Rashagar.8349
-
Posts
264 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Articles
Gallery
Posts posted by Rashagar.8349
-
-
They're still on my to do list. I'll probably never actually get around to getting them, because there are so many other things also on my to do list, but maybe eventually since I do really like the skins. Could never stand the area though so I'm looking forward to trying some of the suggested methods for reducing grind.
-
Unfortunately I spent the last of my gems already, so if this does happen I probably won't be able to afford them, but I still really hope to own them at some point.
-
Lily of the Elon, copperfed, mystic salvage kit, a tonic slot, teleport to friends and the LS3 portal tome are what are in mine right now, though I just bought an extra 5 yesterday with the last of my PoF gems and don't know what will end up in them yet.
-
> @"ZeftheWicked.3076" said:
> Whoa there, not so fast!
>
>
> You said jack of all trades, right? Well there here's a celestial based renegade for you. You can do condi + power damage (kalla's fervor gets crit damage surprisingly high for a celestial build). Thanks to 33% free crit when endurance full you get high enough crit rate to matter in power setting. And thanks to trait enchanced F2 skill combined with mace's fire field blasting and sword's #3 might generation you won't be running low on might in your fights.
>
> Also stuck you some defense in there with retribution line - a new and upcoming rev needs that line like oxygen, especially if they're not the tanky herald, but much more offensive renegade.
Have to admit that does look fun. Not a rune choice I would have anticipated either.
-
I went for human with mine because the heavy lore tie ins were the only way I was going to have fun playing a human when Norn and Sylvari are options.
I do wonder if the asura dodge animations look even better on a revenant though. And their cultural heavy armour is great.
-
I'm usually drawn to support type roles. I don't need to get the big numbers myself but facilitating someone else's kills is very satisfying. I tend to favour ranged play so I can keep an easier tab on the flow of a battle, diving in to get a res off or apply extra pressure where needed.
-
I definitely want more SAB time, but I think I'm still in favour of it being a seasonal thing. The problem for me is I've missed the last few festivals in game and while I definitely don't want to miss this next SAB, it's not something that's entirely inside my control.
-
I've been in two minds about whether or not to get them, but all these pics of alternative colour schemes are really helping me decide to treat myself =)
So thanks all for the great pics and I hope more people continue to share screen shots.
Off hand, does anyone know how long the cheaper price is available for?
-
> @"Haematic.4913" said:
> The duration(s) are very short for shared allies and although you can utilize the current duration(s) in very tight pockets, the ranger is left with an extremely long stance duration which places the rest of the party at an extreme disadvantage.
I know I'm a bit late to the party but do you mind explaining what the "extreme disadvantage" you're talking about is? I didn't quite follow the logical flow of this point.
-
> @"Oglaf.1074" said:
> > @"Rashagar.8349" said:
> > > > @"Rashagar.8349" said:
> > > > That's a perfect example, thank you.
> > >
> > > Sure, if we move the goalpost it is.
> >
> > The goal post you're suddenly interested in is
>
> Uhm. Yes? I'm the one who made this thread in the first place. So. Yeah.
>
> > @"Rashagar.8349" said:
> > And I'm happy to give it a rest if you are, but statistics don't work like you think they do.
>
> Nor the way you seeem to think they do. Or do you believe in the whole "Hundreds monkeys and a hundred type writers"-trope, too?
>
> But yes, I am more than happy to let this idiotic derailment end.
>
>
>
>
>
I'm just going to tell myself that this whole thing is down to a miscommunication caused by a language barrier haha! =D
Though I really can't see how I could have been more clear.
Regardless, this whole baffling "argument" from you doesn't change the fact that I wish you luck in your support ticket and future endeavours.
-
> > @"Rashagar.8349" said:
> > That's a perfect example, thank you.
>
> Sure, if we move the goalpost it is.
The goal post you're suddenly interested in is
> @"Umut.5471" said:
> What if it's a cool word in another language but a bad word in Swedish?
So how is it not a perfect example?
> @"Oglaf.1074" said:
>Just give it a rest already - languages don't work like you think they do.
