Curse

Wild Karrde · Jan 06, 2009, 12:01 AM // 00:01

I actually liked playing Thunderhead keep when it was hard. I played it all the time because of the challange; after the nerf I hated it. Being able to take a picinic during a mission cause of how dumbed down it got was not fun.

I agree with Arkantos Original Post. I personally believe there are some other things that need to be tonned down and such but thats for another time.

GW1 is too far gone for these adjustments to have too much of an effect but it doesnt mean they shouldnt be done.

Easy buttons are never good for a game. And they are the reason so many people are bored of Guild Wars, thus making the game DEAD.

I think part of the reason some (note how I said SOME and NOT all) people are so against the adjustments and therefore against promoting more skilled poeple and play is that fact that they are afraid they wont be able to do these areas anymore. (also note I didnt say they couldnt do it I said they MIGHT think they wont be able to)

Another fact is there will ALWAYS be bad people in every game no matter how long these people play. Thus there will always be some PuGs that fail dismally. So saying PuGs suck just H/H is only true if the players are bad and players are bad because of the the easy buttons installed and if they were gone then they are bad because of lack of a challenge for them in the game, so they can never get good at it.

We can hope that Anet learned from this and will bring back the Skill>Time for GW2 and KEEP IT THAT WAY.

You dont get good in a game by beating up weak retards... you get better and enjoy it more by playing against people better/on par with you, until you are superior/at their level.

Age · Jan 06, 2009, 12:06 AM // 00:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arkantos

If by "kill PvE" you mean "Kill overpowered gimmicks to promote team work, strategy and coordination", then yes.

You're right, PvE is dead. Do you think these gimmicks are helping it

They sure are helping it or more would of left long ago making a very dead game.This is ok for you as you are in great guild with a good active Alliance.There are those of us who aren't in very active guilds or alliances.

What really is killing pve is all the title grind and the lack of content.I would say that most don't want title grind.EoTN is just one big title grind once you finesh it.I rather loath it and they want this game played with groups why the solo quests.EoTN is guinia pig for GW2 well part of it is.

Your suggestions are great way of killing PvE and I have been playing before release.The change to SF is even more nerfed than the pvp version I believe [shadow form] and necros haven't been the same since SR capped.I don't see the other skills being that powerfull as there are still groups forming with them atleast they are less powerfull than any Wow skill that lets you solo.

Arkantos · Jan 06, 2009, 12:09 AM // 00:09

Quote:

They sure are helping it or more would of left long ago making a very dead game.This is ok for you as you are in great guild with a good active Alliance.There are those of us who aren't in very active guilds or alliances.

Which wouldn't be the case if ANet actually did something about them early.

I don't know what guild you think I'm in, but I'm currently in a guild with 5 other friends, no alliance.

Quote:

Your suggestions are great way of killing PvE and I have been playing before release.The change to SF is even more nerfed than the pvp version I believe and necros haven't been the same since SR capped.I don't see the other skills being that powerfull as there are still groups forming with them atleast they are less powerfull than any Wow skill that lets you solo.

Read my suggestion and read the PvP version. I believe you're wrong. My suggestion to SR is only hurting groups with 3+ necros. If anything, it's a buff to 1/2 necro parties.

Also, GW != WoW

Crom The Pale · Jan 06, 2009, 12:20 AM // 00:20

One of the biggest problems you face Arkantos is that changing the skills won't change the game or how people play it.

If you nerf skills one of three things happens.

1) players try to find away to play exactly as they used to but with a different skill/build
2) players quit using that skill at all and move onto some other 'gimick' build
3) players that didn't use the affected skills shrug and continue on as normal

What you want is a change that makes player WANT to use a skill/build and battle through a mission/dungeon once again.

Where is your positive pull? Your hook that brings players on the fence over and has them saying, "Yea! I can't wait to try this build and clear a zone/mission/dungeon!".

Age · Jan 06, 2009, 12:26 AM // 00:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arkantos

Which wouldn't be the case if ANet actually did something about them early.

I don't know what guild you think I'm in, but I'm currently in a guild with 5 other friends, no alliance.

Read my suggestion and read the PvP version. I believe you're wrong. My suggestion to SR is only hurting groups with 3+ necros. If anything, it's a buff to 1/2 necro parties.

