Curse

Draikin · Feb 28, 2007, 10:09 AM // 10:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

I took the complaints to the Editing Team; they reviewed the document with heightened sensitivity to possible offensiveness, and they determined that, because it's an op/ed piece, and because it's not written with intention to offend, they stand behind approving it.

The point of the matter is that it did offend PvE'rs so whether or not this was the intention doesn't matter.

Redfeather1975 · Feb 28, 2007, 10:19 AM // 10:19

Okay, I could not sleep.
I wanted to point out 2 big pros to creating skill effects variations for both PVE and PVP.

1) There is a lot more versatiliy in how skills can be balanced. If a skill is too powerful in PVE or being abused, ie. farming, only the PVE variant needs to be tweaked, thereby avoiding a negative impact on how the skill is used in PVP...and vice versa. There would be a LOT less complaining from the players and polarization of the communities after skill updates.

2) A great variety in gameplay can be created by changing the functionalities of skills to be unique in one mode over the other. That way a player familiar with skills and builds in PVE, could find a fresh new experience when trying to use those same skills and builds in PVP...and vice versa. This increases gameplay longevity quite a bit!

What is required is that each skill has 2 variants. The game's skill window has a drop down chooser to display either PVP effects for skills or PVE effects. The game also decides which variant is equipped when the player leaves an outpost. If they enter a PVP area the game equips the PVP variants of the skills and if the player enters any other type of area the game defaults to using the PVE variants. That way only PVP areas need to flag the change in what skill variant is used, just to make the whole process easier to control.

DIH49 · Feb 28, 2007, 10:38 AM // 10:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

[*]I personally found parts of the article less than warming, but that's ok, because I recognize it's one person's opinion, and I don't demand that everything I read be lockstep with my own opinions -- in fact, I like seeing a diverse representation of many different opinions.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but Gaile is absolutely correct. Even if Adam's article was offensive (and I don't buy it), you do not have the right to not be offended. That's what it comes down to. If you want to live in a candy-cane world where carebears give you hugs every day and tell you you're special, take some opiates and check into a hospital. In the real world, you don't have a right to shut anyone up who you disagree with. Get over yourselves and stop crying. If someone does an editorial you don't agree with, do an editorial of your own in counterpoint.

cthulhu reborn · Feb 28, 2007, 11:16 AM // 11:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

Is it a request that we censor all controversial articles, that we fire the writer in question, that we upbraid the editors, that we only write articles on "safe" topics, or... ? You tell me, because I really think this issue has been addressed and we're well beyond issue and into needless drama and pointless, circular discussion.

Very good point Gaile

5-year-olds throw temper tantrums...some never get beyond that I guess. I like a good discussion. I like to agree and to disagree...I do not like childish tantrums being thrown simply because they don't like someone's views or opinions...it's beyond silly.

My view is that the article doesn't represent how I feel...so he and I disagree and we co-exist without any problem. Just cause I don't share his view does not mean any censorship is to be applied. I know this game is for all ages roughly but we should be more grown up in our attitude.

Disagree all you like but please don't cross over to the 5-year-old-not-getting-what he-wants side. Again, it's beyond silly

Kuldebar Valiturus · Feb 28, 2007, 11:44 AM // 11:44

The discussion is about an article aimed at people who have never PvP'ed before in Guild Wars.

If people are going to morph the article into the embodiment of every perceived slight they ever received in their lives, then that's their doing not ANet's or Adam Sunstrom's.

If your emotions are clouding your reason then your conclusions will likely be flawed.

Hysteria is a good way to get people wound up but it doesn't make them immune to foolishness.

All the objections to the article have been based on such stellar commentary as these:

Quote:

-Kind of sad, because some decent, if superficial, info is lost in the arrogant tone.

-Anet needs to let you go for that poorly composed and horrible article.

-And if he thinks mending is hailed by many pvers as the most useful skill in the game then he know crap.

-A couple months ago, I would write a much better article for anet on the same topic for free if they published it on their site. Now, I just stopped caring.

-Saying PvErs are noobs and that they should go learn to PvP or STFU is a sure way to bring in more new customers and retain existing player base. This is "definately" gonna help sell GW. gg ANET.

- The biggest glaring problem with that article is that he misspelled the word 'shitters' as 'PvErs'.

-It has to be the worst "tripe" ever posted for state of the game and it is complete trashing to veteran PvE players and the larger PvE community as a whole.

-What was covered in that article though is common knowledge.

- If he replaced all references of "PvE players" with "novice/new pvp players" there would be no issue.

