Curse

Thom · Jul 15, 2006, 06:13 PM // 18:13

I've been playing a bit of ritualist in GvG recently so I'll weigh in here.

-Ritualist making positioning by adding another line to the game, much in the same way heal party or orders do.

-Ritualists are more difficult to out pressure or avoid through a spike, but they are easier to directly counter or avoid.

-A defensive ritualist is useless in cast range, so reducing effect range basically kills the entire class. Any reduction of radius has larger effect because it kills area.

-Playing a ritualist requires a totally different style of decision making, planning and anticipation in battle. While it is the easiest class to play in many ways, it requires more situational awareness than any class because it has to make its move 15 seconds before the team does.

-Playing a defensive ritualist is in many ways like playing a three monk backline. If you ignore one of the monks, he'll normally keep the other two alive but if you pressure all three you won't have the damage to make a kill.

-The only time a ritualist is incredibly overpowered is on an HA altar or for pinning teams with their guild lord. There are no other GvG situations where you are forced to fight under a group of spirits.

I guess I don't have a problem with a slow clumsy powerful defense which gets people to respond. If you don't like it you can always back up a bit and you'll be out of range for at least 20 seconds. Not only are ritualists counterable, they are also kind of fliimsy.

Bryon: I would say that a powerful stationary defense is exactly what a game needs that demends on flexiblity. Bulldozer offensive strategies are there designed to run over flexible builds? Ritualists are a barrier that will slow the bulldozer, but won't phase a flexible team.

Wasteland Squidget · Jul 15, 2006, 06:43 PM // 18:43

[QUOTE=Thom]-A defensive ritualist is useless in cast range, so reducing effect range basically kills the entire class. Any reduction of radius has larger effect because it kills area.[/qote]

Why is a defensive ritualist useless in cast range? Obviously they become counterable through interrupts and stuff like consume soul, but so is every other class.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom

-Playing a ritualist requires a totally different style of decision making, planning and anticipation in battle. While it is the easiest class to play in many ways, it requires more situational awareness than any class because it has to make its move 15 seconds before the team does.

I guess if you consider pulling back and calling out an occasional warrior who comes your way so your team can spike him 'planning and anticipation', sure.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom

-Playing a defensive ritualist is in many ways like playing a three monk backline. If you ignore one of the monks, he'll normally keep the other two alive but if you pressure all three you won't have the damage to make a kill.

Totally different situations. Three monks are a source of more defensive energy and make you harder to pressure out, but they also have to be in casting range to be effective, making them vulnerable to the myriad of monk counters that every team brings along. Likewise, monks don't really stack well against a competent offense because of overhealing and such - you're almost always better off taking another kind of defensive character, like a flashbot or Ritualist, than a third monk. 3 monks are nice against short-term shutdown teams (Blackout spam, ect) but not nice enough to justify a spot in most builds.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom

-The only time a ritualist is incredibly overpowered is on an HA altar or for pinning teams with their guild lord. There are no other GvG situations where you are forced to fight under a group of spirits.

Yeah, you can split and mess with the Rit's positioning to gain some advantages. Seriously though, is there any other character that can force an entire team to split and inevitably push the game to VoD?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom

I guess I don't have a problem with a slow clumsy powerful defense which gets people to respond. If you don't like it you can always back up a bit and you'll be out of range for at least 20 seconds. Not only are ritualists counterable, they are also kind of fliimsy.

If by 'a bit' you mean 'to the NPCs,' then yeah. Ritualist spirit range is quite large, and if you're retreating against a good team you have to move fairly slowly to avoid having members of your group snared and killed. That's often ample time for the Rit to set up more spirits in range of your team.

It's not a big balance issue, but big enough to be annoying and drag out a lot of fights beyond where they should be, IMHO.

Phades · Jul 15, 2006, 11:08 PM // 23:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wasteland Squidget

Why is a defensive ritualist useless in cast range? Obviously they become counterable through interrupts and stuff like consume soul, but so is every other class.

Every other class is not forced to sit through 3-5s cast times with meduim to high cost. It wouldnt take much for a warrior to just sprint over to someone in aggro range and use a k/d skill like shock and ruin whatever spirit they were attempting to lay down. The only other profession that even has comparable cost and cast times is the elementalist. Although i am surprised that people havent complained about the "fixed" ether renewal that the ritualists have as many seem to have commented on just about everything else.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wasteland Squidget

I guess if you consider pulling back and calling out an occasional warrior who comes your way so your team can spike him 'planning and anticipation', sure.

