Fractured.3928

If they introduced a housing system, with a mastery...somehow. It would actually intrigue me!

> @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > @"Mortifera.6138" said:

> > ESO

> Never played it that one, but if it is anything like Skyrim, it's not my cup of raspberry-flavoured milk.

> > WoW

> It has a subscription and tokens don't count.

> Somebody **will** have bought the tokens, so they count as the subscription fee.

> >Neverwinter

> It doesn't look good from what I've seen.

> > BD

> The only good point is the character customization.

> The actual gameplay feels off, the content feels generic and the UI isn't clear enough.

> > Tera

> In my opinion, this one is just bad in every aspect.

What you're saying is opinion based, not factual. Besides WoW. I definitely do not think GW2 is the best MMO without a subscription, and it sure as hell isn't the best one with subscriptions.

The only thing I want, is clear paths around the maps. I'm so sick of high level maps just being ABSOLUTELY COVERED IN BADDIES ALL THE TIME FOREVER. Just getting from Point A to B can be extremely frustrating sometimes, when I feel like it shouldn't be.

It is a difficulty in the game I've always felt was unnecessary.

We also just ignoring the End Walker expansion? FF14 will get 5.5 in April, which leads into Endwalker in Fall. Which also dropped a ton of info, and will continue to release more info over the months. Same as WoW.

Star Citizen has (Apparently) more active players than GW2. Clearly they should try new tactics to bring people in. Instead of the same ol' stuff.

I just want wardrobes that I can fast swap too (Not outfits, they are the dumbest idea GW2 has come up with).

Arenanet seems to be stuck on the systems they choose, despite how archaic many of them seem to be.

Nevermind what I said. Silly page that shouldn't exist lol.

> @"Linken.6345" said:

> If they are new have them delete all characters and transfer to Na.

> Or just start a new account.

Annoyingly doesn't work for F2P, had to be a new account.

But she can't transfer servers now....that's...lame.

So my friend just started an Asura on a F2P account (I am paid), and finished the tutorial area. She is new to gaming, so this is kind of a struggle to begin with, but no matter what I do I can't seem to end see her, and vice versa. I see her walking around on the map, but its like we are in different instances. There is no "Join in" button either when right clicking.

Re-created party, left map and rejoined, even selected a different character.

Nothing seems to work.

------------

Resolution: Come to find out, she went to EU. Wasn't aware she did that, nor aware that you couldn't cross over too.

> @"Sobx.1758" said:

> > @"Fractured.3928" said:

> > > @"borgs.6103" said:

> > > Simple reason: Lore. An _elite_ spec is also a _core_ spec, but not the other way around.

> > >

> > > Like how all Deadeyes are Thieves, but not all Thieves are Deadeyes. They can be Daredevils too. And a Daredevil cannot be a Deadeye.

> > > Being a **role-playing game**, when you're "using" all core specs, you're not an elite spec. Meaning when you're using all core Necromancer specs, you're just a Necromancer - you're _not_ a Reaper or a Scourge. To you, a Greatsword is just a cumbersome hunk of steel. You can probably use it to cut corpses in half, and nothing else. A torch is just a light source for you when it's too dark to read your parchments of evil spells.

> > >

> > > Except NPCs. They're weird.

> >

> > Who are you to say what my Necromancer believes?

> >

> > There are legit arguments against opening all weapons to core. This is definitely not one of them lol. Especially when you can so easily switch. One second my Necromancer thinks Greatsword is godlike, the next moment he thinks a torch is the newest invention in the world? Then the next day, right back to Greatsword being hte best, and torches are only used in dungeons for scrubs who don't have Darkvision?

> >

> > Why can't a Thief use a rifle? They HAVE to be a Deadeye in order to use a Rifle? Literally no other way they can even pick one up? It just drops out of their hands? Then why can a Warrior use one without being a Deadeye?

>

> It's probably for the similar reason we can pick at most 3 specs at one time. And why we can't use all traits at the same time (what, you mean if I pick one, I forget how to use the other two?). And why we pick 3 utility skills out of 20 while not even counting especs -and don't even get me started on revenant. Because it's a game and real life logic won't "always" apply and it's not exactly what it's balanced around.

