GW2 Suggestions Thread

[Dace Hunters]

Originally Posted by Elle Bishop

I don't want for every monk to be a Sylvari and every warrior be a Norn.

Agreed, but you have to accept that physically a norn is going to be better at smashing you with a hammer than a tiny Asura. I think that all races should have the potential to be very good at any proffession but some races are better suited for one than another, the differences shouldn't be huge but they should be there. ie a norn is stronger and does more damage with attacks but is rather big and slow, whilst an asura does less damage with attacks but is much quicker and more nimble, faster attack rate ect. Your choice of race shouldn't dominate the way you play the game, your choice of profession should, but each race should have small differences in the way they do things else theres not much point in having races at all

[Curseman]

Originally Posted by Dace Hunters

Agreed, but you have to accept that physically a norn is going to be better at smashing you with a hammer than a tiny Asura.

No you don't. Not as long as the smallest female warrior model in GW1 is no worse at it than the largest male warrior model.

Originally Posted by Dace Hunters

I think that all races should have the potential to be very good at any proffession but some races are better suited for one than another, the differences shouldn't be huge but they should be there. ie a norn is stronger and does more damage with attacks but is rather big and slow, whilst an asura does less damage with attacks but is much quicker and more nimble, faster attack rate ect. Your choice of race shouldn't dominate the way you play the game, your choice of profession should, but each race should have small differences in the way they do things else theres not much point in having races at all

Small differences are still differences, and balancing them for every class to be playable on an even level will be just shy of impossible. No one wants to be gimped so everyone will follow the ideal path, and you'll be right back to every fighter being X and every archer being Y.

[The Great Al]

Originally Posted by Dace Hunters

Agreed, but you have to accept that physically a norn is going to be better at smashing you with a hammer than a tiny Asura. I think that all races should have the potential to be very good at any proffession but some races are better suited for one than another, the differences shouldn't be huge but they should be there. ie a norn is stronger and does more damage with attacks but is rather big and slow, whilst an asura does less damage with attacks but is much quicker and more nimble, faster attack rate ect. Your choice of race shouldn't dominate the way you play the game, your choice of profession should, but each race should have small differences in the way they do things else theres not much point in having races at all

I agree. I think basically that the race could take the place of the second profession. There weren't a lot of W/E's, but there were some, so there's no reason there won't be Warriors who are of Asuran race.

I dislike having to pick a profession at all. I wish that you could just pick your strength/dexterity/wisdom, etc, without being forced into the same cookie cutter stats as everyone else.

[Elle Bishop]

Originally Posted by Curseman

Small differences are still differences, and balancing them for every class to be playable on an even level will be just shy of impossible. No one wants to be gimped so everyone will follow the ideal path, and you'll be right back to every fighter being X and every archer being Y.

I'm afraid of this happening. OMFG your a x Monk or a y warrior fAILZ! noob!

[sportacus]

I don't know if it has been suggested in this thread, but i think there should be at least some spells/skills that don't necessarily need a target or your location to work.Something like being able to use firestorm where there aren't any enemies with the hopes that they're about to get there. or casting a ward halfway across the compass.

[HuntMaster Avatar]

My only suggestion is that Anet put forth the extra effort to make Guildwars 2 a good game. I know, what a ground breaking and original idea.

[Sword Hammer Axe]

Originally Posted by HuntMaster Avatar

My only suggestion is that Anet put forth the extra effort to make Guildwars 2 a good game. I know, what a ground breaking and original idea.

I hope I'm being sarcastic when I say "Yes it is" :P

[Owik Gall]

Here's a ravishing idea! Make voice emotes! Specifically for each class and each gender. Hey, they went as far as adding voice responses to the EotN NPCs. So, why not this?

[Obrien Xp]

I second those voice emotes.

Here's one for the community. Lets add click to move to gw2
Seeing as they so far have said that it won't be in there.

[Voska]

I personally think that it would be awesome to be ale to play as a centaur. I agree with the idea that races should have advantages in certain classes. Although I have no idea what class would be good for centaurs. Maybe a new one?????

[Aljasha]

Originally Posted by Owik Gall

Hey, they went as far as adding voice responses to the EotN NPCs.

it would be awesome, if they implement voice responses to the npcs from the start. a rpg gains so much flair by adding such small features, but they are definately worth the investment.

