Curse

-Pluto- · Oct 11, 2007, 10:58 PM // 22:58

I'm really just trying to picture guild wars pvp with this silly jumping and swimming nonsense, and it's not working for me. I happen to like the current control setup for GW.

Anyway, here's my wishlist for GW2 I guess.

keep core classes (though I honestly wouldn't miss the necro much) somewhat in tact. The way the prot monk works is such a huge part of why this game on a whole works. The same can be said about the disruption classes, mesmer and rangers. Please don't make the monk into a WoW priest, and please keep the skill in shutdown with well timed interrupts or diversion.

Warriors hopefully stay similar too. None of this silly running around chasing a bunch of jumping monks pounding space bar for each individual attack please. Seems like I've never seen a game with this sort of "free movement" that doesn't make you do this, so I have to worry a bit...

Keep the pvp character concept. lyra's idea would work too (it's basically just the same thing), as long as you could still create the pvp items you need and they'd be just as good as the best stuff you get in pve.

And support the pvp community please. I'd like to see updates come much more frequently. I'd love to say, "it'd be great if you never nerf something!" Let's face it though: you probably will. As for all the people suggesting splitting the pve and pvp skills, I just don't see it happening. I don't think it should happen either, since that's just not intuitive.

Anyway, the reason I don't see it happening is because of "world pvp," or giant ABs... whatever they're called. If I understand it correctly, this would be a casual pvp that can work as a possible stepping stone into high-end pvp (ie, gvg). At the same time, it is casual, and you also are going to be required to take a roleplaying character to do World PvP. So which skill set would they use for giant ABs?

I'd also hope that your choice in race would be entirely cosmetic... but I doubt that will happen. In fact, I bet I'm in the minority here, and most people would be severely disappointed if the races didn't have some retarded benefits to its members, which furthermore will probably favor a particular class archetype. Of course, if they can make it so the Norns' traits don't favor physicals, Anet will have at least had a partial success, and will surprise me. This is part of what leads me to worry about the primary professions losing their identity come GW2.

Still on the fence about GW2. Will have to see how the gameplay and classes are shaping up later down the road I guess, and for ANet to address the pvp community in one of these articles or interviews. Other than them mentioning giant ABs, I haven't heard anything at all directed at high-end pvp. The least they could do is just come out and say, "We're not going to even care about pvp this time."

Hope to hear more, and hopefully hear good stuff. I'd hate to have to stay in GW1 just because there's no other good options. Nothing has even come close to really grabbing my attention recently except for Fury, but it has its own core problems to me (charges--bleh). Hopefully, Anet doesn't disappoint.

Age · Oct 11, 2007, 11:51 PM // 23:51

I am pretty sure ther will be a Warrior as it is very common in other games like GW and in 250 years it is not enough totake it away.We in the real world have had Warriors for over since way BC.

Gio · Oct 12, 2007, 01:51 AM // 01:51

If this imagination is success the game will do really well. Let us hope and see when the time comes for the game to be released.

Gigashadow · Oct 12, 2007, 02:03 AM // 02:03

I wonder if the mesmer will stay as-is, or if it will be folded in with the necro. Games before GW generally had the abilities of both combined into one class, and it was GW that separated them out and created the mesmer out of it.

They could fold all the melee classes into warrior, so that you could wield any of the existing weapons. There would then be plenty of different weapon specs to have fun with.

Ritualists and Paragons just need to be removed entirely.

trielementz · Oct 12, 2007, 02:36 AM // 02:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gigashadow

I wonder if the mesmer will stay as-is, or if it will be folded in with the necro. Games before GW generally had the abilities of both combined into one class, and it was GW that separated them out and created the mesmer out of it.

nah.. separate schools of magic entirely. i'd classify mesmers as the enchanting/ illusionary schools and necromancers fit in necromancy (D&D wise). we get more interesting characters if you split them up. besides, we'd lose the regal/ twisted dichotomy of the 2 classes.

samifly · Oct 12, 2007, 02:36 AM // 02:36

To be honest I like the way that I can use the same skills in PvP and PvE, especially when they are useful in different ways.

lyra_song · Oct 12, 2007, 04:18 AM // 04:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gigashadow

Ritualists and Paragons just need to be removed entirely.

ah but see if they were core classes and balanced in the beginning would you be saying that?

Hyper Cutter · Oct 12, 2007, 04:59 AM // 04:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gigashadow

I wonder if the mesmer will stay as-is, or if it will be folded in with the necro. Games before GW generally had the abilities of both combined into one class, and it was GW that separated them out and created the mesmer out of it.

I'd like to see the necro partially absorbed into the mesmer, since a lot of Curses skills really should've been mesmer skills (Spiteful Spirit, most notably)...

draxynnic · Oct 12, 2007, 05:28 AM // 05:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by -Pluto-

Of course, if they can make it so the Norns' traits don't favor physicals, Anet will have at least had a partial success, and will surprise me.