> ...or is what you're saying only valid for espec weapons for some reason? :p

My point was, roleplaying reason isn't a real argument. Its all just a game system, not a roleplaying restriction.

> @"borgs.6103" said:

> Simple reason: Lore. An _elite_ spec is also a _core_ spec, but not the other way around.

>

> Like how all Deadeyes are Thieves, but not all Thieves are Deadeyes. They can be Daredevils too. And a Daredevil cannot be a Deadeye.

> Being a **role-playing game**, when you're "using" all core specs, you're not an elite spec. Meaning when you're using all core Necromancer specs, you're just a Necromancer - you're _not_ a Reaper or a Scourge. To you, a Greatsword is just a cumbersome hunk of steel. You can probably use it to cut corpses in half, and nothing else. A torch is just a light source for you when it's too dark to read your parchments of evil spells.

>

> Except NPCs. They're weird.

Who are you to say what my Necromancer believes?

There are legit arguments against opening all weapons to core. This is definitely not one of them lol. Especially when you can so easily switch. One second my Necromancer thinks Greatsword is godlike, the next moment he thinks a torch is the newest invention in the world? Then the next day, right back to Greatsword being hte best, and torches are only used in dungeons for scrubs who don't have Darkvision?

Why can't a Thief use a rifle? They HAVE to be a Deadeye in order to use a Rifle? Literally no other way they can even pick one up? It just drops out of their hands? Then why can a Warrior use one without being a Deadeye?

> @"Trise.2865" said:

> I would disagree. Not being able to load exactly what you had before leaves it more open to experimentation, slight modifications to the same basic look without just flipping to the same thing every time. I believe that adds more variety and entertainment value to the system.

>

> Besides, there's always the "writing it down" option. It's not that complicated.

This makes 0 sense. Why would having a wardrobe setup prevent this...at all? In the games that have this, I'm always tweaking my wardrobe.

> @"Katary.7096" said:

> > @"Fractured.3928" said:

> > To me it seems silly that Elite Spec weapons are still tied to Elite Specs. Sure, the weapons obviously benefit from those specs, but there are weapons that I far prefer to continue using with other specs.

> Does it seem silly to you, that elite specialization healing, utility and elite skills are tied to the elite spec?

Yeah, they would be sub-optimal, but I don't see a reason to hold them back. They have much longer cooldowns, usually not as much impact as a weapons ability, so the actual impact on gameplay on way or another would be reduced. I don't care either way, utility is utility for a reason.

As far as I'm concerned, Weapons are a playstyle. And utilities are just there to support your weapon. Big difference.

> @"jokke.6239" said:

> > @"Timbersword.9014" said:

> > > @"jokke.6239" said:

> > > > @"Chyanne Waters.8719" said:

> > > > I may be stupid, but the warddrobe system is actually pretty awesome as it is now.

> > >

> > > Yes, its the best I've seen in any MMORPG. But that doesn't mean it can't improve.

> > > I agree with OP. And i'm sure they would make much more money on cosmetic loadouts than transumation charges. I've never purchased them.

> > > It would also be nice if we could save outfit/mount and glider dye themes.

> >

> > You haven't seen a lot of MMOs then. Outfits are fine, dyes are spectacular, but changing the appearance of individual equipment gets pricey with charges. No other game I can name requires real money items to change the appearance of gear. And it's unnecessarily restrictive as only loaded players are going to use them on leveling toons. Everyone else gets to enjoy 80 levels of $#!%-tier gear design sans the odd fashionable one in the mid levels. It's pretty much why I'm all for more outfits while others loathe them. The whole transmutation charge system makes switching appearances impractical next to new outfits. If I could charge to a cosmetic slot and NOT an item directly, that would make them at least understandable, but as it is, it's just archaic and impractical.

>

> I agree that it sucks that you have to have transmutation charges to change skins, but they are not that hard to get though, I have a bit over 100 of them right now, and no I'm not loaded, it's not exclusively a payed item, it's rewarded for doing content. You have to either prioritize PVP/WVW to get them fast though. Getting them from PVE map completion is slow ..