[Curseman]

Originally Posted by sportacus

I don't know if it has been suggested in this thread, but i think there should be at least some spells/skills that don't necessarily need a target or your location to work.Something like being able to use firestorm where there aren't any enemies with the hopes that they're about to get there. or casting a ward halfway across the compass.

Spells that target a location instead of a person/monster? Definitely. I don't know why they didn't put them in GW1 to be honest.

Originally Posted by Elle Bishop

I'm afraid of this happening. OMFG your a x Monk or a y warrior fAILZ! noob!

Seriously. I pretty much always choose human in everything, and I'd rather not have half of the classes in the game cut off from me (whether literally, or balance-wise) because of that.

[nilzardo]

My suggestions:

1. 2-handed axes, swords, hammers,...

2. Put everything (except for FoW, UW etc.) on one big map, an expansion would just increase the map size instead of having a new one. I'ts pretty annoying having to zone more than once when wanting to go from some random town in Elona to some random town in Tyria. Also, a complete world map would be much prettier and less complicated

3. Make us be able to go practically anywhere on the map. Like that place above the Magumma and Kryta, the big black island in then north west corner of the Tyrian map, any slope of the shiverpeak mountains, north of the desert and south of Ascalon, EVERYWHERE I know it's a big thing to ask, but it would be amazing. Also some more open meadow like areas would be great.

4. Tattoos could be placed for a price, but some exceptional ones based on titles and achievements would be cool to. (would fit great for norn characters)

5. If Elona and Cantha aren't going to be placed in the original gw2 please give them to us in expansions :P

6. Tengu and centaurs would be cool as playable races. (but that would probably require a lot of work.)

7. Customizalbe heroes: this would work just like the character creation system. A system that allows you to play with your heroes for a while would be nice too, but they shouldn't just be accesible any time since your actual character should still be the main one. Maybe your heroes would only be playable when your character is dead or something?

8. Scars on your body depending on your death count. They (or some of them) could be removed at a gold price if someone doesn't like them.

9. Let us SLAY PALAWA JOKO.

10. This has been suggested before, but auction houses should make it in the game so Spamadan could be renamed Kamadan again.

Thank you for reading

[Sword Hammer Axe]

While I realise that suggestion time is probably over since they are probably rather far in the game progress I still just HAVE to say this XD:

I think they have this in WoW as far I can remember, and if I'm correct then then there is SOME good qualities of WoW that GW could learn from XD

What I want:
Varied strength monsters in every area. It would be nice if there were certain monsters in an area that are just too much for someone to handle. Of course they should not be in the way of low level characters so that progress is impossible. They should be avoidable except in certain areas like a cave or a tomb or something that are completely intended for high level characters :P

Example:
In Old Ascalon there are an area where there are a lot of Warthogs around level 5, Hulking Stone Elementals level 10, Gargoyles level 14, Hydra's level 22 or something like that.

Reason I want this:
Always missed a lot of strong monsters in low level areas, so that an experienced character could come back and have a decent fight. Of course in GW1 HM was implanted and thank god for that, but with that every monster became high level and you couldn't run around and meaninglessly slaugher small creatures. I would like to be able to do both at once XD

[PahaLukki]

I was fighting against raptors and noticed insane blocking. Even when completely surrounded. Then I remembered that in old Diablo 1, getting swamped meant a low armor class warrior would get wasted no matter how high his blocking was (in that game over 75% blocking, if not perfect, was possible). Blocking meant you were able to duel effectively but it wasn't much for crowd control due to only being able to block 1 strike at once.

I think for GW2, they should implement better (or any!) block animations, but also on-hit animations, that have a very short duration (0.1-0.2 seconds). And this should stop the character in place for the block/hit for 0.2 seconds, but to keep the game mechanics in place, not interrupt any skills or spells, though somehow I would prefer if it interrupted a spell, but not attacks. Effectively 0.2 second stutter would reduce constant running during melee. But also, this should have the effect of not being able to block 2 or more things simulatenously (no blocks during the block animation)! Because 75% block all, and simultaneously, is a bit god-mode like. At least when the last enemy is being swamped, no amount of blocking should help him anymore, as the attacks are coming at the same time from all around. Well, you can imagine how one blocks 4 attacks at once... can you? This would also reduce Aegis to a far more tolerable level of defense (it was nerfed for PvP now?). The other way around is to simply get rid of any blocking enchantments and stances of over 50%. Or make warrior's cunning actually useful by having it more maintainable and cheaper than 10e.