And I'm happy to give it a rest if you are, but statistics don't work like you think they do.
-
> @"Oglaf.1074" said:
> > @"Rashagar.8349" said:
> > > @"Oglaf.1074" said:
> > > It is not a "belief" when it is based on facts.
> > >
> > > Maybe you should, y'know, just trust the native Swedish speaker on this?
> >
> > I've already said that I'm not distrusting you regarding your interpretation of the name you saw.
> >
> > But let's take Ö for an example. A fact (taken from wikipedia, apologies) is that it's also used in the alphabets of German, Icelandic, Finnish, Karelian, Veps, Estonian, Southern Sami, Hungarian, Azeri, Turkish, Turkmen, Uyghur (Latin script), Crimean Tatar, Kazakh (Latin script), and in the Uto-Aztecan language Hopi. So if you were a native Swedish speaker as well as being a native speaker of all those above languages, and fluent in the nuances of slang from all the regions that those languages encompass, then I could begin to believe your "fact" that it is literally impossible for a Swedish curse word to also be something cool in a different language.
> > But my suspension of disbelief can't stretch that far.
>
> Yes but how many languages do you think have that same letter, in the same word, as a Swedish curse word/derogatory term?
>
> There's just no chance of that happening, ever. The very notion is laughable.
Well for one the probability of it happening would probably be proportional to the length of the word in question. There are only so many combinations of vowels and consonants available (less when you take ease of pronunciation into account), so the likelihood of overlap between languages when using a common alphabet is fairly decent at smaller word sizes.
> @"Tycko Larsson.7829" said:
> Well the Spanish word fore time (hora) is a realy bad word in Swedish. So thats is one example.
That's a perfect example, thank you.
-
> @"Oglaf.1074" said:
> It is not a "belief" when it is based on facts.
>
> Maybe you should, y'know, just trust the native Swedish speaker on this?
I've already said that I'm not distrusting you regarding your interpretation of the name you saw.
But let's take Ö for an example. A fact (taken from wikipedia, apologies) is that it's also used in the alphabets of German, Icelandic, Finnish, Karelian, Veps, Estonian, Southern Sami, Hungarian, Azeri, Turkish, Turkmen, Uyghur (Latin script), Crimean Tatar, Kazakh (Latin script), and in the Uto-Aztecan language Hopi. So if you were a native Swedish speaker as well as being a native speaker of all those above languages, and fluent in the nuances of slang from all the regions that those languages encompass, then I could begin to believe your "fact" that it is literally impossible for a Swedish curse word to also be something cool in a different language.
But my suspension of disbelief can't stretch that far.
-
> @"Oglaf.1074" said:
> > @"Rashagar.8349" said:
> > > @"Oglaf.1074" said:
> > > > @"Umut.5471" said:
> > > > What if it's a cool word in another language but a bad word in Swedish?
> > >
> > > That’s literally not a possibility.
> > >
> >
> > ... because Swedish can't be cool?...
> >
> > =P
> >
> > *Edit
> > I realise now that you probably meant "it's not a possibility in this particular instance" rather than "ever" but you got me really curious trying to figure out what possible spelling quirk all Swedish curse words could have in common with each other that they would definitely never share with any other language's words haha!
>
> The “quirk” are the Swedish letters Å, Ä and Ö. They’re very hard, gutteral-sounding letters and as such many “naughty” words end up with them.
>
> The odds of another language using a Swedish curse word or derogatory term for something “cool” are slim to null as a result. It ain’t happening
Hmm, I mean I wouldn't be so sure. Especially when you take slang into account, and spelling/pronunciation variations across regions, (and as a more tongue-in-cheek example, non-Swedish speakers using an Å instead of an A because they really want the name Aragorn but it was already taken or something). You might be surprised at how innocent some examples could be like.
Either way, I hope you understand that I'm not saying you were wrong to make a report/support ticket about it, and I'm not doubting your assessment of the original name that began this discussion. Just saying languages can be funny things.
And thanks for letting me know the "quirk" that led you to your belief =)
-
> @"Oglaf.1074" said:
> > @"Umut.5471" said:
> > What if it's a cool word in another language but a bad word in Swedish?
