Curse

Seef II · Nov 26, 2008, 06:22 AM // 06:22

40/40 sets. It is probably too late in the game to do anything about these. They are pretty much essential on all casters these days, though.

What's the general consensus on 40/40 sets? Do they cause unnatural reliance on luck to get that Guardian off quick or prevent Steam from getting interrupted? In other words, do these things belong in the game in their current form? The GvG Me/E fastcast midliner seems like the pinnacle of supercharging magic in this way, as it does everything an Elementalist would be asked to do.

It just seems frustrating to miss an interrupt due to a HCT procing or get something diverted. While some degree of randomization is warranted in a game like this (e.g. weapon damage), having the whims of the random number generator sometimes decide games doesn't sit well with me at this point in GW's life. As player skill has plateaued out, the smaller things like 40/40 sets start having a larger impact, and they aren't under direct control of the players.

They are fair, since both teams can use them, but are they balanced?

Krill · Nov 26, 2008, 06:49 AM // 06:49

40/40's (or 40/20 staff) are great for monks and ele's, somewhat balances out punishing skills like d-shot, magebane, PD and p-block and gives good players that weapon switch an edge.

What I don't like is curses and dom hexes getting HCT and diversion in particular getting HRT. Skills like soul bind, VoR and shame are allegedly balanced because they are "ez to d-shot" but you can't hit them half casted with a ranger for sure, maybe with mesmer interrupts and a really good ping. On the other hand shame and diversion would be very difficult to use in ranger heavy metas without the HCT chance. Idk where the balance lies but the randomness is bad.

But this has been discussed many times before and isn't going to change.

Aera · Nov 26, 2008, 07:27 AM // 07:27

Surely it's luck related, but as long as the mechanic of interrupts is around, so the HCT/HRT things should as well. Imagine you can have every spell interrupted, apart from the 1/4 sec casts.

I Angra I · Nov 26, 2008, 08:21 AM // 08:21

Too many people know how to interrupt normal length casts to be able to get rid of 40/40 sets these days I think. If you didn't have them, things like pblock and dshot would be incredibly ridiculous.

Of course fc water mesmers are completely retarded though and need to be removed.

Kyp Jade · Nov 26, 2008, 09:36 AM // 09:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by I Angra I

Of course fc water mesmers are completely retarded though and need to be removed.

Have my babies

Capua · Nov 26, 2008, 10:07 AM // 10:07

Hahah, mine too!

Rothan Celt · Nov 26, 2008, 12:32 PM // 12:32

You may have my kitties! cute little forum moaner

LifesRestorer · Nov 27, 2008, 12:36 AM // 00:36

now that you got everyones attention kyp, turn it into a sacred temples thread

icedwhitemocha · Nov 27, 2008, 08:43 AM // 08:43

I'd say as long interrupts/disruption exist in their current form, then yes 40/40 sets are necessary.

That said, the disruption mechanics in GW are one of the biggest reasons I preferred it to other games' pvp. I sincerely hope they use a similar system in GW2.

scruffy · Nov 27, 2008, 09:17 AM // 09:17

things that do different things even when used the same way every time are bad for pvp.

i.e, weapon mods, catapult,block/miss

it lets people rely on luck to get advantages rather than skill

if a low HP target gets gaurdian'd half the time u can finish him and half the time you can't just by doing the same actions, how is this good for pvp? it promotes hitting protted targets just because you can win the lottery...

sundering weapons for spiking...again with the lottery
40/40 sets...catapults...on with the lottery

randomness isnt a replacement for good balance and it is bad for pvp

when you do something you should be able to know what will happen reliably so you can make accurate strategies rather than just getting lucky, when u prot someone you want to be sure that 50% damage will be reduced, because half the time your spell will be enough and half the time it wont be...why not just take the randomness out so you can accurately judge whats going on

Marxon Aurion · Nov 27, 2008, 10:42 AM // 10:42

Above poster hasn't thought this out clearly obviously. The whole game is balanced around this. For example weapon switching can give you rewards and will eventually, but if it would always happen or never it wouldn't be balanced. And blocking is a needed mechanic, you cannot just say halve the damage, because blocking has anti adrenaline features and halving damage wouldn't.