> Skins directly being saved in wardrobe after selling/salvaging/equpipping is amazing and super convinient. You don't have to hold onto the item in a wardrobe bank or whatever (that usually also have limited slots)

> Dye system is also the best I've seen, and lets not forget that we don't have to buy dyes more than once, in other games you usually have to purchase them as consumable everytime you want to change colors, and they can even be very expensive.

> Also you don't have to go to a NPC or home instance or whatever to change skins/outfits.

> So yeah I would say the convinience factor of GW2 wardrobe far outweighs the negative aspect of having to use transmutation charges

1. You also have to change individual pieces...every time. Instead of having saved wardrobe sets. Hell, even City of Heroes had a better system than GW2, and its older than WoW. So does Warframe, a F2P system, with a better dye system too. WoW does this better too, the only thing it doesn't have is a dye system which is dumb. F14's system is similar to GW2, but still has saved wardrobes. Every MMO I've mentioned also saves the skin, you don't need to keep it.

2. "Outfits" imo are terrible. Not being able to mix and match drastically reduces the amount of dress up I can do. I always avoid outfits for this reason. And they still clip!

3. The home instance/npc thing is the only thing you've mentioned that GW2 has above the others. But honestly, with saved wardrobe settings, I'd say it takes less time to go to a NPC, and click 2 quick buttons than to go through, find the armor, and reset all your dyes so it looks good again. And then you lose your previous look, so going back requires you to do that all over again.

In other MMO's that have a saved look, people change looks A LOT more. Most people I know in GW2 are rocking the same look for a year+. They rarely change anything, and if they do, its only one or two pieces. While in WoW/FF14/Warframe/CoX, people are constantly changing pieces around, throwing on all the different outfits they have, etc. Because its more accessible, and enjoyable.

> @"Chyanne Waters.8719" said:

> I may be stupid, but the warddrobe system is actually pretty awesome as it is now.

I am not even sure how this is a possible opinion when comparing other major multiplayer games.

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"robertthebard.8150" said:

> > So as it stands right now, you have basic, specialization and e spec. Specializations have a level requirement, w/out looking, I'm guessing 30 or 31, and then e specs require the core build maxed out, and level 80. E specs unlock the weapons we're discussing moving, so how does it not change anything about it?

> You should really learn to read first the thread you're responding to, because this isanother time you seem to think we're talking about something else than we actually did.

>

> No, the proposal that was brought up here was like that:

> - you level up to 80

> - you max out the core

> - you unlock espec

> - you max out that espec (unlock all the traits/skills).

> - _from that point on_, on that one character, the espec weapon becomes available also to core class and other especs of that class

>

> (so, for example, to use weaver sword on core ele and tempest, you would need to max out core ele and weaver on that character first)

>

> > If you're not trying to move the weapon to the leveling process, or to other classes, then what's the point of moving it at all?

> The point is not that you would get something early. The point is that you would get access to espec weapon even when running builds from core and/or the other espec. You would still need to work for it, but in exchange you would get a few more choices available.

>

> > I hit a wall on my Druid, for example, because I don't like the way the staff behaves, and find I'm better off using core specializations, for the way I prefer to play. Reading through this, it would seem that I accidentally stumbled onto the "meta" version, since I prefer LB/GS to the staff.

> That's because staff is a weapon mainly for the _healer_ druid build. And the weapons you use are for a power build, which is specifically something druid, of all Ranger options, is probably the worst choice for. Druid staff however, as a very specialized weapon, is probably most extreme case here. Even more extreme than the currently completely useless DH Longbow, which at least still has the change of getting upgraded at some point.

>

> > At any rate, this would very definitely change something. Isn't that the whole point of the thread, to change something?

> Yes. It will change something obviously. I don't see what is the relevance of bringing that up however, seeing as, by itself, it's not an argument for (or against) anything.

>

I gave up on that one, you should too lol.

All in all, there are legit reasons to not do it. However, I still believe those problems could be resolved to some degree.