>
> That’s literally not a possibility.
>
... because Swedish can't be cool?...
=P
*Edit
I realise now that you probably meant "it's not a possibility in this particular instance" rather than "ever" but you got me really curious trying to figure out what possible spelling quirk all Swedish curse words could have in common with each other that they would definitely never share with any other language's words haha!
-
But yeah, as to the OP:
I know I used to get very annoyed by the "one shot or reset" type playstyle professions back in the day too. How I kept it fun was by trying to bait them into overextending and using terrain/surrounding allies/npcs to give me an advantage. Or honestly sometimes just going elsewhere for my fun if I wasn't up for the challenge that day. If you learn the profession enough to know the likely mobility options they've slotted and can bait them into using them to "finish you" instead of saving them for their own escape you can time the reversal of fortune sometimes, and that's amazingly satisfying when it happens. Beyond that just accepting dying as part of life helps, although I never got unsportsmanlike whispers from people so.
-
Personally I don't know how people really manage to solo roam since server pairing became a thing. There always seem to be server mates around wherever I go, and fluidly falling in with random allies is one of my favourite things in wvw. I suppose if I actively tried avoiding people and played at off hours?
-
I'm always curious about these things, and whether they were intentional or just an interesting quirk of different languages sharing a common alphabet.
I like the idea that Anet would listen to both sides anyway. I know that if one of my character names (for example taken from Irish mythology) happened to be a bad word in Swedish I'd feel like my character name shouldn't need to be changed, and if it was changed on me I'd feel quite a lot of negative emotions about that decision.
I also know that the above example isn't very likely to be what is actually happening here. But it's bound to happen at some point. So I like the idea that Anet would listen to both sides before taking action.
-
In general, unless your immediate aim is high end fractals and raids, I'd also suggest treating the build sites as not much more than interesting reading material and suggestions/examples of how you can look for synergies in a build. Just because they tend to be hyper-focused on being optimised for content that you're not currently doing.
The way I tend to do my characters/builds etc. is: start by trying weapons out and seeing what feels good to you. Or just what you think looks cool. The pvp area can be a good place for this since changing stats between power/condi/hybrid/support etc there is quick and free. When you settle on your preferred weapons you know whether to prioritise power/condi/hybrid stats in your adventures. Next, pick the trait line that contains the trait that augments your favourite weapon, and the one for your elite spec of choice. The third trait line is for experimenting with. As are all the utility skills, though I tend to start with any ones that your two static trait lines might augment and try things out from there. I also tend to keep one "oh shit button" utility slotted for when I bite off more than I can chew.
This method works for me, because I really enjoy trying out the full range of skills a profession has to offer, but also find it daunting not having a fixed place to start from.
Just in case it helps. Welcome back and I hope you have fun.
-
There's a lot for me to love about revenant to be honest.
I love staff. It's a ridiculously fun weapon set and the whirl finisher on the auto attack is something I find really satisfying.
I love Mallyx and turning on Embrace the Darkness with an "elite skill does x" rune equipped, along with a selection of the "elite skills do y" traits. I don't care about it being unoptimal or whatever, it's just lots of fun.
I love being able to mix and match the various kits. Each trait line having an associated legend really makes it feel like you're a vessel for all these voices/powers to manifest through, you don't feel limited to just the two you happen to have chosen to channel, eg. Shiro granting you life steal through the devastation line even while you're mainly channeling Ventari and Glint, or Ventari's blinds and roots coming to your rescue even though you're currently channeling Mallyx, or whatever.
Plus the actual gameplay just tends to feel more satisfying than either of the other heavy armour professions for me.
-
Just coming here to say that, as a person who always preferred phantasms conceptually to clones, I actually really like the changes they implemented and am optimistic for the future.
-
> @Djinn.9245 said:
> > @Rashagar.8349 said:
> > > @Ohoni.6057 said:
> > > > @Rashagar.8349 said:
> > > > Yeah it's just funny hearing it being talked as some kind of act of magical contortion when for me the true contortionists are, for example, player "A" who believes that Anet's motives lie somewhere between skeazy and EA levels of evil because Anet dared to target a demographic with their initial release that didn't include player "A" haha!
