James.1065 Posted January 10, 2019 Author Share Posted January 10, 2019 > @"Asum.4960" said: > Why not 4 core + elite while we are at it? Imagine the customisation! > > But yea, no. There is already too little choice in terms of weapon skills being locked and very few utilities being viable per build. I agree with you and believe this would fix that issue without having to Add new weapon skills and utilities per build. That's what makes the game fun and not overwhelming like Wow where you trying to play with 50+ spells at a time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westenev.5289 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 So, what happens to F2P or Core players? Do they have to buy an expansion, or forego an entire traitline? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James.1065 Posted January 10, 2019 Author Share Posted January 10, 2019 > @"Airdive.2613" said: > > @"James.1065" said: > > > @"Trise.2865" said: > > > In a word: Why? > > > > More varity and flexibility to customise your character without adding more elites etc > > Ironically, there are 10 possible core specialization combos along the chosen elite specialization in the case of elite+2 **and** in the case of elite+3. Thus all you're getting is pure power creep. Assuming all classes skills and traits remaining the same with the only modification being you choose 1 elite and 3 additional specs per profession, the increase would be relative to the current situation and the power creep impact would remain neutral Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James.1065 Posted January 10, 2019 Author Share Posted January 10, 2019 > @"Westenev.5289" said: > So, what happens to F2P or Core players? Do they have to buy an expansion, or forego an entire traitline? Nope, you pick 4 lines. But only 1 of those can be an elite. (So elite +3 or 4 core lines) I hope that clears up my idea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James.1065 Posted January 10, 2019 Author Share Posted January 10, 2019 > @"TexZero.7910" said: > No. > > Doing so would entirely defeat the design of specializations which is to make you have trade-offs and not just stack the 4 strongest trait lines you have. I dis-agree: you still have to make a trade off when choosing 4 lines out of 7 options. And in terms of game design by giving players addition utility, durability etc it moves the game further from the "holy trinity" effect which I believe still exist when you forced to only have 3 lines Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyninja.2954 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 > @"James.1065" said: > > @"Airdive.2613" said: > > > @"James.1065" said: > > > > @"Trise.2865" said: > > > > In a word: Why? > > > > > > More varity and flexibility to customise your character without adding more elites etc > > > > Ironically, there are 10 possible core specialization combos along the chosen elite specialization in the case of elite+2 **and** in the case of elite+3. Thus all you're getting is pure power creep. > > Assuming all classes skills and traits remaining the same with the only modification being you choose 1 elite and 3 additional specs per profession, the increase would be relative to the current situation and the power creep impact would remain neutral Why not just let every class use all their trait lines then? Why have choice at all? Also the power creep would be huge and disproportionate between classes since different trait lines are not all equally strong, especially between classes. If you can't see how more traits and more elite specializations, which are among the most powerful trait lines with further benefits like giving access to some of the most powerful weapon skills, would create huge power creep, then there is no reason for further arguing. Choice does not eliminate power creep or unbalance, that's where you are mistaken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndigoSundown.5419 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 > @"James.1065" said: > > Why do you automatically assume it would make the situation worse and not better? Giving people more options to work with would allow them to make more elaborate builds and ways to combine existing skills, which would make for much more interesting situations. I can't speak for Cyninja, though I suspect he might agree with me. The cost for, "Giving people more options..." would be that players would have less choices to make. Lowering or eliminating the opportunity costs inherent in build-crafting removes the need for players to have to actually sacrifice one something to get another. There are already not enough trade-offs in GW2 build crafting. Removing more opportunity costs makes for a duller game and less differentiation between builds. This would be a move towards a dumber game. Not for me, thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avey.4201 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Toughness and vitality are already a wasted stat, only viable options are glass because they'll 1 hit you anyway, so why not stack more damage, mobility, and utility on broken specs, we'd be better off with 1 less spec at this time, may actually add more true variety, better balance too. I feel bad for those allergic to dairy, GW2 full of cheese. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gehenna.3625 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 I said no but it's not because I don't agree that there's an issue, but I just don't think this is the right solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chyanne Waters.8719 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 For now elite specifications are based on new expansions so have to wait for that. Maybe in the future they will stop making expansions and just fill the game with more living story episodes faster. Some people will call that crazy, but you never know lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Illconceived Was Na.9781 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 > @"James.1065" said: > Nope, you pick 4 lines. But only 1 of those can be an elite. (So elite +3 or 4 core lines) I hope that clears up my idea Why stop at 4 lines? Why not 5? How about 6? Why not include lines from other professions? **** Instead of proposing a solution first and trying to retrofit reasons for it, how about start with a clear statement of the problems you see. Then we can have a decent discussion about potential solutions. It seems unlikely that "four trait lines" is going to end up being the most promising possibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDub.1530 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 If my numbers are correct, we currently have 30 different trait line options. If we added a 4th trait line, we would have 25 options. So I don't see how this idea increases options and diversity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donutdude.9582 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Not required. ArenaNet have already hit the sweet spot as it allows for clearly defined difference between each. