything more than Masterwork gear (green) is more than you'll need for most purposes. Similarly, runes and sigils; buy them if you want, but for most PvE levelling and Story purposes they won't make enough difference to be worth bothering about.

3. Even though you've already been playing, **find a Beginner's Guide** or two and read/watch them. If you're struggling in lower-level PS episodes, you're missing something basic; don't be too proud to try to find out what it might be. (I had to explain to a friend running a new Ranger, for example, that there's no "white" damage in GW2, and bounce him out of a mindset that saw "short bow" and "long bow" as basically the same thing - because "weapon types" *( all of them, including things that don't necessarily feel like "weapons" - such as torches and war horns)* are basically just labels for packets of spells. So rather than what seemed obvious to him - a sword for damage and whatever bow he could get his hands on for ranged damage - what he needed was to look at the spells each weapon type gave him, and choose whatever best suited his needs and play style.)

I can't speak for guilds; I've been in a couple of decent ones, but it doesn't suit my solo play style, and right now I don't belong to one worth the name (I have a couple of my own for storage purposes, but that's different). All I can say is that I'd do the legwork to research them before joining, and make sure that they were receptive to new, inexperienced players.

> @Kapax.3801 said:

> Three pillars, and each one has different "sub pillars"

Possibly, but Ohoni's analysis of the state of PvE splits things along a very real and important fracture line.

There's open world PvE, plus (most) story, that people can and do play solo, or with a few friends and such people as they bump into along the way.

And there's the rest (raids, fractals, dungeons), that demand the right number of players, a definite level of gear and specs, and more organised, disciplined groups and play.

I know of plenty of people (myself included, obviously) who do the first whilst rarely, or even never, dipping into the second. And whilst it's less important to the mode of play, when it comes to things like gear and spec's, we're rarely recognised. So, for example, gear we might quite like to get our hands on, is pretty much locked behind multi-player content we're almost certain never to do. And, yes, as one of that group, I feel precisely as described about the new PoF elites - mostly a big "(meh...)". I'm an altoholic, but there's precious little in there, in any of the latest elites, of any use or interest to me in the game as I play it.

Sure, I don't **need** new elites; but - you know what? I'd like to have some fun with new ways of doing things as well, rather than watching yet another set of niche specs get handed out to the PvP and raid players.

_Re that "(most) story", above:_

I'm thinking about the finales of the base story and of HoT, of course, where I took exception to being exepected to do it in a party. I won't group with random strangers to get me through "my" story. It's **mine**, and I want to be able to solo it. I am, at most, prepared to do it with RL friends. So I didn't complete the base PS at all until they nerfed it to a level that could be solo'd, whilst I've completed the final chapter of HoT exactly **once** (with friends).

> @FANY.6524 said:

> **Spoilers. I mean, obviously, but you know... Precautions. **

>

> For those wanting to bring party members, it won't help. They'll be turned into little kitten of spirit light with few abilities and none are particularly helpful.

>

Sorry I'm late to the party too, but - it's worse than "won't help"; if they stay close to him in this fight - spamming the pathetic skills they're allowed, thinking they're helping - he'll take every chance he gets to heal off them instead. And (nerf not withstanding), you'll NEVER get him down. Any party members should just keep well away during this fight, and let the main character get on with it.

> @"Kaltyn of Torbins Deep.2946" said:

> Was running around Elon Riverlands last night on my mesmer. Completed the heart at the skimmer ranch and bought a bunch of skimmer treats, but when I tried to consume one (while sitting on the skimmer), I received the message that I couldn't consume it while in combat or right after consuming one. I did the story, and unlocked the mounts and treats, on my warrior, not my mesmer. Just doing map completion on the mes. I tried in several spots on the map, was never in combat when I tried and never was able to eat the treat. Was able to consume a springer treat, but not the skimmer. Anyone else have a similar issue? I have not tried it on my warrior or in a different map yet.

I haven't used treats all that often (only when building XP to spend MPs), but I've quite often received that message shortly after swapping to a mount. So far I've found that, if I wait a few seconds and try again, and repeat as necessary, it has always cleared within two or three attempts (YMMV, of course).

> @Teratus.2859 said:

> I had nowhere near the same trouble..

>

> Ran the whole story through and explored almost all of the new map in several hours with a glass cannon ranger.

> I don't think I died once during the story instances..

>

> I play a mix of Range and melee though.. I can understand your trouble if you are playing purely melee..