Also, GW != WoW

What do you mean if Anet did something about them early to what.?I thought you were in Ractoth's guild SMS.SF is about the same as you propose along with pvp yours higher energy cost longer casting time with shorter recharge.My necro hasn't been the same since the cap

and GW=WoW is PVE skills at thier current state they are no where near as to what powerfull wow skills are.

Arkantos · Jan 06, 2009, 01:07 AM // 01:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Age

What do you mean if Anet did something about them early to what.?I thought you were in Ractoth's guild SMS.SF is about the same as you propose along with pvp yours higher energy cost longer casting time with shorter recharge.My necro hasn't been the same since the cap

and GW=WoW is PVE skills at thier current state they are no where near as to what powerfull wow skills are.

If ANet did something about balance in PvE, people wouldn't be leaving the game, and it wouldn't be as bad as it is now. And no, SMS died months ago.

The buff I suggest for shadow form makes it so it can recharge in 34 seconds and it can last up to 25 seconds. How is that anything with the PvP version? Also, my suggestion removes the cap, so I don't see why you bothered mentioning that.

Wait, what? You're saying GW=WoW, than you're saying WoW has more overpowered skills?

kostolomac · Jan 06, 2009, 01:17 AM // 01:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arkantos

If ANet did something about balance in PvE, people wouldn't be leaving the game, and it wouldn't be as bad as it is now.

People leave the game mostly because they realise that after beating the campaigns the only thing left is title grind because there is no new content. Most people on my friends list left because of that , not poor skill balancing.

Tenebrae · Jan 06, 2009, 02:07 AM // 02:07

Ou God dont u have a limit ? why the hell u put so much emotions on a damn game ?. Look it with perspective , just an example of SY , there are some steps where this skill could be :
A: Useless
B: Not bad but others do better
C: Good for some zones or game style
D: Good always , a "must have" on most X or /X prof build
E: Overpowered and most wanted ( if u dont have this skill at good rank you are out )
F: I win button

I dont really think that theres a skill that is on F state but ok. If you think that some skill is on F state ( like UB was ) and you really think it needs to be ner.... i mean "balanced" why can you just go ONE STEP DOWN , not all the way down ?. Theres something between black and white , you know ?. Arkantos uses so much words just to avoid writing "SY is overpowered and i only want warriors to use it" wich is what he really thinks , wich is taking the skill from the F state ( or E ) to the A state for ALL profs except warrior. Not fair sorry , thats reality.

@HawkofStorms : I really find the irony in your comment about you telling someone not to troll . You were doing fine till then ... it was like reading a poster that says "no posters allowed" , dont give advices to anyone ( wow , double irony , damn im on a roll ).

HawkofStorms · Jan 06, 2009, 02:13 AM // 02:13

Again, posters can disagree on opinion without calling each other names. Stop doing that.

You keep insulting people (you are the one inputing "emotion" into this, Arkantos was purely anayltic when this started. Everybody personally attacking him is when he became defensive).

Hanok Odbrook · Jan 06, 2009, 03:23 AM // 03:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wild Karrde

You dont get good in a game by beating up weak retards... you get better and enjoy it more by playing against people better/on par with you, until you are superior/at their level.

Perhaps in PvP, but this is PvE we are talking about. How a player enjoys one mode does not necessarily translate to the other. That's why PvP's dependency on the PvE portion of the game was severed long ago, and we are now seeing more PvE specific content that just would not work in PvP.

What you state here is more of a PvPer's outlook - PvEers (at least the ones I have known through my many long years) don't base their enjoyment of a game on being equal or superior in skill to other players.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crom The Pale

One of the biggest problems you face Arkantos is that changing the skills won't change the game or how people play it.

Good point here, as proven by the history of nerfs and skill balances throughout GW's history. DoA is a good example - after the initial newness of the area wore off, it saw very little action until UB came about, and players figured out how to use the skill to benefit completing the area. Now it is a ghost town again - Anet eliminated one problem without fixing the root of the problem itself, so nothing ends up being solved.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arkantos

If ANet did something about balance in PvE, people wouldn't be leaving the game, and it wouldn't be as bad as it is now.