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jski.6180 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Yes but only if you take away all type of state boons from lines and make it a pure gear build. So if you want to do dmg you have to build dmg but your lines will mod your effects more. Though i must say as things stand only some classes benefit from the 3 lines only more so then other classes a 4th may make these class too much. The game is not balanced right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James.1065 Posted January 10, 2019 Author Share Posted January 10, 2019 > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said: > > @"James.1065" said: > > Nope, you pick 4 lines. But only 1 of those can be an elite. (So elite +3 or 4 core lines) I hope that clears up my idea > > Why stop at 4 lines? Why not 5? How about 6? Why not include lines from other professions? > > **** > Instead of proposing a solution first and trying to retrofit reasons for it, how about start with a clear statement of the problems you see. Then we can have a decent discussion about potential solutions. It seems unlikely that "four trait lines" is going to end up being the most promising possibility. This is a poll to open a discussion about adding more diversity to the game through more build options, not "proposing a solution" to a non-existent problems Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James.1065 Posted January 10, 2019 Author Share Posted January 10, 2019 > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said: > > @"James.1065" said: > > > > Why do you automatically assume it would make the situation worse and not better? Giving people more options to work with would allow them to make more elaborate builds and ways to combine existing skills, which would make for much more interesting situations. > > I can't speak for Cyninja, though I suspect he might agree with me. The cost for, "Giving people more options..." would be that players would have less choices to make. Lowering or eliminating the opportunity costs inherent in build-crafting removes the need for players to have to actually sacrifice one something to get another. There are already not enough trade-offs in GW2 build crafting. Removing more opportunity costs makes for a duller game and less differentiation between builds. This would be a move towards a dumber game. Not for me, thanks. I like your economic approach to the discussion and I agree with you that removing trade-off decisions will kill the game, but you can currently choose 3 out of 7 lines. I don't think making it 4 out of 7 will make the game "too boring". I believe there will still be enough options that you have to choose from, while adding value to more diverse range of builds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goettel.4389 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 They "should"n't do anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HazyDaisy.4107 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 A year or 2 ago when trait lines were all messed up and there was one trait on one line you would've loved to have in the mix but needed all the traits in the other 2 core lines you picked so you sacrificed that one core line. It made sense a year or 2 ago for more options, but since, most professions have seen their lines cleaned up or revamped to the point it's not really necessary to have that much extra umph. It would be fun however to run 2 elites at once, but, again that's too much power depending on your chosen profession and mode. I'd just personally like to see them remove weapon binding from elite lines, leave the special skills locked behind having the line equipped, but if you have that elite trained (scourge for instance) let us run 3 core traits and still be able to wield a torch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zahrak.6382 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Yes, have all specializations open for use but only 9 trait points to spend across them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menzo.2185 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 Anet could rework the whole tree of traits, but never increase the number of specializations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curunen.8729 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 > @"James.1065" said: > > @"Trise.2865" said: > > > @"James.1065" said: > > > > @"Trise.2865" said: > > > > In a word: Why? > > > > > > More varity and flexibility to customise your character without adding more elites etc > > > > and that's good because...? > > it's not gamebreaking because...? > > it adds value without removing it because...? > > > > Come on, man, support your premise. > > > It wouldn't break the game, because it's already broken! > Heh, fair point, can't argue with that! :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyninja.2954 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 > @"James.1065" said: > > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said: > > > @"James.1065" said: > > > > > > Why do you automatically assume it would make the situation worse and not better? Giving people more options to work with would allow them to make more elaborate builds and ways to combine existing skills, which would make for much more interesting situations. > > > > I can't speak for Cyninja, though I suspect he might agree with me. The cost for, "Giving people more options..." would be that players would have less choices to make. Lowering or eliminating the opportunity costs inherent in build-crafting removes the need for players to have to actually sacrifice one something to get another. There are already not enough trade-offs in GW2 build crafting. Removing more opportunity costs makes for a duller game and less differentiation between builds. This would be a move towards a dumber game. Not for me, thanks. > > I like your economic approach to the discussion and I agree with you that removing trade-off decisions will kill the game, but you can currently choose 3 out of 7 lines. I don't think making it 4 out of 7 will make the game "too boring". I believe there will still be enough options that you have to choose from, while adding value to more diverse range of builds Incorrect, you have 5 base line trait lines and 2 elite specializations. Being