I am pretty sure he meant making judgement calls on the flow of battle. When to move forward or to pull back, as the ritualist would need to be in the new position setting up spirits to properly follow the flow of battle. Its a similar mentality to the bunker push strategy for the terrans in starcraft.

What you described would be something that any character could and should do depending on the relative positioning of the characters.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wasteland Squidget

Totally different situations. Three monks are a source of more defensive energy and make you harder to pressure out, but they also have to be in casting range to be effective, making them vulnerable to the myriad of monk counters that every team brings along. Likewise, monks don't really stack well against a competent offense because of overhealing and such - you're almost always better off taking another kind of defensive character, like a flashbot or Ritualist, than a third monk. 3 monks are nice against short-term shutdown teams (Blackout spam, ect) but not nice enough to justify a spot in most builds.

The comparison was in theme, not application.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wasteland Squidget

Yeah, you can split and mess with the Rit's positioning to gain some advantages. Seriously though, is there any other character that can force an entire team to split and inevitably push the game to VoD?

Just because it goes to VoD doesn't neccacarially mean that the team with the rit will always win. If that were the case, then a change would be in order.

cookiemonkie · Jul 15, 2006, 11:15 PM // 23:15

If rits spirits range are going to be as large as they are, then the rit spirits themselves need to degerate their health and die on their own at a rate that is balanced with Ritual Lord binders. There needs to be some skill placed into this class that forces the ritualist to place the spirits effectively as well as timely just like any other class. Camping on the opposite edge of the radar screen, spamming spirits that don't die on their own is silly.

There are plenty of classes out there that do have long cast times, that do get shutdown easily, that do have to deal with foes within casting range. Eles have to deal with this, So do diversion mesmers. Ele's are forced to deal with this by using mantra of resolve, why does the ritualist not have to? The fact that "binding rituals" aren't spells and can't be disrupted by a majority of Mesmer skills to begin with should serve no excuse for binding ritualist to have the spirit range effect that they employ.

Vindexus · Jul 16, 2006, 01:08 AM // 01:08

The range of Rit spirits needs to be changed so that Rits have to play at least near the backline. You can't interupt them if getting in range makes you die. You can't kill them if getting in range makes you die.

Red Locust · Jul 16, 2006, 03:42 AM // 03:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by cookiemonkie

If rits spirits range are going to be as large as they are, then the rit spirits themselves need to degerate their health and die on their own at a rate that is balanced with Ritual Lord binders. There needs to be some skill placed into this class that forces the ritualist to place the spirits effectively as well as timely just like any other class. Camping on the opposite edge of the radar screen, spamming spirits that don't die on their own is silly.

There are plenty of classes out there that do have long cast times, that do get shutdown easily, that do have to deal with foes within casting range. Eles have to deal with this, So do diversion mesmers. Ele's are forced to deal with this by using mantra of resolve, why does the ritualist not have to? The fact that "binding rituals" aren't spells and can't be disrupted by a majority of Mesmer skills to begin with should serve no excuse for binding ritualist to have the spirit range effect that they employ.

You can't have the rits in the same place as all the other casters. No other class has exclusively 3s and 5s spells to cast, constantly, under fire. Not only would you get ripped apart while you sit there for 3-5s at a time, but your spirits would be right in the face of their warriors and get ripped apart in 3-5s also.

Just like ranger spirits need to be placed far away for them to have any value, so do ritualist spirits. Forcing them into casting range and creating a big mess of a melee would be the worst solution, I'd rather see some kind of nerf to ritual lord.

cookiemonkie · Jul 16, 2006, 04:27 AM // 04:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red Locust

You can't have the rits in the same place as all the other casters. No other class has exclusively 3s and 5s spells to cast, constantly, under fire. Not only would you get ripped apart while you sit there for 3-5s at a time, but your spirits would be right in the face of their warriors and get ripped apart in 3-5s also.

Just like ranger spirits need to be placed far away for them to have any value, so do ritualist spirits. Forcing them into casting range and creating a big mess of a melee would be the worst solution, I'd rather see some kind of nerf to ritual lord.

Fire and water eles have to deal with this all the time. The 3-5 second casts of Ritualist are offset by the fact the most mesmers use skills that interrupt spells, this doesn't apply to binding rituals. Forcing the ritualist to play skillfully is the solution to a class that doesn't require any skill to play as a spirit spammer. If Eles have to deal with it and be aware of positioning with long casts, so be it with Ritualist.

The game has been out long enough, that overpowering a new class to get more people to play them isn't needed.

Wasteland Squidget · Jul 16, 2006, 05:44 AM // 05:44

If the spirits range was reduced to a reasonable level, I wouldn't even mind seeing them have a bit more health, so Displacement or Shelter can take more hits after they're actually put down. I think 3-5s casttimes are feasable and you'll get them off if you try, but they have to be really powerful effects to be worth it.