> > >
> > > It's not about "targeting demographics." The Halloween mounts did not "target my demographic," because I didn't want the faux-skeleton designs, and I was totally fine with that. The problem here is that they *did* "target my demographic," in that there are several of those skins that I definitely want, but then they presented them as being impossible to own without buying into a corrupt gambling scheme. That's the problem, for me at least, and from what I gather, for a lot of other players. Nobody forced them to put these skins behind gamble boxes, and nobody is forcing them to keep them there. They could have made a better choice going in and they can still make a better choice now. It's a harder choice now because they might have to take a cut to make it right by the people who already bought in, but the longer they allow it to continue the worse that problem will become.
> >
> >releasing the skins with an rng element meant that this initial release method was simply meant to appeal to the people who enjoy rng elements. Nothing more.
>
> I again find it interesting that you can come to such definitive conclusions - do you happen to work for Anet Marketing to know for a fact what their motive was? I say definitively that their motive was to make more money off mount skins than they would have if they sold them individually by manipulating players with a gamble box. Nothing more. Do you have evidence to prove my statement wrong?
Not at all, my point is that alternative explanations for their motives exist than ones of "corrupt manipulating". I don't have to provide evidence that your statement is wrong because I'm not denying that your's is also possible. If you want to bring evidence into this then you would have to provide evidence why my statement cannot be right.
>
> >Calling it a "corrupt gambling scheme" doesn't make it one, that's imbuing their actions with a motive
>
> There have been many articles over the years and very recently that prove that gamble boxes manipulate the player both psychologically and chemically. I don't see what else you can call it but corrupt when you are talking about manipulating people into spending more money.
I've already told you that if this is your definition of corrupt then coffee is also a corrupt substance. If you're just going to post the same drivel again I'll just go back and copy/paste my original retort into a reply and we can go round and round in circles all day if you really want.
-
> @Ohoni.6057 said:
> > @Rashagar.8349 said:
>
> >This is as clearly laid out as I can manage right now. I hope the message is easy enough to follow, and that it isn't going to get lost in future nitpicking.
>
> Definitely, it was very clear and easy to follow. You were just wrong.
>
>
You're entitled to your perspective of the situation. Obviously I disagree. I did have a bit of a chuckle at the hypocrisy of "their perspective is as valid to them as yours is to you" followed a few posts later by "You're just wrong" though haha!
Now here's why I disagree. And why you haven't even come close to showing my stance as "wrong". =P
> >I'm sure your perspective is as valid to you as mine is to me, but really you are just using a different definition of "demographic" to what my statement was using. Since to me, them releasing the skins with an rng element meant that this initial release method was simply meant to appeal to the people who enjoy rng elements.
>
> I don't acknowledge that as a valid premise.
I can choose to not acknowledge that the sky is blue but sticking my head in the sand doesn't change it's colour to anyone else.
>A skin is art. It is a thing that people value for its aesthetics. You cannot say "this skin is for these players, not for those players," the skin has to be for anyone that like the skin. It'd be like opening a restaurant that serves burgers and also chicken, but has a weird rule that you can order burgers off the menu, but if you want chicken, the only way to get it is off an RNG roll with 29 other food items, some of them salads. It's just nonsensical.
I was not saying "this skin is for these players, not for those players" so this entire paragraph is irrelevant as it's not actually referencing something I said, I was saying this *release method* is for the players who enjoy this style of release method, not for the players that don't. A skin's aesthetic value or position as art does not have any bearing on that position.
> If people like RNG, fine, give them RNG, but don't make it the ONLY way to acquire that thing. I highly doubt that there is a single player in GW2's community who believes that the RNG mount box *should* be the only method of acquiring them, that they could *only* enjoy getting the skin they want by participating in an RNG loot box to earn it. I think that if you could acquire them individually as well, it would only *heighten* the experience for fans of RNG, since they could get that feeling that they';d "beat the odds" and got a 800gem skin for half the price. I just don't see a "they had to give something to the poor RNG fans out there" argument as a good faith position, it just comes across as a Potemkin village.