> @"Atomos.7593" said:

> I don't have any problems with it. I like seeing community creations in games. I think it helps create community interest, reduces the need for devs to come up with new content of that type all the time, and it's nice to see the most popular ones being added to the game.

I know when Star Citizen did a whole "Create a ship" ordeal, it was one of the more fun things I've ever seen. I'd love to see something like that happen with GW2 cosmetics.

Hell, let the community create a new espec for each class. I eat this stuff up.

I'll say yes to this if by "Outfit", it isn't actually an in-game outfit. Individual pieces please, thanks!

I definitely wouldn't complain about a second layer, where you can add townsclothes or something underneat your armor. Could definitely make for some cool cosmetic mix and match.

> @"Bristingr.5034" said:

> > @"Fueki.4753" said:

> > Vindictus is there for you.

>

> Vindictus is still alive? I figured that game shut down years ago.

>

>

You and me both, I was shocked that it visually looks good too.

> @"AgentMoore.9453" said:

> They actually do have this right now, but it's [gear loadouts](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Template#Equipment_Template). They're 500 gems a pop, and you can have up to 6 per character. Not the best system, and I've seen other games do it better (and cheaper), but at least it's there I guess.

>

> It'd be nice if the slots were accountwide - currently you have to buy them per character.

Gear loadout just changes your gear, not simply the cosmetics on the gear.

> @"kharmin.7683" said:

> Once you have an outfit, it is account bound so transmutation orbs aren't really needed. Having a way to quickly swap in to/out of an outfit could work I suppose, but the slots would probably be monetized like the equipment wardrobe.

>

> I don't know about Warframe. Is it also F2P? Comparing things in games with different business models isn't necessarily a valid comparison.

Outfits are pre-determined, and not what I want as I mentioned in my post.

Also Warframe is F2P. Only difference between GW2 and Warframe is you have a base price (Which means things should be cheaper in GW2 imo, but whatevs).

As the title says, I think we need a wardrobe slot system. Where we can switch between wardrobes on a whim.

Now, before you go saying "But they need money from Transmutation Orbs!" , lets look at it from a different perspective. Also, outfits are not a solution to this imo. That is a set look, and there are tons of singular gorgeous pieces of gear that I enjoy mix and matching.

I have literally never bought Transmutation orbs, and I'm one of those people who have played since beta. I just don't need to. They come for free often enough, and because it requires TOrbs, I often don't change my outfit. Plus the fact, I can't easily change back. Sure, I could just have an extra set of gear, but that is a lot of work to go through, bank space, and organization I'd have to bother with. Not happening.

However, if you give me multiple Wardrobe slots. You can both charge for the slots, and myself (Possibly a lot of other players too) will be using a lot more TOrbs, as I fill out my Wardrobe.

Granted, I think we should get rid of TOrbs entirely, and move to a Wardrobe Slot system. Warframe does this well, where you get a few slots to change the look of your frame, and you can purchase more. The system clearly works well for them. Being able to play dress up a lot more freely, I'd definitely purchase more slots, and more cosmetics from the shop so I can tweak out my look a lot more.

> @"robertthebard.8150" said:

> > @"Taril.8619" said:

> > > @"robertthebard.8150" said:

> > > It's not a good idea, but it's not a good idea because the whole point of e specs is a sense of progression after the level cap. We don't have a gear treadmill. Once one has crafted their endgame equipment, they're done with that. So, instead of giving us a real grind, they did this. Why "undo" it by moving the spec down to core, instead of endgame?

> >

> > They could still put the weapon inside the E-Spec. Heck they could even make the fully unlocked weapon usage be tied to completely obtaining all traits within the E-Spec (So you get access to the weapon with the E-Spec upon spending the 30 points to obtain the E-Spec, but won't get to use the weapon in Core/other E-Specs until you've spent the 250 points to get the entire E-Spec)

> >

> > Thus, E-Spec weapons are still a part of "End-game" (Which, more and more feels like "The beginning of the game" with so much stuff locked behind being level 80) and are still locked behind purchasing the relevant expansion to access said E-Spec (So F2P players aren't able to run around with E-Spec weapons)

> >

>

> Hope I did this right...