Thom · Jul 16, 2006, 09:04 AM // 09:04

Thanks Phades, you saved me typing up exactly that post.

You don't have to like the strategy, but it isn't broken.

shardfenix · Jul 16, 2006, 07:19 PM // 19:19

Arenanet will never give this game the skill balance it needs. There are 3 possible reasons for this.

1: Arenanet is too clueless to know what is going on in their own game and how overbroken some skills are. I highly doubt this is the reason, though there is a small chance that they are clueless as to what "balance" is. I've played quite a bit of good RPG and TCG's, and GW is nowhere close to being a balanced game. Some of the skills in the game are the black lotuses and moxen of GW.

2: Arenanet plays the gimmick builds and wants to be able to win without actually using skill. Builds such as this include IWAY, smite, ...well that's about it. They did a good job nerfing minion factory and henchway, which sucked anyway. I am 100% convinced that ALL of arenanet's employees play iway, otherwise it would have been nerfed beyond playability already.

3: They don't care, or are too busy fixing pve quests that work anyway.

I think it might be a mix of all 3. They might not know what a true game balance is (its ok for some skills to be strong, it's just not ok to be able to kill a monk without any chance of him healing himself because of how rediculous hammer damage is, or to have a skill that is an effective portable profane.)

This game will not be fun until A-net realizes how abusable some of the skills in the game are, regardless of whether theyre used or not. They must also be unafraid to give popular gimmick builds the nerf. Sure, it will make the noobs whine about how they cant play their build anymore, but I would personally like to see Guild Wars as a game of skill like it once was.

However, on a more positive note, arenanet, im very surprised that you realized the Air of Enchantment exploit and fixed it. By the way, can you please fix infuse health?

tomcruisejr · Jul 17, 2006, 12:03 AM // 00:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by shardfenix

2: Arenanet plays the gimmick builds and wants to be able to win without actually using skill. Builds such as this include IWAY, smite, ...well that's about it.

how about ranger, necro, monk, ele, whatever 3-2-1 SPIKE?!?!??!?!?!?!??!?!? are you excluding yourself?!?!??!?

Lord Dark Genie · Jul 17, 2006, 02:07 AM // 02:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by shardfenix

(its ok for some skills to be strong, it's just not ok to be able to kill a monk without any chance of him healing himself because of how rediculous hammer damage is

I think you proved right there that you don't have a clue about balance either.

Lando Griffen · Jul 17, 2006, 02:27 AM // 02:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by shardfenix

This game will not be fun until A-net realizes how abusable some of the skills in the game are, regardless of whether theyre used or not.

If guildwars is so bad then please stop playing the game. You know as well as I do that Anet is never going to "fix" the game to your satisfaction.

socrlax24 · Jul 17, 2006, 06:22 AM // 06:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rieselle

Height matters -> most pvp maps are fairly flat. Esp. HA.

i'm in love with your intelligence...

sorry if this has already been addressed, but i havnt read the entire thread..

Reiselle, the person that talked about height was refering to the PLAYER not the MAP..a short person has a better chance of getting hit in the head or torso than the legs and feet when fighting a taller person.

cookiemonkie · Jul 17, 2006, 06:30 AM // 06:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by socrlax24

i'm in love with your intelligence...

sorry if this has already been addressed, but i havnt read the entire thread..

Reiselle, the person that talked about height was refering to the PLAYER not the MAP..a short person has a better chance of getting hit in the head or torso than the legs and feet when fighting a taller person.

Has this even been verified that height of a character matters? Most, if not just about all RPG games use the same bounding boxes for where a character is hit. Quake 3 used the same system.

Exception being is games that uses the latest rog-doll physics type engine, which are current/next generation FPS shooters.

socrlax24 · Jul 17, 2006, 06:35 AM // 06:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by cookiemonkie

Has this even been verified that height of a character matters? Most, if not just about all RPG games use the same bounding boxes for where a character is hit. Quake 3 used the same system.