And here you're agreeing with me again while pretending that it refutes my stance. I have already stated and reiterated my belief that it would be better if both methods were available. So this whole paragraph, again, does not address anything I actually *said*. The point, since it seemed to pass you by, is not that they "had to give something to the poor RNG fans out there", it's that they prioritised a different paying demographic than the one you are a part of. That does not make it a corrupt practice.
> >It is usually (though not always) being based on the assumption that the skins would never be released in any other fashion, which has, from the beginning, been simply that.
>
> Did you not read Mo's post? It's right there at the beginning. "We won’t change the existing license in a way that would invalidate the investment players have made, but I want to confirm to you that our next planned mount skin releases will focus on individual sales like the Reforged Warhound and bundles like the Spooky Mounts Pack."
>
I read it, yes. And my post you chopped up already addressed this point of your's. Interestingly you didn't include the part where I addressed it in your reply though, hmm...
>
> That's about as clear as it could get that they don't intend to offer the existing skins in a respectable fashion, and you have to really stretch to imagine that it intends to mean anything else. Now if there was some misunderstanding on that, they've had over 72 hours and hundreds of posts on the subject in which they had plenty of opportunity to say "oh, no, you misunderstood us, we will be releasing these skins some other way, just give us a little time to get that together."
>
> But they haven't.
>
It's not a stretch of the imagination to imagine it means anything else, it is however extreme tunnel vision and a failure of imagination to imagine that it only means what you claim it to mean.
> And personally I do think that 400 is too high for the most simplistic of the skins, but at this point, for these skins, I wouldn't entirely object to them sticking to that price point for the existing ones, so long as they commit to a lower price on future equivalent skins. It would just mean that I'd be buying less of them than I'd planned.
This is a question of what they are personally "worth" to you, which is an entirely subjective opinion and not at all related to the discussion when it comes to you defending your claim of it being a corrupt practice from being challenged.
> >Calling it a "corrupt gambling scheme" doesn't make it one,
>
> Of course not, its *existence* as a corrupt gambling scheme is what makes it a corrupt gambling scheme. It's like calling whisky an "alcoholic beverage" doesn't *make* it an alcoholic beverage, it always is one whether you call it that or not. Even if the distiller didn't *intend* for it to be alcoholic, that's how it turned out in the end.
>
Again, you're just calling it one here. This paragraph has no substance except to reiterate your belief. It is not fact. Saying something is alcohol is a factual statement. What you are saying about it being corrupt, is not.
But look, I can do it too...
> >Logically, if you believed that the skins were likely to be released in another method at a different price point, you would never believe that you were being "forced" to take part in the gamble mechanic.
>
> Even if they did always intend to release these skins via some other method at a future date, this would still be a corrupt gambling scheme, because they didn't tell us that. Furthermore, they had a temporary discount on the total package of 9600 gems instead of 12000 gems. This gives players the impression that the best chance they have to get the skins they want is to pay the $120 and get them now, because it's only going to get more expensive later. If in a couple months they were to release them at even double the price-per-skin, that would still be a massive savings over the original method.
It is not a corrupt gambling scheme. No evidence required since no evidence in opposition was provided.
> If they'd intended to offer "plan B" from the start, then what excuse could there be for it than that they wanted to trick people into buying mounts that they did not want?
Well, since you asked, off the top of my head: It is not a trick if you believe that the people in your target demographic (ie. the ones who enjoy the rng element) are the ones doing the majority of the purchasing. Which would be a reasonable belief to have. Claiming it can only be a trick is, at best, another failure of imagination. At worst, a self-affirming cyclical argument. (That is, you're using the above quote to justify your perspective, but you're basing your justifications on the assumption that your perspective is the only justifiable one.)
> The only way an RNG system is not corrupt is if it is released *alongside* a non-RNG method (or at the very least alongside an explanation of a non-RNG method in the near future), and if the costs of the non-RNG option are within a reasonable margin of the RNG method. Basically, luck-based for people who enjoy that sort of thing, but fair to everyone else too.