[domicro]

The one thing that frustrates me in gw the most are bots. Arenanet nerfs the loot, which causes even more bots. So basically they are encouraging cheaters and gold farming companies. Lets face it guys they do it on purpose. I just hope i dont have to explain, because its complicated. Now, about gw2 ( finally ) :
Jeff Strain said in an interview that gear will be a lot more important in gw2.
Im not sure if a thread about that interview is already on guild wars guru,
and since i can not use search function at the moment , i dont even care.
I have just raised my eyebrow when i read it back then, im pretty confused, so if someone can solve the mystery for me :
1) Arenanet said they will stick to some guild wars design philosophies, which included
skillfull and active play, whats funny that they even mention "nobody wants to waste a lot of time on grinding just so that they can have certain gear so that they can be competitive" (or something like it). Isnt making gear more important totally opposite than this philosophy?
2) Gear being more important will cause the game to be more like wow, and less like guild wars. Now, developers stated they they do not want to clone wow, and that they "dont plan on chasing any mmo out there". I guess gear being more important indicates that they lied. I guess greed for wow popularity and incomes have greatly affected them. Like does anyone really wants gear based character power? NO! Not a single mmo player out there wants gear to be more important, which brings me to my next point.
3) Gear being more important will encourage bots and gold farming companies, which brings me to my theory that arenanet encourages bots and gold farming companies on purpose. They do ban players sometimes, but there are so many bots left in game,
that it just proves my theory. The only reason they sometimes ban people is because they dont want people to figure out my theory.

So what are your thoughts about all this?

[PahaLukki]

Gear-dependency can be made good or bad. I hope if there is going to be more gear dependency, they go they the better route and choose a lesser form of dependency!

I've noticed gear makes less difference as you play diablo 1 than diablo 2. There are three things that affect this. Base item stat increase and suffix/prefix % increase, the additional third one is the way how character's strength is applied through a weapon.

In Diablo 1 you start with a 2-6 dmg sword. You end the game with a 6-15 dmg sword with 175% enhanced damage at maximum. That sword then deals roughly 41 dmg max? The difference of start and end weapon damage is 41/6*100% = 680% increase from start game weapon.

In Diablo 2 you start with 2-6 dmg sword, and can end up with anything up to 50 or 70 max base damage. Let's pick 50. To this we can add a cruel prefix of +300% ed. The sword now does 200 damage. That is a difference of 200/6*100% = 3333% damage difference to start game weapon. That is a huge range, and meaning items are super-important. You think that's bad, think this:

In Diablo 2 your skills add %-damage to your existing damage, the damage of your weapon. So that insane damage is then multiplied by your skills, for a further up to +300% easily with masteries and skills. This means the skills only serve to enhance the glory or crappiness of your weapon. If you cannot find a decent weapon, your character will be properly gimped and unplayable. This is what every gear-game opponent is probably against!

This wasn't so in Diablo 1. There you had a fixed +damage, a fixed number really, dependent on character strength. That meant a late warrior could do 100 damage with the best weapon in game, Kings sword of haste 175% ed, but switching to a short sword of 2-6, he would only do 41 - 6 less damage, that is 36 less so 64. His damage went down 36% and he is still able to kill the monsters with just 1-5 more hits maybe. While in Diablo 2 your late barbarian can do anything up to 10 k damage, but if you give him a short sword he is sent right back to the sub-1000 range.

I don't get how some people oppose gear dependency, but do not understand that you can change so much through gameplay mechanics. Simple observations if you just play some of the gear games..

[Tender Wolf]

Somewhere in this thread I have other suggestions, but a new one comes to mind:

I like the leveling system in Guild Wars right now. It doesn't take a week to gain a level (glares at WoW) and it's relatively easy to do. I hope they keep the same leveling system. Or if they make it not so easy, don't make it take a week or even days to gain a level. That would be even more grind and people don't want that in this game since it's supposed to be non-grind based.