That's really one of those blanket statements that are wrong just as much as they are right. No one can really say for certain why players are leaving the game (from what I can see, we have more players today than when we started), and I have seen many, many varying reasons why some of the people I know no longer play on a regular basis.

It again comes down what one is looking for in the game. By limiting options, one limits the number of players in that game. By providing as many options for game play as possible, one increases the potential player base. The nerfing of skills and builds naturally limits the number of choices players have in choosing how to play the game, therefore will decrease the viable player base.

In my view, it is much better to give players as many viable options for a character and let them choose their desired level of challenge based upon that. Just like choosing to explore an 8-member area with a 4-member team creates an additional challenge, so to does our choice of which skills to bring to an area. The addition of Heroes, PvE skills, and Consumables, as all increased the number of options we have when playing the game. It is up to us to choose the type of balance we want by choosing to play in the manner in which we have the most fun.

Hanok Odbrook

A11Eur0 · Jan 06, 2009, 03:47 AM // 03:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arkantos

They'll fail because they're bad, and bad players shouldn't be doing elite areas/hard mode. That is just common sense. If something is supposed to be hard, you're supposed to be good.

No, I don't think inexperienced players are bad. Everyone who plays Guild Wars was inexperienced, but not everyone who plays Guild Wars has been bad. You're inexperienced when you first try and complete an area and fail. You're bad when you fail after multiple times, and do not try to learn from your mistakes. And no, I don't think players who use gimmick builds are bad. I do, however, think players who only use gimmick builds and fail with balanced builds are bad, though.

Yes, these gimmick builds do introduce players to elite areas. The problem is, these players are introduced to it with an overpowered gimmick. They don't truly learn anything about the area. Once introduced by gimmicks, they still don't know jack, and will still run gimmicks, and failing at balanced when they try. Players should be running balanced first, than gimmicks. At least that way they learn about the area, and (hopefully) become a more skilled player.

How do gimmick builds have nothing to do with balance? Seriously, think that one over.

Sorry but lol. Talking about PvE and balance is a farce. If you wanted PvE to be balanced, remove Duncan the Black's damage-return "skill". Make it so that spirits in Slaver's Exile can't overlap like they do BLATANTLY. Make it so PvE mobs have to follow the same rules as the players. Give them better AI. PvE skills only make it so that the players can stand a chance against these super-powered monster skills and inherent attributes and have fun with it. I don't think that constantly beating against a brick wall against a broken monster skill is very fun. If you remove PvE skills that make PvE fun again, remove the monster skills and imba inherent attributes that Anet felt were necessary to add "challenge" to the game.
I'll repeat my strong point: Pugs and inexperienced players don't "roll" elite areas. They hardly even complete them without serious issues. So your entire point is moot.

pumpkin pie · Jan 06, 2009, 04:40 AM // 04:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by deank81

Actually, it does affect other players. All you see is glf cryer, sf tank, etc, etc. I honestly don't understand what ppl have against toning down some ridiculously overpowered skills. It will make hard mode a bit harder which is more challenging and fun, but still very doable. It would just require more thought and teamconsult. Combined with the attempt to buff underused elites (which allows a bit more builddiversity), it would allow more flexibility so cryers and sf tanks and what not are not necessary anymore. However, as long as they exist....

Question: what do you think these players you see looking for cryer, sf tank, etc etc are doing?

My answer: team work, they are playing with other players.

If this thread is to nerf skills so players will play together. Then it does not serve any purpose because those players are already forming team and playing together.

If the game is made "harder", and shadow form is not maintainable anymore, what do you tell all the assassin players when they ask to join your elite mission group? It will become even harder for players to get group. It will be switch back to only the "elite few" will be able to play in elite missions/maps. Hence defeating any purpose of promoting team work.

"words in brackets" may have different definitions view by different people.

Arkantos, sorry, I know my posts are not exactly skill-change related, but it is pretty hard if you limit your thread just to discuss change of the skills you want change, like it is a set thing, where in fact its not set at all. There are players who do play other builds making their own game as fun as possible for themselves. Why do you think I take Zenmai and Anton in my team for?

Lhim · Jan 06, 2009, 06:48 AM // 06:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

Question: what do you think these players you see looking for cryer, sf tank, etc etc are doing?