Don't look at it as winning the lottery, because eventually you will reach an acceptable average where it's balanced around (good or not is arguable, but not my point).

Kyp Jade · Nov 27, 2008, 11:16 AM // 11:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marxon Aurion

Above poster hasn't thought this out clearly obviously. The whole game is balanced around this. For example weapon switching can give you rewards and will eventually, but if it would always happen or never it wouldn't be balanced. And blocking is a needed mechanic, you cannot just say halve the damage, because blocking has anti adrenaline features and halving damage wouldn't.

Don't look at it as winning the lottery, because eventually you will reach an acceptable average where it's balanced around (good or not is arguable, but not my point).

This is both the reason why HCT sets are both good and bad. When you can abuse the average (cancel casting) it was a problem. Glyph nerf fixed the huge problems. Currently the only real issue is water mesmers, and thats not a 40/40 issue, its a mesmers are better water ele issue because they never get interupted.

scruffy · Nov 27, 2008, 11:56 AM // 11:56

i would take a set 50% damage and 50% adren reduction from attacking the protted target over a 50%chance to make your attack do nothing any day

randomness makes bad mechanics

Marxon Aurion · Nov 27, 2008, 01:14 PM // 13:14

The whole game is balanced aroundk[ mechanics with a XX% chance of mechanics, if you don't like that and don't see the advantage apart from the disadvantages you should be playing another game.

DarkGanni · Nov 27, 2008, 01:39 PM // 13:39

Interesting topic. While I don't pvp much I find 40/40 sets a must, I think they are fine as they are.

Dmitri3 · Nov 27, 2008, 02:12 PM // 14:12

You're not staying in 40/40 set 100% of the time. You gotta balance between at least 4 sets and it just happens that 40/40 is one of them (for practical reasons of course). It's like saying weapon-swapping is bad...

It's not skill when your 40/40 triggers, but it is skill when you change to it because you know it will give more advantage that other sets (for example, chance against interrupts).

Marxon Aurion · Nov 27, 2008, 02:23 PM // 14:23

40/40 is the most important set as a caster in my opinion, followed by your shield set ofcourse.

kosh · Nov 27, 2008, 08:38 PM // 20:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by scruffy

things that do different things even when used the same way every time are bad for pvp.

i.e, weapon mods, catapult,block/miss

it lets people rely on luck to get advantages rather than skill

if a low HP target gets gaurdian'd half the time u can finish him and half the time you can't just by doing the same actions, how is this good for pvp? it promotes hitting protted targets just because you can win the lottery...

sundering weapons for spiking...again with the lottery
40/40 sets...catapults...on with the lottery

randomness isnt a replacement for good balance and it is bad for pvp

when you do something you should be able to know what will happen reliably so you can make accurate strategies rather than just getting lucky, when u prot someone you want to be sure that 50% damage will be reduced, because half the time your spell will be enough and half the time it wont be...why not just take the randomness out so you can accurately judge whats going on

cuz like every other game, and like every sport, and Real life, the random factor MUST be included, blind luck wins wars, games, Superbowl and w/e. you cant take out that factor out of the game and call it balanced. part of being balance is the fact that nothing can be 100% pre detriment, and this where luck or the 40/40 come into place. i do agree that seeing 40/40 on fc mes is somewhat retread, or MB ele, but that's more to the FC bar rather then the 40/40 prob.

Lord Natural · Nov 28, 2008, 12:35 AM // 00:35

I've never liked this feature and the luck factor in general. In a game with 2 evenly matched teams, it's certainly possible that a key skill getting off could swing the favor of the match. Having this attributed to the luck factor is a bit disappointing. You can do everything right and still lose. I guess coming from strategy games I'm used to going by the numbers, so throwing some chaos in is a bit annoying. That being said, the function exists, so you basically have to use it.

snaek · Nov 28, 2008, 01:55 AM // 01:55

40/40 is powerful no doubt

but i dun think the randomness is powerful nuff to make a bad player beat a good player
or a good player lose to a bad player

and comparing it to the lottery is a bad example imo
comparing it to maybe sport betting or poker would be better