>
Your idea of fair is different from everyone else's.
(Someone's idea of fair could be that you always get a unique skin and are offered the same opportunities to get the skin you want as anyone else is)
Your idea of value for money is different from everyone else's.
(One person's definition of "good value" could be 400 gems for the non-rng variety while another person's idea of could be 1600)
So if the only way this rng system is designated as not corrupt is through the use of these subjective concepts, then how can you claim that your definition of corrupt is not in turn subjective? And if you now claim that it is subjective after all, how can you claim that my definition is "wrong"?
-
> @Ohoni.6057 said:
> > @Rashagar.8349 said:
> > Yeah it's just funny hearing it being talked as some kind of act of magical contortion when for me the true contortionists are, for example, player "A" who believes that Anet's motives lie somewhere between skeazy and EA levels of evil because Anet dared to target a demographic with their initial release that didn't include player "A" haha!
>
> It's not about "targeting demographics." The Halloween mounts did not "target my demographic," because I didn't want the faux-skeleton designs, and I was totally fine with that. The problem here is that they *did* "target my demographic," in that there are several of those skins that I definitely want, but then they presented them as being impossible to own without buying into a corrupt gambling scheme. That's the problem, for me at least, and from what I gather, for a lot of other players. Nobody forced them to put these skins behind gamble boxes, and nobody is forcing them to keep them there. They could have made a better choice going in and they can still make a better choice now. It's a harder choice now because they might have to take a cut to make it right by the people who already bought in, but the longer they allow it to continue the worse that problem will become.
I'm sure your perspective is as valid to you as mine is to me, but really you are just using a different definition of "demographic" to what my statement was using. Since to me, them releasing the skins with an rng element meant that this initial release method was simply meant to appeal to the people who enjoy rng elements. Nothing more. Calling it a "corrupt gambling scheme" doesn't make it one, that's imbuing their actions with a motive based on your perspective and on one of your assumptions, and to me, believing it is a "corrupt gambling scheme" is an impressive feat of mental contortion. It is usually (though not always) being based on the *assumption* that the skins would never be released in any other fashion, which has, from the beginning, been simply that. An assumption *. And an illogical one at that since the demographic of "people who want these skins without wanting to deal with the rng element" is a market that is very cheap for them to tap into (since the skins already exist) and also entirely in their interests to tap into at a later date. Maybe a little more risky for them now that there's been all this furore and they've been backed into a legalese corner with their every future action being closely judged, but I'd still read their statement of not wanting to, what was it, "invalidate the purchases of those that have already bought the skins"? not as saying that the availability of these skins will be exclusively rng based but instead referencing the people who believe that the correct price point is 400 gems without the rng, and simply warning those people that they are deluding themselves, as that price point would be invalidating the prior purchases, whereas simply releasing the same skins in a different method would not be, providing the lack of random element is factored into the cost.
*The reasoning behind the statement; "the belief that it is a "corrupt gambling scheme" is based on the assumption that the skins will never be released in any other method": Logically, if you believed that the skins were likely to be released in another method at a different price point, you would never believe that you were being "forced" to take part in the gamble mechanic. You would simply believe that you weren't the target audience for this release, and wait for the next method of release. Believing both that the skins would be released in a different method and that you were being forced to take part in a gamble mechanic would be flawed logic since the other choice of waiting would be available to you. Unless you were also working under the ironclad belief that you Needed to Have it Now, which Anet can't really be blamed for.
This is as clearly laid out as I can manage right now. I hope the message is easy enough to follow, and that it isn't going to get lost in future nitpicking.
[Poll] Weapon for the next Revenant Elite Specialization
in Revenant
Posted
I can't even remember what I voted for in the poll at this stage, part of the reason I'm posting here is out of curiosity to see what answer comes up under my name heh.
In general, I prefer getting one handed weapons so they're capable of being mix and matched with earlier base weapons, but revenant doesn't actually have the base options to mix and match with, so that becomes much less of a factor.
I agree about core rev and focus.
*Edit
Oh ok apparently I voted axe. Cool.