It could be done by introducing more totem animals - in GWEN, the Norn only used the bear (only the PCs seemed to use Wolf or Raven, and then as a replace-your-skills blessing rather than the Norn bear form that acts more like a Dervish avatar), but on the other hand all the Norn we meet are physicals as well (mostly warriors and paragons from memory, with Sif as a ranger), so they may simply have chosen the form most suitable for their skillset - more magically inclined Norn may have a different totem animal.

On Paragons being underpowered: Even post-nerf, Song of Restoration still gives better rewards per-point-spent than Light of Deliverance, and has less conditions as well. It has a slower recharge admittedly, but the Paragon can still do a good job of keeping off the pressure when the whole party is being hit so the Monk can concentrate on the characters being spiked. And a bunch of adrenal Warriors fueled by a Paragon can be scary.

Paragons have to be flexible - if they don't have a build suited for the party they may not do anything at all, but with the right party the whole party will shine. This can, however, mean they often have to compromise in balanced groups.

On the Mesmer: I agree with trielementz. The distinction, as I see it, is that the Mesmer messes with your mind while the Necromancer messes with your body. The problem is that the line has been blurred by some skills being put in the Necromancer line that should, IMO, really be in the Mesmer line - pretty much everything (with the possible exception of the ones that cause life-stealing like Insidious Parasite and Soul Leech - and even those seem more appropriate as a mix of both than being in one or the other...) that try to make the victim think before doing something - SS, Spoil Victor, Spirit of Failure - plus a few others like Reckless Haste all appear to be in the 'messing with the mind' category.

The way I see it, the response to being hexed a lot by a Mesmer should be something that starts to make you make difficult choices: Do I attack and set off Empathy, cast a spell and set off Backfire, or do I do nothing until they wear off? Do I help finish off the monk and let Spoil Victor go off, or do I turn around and hit that warrior so I'm not setting off SV but I'm at least doing something? And that sort of thing. Necromancer hexes, by contrast, should be the sort of thing that you grin and bear - stuff that makes it harder to do the things you want to do or make it easier for your enemies to hurt you, but not contingent on your activities to hurt you.

Besides, if SS had been a Mesmer skill all along, we probably wouldn't have the Mesmer=PvP attitude we have to deal with now.

Muspellsheimr · Oct 12, 2007, 06:29 AM // 06:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hyper Cutter

I'd like to see the necro partially absorbed into the mesmer, since a lot of Curses skills really should've been mesmer skills (Spiteful Spirit, most notably)...

Actually, skills such as Spiteful Spirit fit with both the Mesmer & Necromancer concepts, and if I had to choose, I think they would be fitted better to the necromancer. However, such skills should not be the focus of the class', as they are both designed for disruption, not damage, with mesmer's leaning more towards directly ****ing the enemy, while necromancers are more debuffing with some party support.

revaer · Oct 12, 2007, 07:13 AM // 07:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

For GW2, i would like these ideas to integrate the two playstyles further:
-elimination of the PvP-only character
-enough player slots to play all primary classes
-UAX while in a PvP area
-Max armor while in a PvP area
-All players instantly at Level cap while in a PvP area
-max weaponry in a PvP
-Essentially, the PvE character turns into the PvP-only character's behavior in a PvP area. Players would also be able to access "tiers" of PvP, based on their on accomplishments.

Personally, I would keep PvP characters. The ease of re-rolling is important. Otherwise UAX would be pretty much pointless as you don't get to play all the professions anyway, unless there is a way to easily change your primary. But as long as the entrances to the "structured pvp" areas, as the devs call it, are in the starting location of PvE characters (or if they are accessible through map travel), I don't mind.

Also, what do you mean by "tiers" of PvP?

-Pluto- · Oct 12, 2007, 07:42 AM // 07:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Age

I am pretty sure ther will be a Warrior as it is very common in other games like GW and in 250 years it is not enough totake it away.We in the real world have had Warriors for over since way BC.

There will be a warrior. will it be the GW warrior though, or some retarded new warrior class?

Quote:

Originally Posted by gigashadow

Ritualists and Paragons just need to be removed entirely.

Paragons and rits actually aren't too terrible. Personally, I'd rather do away with dervishes and assassins.

Shmanka · Oct 12, 2007, 07:56 AM // 07:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by frojack

If anyone can make it happen, it's these guys.

Blizzard?...

revaer · Oct 12, 2007, 08:49 AM // 08:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by -Pluto-

Paragons and rits actually aren't too terrible. Personally, I'd rather do away with dervishes and assassins.

No offense but I think all of the non-core classes are terrible. But if some of the new classes have to stay, I'd at least redesign them completely. Anything resembling Leadership, Aggressive Refrain, Recall, Grenth, Deadly Paradox, Augury of Death, Black Lotus Strike, Blades of Steel etc. shouldn't remain in GW2. I don't believe the game mechanics will change so much that skills or attributes like that wouldn't be imba.

tmakinen · Oct 12, 2007, 09:27 AM // 09:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by revaer

Personally, I would keep PvP characters. The ease of re-rolling is important.

