Curse

CaptainGuru · Jul 13, 2005, 03:32 AM // 03:32

Allow for cancel combos and make the character animation more fluid.
Move take longer to do because the animation is chopping and they have to restart their animation if they are in middle of attack. For example, if my warrior is about to hit his opponent with a normal attack and I press the key to use hamstring, he stops momentarily, reach back again and his opponent with a more slow animation. This also happen when playing a ranger, giving the opponent time to react. With cancel combos, players can hit opponent and still land their special attack immediately after with player immediately avoiding the attack.

Speed up Ranger attacks, giving them a kiting ability and take away snares
One of the imbalance issues of fights with warrior against Ranger is that Warrior have can be snared by enemies in a thousand different with no protect, leaving them sitting ducks or helpess to help their friends. This game is suppose to be balanced and every class is suppose to be weak against one another. Unfortunately, Ranger has easy time against a warrior. One could say use Mend Alignment, but if that person is using choking gas or manage to land distracting shot, debilitating shot, savage shot or concussion shot, there isn't anything that warrior can do. The can easily condition that warrior death with the right skills and traps, which again is unfair to the warrior. And stances don't work since a ranger can use crippling shot.

I believe a ranger shouldn't be able to snare, but instead being to kite. It's a good trade since snaring puts warriors at a disadvantage. The only set back will be that they can't do special attacks while running, but they can still shoot.

Less Monsters and Smarter A.I
Having Several monster in one area does not make a quest hard. Having monster work together like a real group would benefit players more and provide a better challenge than 20 monster roaming in one area with Bad A.I. I believe monster should be similar to the unworthy undead outside of TPK when you attempt to the do mission. This will help cut down boring gameply and require the players apply themselves more than these quest and mission provide. PvE has been the biggest bore because all I have to do press a button against any monster and they are dead. None of the monsters respond quick to heal their companion and the fight ends quickly before you know it.

None of the mission and quests have been challenging either. I rarely die on a mission or quick unless we stringy 20 or so monsters together or if I try to solo a monster with henchmen. But that doesn't make a quest hard. What makes a quest hard is when enemies work together against a group. So lowering the number of monsters in quests and missions and upping their A.I would benefit PvE a great deal.

Now as for attributes, I believe other/all attributes should be more use like Strength, Expertise, etc. where they effective the players performance. Putting point into them not only effect your skills, but effect your performance.

For example

Warrior Attributes:

Tactics
Requiring a shield, every 2 points the warrior gain a 5% chance "Defend" against a melee, magic attack or projectile for a total of 30% by rank 12. The benefits from this attribute are nelgected if using a stance. Hexes, conditions and preparations can still bypass. This will allow the warrior last longer in battle.

Axe Mastery, Hammer and Swordsmanship
You gain +1 of damage per towards a attack when using an axe, hammer or sword per point you put into either of these categories allowing for a total +12 damge by rank 12.

Monk Attributes

Smiting
Attack skills and Magic attacks against undead inflict +2 holy damage per point for 24 holy damage at rank 12.

Ranger Attributes:

Beast Mastery
Pet basic attacks do +1 damage per point for a total of +12 point by rank 12.

Marksmanship
The Ranger gain 2% chance per point to hit a moving target or a target using a stance for total of 24% by rank 12.

Wilderness Survival
Any attack to a non-humaniod characters will result in +2 damage for a total of 24 damage by rank 12.

Necromancer

Soul Reaping
Player not only gains +1 point of energy per point in Soul reaping, but any foe near a player who has just die will do gain +5 to +60 damage per death.

Mo/R9 · Jul 13, 2005, 03:41 AM // 03:41

Quote:

Speed up Ranger attacks, giving them a kiting ability and take away snares and stance
One of the imbalance issues of fights with warrior against Ranger is that Warrior have can be snared by enemies in a thousand different with no protect, leaving them sitting ducks or helpess to help their friends. This game is suppose to be balanced and every class is suppose to be weak against one another. Unfortunately, Ranger has easy time against a warrior. One could say use Mend Alignment, but if that person is using choking gas or manage to land distracting shot, debilitating shot, savage shot or concussion shot, there isn't anything that warrior can do. The can easily condition that warrior death with the right skills and traps, which again is unfair to the warrior. And stances don't work since a ranger can use crippling shot.

I believe a ranger shouldn't be able to snare, but instead being to kite. It's a good trade since snaring puts warriors at a disadvantage. The only set back will be that they can't do special attacks while running, but they can still shoot.

Aha, but does not empathy put warriors at a disadvantage? Does not Backfire put casters at a disadvantage? Does not meteor shower and skills that induce burning put everyone at a disadvantage? Does not hamstring, sever artery and gash put people at a disadvantage? Does not Drain Life and Life Transfer put people at a disadvantage? Should we remove all of the above skills? All the classes have their own "snares" or skills that put other classes at a disadvantage. Get over it.

CaptainGuru · Jul 13, 2005, 03:52 AM // 03:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mo/R9

Aha, but does not empathy put warriors at a disadvantage?

