Enough, constant death isn't fun!

[Carighan.6758]

I don't think this one was particularly bad. OTOH, overall yes, I agree. I think it goes to show how much _player-count-based scaling of events/enemies_ and _player power overall in the light of elite specs_ are broken against what the game was originally designed for. They can't make it useful for 2-3 players if they don't overdo it for a single player.

 

Solution is usually to run a meta DPS spec.

[Ithilwen.1529]

> @"kharmin.7683" said:

> Maybe some of us don't like PvP or playing a character to its optimal build? I will agree that taking skills and traits that don't compliment each other is probably not a good recipe for success, but some of us find builds that we enjoy that work well enough for us in the open world. Creating content specifically for solo play should not mean that each profession must be fully traited to an exact build in order to succeed.

>

> Yeah, I died a lot in this chapter and I'm sure it's because I haven't the best, most efficient build. It must be very difficult for ANet to design these things for players like you and like me. Still, I'm not complaining (overly much?). I knew how things would go and the battle met my expectations.

>

> As for finding the right profession, I would argue that it shouldn't take playing a lot of PvP to discover that. I already know that I'm not a very good engineer/scrapper/holosmith or elementalist/tempest/weaver so I am pretty much left out of playing these chapters as those professions. I don't believe that this is something that ANet should encourage.

 

This poster makes a very good point. If I wanted to play a fixed build to maximise efficiency, there are several shooters I could choose.

 

GW2 was supposed to be about "play it your way."

[flog.3485]

> @"Ithilwen.1529" said:

> > @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > Maybe some of us don't like PvP or playing a character to its optimal build? I will agree that taking skills and traits that don't compliment each other is probably not a good recipe for success, but some of us find builds that we enjoy that work well enough for us in the open world. Creating content specifically for solo play should not mean that each profession must be fully traited to an exact build in order to succeed.

> >

> > Yeah, I died a lot in this chapter and I'm sure it's because I haven't the best, most efficient build. It must be very difficult for ANet to design these things for players like you and like me. Still, I'm not complaining (overly much?). I knew how things would go and the battle met my expectations.

> >

> > As for finding the right profession, I would argue that it shouldn't take playing a lot of PvP to discover that. I already know that I'm not a very good engineer/scrapper/holosmith or elementalist/tempest/weaver so I am pretty much left out of playing these chapters as those professions. I don't believe that this is something that ANet should encourage.

>

> This poster makes a very good point. If I wanted to play a fixed build to maximise efficiency, there are several shooters I could choose.

>

> GW2 was supposed to be about "play it your way."

 

“Play it your way” never referred about how difficult or not the game should be. Some instances are harder, others are not so much. You have checkpoints during the instances, from which you can choose to play a more safer build or not. It is good design to be able to change your traits or not if you are struggling too much, if you are given the opportunity to change whenever you are out of combat imo.

[lokh.2695]

"Play as you want" should never keep you from adapting to a situation. If the way you want to play doesn't work for you, why not change it a little?

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Carighan.6758" said:

> I don't think this one was particularly bad. OTOH, overall yes, I agree. I think it goes to show how much _player-count-based scaling of events/enemies_ and _player power overall in the light of elite specs_ are broken against what the game was originally designed for. They can't make it useful for 2-3 players if they don't overdo it for a single player.

>

> Solution is usually to run a meta DPS spec.

 

Incidentally, a meta dps build would be probably one of the worst choices for the trap part.

[Rauderi.8706]

> @"derd.6413" said:

> The grates with sparks are safe

 

Huh! I assumed the opposite, because ANet's usual lack of conveyance, but I suppose that could be interpreted as "this box is malfunctioning, stand on me!"

Thanks for the tip. :)

[Ephemiel.5694]

Those traps in Joko's fortress were hell on earth and, at least for me, they were constantly buggy.

 

Lasers hitting you anyway even when they "weaken" so you can pass, the grates doing damage when absolutely nothing is happening on them, the lasers being added INTO THE FIGHT for some absurd reason.

 

Why? There's a difference between difficulty and outright going overboard, plus the game gave 0 hints on what to do other than "use the signet". This game has NEVER been about difficulty. I hope to God we will not have areas like this in the future.

[SunTzu.4513]

Overall the traps were okayish imo. On my first run with my norn necro lady i died one time in case of own stupidity. Second run with my Mesmer does not count, blink made it really ez. Third run was hell. Biggest sized Charrrev is not an good idea for small tunnels/areas like this. I know hitboxes are the same but my field of view was really bad and i was messing around with the camera angle a lot of times.

[Haishao.6851]

> @"Ithilwen.1529" said:

> > @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > Maybe some of us don't like PvP or playing a character to its optimal build? I will agree that taking skills and traits that don't compliment each other is probably not a good recipe for success, but some of us find builds that we enjoy that work well enough for us in the open world. Creating content specifically for solo play should not mean that each profession must be fully traited to an exact build in order to succeed.

> >

> > Yeah, I died a lot in this chapter and I'm sure it's because I haven't the best, most efficient build. It must be very difficult for ANet to design these things for players like you and like me. Still, I'm not complaining (overly much?). I knew how things would go and the battle met my expectations.

> >

> > As for finding the right profession, I would argue that it shouldn't take playing a lot of PvP to discover that. I already know that I'm not a very good engineer/scrapper/holosmith or elementalist/tempest/weaver so I am pretty much left out of playing these chapters as those professions. I don't believe that this is something that ANet should encourage.

>

> This poster makes a very good point. If I wanted to play a fixed build to maximise efficiency, there are several shooters I could choose.

>

> GW2 was supposed to be about "play it your way."

 

You're taking "play your way" out of it's context and apply it to something else.

Play your way was about not being forced into specific game mode to reach max level and get max level equipment.

 

Maximizing our efficiency has always been at the core of GW. This is why we can change our entire build right out of combat. In GW1 it was only possible to do in town so we had to maximize our build for an entire map before stepping out, but now we can do it between every fights if we chose to so it gives a lot more liberty in how we can approach every fights.

We can play fixed build in most places if it's balanced, but chances are it's more balanced for a specific content than another and will probably need some adjustments for different situations.

 

[Cragga the Eighty Third.60]

I'm not a fast-reflex arcade-type player. It took 7 revive orbs to get past the last hallway section. Of course, my progression strategy was, "the laser walls throw you backward, so walking into them _backwards_ throws you the way you want to go. Awesome!"

So, thanks Anet for the occasional revive orbs in my daily reward chests! Their accumulation was worth it.

 

Oh, and thanks for the one repair cannister that was required to avoid unseemly nudity.