Curse

Operations · Nov 30, 2008, 05:43 PM // 17:43

Originally posted at GWOnline, but I wanted a more sets of perspectives.

I love the bonus weapons. Many of them look neat and make it easy to equip heroes.

What I don't like is that they are frequently hard to work into a PvE build, even for fun.

So, we know they can 'tag' things for different effects based on PvE or PvP areas (skills), so why can't they do it for the bonus weapons?

Then, the PvE versions of the bonus weapons could have no requirements for use.

Or, make the bonus weapons PvE only with no requirement, as they are not needed for PvP anyway, as you build your own gear in a PvP character.

Just an idea I had. But to answer the voice of dissent early...

Quote:

Originally Posted by the Voice of Dissent

Making them without requirements? There is a constant in equipment in GW: Things with no req have a maximum damage they cannot surpass.

Which is done primarily for PvP balance. Cause no req max damage weapons in PvP would break it quickly. Imagine a Warrior who didn't need to put points into swordsmanship being able to use the sword, but max out tactics and strength?

*considers*

Actually, not that scary. Still no points in the sword skills, so all the attack skills would have to come from strength. That would limit the use of the sword, cause the best uses come from its connected skills, not the blade itself.

*considers more*

Heck, that's true for EVERY class. Just having the weapon is not enough, the connected skills must also be high enough to be useful as well.

So why bother with requirements in PvE at all except to fuel a gold weapon market?

And again, like my original point was, why not let the bonus weapons have no requirement in PvE only? Don't talk to me about PvE balance when PvE skills like Ursan exist. I need a better reason than that. We can have separate stats for skills based on PvP/PvE, so why not weapons?

Reverend Dr · Nov 30, 2008, 06:57 PM // 18:57

What?

There is a reason warriors run 14 in their weapon instead of just 9 for the base requirement.

Even then, tactics is currently pretty terrible in pvp.

Why are you having trouble meeting bonus weapon requirements? I mean if you are using a bow/spear/melee for damage, then you already meet the reqs. If it is a caster, do you really care about wanding damage? Or is it the extra +8 armor from meeting a shield's req? That matters in PvP, but +8 armor in PvE really isn't going to change a thing.

Quote:

why not let the bonus weapons have no requirement in PvE only?

Answer: There is no real reason for this implementation. No reason to waste developing/coding time to put this in play.

FlamingMetroid · Nov 30, 2008, 07:11 PM // 19:11

wat

Quote:

Originally posted at GWOnline

oh that makes sense

Capua · Nov 30, 2008, 07:29 PM // 19:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlamingMetroid

oh that makes sense

Hahah.

12345chars

MisterB · Nov 30, 2008, 08:07 PM // 20:07

Please explain why limited edition weapons not generally available should have their power increased in such a fashion. The only explanation you have provided is "because they look cool" and "why not?' Bonus weapons are designed to be temporary equipment until you acquire something better. I don't find it difficult at all to meet requirements for those weapons in my builds.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Operations

Don't talk to me about PvE balance when PvE skills like Ursan exist. I need a better reason than that. We can have separate stats for skills based on PvP/PvE, so why not weapons?

The existence of one unbalanced or broken mechanic does not justify breaking the game even further.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Operations

Originally posted at GWOnline

Oh, OK. Makes sense now. I'm sure you'll get better responses there. Can't be bothered to look.

Gift3d · Nov 30, 2008, 08:07 PM // 20:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlamingMetroid

wat

oh that makes sense

it does, if you go as far as disagreeing with somebody there you're banned. unless you cover it up with lots of carebear-isms and tons of smiley faces.

Rhamia Darigaz · Nov 30, 2008, 09:39 PM // 21:39

i get the idea you don't know how weapon damage is calculated OP.
if you're running around with only a few points in a weapon attribute you're going to do shitty damage even on a weapon without requirements.
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Damage_calculation

Deviant Angel · Nov 30, 2008, 10:28 PM // 22:28

It appears that I'm missing the r16 items that the OP is speaking of when I do /bonus...

What I'd like to know is how you are frequently unable to squeeze at least 9 into your weapon's attribute.

Could it be because you forgot to do the 15 attribute quests and/or you're using builds that have skills from 5 or 6 different attributes? Maybe you're not putting runes on you and your heroes?

There's no reason why we need max damage weapons with no requirements.

Sora267 · Nov 30, 2008, 10:31 PM // 22:31

Err, how about they just add the skins of the bonus weapons as options in the PvP equipment creation screen for those who have unlocked them, and allow the PvE versions to be remodded? It's a lot harder to incorporate them in builds because of their mods than their requirements (and even then, it's not too hard). If you can't meet the requirements for a weapon in a build even though you pretty much have to for its skills, then there's one of two things wrong: 1) You're not level 20, and therefore don't have enough attribute points, or 2) You're inept at PvE. If it's #2, just install GW. kthxbai

Owik Gall · Nov 30, 2008, 11:28 PM // 23:28

Aaaagh! Somebody put up a math table of damage calculations in here! Why not just tell us that it's better to have requirements than no requirements? Simple!

On topic, it makes sense that a weapon is requirement based because they determine how effective your attacks can be. No requirements makes your damage flat, bottom line. If you have high required weapons, tough for you. Work around it just like everyone else. For the dispute of stats in some bonus items, they are fine the way they are. The Glacier Sword for example is great for conjure frost warriors. It's better to have weapons with unique stats than weapons that have the 'generally popular' stats. Those kinds are neutral which doesn't make them strong for any situation, but without draw backs all the same. Never the less a weapon with stats that helps only a specific build, or your game tactics is a lot more effective so long as you follow the strategy the weapon is good for. Of course those weapons have draw backs, but it's better to go with that risk than to stick with dirt flat effects.

Every weapon has a purpose and it's up to you to use it, not mope around for stats that you WISH you had. Be a real gamer, make a character or change one of your existing ones to use the weapon for what it's designed for.

newbie_of_doom · Dec 02, 2008, 10:56 AM // 10:56

so basicly you are saying weapons shouldnt have a req, lol looloolool. I know weird mods like to delete posts where I flame people, which is retarded. So you better read this quickly: STOP FAILING, UNINSTALL GUILDWARS DELETE YOUR GURU ACCUONT AND NEVER COME BACK.

FengShuiDove · Dec 02, 2008, 01:01 PM // 13:01

I... guess I don't understand. Even you in your original post said that it wouldn't make sense, for example, for a warrior to bring a sword without dropping atts into Swordsmanship. Sure, you can use some Strength skills for offense, but in all reality, almost all builds excepting some gimmick builds you might create would synergize better using Strength and Swordsmanship. You've got enough points to put 2 attributes lines to max... even if you run a Strength based offense you can put 9 into Sword to meet the requirement and have 9 left over for any Tactics skills you may want to use. It's pretty easy to shuffle those around.

In situations where you're not concerned with meeting the requirement, you also aren't concerned with damage. Think: caster sets. Would the extra 10-12 raw dps for a Spear auto-attacking, considering no blocking skills, misses, or time to cast, really be worth tossing 9 into Spear Mastery? No way. It's plinks of damage anyway, unless you use skills from that line, in which case you'd be necessarily concerned about dealing damage and would want to put points in it anyway.

So my answer, overall: why implement this when no one in their right mind would benefit from it? You put points in when you want damage/stronger skills from a line or passive benefits like DF and Strength. If you don't want skills from that line, don't put points into it.

And please don't say I missed the point, "what if I wanted a Tactics and Strength build?" You're hardly going to gain anything running 12/12 Tactics/Strength vs. 12/9/9 with 9 being a martial branch.