My answer: team work, they are playing with other players.

If this thread is to nerf skills so players will play together. Then it does not serve any purpose because those players are already forming team and playing together.

If the game is made "harder", and shadow form is not maintainable anymore, what do you tell all the assassin players when they ask to join your elite mission group? It will become even harder for players to get group. It will be switch back to only the "elite few" will be able to play in elite missions/maps. Hence defeating any purpose of promoting team work.

"words in brackets" may have different definitions view by different people.

Arkantos, sorry, I know my posts are not exactly skill-change related, but it is pretty hard if you limit your thread just to discuss change of the skills you want change, like it is a set thing, where in fact its not set at all. There are players who do play other builds making their own game as fun as possible for themselves. Why do you think I take Zenmai and Anton in my team for?

I see what you mean, and that will probably be the case if the only change would be to tone down overpowered skills. That's why I really like to see more elite skills and hopefully non-elite skills improved per class. So that a group has more viable options: a warrior using A is just as efficient as an assassin using B or Dervish C, etc.
I think it would be nice to be able to join groups with any class like that and not having to have a certain rank. I honestly believe that, slicing some overpowered skills of the top and improving unused ones to a level where they're strong valid options so builddiversity is promoted, is the way to do this and make the game more challenging. But maybe I'm just thinking too rosy

.

the_jos · Jan 06, 2009, 09:26 AM // 09:26

Back to track after my little rant in my last post.

If skills and mechanics are changed, I think they should be tuned for more tactical use.
One such thing is to make CoP only do damage on interrupt (perhaps AoE interrupt like CoF).
Another change is to only damage foes hexed by a mesmer hex and remove one mesmer hex from target (shatter hex with AoE damage and interrupt).
Edit: just to make sure there is no misunderstanding, on each damaged target a mesmer hex is removed. So for use of several CoP several hexes need to be on the foes. This would require some hex stacking.
This would call for some thoughtful use of the skill instead of blind nuking.
And opens some new posibilities.

Regarding SY, I think the skill might last longer (around 10 secs for example) but have a significant cooldown (30/45 secs). Adrenaline can be lowered.
That way it could still give protection when needed (pressured monks, huge AoE damage) while not giving 24/7 protection.

Last Shadow Form.
I really don't know how to change it.
Being able to solo tank is something A-net doesn't mind, but the build causes some problems. The main solution would be to add untargeted or non-spell enchantment removement in some areas, making it less efficient for a solo player to work there.

However, one needs to understand that PvE skills are one of the reasons people still team with other human players. Heroes might be stupid but give a lot of advantages (no afk, no leaving, not bringing wrong builds, very good triggering skills on certain game conditions). PvE skills give the unorganised human player advantage.
And sure it can be abused by the organised few, but how many of the high-end PvE guilds which are able to really abuse them are still around?

Therefore, if something deserves the first change it's consumables.
Not a single one, but the combination.
They buff a party too much when combined and give them advantage over any foe in NM and HM. The only exception I can think of is DoA HM with the environmental effect and maybe Slavers.
I've played enough NM and HM to know the difference and HM with a cons set is in many cases easier than NM without them. I doubt that's the purpose of consumables.

Improvavel · Jan 06, 2009, 09:39 AM // 09:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arkantos

Read my suggestion and read the PvP version. I believe you're wrong. My suggestion to SR is only hurting groups with 3+ necros. If anything, it's a buff to 1/2 necro parties.

This was what made me dislike this thread.

What you mean is "I dont want people to run the 3 necro heroes".

A fine tuned discordway is actually a prime example of hybrid characters and redundancy. They have offensive firepower, some along with healing, others along with protecting, others with utility and shutdown.

They are used instead of other heroes, because other than Paragon and ranger heroes that also have passive ways of energy management, all other heroes suck hard at it (some mesmer builds don't). And melee heroes AI is pathetic.

SY! is powerful and allows for too many mistakes? Yes. Then reduce armor gained to 40 or 60.

Also, I never played cryway, but it seems to me its just another tank and spank, using heavy consumables. I'm ok to remove tank and spank from the game, but truth is, no one complained about old obby tank and spank teams. PPl only laughed at them cause they were slower and frail.