[domicro]

Please take on your mind all features developers have stated for gw2 before reading this post.
I noticed that arenanet was discussing to have 100 levels or unlimited levels.
They probably already decided, but here is my IDEA :

PVE :
1) 100 levels because that way players get the best feel of progression.

I know that gw2 will have expansions instead, but they can still make campaign to be a part of what you get in an expansion, the difference would be :
-no tutorial area
-no "beginner" zones
-no new classes
-each expansion would add levels to the game so that doing quests and missions in it actually makes sense.
-I know that the storyline isnt linear in gw2, but instead has story arcs, and a story arc doesnt depend on another story arc, and you could complete story arcs in any order you like, regardless of your level. It means that when you complete a quest or a mission you gain certain percent of exp you need to level up. If you are level 1 and complete quest "A", you gain 20% of exp you need to level up, but you would also gain 20% if you are level 99. Each story arc is a chain of missions and quests, missions and quests in it are being unlocked in certain order, you unlock 1 mission or quest for a story arc "A" when you complete 1 mission or quest in story arc "A". My Idea would be that once you complete all story arcs in a campaign, then you get "final story arc" unlocked, which is basically the ending for each story arc in a campaign, that means that all story arcs share same ending of a their stories, which is actually a big conclusion and ending of the whole campaign.
-each expansion would have 1 campaign
-gw2 without expansions has 1 campaign
Each expansion would add additional levels to the game so that completing quests and missions makes sense. If you complete first campaign, without repeating any quest or a mission, participating in world pvp or in dungeons, you would be level 100.

2) Players would not gain experience by killing monsters.

3) Players would not gain money and items (loot) by killing monsters.

4) This is for quests (missions would have same system as in gw1) : When you are in party, all party members have their levels equal to the level of the member with highest level, developers call it sidekick. When your party interacts with a monster, that monster becomes "reserved" for your party. It means that its level becomes the same as the level of the party member with the highest level.The interaction that caused the monster to become reserved is calculated based on its "new" level after it got reserved. It also means that only players from your party can interact with it for as long as its reserved. When a monster leaves its "original spot" for a certain radius, it is no longer reserved. "Original spot" is a spot where the monster was at the moment your party reserved it.

5) Sidekick : You are level 10 primary elementalist. Your friend is level 50 warrior. So basically, when you party with him, you temporary "jump" for 40 levels. Now, your elementalist at level 10 has 5 energy storage and 5 wind magic. By jumping to level 50, he would gain an amount of attribute points that combined with his current used & unused attribute points give an amount of attribute points that level 50 characters have. Attribute distribution over certain attributes would be based on his current attributes,
which is 5 energy storage and 5 wind magic, and the rest 0.
Lets assume he would gain 100 attribute points by jumping for 40 levels.
Then the automatic distribution goes like this :
[5(energy storage) +5(wind magic) =10. 100:10=10. 10*5 (energy storage)=50. 10*5(wind magic)= 50.] Sorry for me being bad in math :P.
Anyway, this would mean that 50 attribute points would automatically upgrade wind magic, while another 50 energy storage.
Of course that attribute upgrades would be like this then :
Upgrading wind magic to rank 2 would require same amount of
attribute points as upgrading it to rank 20. Of course this could lead to many people using skills of 4 or more attributes at once, BUT you could adjust
skills to it, and skills which do non-numerical effects, would require certain attribute rank if you want that effect to work. So, it is possible to still keep people on using only 2 or 3 attributes with this system.
The same way that experience functions would attribute points function as well. Developers stated that gear will not be class dependent. Lets assume
you have a gear which gives you + 50 physical defense, +10 elemental defense at level 10. Gear for level 15 would give you for example +75 physical defense, and + 15 elemental defense. Of course that there would not be a gear for every level, but if you jump from 10 to 50, and there isnt
a gear for level 50, and the first gear below that is for level 45, you would than have your gear "buffed" so that its original stats and the buff combined give the stats of a level 45 gear. Of course this boost would also depend on how your gear is customised. So if the gear on level 10 gives 50 physical defense and 10 elemental defense, if its boosted on level 45 it would give you for example 1750 physical defense and 350. Notice how 1750/350 is the same as 50/10. Im not sure if this would be the best way, since you can also do it as a difference between 50 and 10 being 40, which would mean that then we have 1750 physical defense and 1710 elemental defense.
Next, you are level 1 and you have 25 health and 10 energy.
When you gain a level you would gain 25 health and 10 energy.
If you had 30 health and 5 energy, you would gain 30 health and 5 energy when you level up. This depends on your primary profession of course.
I see a flaw here if race affect stats. So instead of an asura having inherent advantage as elementalist over norn elementalist I did it differently.
Your character would have racial attribute of his race+ primary attribute of his primary class+ secondary attributes of primary and secondary class.
Racial attribute doesnt have inherent effect, but there are skills that belong to it. It is the same as as a secondary, but has an importance as primary,
because it depends on your race and you cant change your race of a character. Norn racial attribute would probably have form skills, currently most known is bear. Racial attribute skills would be balanced with other attribute skills, because if they are not balanced, that would be the same as giving races inherent advantages then, which would force people to choose asura if they want to be elementalist. And besides its better to have balanced skills separated into more attributes because its easier to balance them then.