Not really, you can avoid hexes by shatter a hex, inspiring a hex or just healing signet.

Does not Backfire put casters at a disadvantage?

Mesmer were design to take on spellcasters or spellcaster related class. If warriors had a Backfire-type as a class skill then that would be imbalancing because that would give everyone a long distance shutdown ability and that would most certain put the Elementalist and Necromancer at a disadvantage.

Does not meteor shower and skills that induce burning put everyone at a disadvantage? Does not hamstring, sever artery and gash put people at a disadvantage? Does not Drain Life and Life Transfer put people at a disadvantage?

At this point you're just being silly and not providing any logic behind your statments so I'm going to politely ignore your attempt to troll. Again, Rangers are suppose to be at disadvantage against warriors. For a game to be balance every class has to be weak against another class. If one class has advantage against all then that create a imbalance and players abuse that tactic or class. (WoW Paladin for example)

Warrior are at disadvantage for two reasons: They can't do effective damage and they can be snared from a distance.

CaptainGuru · Jul 13, 2005, 10:46 AM // 10:46

Got some postive criticism from this board.

http://boards.gamefaqs.com/gfaqs/gen...topic=22168260

Louis Ste Colombe · Jul 13, 2005, 11:31 AM // 11:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainGuru

Not really, you can avoid hexes by shatter a hex, inspiring a hex or just healing signet.

And you can avoid conditions... Just the same... If you think conditions are the biggest problem for a warrior, bring a secondary that take care of this.

Quote:

Again, Rangers are suppose to be at disadvantage against warriors.

...

Warrior are at disadvantage for two reasons: They can't do effective damage and they can be snared from a distance.

Rangers are supposed to be at disadvantage against warriors? Why is that? And are they really?

Everyone can be snared from a distance, not only warriors: I guess you mean that warriors needing to be close, it's more of a problem for them. Instead of asking for a nerf, I'd suggest you look for solution to this problem. You'll find some.

And as far as effective damage goes. Well, that's arguable, some data would be nice to support that assertion. A few other posters also think that warriors are the best for sustainable long term damage.

I have not quoted that part... but if as a warrior, I am targetted with Choking gas, Debilitating shot and all other skills mentionned, that's a rather good news: I'd rather be the target than my team's mesmer or monk. So please shoot me, and leave the softie alone!

Louis,

Dudededu · Jul 13, 2005, 05:20 PM // 17:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainGuru

Got some postive criticism from this board.

http://boards.gamefaqs.com/gfaqs/gen...topic=22168260

Yes... and since you had some positive feed back in one board, your supposed to get all positive feed back here too...
Damn the people for not understanding...

CaptainGuru · Jul 13, 2005, 05:36 PM // 17:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Louis Ste Colombe

And you can avoid conditions... Just the same... If you think conditions are the biggest problem for a warrior, bring a secondary that take care of this.

Signets can't be disable unless you have Ignorance, but many find that spell useless.

Rangers are supposed to be at disadvantage against warriors? Why is that? And are they really?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Louis Ste Colombe

Everyone can be snared from a distance

5 out of 6 class can attack from a distance. One of the reasons why so many get bored with the Warrior quick because they are NO other class they can fight up close. (Which is an imbalance issue) If you look at the warriors skills, most of them are ones that takes out stances and counter melee attacks. ANet believed the warrior in this game would fight other warriors, but it isn't the cast in this game. We've learn to ignore other warriors or use tactics to slow them down long enough for the other team to get their monk.

Spellcasters were design to beat warriors (mesmer can beat both), rangers were designed to beat casters and warrior were suppose to be able to beat rangers. Problem is warriors do not come with enough counters against arrow attacks, cripples from arrows attacks and they can be chain snared/condition to prevent a warrior from removing all conditions.

This is a real imbalance if every class can snare in two or more ways.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Louis Ste Colombe

And as far as effective damage goes. Well, that's arguable, some data would be nice to support that assertion. A few other posters also think that warriors are the best for sustainable long term damage.

http://boards.gamefaqs.com/gfaqs/gen...topic=22170458

http://boards.gamefaqs.com/gfaqs/gen...topic=22102034

And they are more post like these in my forums and I've talked to those in the chat.

Quote:

I have not quoted that part... but if as a warrior, I am targetted with Choking gas, Debilitating shot and all other skills mentionned, that's a rather good news: I'd rather be the target than my team's mesmer or monk. So please shoot me, and leave the softie alone!

Louis,

You can do more with that combination if you use poison arrow, hunter's shot and power shots. The warrior is force to sit out for the time being to recover if the ranger gives him the chance.