My hopes though, lie in GW2. GW was a very nice experience and a different concept in MMORPG or MMOCRPG.

Hope anet learned with their mistakes and can come with a better version of GW. Just killing time till D3 and GW2, really.

Improvavel · Jan 06, 2009, 09:42 AM // 09:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_jos

Back to track after my little rant in my last post.

If skills and mechanics are changed, I think they should be tuned for more tactical use.
One such thing is to make CoP only do damage on interrupt (perhaps AoE interrupt like CoF).
Another change is to only damage foes hexed by a mesmer hex and remove one mesmer hex from target (shatter hex with AoE damage and interrupt).
This would call for some thoughtful use of the skill instead of blind nuking.
And opens some new posibilities.

Regarding SY, I think the skill might last longer (around 10 secs for example) but have a significant cooldown (30/45 secs). Adrenaline can be lowered.
That way it could still give protection when needed (pressured monks, huge AoE damage) while not giving 24/7 protection.

Last Shadow Form.
I really don't know how to change it.
Being able to solo tank is something A-net doesn't mind, but the build causes some problems. The main solution would be to add untargeted or non-spell enchantment removement in some areas, making it less efficient for a solo player to work there.

However, one needs to understand that PvE skills are one of the reasons people still team with other human players. Heroes might be stupid but give a lot of advantages (no afk, no leaving, not bringing wrong builds, very good triggering skills on certain game conditions). PvE skills give the unorganised human player advantage.
And sure it can be abused by the organised few, but how many of the high-end PvE guilds which are able to really abuse them are still around?

Therefore, if something deserves the first change it's consumables.
Not a single one, but the combination.
They buff a party too much when combined and give them advantage over any foe in NM and HM. The only exception I can think of is DoA HM with the environmental effect and maybe Slavers.
I've played enough NM and HM to know the difference and HM with a cons set is in many cases easier than NM without them. I doubt that's the purpose of consumables.

These are much more acceptable changes. I agree with most of what u said.

Changing without outright destroying the skills or reducing the options.

zwei2stein · Jan 06, 2009, 10:03 AM // 10:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_jos

I doubt that's the purpose of consumables.

How can you doubt that? For me, it is pretty obvious reason they added them. To make HM titles (and GWAMM) doable by every, umm, dedicated player regardless of skill.

---

WoW imba is being mentioned. However, there is one thing: in WoW, you always get imba too late. Gear that makes X easy is usually reward for doing X. By time you are imba enough to break area X there is no point in doing it anymore, but you got just enough imba to try Y (which was impossible without rewards from X) It works insanely well as carrot.

GW does not work this way. In GW, imba breaks game. In WoW it *makes* game.

I wonder how GW would work if PvE skills were reward for doing elite missions.

Tenebrae · Jan 06, 2009, 11:31 AM // 11:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Improvavel

These are much more acceptable changes. I agree with most of what u said.

Changing without outright destroying the skills or reducing the options.

Thats the key , just lower the skill power/viability 1 step down , not ALL the way down to destroy it or dramatically reduce the options. The balance Jos wrote to SY is good , last 10 sec , reuse 30 .... even last like its now , reuse 12 or 15 sec. If u want a 24/7 prot from SY then ull need 2 or 3 ppl with that skill to sync well.

SF is pretty hard to balance , is not a stealth but you can get close to it. Theres somethin that is pretty clear , you cant take out the pros of SF without taking out the contra ( or at least part of it ). To make it even harder its an ELITE skill so that if you nerf it too much will stop being elite . So imho there are some things to watch about this skill :
- God mode ( except for touch skills and untargeted spells/skills )
- Duration ( being able to keep it always on or not )
- Damage reduction while using it ( or even end the SF if you damage someone )
- HP loss when you lose it
Now the 4th point is totally broken , meaning if you lose shadow form you have impressively high chances to DIE fast so .... if you try to ner .... i mean balance shadow form you must boost something a little. Breaking a skill its easy ( hello FGJ pvp ) and we dont need to explain . Balancing some skills is harder but please .... dont call it "balance" when you really mean nerf/break .