Exception being is games that uses the latest rog-doll physics type engine, which are current/next generation FPS shooters.

you make a valid point, but i am sad to say that i do not know what quake3 is. i do not know for certain that this has been proven, but it just seems to me that if the game were to be as realistic as possible, which would be ideal, this said system would be best.

what i do know is that some certain skills like the sword skill "hamstring"(orwhat ever its called) is directed directly to the legs, hence crippling the person's legs, same with crippling shot or pin down.

as for height, both of our points yet to be researched, i plan to look into this matter because it is something i actually find interesting.

cookiemonkie · Jul 17, 2006, 06:45 AM // 06:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by socrlax24

you make a valid point, but i am sad to say that i do not know what quake3 is. i do not know for certain that this has been proven, but it just seems to me that if the game were to be as realistic as possible, which would be ideal, this said system would be best.

what i do know is that some certain skills like the sword skill "hamstring"(orwhat ever its called) is directed directly to the legs, hence crippling the person's legs, same with crippling shot or pin down.

as for height, both of our points yet to be researched, i plan to look into this matter because it is something i actually find interesting.

Quake 3 is a popular FPS shooter with different character choices / sizes. GW can not be as realistic as possible due to computer resource limitations. The system is NOT fully 3D as your position updates come as X, Y and sometimes that bug leads to getting stuck inside the map. Yes there are special cases where you have a character occupying the same Z since they are on a bridge above but special cases are made for that, doesn't mean player updates include Z axis information. Not having to take into account the Z axis for everything means an exponential amount of network and server resources save, clients have plenty of computing resources. Just about all RPGs work this way.

kryshnysh · Jul 17, 2006, 07:28 AM // 07:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by socrlax24

you make a valid point, but i am sad to say that i do not know what quake3 is. i do not know for certain that this has been proven, but it just seems to me that if the game were to be as realistic as possible, which would be ideal, this said system would be best.

what i do know is that some certain skills like the sword skill "hamstring"(orwhat ever its called) is directed directly to the legs, hence crippling the person's legs, same with crippling shot or pin down.

as for height, both of our points yet to be researched, i plan to look into this matter because it is something i actually find interesting.

In the case of hamstring/pindown/etc., you're wrong. Just to make sure it wasn't somehow updated in the last update, I just tested this.

To test, grab a guildie (or alliance mate or whatever) for a scrimmage and get to the archers, they use pin down. Take off your leggings (and boots if you think they could be hit too). At least some of the pin downs will still hit for low damage (one pin down on me was 11) while other hits (and some pin downs) will hit for high damage (for instance 78 from a non pin down). Pin Down doesn't hit you in only one location (and common consensus is hamstring, cippling shot, etc. don't either), unless you'd like to show the "proof" you claim for this.

Some people claim it preferentially hits certain areas (Pin Down percentage of hitting the leggings is higher than a normal shot), but I've never seen any proof of this, really just speculation.

Zui · Jul 17, 2006, 09:33 AM // 09:33

socrlax24, don't post if you don't have any clue as to what you're talking about. Spreading information you have not verified is just bad practice, and makes people think you're a scrub who wants to feel important.

Pin Down and Hamstring have the same chance to hit any part of the body as any other attack does. It is in no way always directed at a certain part, nor is it preferential to a certain part of the body(I haven't personaly done extensive testing about the preferential part, but when I have tested this, I was in no way lead to beleive otherwise, and didn't feel any more testing was worth my time). There are plenty of myths such as this, like Superior Absorbsion should be placed on your chest because thats where spells always target... And so on...

As for height being a factor in who gets hit in the head more often, I've seen no evidence to support that claim, nor have I seen any that proves that is not the case. However, I like to hold belief that somthing is false unless it's proven otherwise, as whoever is correct usualy has actual facts to back what they're saying up. So, if you want to make this claim, please test it, and post the detailed results here.

Patrograd · Jul 17, 2006, 10:06 AM // 10:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zui

There are plenty of myths such as this, like Superior Absorbsion should be placed on your chest because thats where spells always target... And so on...

.

IMO there is an element of truth in this. I have never done any empirical testing, so this is only an impression gleaned over time, but I would make the following comments:

1) A superior absorption rune *should* go on the chest becasue more hits, whether spell or melee, hit the chest than anywhere else. Conversely, you should put your superior attrib rune (if you use one on a PVP char and dont have spare minor rune armour) on your gloves or boots, so that if you need to take it off (when facing spike eg) you dont lose too much. I am almost certain that more hits land on the chest than anywhere else, which is why monks tend to wear armoured chest and leggings, with tats on arms and feet.

2) The positioning of melee characters is important, and there does appear to be an advantage when striking from terrain height in melee, and there 100% for sure is when using bows. Therefore the game is definitely reporting z axis info

3) the actual size of the character makes no difference, the hit box is the same size

4) Projectile spells (eg orb) always seem to hit the chest

5) Some spells always appear to hit the feet (earthquake eg)

As I say, I have never tested any of this, but I've been around a bit and this has been my experience. I would be itnerested to hear from someone who has actually done this testing to see which is in fact the real situation