I was mostly trying to stay out of melee range, but there *were* points where the temptation to get in close and unload my necros' shroud damage skills got too strong - and, especially against the various bosses, it was usually a mistake. (Plus the "mere" veteran mobs seemed quite tough compared to even those in the PoF maps - which themselves seemed a step up on previous stuff. I rather hope this isn't the beginning of a march to make the game ever more challenging - that's good for dedicated and committed players, but not so good for keeping a good base of casuals, and it was that, in the end, that finally stopped me playing GW.)

As I said earlier in the thread, in different words - having done them a couple of times now, I felt that the story instances were tuned somewhat toward raw damage output, with decent AoE damage sometimes being highly desirable as well, rather than (say) a build with more survivability but a slower damage profile. Just my opinion/reaction, of course - but I've no doubt that a glass cannon could undoubtedly cut it, if it mostly kept out of the heavy damage zones.

Although for me, figuring out the "best" way to handle a couple of the fights helped a lot (in one case, it was nothing more complex than putting a target on the boss; in the last fight, it was simply knowing what the **heck** to do!). And there were times, too, when deciding which attacks to try and dodge, and which to simply suck up, also seemed more important than usual - too many times I'd dodge repeatedly through what proved to be a a fairly innocuous string of attacks - only to not then have the energy to avoid some much bigger, shortly after. I'd learn as the fight progressed, of course - but the first time in particular, I suffered quite a bit because of that.

> @Cryshal.4036 said:

> Not all of us are as young and/or agile as the players who run through all of the game content with no problems.

Don't sell us wrinklies short; I'm retired with grandchildren myself. :) I manage OK. Sure, some of the younger PvP guys would undoubtedly hand me my posterior on a plate, if I gave them the chance - but outside of that, keeping your head and your wits about you is at least as important as mere trivia like raw reaction time. Although I'd recommend anyone to get a gaming mouse, if they don't have one - not having to find the right key or mouse-click the right icon is a real plus.

> @Doghouse.1562 said:

> > @Cryshal.4036 said:

> > Maybe it wasn't Daybreak. I'm confused.

> >

>

> Yeah, it was *Daybreak*. I thought that first wretched instance was not only overly long and repetitive, but freakin' HARD.

>

> I was in there on my "easy mode" Necro, and the last battle felt more like an end-of-finale boss fight than the introduction to a new swathe of content. I didn't actually die, but I came close - and I lost track of the number of times that all that kept me alive was Life Leech (Necro downed skill 1). I felt really put off. I'll stick at it, but I'm frankly not looking forward to what else is waiting in the rest of the LS. And I'm absolutely dreading trying to take some of my other, less well-geared characters into the content; I can well imagine taking 2 hours or more.

I don't know whether it's been retuned - possible - but I Just did it again, with another Necro (similar spec; condi minion-master/reaper, but rather less well geared) and the whole thing went **much** smoother. Perhaps I was simply better prepared for what was coming; perhaps I was more awake. I don't **think** I was ever actually downed even (which, considering my necro's do more damage in that state, and I sometimes deliberately let it happen when I'm low on health and shroud - just so that I can DPS hard back to my feet **and** bounce back healthier than I went down - is a statement in itself).

Although I do think that not only that instance but pretty much all of them in LWS4 are rather over-tuned towards raw damage, be it DPS or condition, for my liking. I've definitely got other L80s that I think are likely to struggle unless I respec for the occasion.

> @Danikat.8537 said:

> As for why he's so often naked there's a variety of reasons in-game. In Southsun he was on holiday on the beach, in HoT I think he lost or damaged his clothes in the crash and then decided he was going to live off the land and dress kind of like the hylek. And at the end of PoF he's apparently working on his tan...at night...inside. He's not the brightest bulb in the box. I get the impression someone at Anet thinks he's attractive and wants excuses to show him off.

I always thought of him as a running gag.

Plus he's genuinely a nice guy - delusional, sure, but as brave, loyal, honest and well-intentioned as the day is long. He'll never be a major character, because he's just too good as he is to have to add more depth to - and perhaps have to kill off - but he'll doubtless keep popping up to lend his own peculiar brand of "support" when he's least expected. There will always be a place for Lord Faren; without him, the game would be that little bit a poorer place.

As for the true motivation for his modes of dress - indeed.

"I see you've managed to get your shirt off." - Alexander Dane (Alan Rickman), "Galaxy Quest".