Knight O Cydonia · Jan 06, 2009, 11:34 AM // 11:34

My thoughts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arkantos

Shadow form

Currently:

10e/1c/45r

Elite Enchantment Spell. For (5..21) seconds, all hostile Spells that target you fail and all attacks against you miss, but you deal 33% less damage. When Shadow Form ends, lose all but (5..50) Health.

My change:

15e/2c/45r

Elite Enchantment Spell. Lose your curent stance. For (5..25) seconds, all hostile Spells that target you fail and all attacks against you miss. When Shadow Form ends, lose all but (5..50) Health and all enchantments.

I'm not much of a farmer, so i haven't got much of an opinion on this one. It pretty much takes it back to niche boss farming, as theres no way you could 'tank and spank' with the chance of your tank blowing up in longer fights in tougher mobs. But it's a stupid skill.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arkantos

"Save yourselves!".

Currently:

8a

For (4..6) seconds, all other party members gain +100 armor.

My change:

5e/8a/3r

For (3..5) seconds, all other party members gain +(3..5) armor for each rank in Strength.

I like this change, thumbs up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arkantos

Cry of pain

Currently:

10e/.25c/12r

Spell. Interrupt target foe's skill. If that foe was suffering from a Mesmer Hex, that foe and all foes in the area take (65..100) damage.

My change:

10e/.25c/15r

Spell. Interrupt target foe's skill. If that foe was suffering from a Mesmer Hex and you interrupted a spell, that foe and all foes in the area take (10..15) damage for each 2 ranks in Fast Casting.

Hmmm, I just see this as overkill. With those numbers you would have to spec purely into FC just to make it viable, most mesmers I know pretty much run 10 FC max. Even Cry of Frustration does 42 damage at 14 dom, without the need for a mesmer hex on top of this or any title grind. The whole concept of interrupting a hexed foe as a condition just pigeon holes it into an illusion bar. I can only think of a couple of hexes that would complement your suggestion, like Arcane Conundrum and Migraine.

I think it needs to be changed, but more along the lines of making it a non stackable hex. Something like a Web of Disruption / Wastrels Worry hybrid. Just off the top of my head

10e 0.25c 12r

Hex Spell. Interrupt target foe's skill. For 3 seconds target foe is hexed with Cry of Pain. When this hex ends, that foe and all foes in the area take 15...30 damage + 10 damage for each 2 ranks in the Fast Casting attribute. (max 100 dmg).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arkantos

Soul Reaping

Currently: For each point of Soul Reaping, you gain 1 Energy whenever a non-Spirit creature near you dies. You may only gain Energy in this way 3 times every 15 seconds.

My change:

For each point of Soul Reaping, you gain 1 Energy whenever a creature near you dies. You gain half of that energy when a spirit or minion dies. Your energy gain is divided by the number of necromancers in the party.

Yes sounds good, although they would have to sort out monk's hero AI after this

And yeah agree on consumables.

the_jos · Jan 06, 2009, 12:01 PM // 12:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by zwei2stein

Quote:

Originally Posted by me!

(added back this line in quote) I've played enough NM and HM to know the difference and HM with a cons set is in many cases easier than NM without them. I doubt that's the purpose of consumables.

How can you doubt that? For me, it is pretty obvious reason they added them. To make HM titles (and GWAMM) doable by every, umm, dedicated player regardless of skill.

I think A-net underestimated the impact of consumables.
They looked at the usage of player-cons and decided to make a party-wide one.

Since the introduction of EotN there have been several builds that have been nerfed, the most visible being ursan.
I'll repeat myself, Ursan Blessing was not the main problem, most teams crumbled in hard areas the moment the cons set went down.
It was the consumables that allowed an ursan team to rampage through an area smashing 1,2,1,3,1,2. And now consumables do the same, only on different builds.

My problem with consumables is that it makes HM easier than NM in a lot of situations when used together.
If someone can't beat an area NM (for HoM statue) and pop some cons they can win.
I have no problem with people doing that.
But when they enter HM, pop the same cons and breeze through it easier than NM I think it's wrong.

Same with vanquising. Someone with enough time and dedication will succeed.
I have a RL friend who plays GW and vanquished several areas as W/R using bow and pet. No cons needed, only a lot of time.

Now the real question is, does skill actually matter or did A-net intent to make GW a grinding game?
And how does this translate to GW2?