6)The reason for monsters having levels would be when you fight certain monsters and bosses. If you are level 20 and do quest in which you fight "werewolf" level 20 and "werewolf queen" which is level 24, that would mean if you are level 40 doing that quest, you would fight "werewolf" level 40 and "werewolf queen" level 44. (no, not level 48 as some of you may think.) Basically, werewolf queen level in this case is "your level +4 because she is a boss" in easy mode. If you do hard mode, her level is then "your level +4 because she is a boss + few levels because its hard mode".

7) Players would gain experience, money and items as a reward for completing a quest or a mission. I dont know what kind of quests will gw2 have, but if it has standard "kill 10 bulls", "collect 10 bull horns", then the solution is very simple : Each party member has its own quest counter.For example, if there is a party with 2 party members doing the same quest each of them has to kill 10 bulls. This is the simplest possible solution for scaling up in difficulty. So that not every member has to talk to npc to get his "copy" of the quest, a player could send a quest invitation to party member and that player could accept it if he/she has it unlocked. Every time you send a quest invitation, it is automatically sent to each party member. If a party member already has that quest on his/her quest log he/she does not receive the invitation for it. First time you complete a quest or a mission, it is in easy mode. All quests and missions would be repeatable. If you want to repeat a quest or a mission, you have to complete the whole campaign in easy mode first. Completion of campaign unlocks hard mode for its quest and missions. When you decide to repeat missions or quests, you would only gain experience if it is in easy mode. In hard mode you get money and items same as you get when completing the quest or a mission for the first time and more experience than in easy mode. However, if you complete the same quest or a mission in hard mode twice you would get only experience the second time. You could repeat any quest or mission any time since you already have all missions and quests unlocked from before. If any member in party has hard mode, every party member mode becomes hard if they have it unlocked. If not, then all hard modes in party become easy modes.
You could switch on and off hard modes only while outside of the party,
you might consider it a "toggle self-buff" and each time you switch from easy to hard, everything you achieved in a quest is reset. For example if you killed 5/10 bulls, if you change mode, it becomes 0/10 bulls. When you switch from hard to easy there is no reset. You could see if a player has hard mode unlocked.

8) Dungeons : Instanced, rules 2) and 3) not valid. To be honest, dungeons are only played for farming, but i decided not to bash developers ideas for gw2 so i complimented it instead.

9) You would gain experience by participating in world pvp.

Reason for this kind of system :
I would like to play an MMO as a game, not as everyday job.
Basically, MMOs these days have gameplay which is more like an everyday job for a player than a game. I mean on grind. Even if the game has like so many quests that you dont need to grind to level up or has only few levels or no levels at all, you must still farm for money.

[Tender Wolf]

I've got a suggestion for possible expansion packs:

There have been a few threads asking if Elona and Cantha will be a part of GW2; the main storyline is currently known to be in Tyria. Perhaps ANet will release expansion with Cantha and Elona, and also Utopia.

With each expansion, instead of new professions (because hopefully all 10 will be kept to begin with), there would be new races. Tengu for Cantha, Centaurs for Elona, and something else for Utopia.