>

> That's what end game is though. I've played MMOs that would kill to get the end game we get here. Yeah, we can still chew it up and spit it out pretty fast once it's released, but a new player that comes in and gets all the post release content will be busy for a while, and they'll be busy for a while post level cap. I'm not even all that hardcore, but I'm already spending HPs on DE on my DD, because I've got nothing left to spend them on, so I can imagine that there are others that have already maxed out all their e specs. Moving availability to core won't speed the "I've got nothing to work towards, may as well take a break" overmuch, but it will accelerate it. I'm not sure at what level I started having to bank HP because my Core was maxed out, I'm going to guess mid 70s, but I had something to look forward to in so far as those HP were concerned, with whatever e spec I'm going into, and figuring out how it works, and what I'm going to need for the final build.

>

> Yeah, there's going to be lots of story to work toward, but for the players that aren't all that interested in it, or that have done it once, and don't want to do it again, there's nothing really left for them if they're sitting on their final build before they even finish the core story line, assuming, of course, they ever would.

>

> The system works the way it is now, of course, because the game was already sitting at cap before there was any LS or expansions, but even if it were designed this way at launch, I think it would still be a good idea, especially w/out a gear treadmill to fill people's time towards progression.

I feel like, you are often on a different wavelength than everyone else. At least in this thread.

If anything, opening weapons to core after completing the ES Spec opens up the end game to more stuff....kinda significantly.

1. I would actually bother opening the other paths. I don't care for Mirage, or Scourge honestly. So I don't spend points into it. However if it unlocked the usage of the weapons for every spec, I'd be more inclined to do so. As I could still be in the spec I prefer, and play around with new weapons.

2. It would add 2 weapons (1 for Rev) to every class, so I could experiment more with builds. And spend more time trying out new things, and switching things around when I'm bored of the current weapons.

And both of those are only done in end-game.

> @"Tukaram.8256" said:

> It makes perfect sense to me the way it is. My necro generally does not have access to the greatsword. The greatsword they gave me is soulbound to the character, and I assume is tied to the reaper elite spec, as it should be.

>

> If I use reaper - he can use greatswords. If I do not use reaper - he cannot use greatswords. If I switch to scourge, he can use a torch. How else would it work?

There are a few reasons against doing what I'd like. However, what you just said makes no sense lol.

> @"Parasite.5389" said:

> > @"KeoLegend.5132" said:

> > i agree. They need to do smt about Living World. Either add them on the sales or make a special pack or smt like that

>

> you mean these packs?

> * [Living_World_Season_2_Complete_Pack](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Living_World_Season_2_Complete_Pack)

> * [Living_World_Season_3_Complete_Pack](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Living_World_Season_3_Complete_Pack)

> * [Living_World_Season_4_Complete_Pack](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Living_World_Season_4_Complete_Pack)

By "Special Pack" I think they meant something along the line of "Gold Edition". Where you pay a higher price, but everything is included.

> @"Sobx.1758" said:

> > @"robertthebard.8150" said:

> > > @"Fractured.3928" said:

> > > > @"robertthebard.8150" said:

> > > > > @"Fractured.3928" said:

> > > > > > @"robertthebard.8150" said:

> > > > > > > @"Fractured.3928" said:

> > > > > > > > @"robertthebard.8150" said:

> > > > > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > > > > > > > @"robertthebard.8150" said:

> > > > > > > > > > Because Trident wasn't hardcoded into an elite spec.

> > > > > > > > > What does that have anything to do with a core class being able to use it or not? Especially if, like @"Blocki.4931" said in his original claim, especs are treated as separate classes for weapon availability? It's not like a weapon being accessible by one class prevents it from being used by another, after all.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > @"robertthebard.8150" said:

> > > > > > > > > > I have no access to code, but, a dagger does something different on different classes, off the top of my head. A thief using it off hand certainly doesn't get the same skills an Ele does. That's the element that's probably hardcoded.

> > > > > > > > > No more or less hardcoded that any other skills are. And yet they did add skills to core classes throughout the GW2 history.