The current GW system is a kind of a kludge, and based on what I've read so far, the GW2 approach will be something like:

* there is just one type of character instead of separate PvE and PvP ones
* characters have permanent access to most or all PvP areas but only those PvE areas that they've unlocked so far by playing PvE
* once a character enters a PvP staging area:
1. his/her armor/health/attributes are scaled to max level
2. all skills become available (or at least those unlocked on the account)
3. s/he gets access to the PvP equipment crafting dialog
* when a character leaves the PvP area all changes are reverted back and PvP equipment becomes unusable

This way you don't lose anything in flexibility but gain unity in character creation. It doesn't matter that the character you just rolled is a lv1 newbie on the PvE side because when you jump on the PvP side it works exactly the same as the current PvP only characters.

Cobalt · Oct 12, 2007, 10:50 AM // 10:50

For GW2 to be better than GW I think three fundamental areas need to be addressed.

1, They need to hire a beta team; I think I can speak for every person who has forked out $49.99 for a Guild Wars game when I say we spent the money on a finished versions of the product not to become Anets personal army of beta testers. The short version; no more nerfs, if they put it in the game it is in the game, period, as nothing ruins a game faster than a nerf!

2, It is no secret that 75% of the GW "Elite" skills are garbage, thus no one ever uses them. So I came up with a a simple rule of thumb that should be used and would fix most of it and that is; " Any skill that causes a negative affect on the caster does not an Elite make".

3, Putting this a delicately as possible; For god sake hire a heterosexual male to design the males and their Armor!

It is not hard to see the males and their armor are severely masculinity challenged across the board in this game and it continues to get worse with each new class released, it needs to be fixed big time.

lyra_song · Oct 12, 2007, 01:05 PM // 13:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobalt

For GW2 to be better than GW I think three fundamental areas need to be addressed.

1, They need to hire a beta team; I think I can speak for every person who has forked out $49.99 for a Guild Wars game when I say we spent the money on a finished versions of the product not to become Anets personal army of beta testers. The short version; no more nerfs, if they put it in the game it is in the game, period, as nothing ruins a game faster than a nerf!

No more nerfs? Doesn't matter how big an alpha or a beta team is, if an exploit or an imbalanced becomes discovered, it WILL be nerfed.

Nothing ruins a game faster than exploiters and imbalanced builds.

Leaving the game stagnant with no room for adjustment while exploiters and imbalanced builds run rampant isn't a very good design decision.

Quote:

2, It is no secret that 75% of the GW "Elite" skills are garbage, thus no one ever uses them. So I came up with a a simple rule of thumb that should be used and would fix most of it and that is; " Any skill that causes a negative affect on the caster does not an Elite make".

lol. While its not secret a lot of the elite skills aren't that great, quite a few elites are elites for the reason that they don't want them being used with other elites.

Skills are balanced in guild wars through: Strength of effect, cost, cast time, recharge, negative effect.

A powerful effect is balanced by: high cost, high cast time, high recharge or a a negative effect. Its a very simple system that i think you fail to grasp.

The only skills with powerful effects and little side-effects are the PvE skills, and they are quite imbalanced.

Quote:

3, Putting this a delicately as possible; For god sake hire a heterosexual male to design the males and their Armor!

It is not hard to see the males and their armor are severely masculinity challenged across the board in this game and it continues to get worse with each new class released, it needs to be fixed big time.

Um...i think your perspective is quite a hard one to defend, if you are specifying to the Paragon's controversial skirt and nippled armor implies that the designers are gay...I don't think you wanna go there.

dpcash · Oct 12, 2007, 01:40 PM // 13:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

Um...i think your perspective is quite a hard one to defend, if you are specifying to the Paragon's controversial skirt and nippled armor implies that the designers are gay...I don't think you wanna go there.

Para in a skirt?

How about Derv in a dress?

Not necessarily a gay designer...

Maybe a female with a sick sense of humor!

lyra_song · Oct 12, 2007, 01:53 PM // 13:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by dpcash

Para in a skirt?

How about Derv in a dress?

Not necessarily a gay designer...

Maybe a female with a sick sense of humor!

I dont see how having a skirt is non-masculine. Pants were originally for women and skirts were for men.

Pants are quite contradictory to the male anatomy since they bifurcate your reproductive organs. In this modern age, men no longer ride horses as a primary transportation, so there is no need to wear pants anymore.

The Dervish design is not coincidental that they wear a hood and robes and a scythe, since it its thematic of the grim reaper...

I think the only ones lacking any masculinity are the male players without any self confidence who seem to think that these designs somehow make them look any less manly.

Muspellsheimr · Oct 12, 2007, 01:56 PM // 13:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by dpcash

Para in a skirt?

How about Derv in a dress?

Sense when have robes become dress'? Seriously, try identifying things before you speak - and there is nothing wrong about robes on men. The dervish actually look pretty badass with the robes.

I do think the paragon armor looks gay though.