able to chose 2 out of 5 trait lines is way different than being able to chose 3 out of 5 (or from 3 out of 5 to 4 out of 5). The choice for the elite (depending on how it gets implemented) either goes from optional as third trait line to 1 of 2 on an elite spec. Those are huge changes and not some minor alterations. That's not even getting into the amount of synergy which trait lines right now have which would explode since some combinations are simply not possible right now but would be with 3 or 4 trait lines. > @"Curunen.8729" said: > > @"James.1065" said: > > > @"Trise.2865" said: > > > > @"James.1065" said: > > > > > @"Trise.2865" said: > > > > > In a word: Why? > > > > > > > > More varity and flexibility to customise your character without adding more elites etc > > > > > > and that's good because...? > > > it's not gamebreaking because...? > > > it adds value without removing it because...? > > > > > > Come on, man, support your premise. > > > > > > It wouldn't break the game, because it's already broken! > > > > Heh, fair point, can't argue with that! :D Not really, it's simply a cheap cop out to not have to address the issue of how unbalanced things can become. Balance is not a binary state of either yes or no. It has very far degrees of variation and depth. To use this as argument one would have to show that current balance is so far away from reason that more unbalance would make no difference. Subjective opinion ignored, that would be quite difficult given how close many damage benchmarks are and even spvp representation of classes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtpelion.4562 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 I want them to go the other direction and further limit customization by making one of the core trait lines Elite to prevent you from being able to mix and match the expansion Elite lines with all of the core lines. For example, Arcana for Elementalists should be set to Elite so that it can never be mixed with Tempest. Lots of customization is amazing in a single player game. It is the absolute worst thing possible in a multiplayer game that has any form of competitive game mode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Illconceived Was Na.9781 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 > @"James.1065" said: > > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said: > > > @"James.1065" said: > > > Nope, you pick 4 lines. But only 1 of those can be an elite. (So elite +3 or 4 core lines) I hope that clears up my idea > > > > Why stop at 4 lines? Why not 5? How about 6? Why not include lines from other professions? > > > > **** > > Instead of proposing a solution first and trying to retrofit reasons for it, how about start with a clear statement of the problems you see. Then we can have a decent discussion about potential solutions. It seems unlikely that "four trait lines" is going to end up being the most promising possibility. > > This is a poll to open a discussion about adding more diversity to the game through more build options, not "proposing a solution" to a non-existent problems Polls don't "open discussions;" they close them by assuming the options available. A thread to begin discussion would ask, "what can we do to add build diversity to the game?" Or even, "is there enough build diversity in the game," as I'm not sure that everyone agrees with the premise of the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curunen.8729 Posted January 10, 2019 Share Posted January 10, 2019 > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > @"James.1065" said: > > > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said: > > > > @"James.1065" said: > > > > > > > > Why do you automatically assume it would make the situation worse and not better? Giving people more options to work with would allow them to make more elaborate builds and ways to combine existing skills, which would make for much more interesting situations. > > > > > > I can't speak for Cyninja, though I suspect he might agree with me. The cost for, "Giving people more options..." would be that players would have less choices to make. Lowering or eliminating the opportunity costs inherent in build-crafting removes the need for players to have to actually sacrifice one something to get another. There are already not enough trade-offs in GW2 build crafting. Removing more opportunity costs makes for a duller game and less differentiation between builds. This would be a move towards a dumber game. Not for me, thanks. > > > > I like your economic approach to the discussion and I agree with you that removing trade-off decisions will kill the game, but you can currently choose 3 out of 7 lines. I don't think making it 4 out of 7 will make the game "too boring". I believe there will still be enough options that you have to choose from, while adding value to more diverse range of builds > > Incorrect, you have 5 base line trait lines and 2 elite specializations. > > Being able to chose 2 out of 5 trait lines is way different than being able to chose 3 out of 5 (or from 3 out of 5 to 4 out of 5). The choice for the elite (depending on how it gets implemented) either goes from optional as third trait line to 1 of 2 on an elite spec. > > Those are huge changes and not some minor alterations. That's not even getting into the amount of synergy which trait lines right now have which would explode since some combinations are simply not possible right now but would be with 3 or 4 trait lines. > > > @"Curunen.8729" said: > > > @"James.1065" said: > > > > @"Trise.2865" said: > > > > > @"James.1065" said: > > > > > > @"Trise.2865" said: > > > > > > In a word: Why? > > > > > > > > > > More varity and flexibility to customise your character without adding more elites etc > > > > > > > > and that's good because...? > > > > it's not gamebreaking because...? > > > > it adds value without removing it because...? > > > > > > > > Come on, man, support your premise. > > > > > > > > > It wouldn't break the game, because it's already broken! > > > > > > > Heh, fair point, can't argue with that! :D > > Not really, it's simply a cheap cop out to not have to address the issue of how unbalanced things can become. Balance is not a binary state of either yes or no. It has very far degrees of variation and depth. To use this as argument one would have to show that current balance is so far away from reason that more unbalance would make no difference. > > Subjective opinion ignored, that would be quite difficult given how close many damage benchmarks are and even spvp representation of classes. I was tongue in cheek, but anyway I agree the op is not a good idea for said reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now