> > > > > > > > > Besides, notice how those skills for elite spec weapons are already in the game. You don't need to make them

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Anet was talking about possibly adding new weapons to the classes since the very beginning of the game. As such, i don't find it likely that they've made those classes in a way that would make adding weapons to them prohibitively hard.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > So just to stick to my example, which version of dagger are they going to use? What happens if they choose the "wrong" version? My DD's staff behaves very differently from an Ele's staff, which staff should they use? I'm not sure how that applies to other classes, as I haven't used them enough to know. I do know that a Mesmer with a GS does something completely different than what a Warrior does with the same weapon. If every weapon behaved the same way on every class, this wouldn't be hard to do at all, but they don't. To use the great sword example again, Warrior, Ranger and Mesmer all use it, but it's a different weapon on all three classes, based on the skills it gives.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > To answer your other question, they coded one set of skills for one class for the trident. What happens if you want to use it on another class that can already use the trident, and you don't get those skills? Even e spec weapons will run into this problem on classes that can already use the base weapon. Since, as I mentioned, weapons don't perform the same way across the board, and we really don't want them to, which versions are they going to make available, and what happens when the version they decide is the best to use doesn't meet what certain members of the community wanted? The short answer is a thread similar to this one.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I'm honestly not even sure what point you're trying to make anymore? Its confusing.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > A weapon is literally just a variable in the code, with an attached graphic, and an attached animation.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Which is unique for whichever class is using it. The class determines the weapon's function, not the weapon type. As mentioned in my previous post, in order to make this function properly, all classes would have to have access to all e specs, because that's how the game's coded to deal with them.

> > > > >

> > > > > Just out of curiosity, how do you know how the game is coded?

> > > >

> > > > I play it? I equip weapons on characters, and observe what skills they give when I do. I notice that different classes get different skills for the same weapon types, and I know that's down to how they're coded. I don't have to have backend knowledge of the game, this is observable on the user level. A staff on my Weaver performs significantly different from a staff on my DD. I don't have to have any understanding of game code to notice this, I simply have to equip the weapons in question on a spec that can use them to see it.

> > > >

> > > > So, when I equip a staff on my DD, I don't get Ele skills. Why is that? Because the game is coded to read "DD spec, assign skills a-e". If it went on weapon type alone, then Ele would get DD skills, or, since Ele was in first, DDs would get Ele skills. Instead, the code checks the class, and assigns the appropriate skills for allowed weapons. That it's coded based on class is observable by the classes that use the same weapon, but get different skills accordingly. It doesn't matter if it's Core or Elite, that's how the game handles weapons.

> > >

> > > So you're making this all up as you go, got it. Well I'll leave you to it then.

> >

> > Really? So a Great Sword on your Warrior and Ranger behave exactly the same, and give exactly the same skills? You're the only one in the game to have that happen. One of us is making stuff up...

>

> You have no point here -as far as I understand what you're talking about- and you respond with something irrelevant to what is the "issue" brought up in this thread. Weapons functioning differently between the classes is something everyone know about and something nobody here discusses or argues about. What OP wants is that the espec unlocked weapons would be available for THAT exact same core class. Nobody says anything about mixing the weapons between the classes (from what I understand), so the answer to your question "which weapon version would the core class use?!?!" is literally "the one it unlocked from its own espec". What about this is unclear for you?

>

> And it's not about it "being hard coded like that", because they can potentially just enable the usage of the weapons for core classes. It's probably more about the digree in which the weapon synergises with their especs (even if it's not all of them, that's still enough) and anet's vision of the game. You don't really need to make up some artificial dilemmas about "which weapon would the class use", because nobody has any doubts about that.

You're right. I'm not even sure what that person is arguing half the time lol.

The real argument is balance, and the weapons that are legit tied to the ESpec's ability (Weaver, and Holosmith as examples). Balance I don't care as much about, since almost every (if not every) class has weapons that are often so underpowered they are considered useless. It sucks that this would just add another one to the list, but more content/builds is more content/builds.

However, weapons literally being useless (Like Holosmith) would be a problem. They could somehow tweak the numbers so that when it is not under Holosmith, it runs as "average" without heat. But it is probably too much to ask for. And how would you even deal with Weaver?