Thomasuwoo · Jul 13, 2005, 06:16 PM // 18:16

Hate to be a little rude guys but you seem to be overlooking a very crucial part of the game here. I can't remeber the last time I fought a sinlge character solo. That's because this is a game based on teamwork. Hell a ranager can pindown and stop a warrior with the right skills but can he do the same to two? What about if that warrior was backed up by a monk with mend aliment out of range of the rangers arrows? What if an elementalist suddenly cast grasping earth on the ranger and the rest of the enmiy team had lightning based weapons?
There are tonns of arguments of classes being overpowered. This is usually because they are compared on a one on one basis. Guild wars is alot more complicated then that. Rarely will two characters be able to face off mano-a-mano and only preparing for such an occurance is going to gimp the rest of your team.
The reason some skills/classes/attributes seems underpowered is because when you combine them with another players atatcks/stragey they can all of a sudden become tremendously powerful.
Looking at your current proposal of skills would even the players up in the case of a one on one bout but if you threw these into the mixer there are some combinations that can only be described as uber.

CaptainGuru · Jul 13, 2005, 06:40 PM // 18:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomasuwoo

Hate to be a little rude guys but you seem to be overlooking a very crucial part of the game here. I can't remeber the last time I fought a sinlge character solo. That's because this is a game based on teamwork.

Don't give me that crap. The fanboys in Gamefaqs say this too when they get tired of the arguements. You'll find yourself going one on one for three reasons: 1) Your both team members are dead on both sides except you and your oppoent, 2) Scare tactics that cause the enemies to run and you for to pursue them, and 3) Or your team member who aids you is disabled.

A monk can't heal you if a mesmer has him/her hex or shutdown. No that monk will not heal you if he has backfire or diversion on him nor can he if all of his energy gone. So don't give us that teamwork bs.

MSecorsky · Jul 13, 2005, 06:41 PM // 18:41

So don't give us that teamwork bs

Well, it is called Guild Wars, not Solo Wars...

You miss Diablo, no?

CaptainGuru · Jul 13, 2005, 06:43 PM // 18:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSecorsky

So don't give us that teamwork bs

Well, it is called Guild Wars, not Solo Wars...

You miss Diablo, no?

Never played Diablo so you can use that Diablo fanboy excuse. This maybe called Guild Wars, but majority of the people solo or find themselves combating opponents alone.

Dudededu · Jul 13, 2005, 06:45 PM // 18:45

You havent played much have you?

MSecorsky · Jul 13, 2005, 06:46 PM // 18:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainGuru

Never played Diablo so you can use that Diablo fanboy excuse. This maybe called Guild Wars, but majority of the people solo or find themselves combating opponents alone.

But not against each other, thus rendering your point moot.

CaptainGuru · Jul 13, 2005, 06:47 PM // 18:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dudededu

You havent played much have you?

I've played PvE, GvG, HoH, PvE, Arena and Team Battles. All the battles were we did win and were the ones where no told me how to do my job.

Dudededu · Jul 13, 2005, 06:50 PM // 18:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainGuru

I've played PvE, GvG, HoH, PvE, Arena and Team Battles. All the battles were we did win and were the ones where no told me how to do my job.

So have I and the only teams Ive managed to keep winning with were the ones who communicated and used teamwork.

Thank god for diversity

CaptainGuru · Jul 13, 2005, 06:57 PM // 18:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSecorsky

But not against each other, thus rendering your point moot.

"Never played Diablo so you can use that Diablo fanboy excuse. This maybe called Guild Wars, but majority of the people solo or find themselves combating opponents alone."

CaptainGuru · Jul 13, 2005, 06:59 PM // 18:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dudededu

So have I and the only teams Ive managed to keep winning with were the ones who communicated and used teamwork.

Thank god for diversity

Your point?

I fail to see the point where a monk is shutdown, a warrior who is snared can proves your point? Congratulations, you friends have tried to troll the thread. Find something better to do.

MSecorsky · Jul 13, 2005, 07:00 PM // 19:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainGuru

"Never played Diablo so you can use that Diablo fanboy excuse. This maybe called Guild Wars, but majority of the people solo or find themselves combating opponents alone."

The majority of people find themselves fighting living peopel opponents alone, or monsters alone? I for one haven't had a single 1v1 match yet with a human. This was your whine, yes? Rangers can beat warriors, yada yada yada?

Mistress Dasha · Jul 13, 2005, 07:08 PM // 19:08

wow can you believe this guy... if your the stupid warrior who falls for scare tactics and actually chases the person leaving you group then you deserve to die.. and if your whole team is dead and its just 1 on 1 then me thinks a ranged attacker will win umm hello its called common sense... oh thats right you had a third one what if your teamate is disabled.. well what if the ranger is disabled from your other teamate.. wow looks like your whole lil plan here is a wash huh....

CaptainGuru · Jul 13, 2005, 07:10 PM // 19:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mistress Dasha

wow can you believe this guy... if your the stupid warrior who falls for scare tactics and actually chases the person leaving you group then you deserve to die.. and if your whole team is dead and its just 1 on 1 then me thinks a ranged attacker will win umm hello its called common sense... oh thats right you had a third one what if your teamate is disabled.. well what if the ranger is disabled from your other teamate.. wow looks like your whole lil plan here is a wash huh....

English?