- If this Adam Sunstrom speaks for Anet, then the poeple of Anet are the biggest jerks around, the artical makes me want to PvP less, not more. I read it and basicly my grasp is that he is saying PvE is for beginners, but PvP is for the pro's.

The comments quoted above spring from a list of claims:

1.) The article has an "offensive tone".

2.) The article is offensive because it is "common knowledge."

3.) The article states that <insert statement, examples below>
"trashes" PvE'ers, considers PVE players "noobs", "all" PvE players use Mending, PvE is for "beginners".

Concerning the "tone" of the article:

This largely depends on what each reader brings to the table. Another words, if you bring a skunk to a picnic don't expect to have a pleasant picnic.

Being offended is entirely subjective even in extreme situations. But, it doesn't give anyone a trump card for winning an argument.

Concerning the article being "common knowledge" and so, therefore, useless. (also this is brought up to support the "offended" position)

First off, it's argumentative to call something common knowledge. Another words you can't prove it as truth. Just one person not knowing something proves that "something" isn't common knowledge.

But, this position doesn't get out of the starter gate, because the stated scope of the article specifically says that:

Quote:

In this article I'll try to point out the most common mistakes PvE players make when trying PvP, as well as basic concepts a lot of beginner players don't immediately grasp. -A. Sunstrom

The author of the article never presented his work to be an "advanced" source of information or guidance. He clearly states his goals with in the first paragraphs.

Concerning various claims of what the article states:

This is a big category, but easily cleared if one looks at the actual claim and then reads the article to see what is actually stated.

I'll cover the two standard variations.

-"trashes" PvE'ers, considers PVE players "noobs", etc.

The biggest group of claims about the article are created from the perceived "tone" of the article (see point one above). The words used are not in the article at all but what certain readers divine to be what the author is saying. It's very much like a Rorschach Inkblot Test or reading tea leaves. The claims say more about the reader than they do about the article.

-"all" PvE players use Mending & PvE is for "beginners"

The smaller group of claims used as a basis for debate is the parsing of the statements about "Mending". The outrage is directed at the article because it is said to paint all PvE'rs as users of skill that is popularly considered "poor".

The article makes the following comments regarding Mending:

Quote:

1.) Hopefully this article will help experienced PvPers as well, in that they can post a link to it when they don't want to explain why Mending isn't a good way to stay alive.

2.) Hailed by many PvErs as the most useful skill in the game, it provides a constant, accessible, and fairly cheap source of healing. However, it has no place in PvP competition, and is actually a long-standing joke in the PvP community.

3.) A spike is designed to kill a character in a fraction of a second, during which Mending offers little help.

4.) Running Mending reduces the Energy available for other healing.

5.) Healing Breeze – This one returns quite a bit of Health for the Energy investment, but it suffers from one of Mending's problems: it requires ten seconds to have its full effect. -A. Sunstrom

The claim that the writer painted all PVE Players with the same brush solely hinges on the use of the word, "many". I would just point out that the established definition of "many" does not equate to "all".

Lastly, the claim that the writer categorizes all PvE Players as "beginners".

This is sprouting from "perceived tone" and is not stated at all with in the article. In fact the word "beginners" is used to refer to players coming from the PvE portion of the game to play PvP for the first time. The usage of "beginners" here is a fair description of people that haven't done a particular thing before.

arcanemacabre · Feb 28, 2007, 11:53 AM // 11:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kuldebar Valiturus

Stuff...

What is it they say about arguing with idiots?

Kuldebar Valiturus · Feb 28, 2007, 12:01 PM // 12:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

What is it they say about arguing with idiots?

Should I refute your implication, or shall I be accused of something?

Sometimes, after the skunk is brought to the picnic, some air freshener is in order.

Gun Pierson · Feb 28, 2007, 12:02 PM // 12:02

I'm not offended by the article. On a side note, nice try to get more pve players into pvp, but really we won't see a major change. Pvp is more for fast paced and often younger people. Gamers are at their prime around 16. Once you are above 25, forget it if you want to compete with those teenagers at a serious level. RPG's have an older playerbase than for example a FPS. Lots of RPG players don't give a damn about competitive play, they just wanne have a good time without stress and the 1337 stuff.

Rene Saliere · Feb 28, 2007, 12:15 PM // 12:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

What is it they say about arguing with idiots?

I couldn't agree more.

It's absurd to say the article isn't offensive to a lot of people, when clearly a lot of people are offended by it.

No doubt Kuldebar will reply to this post with some more long-winded, unsupported assertion-filled nonsense, ending with some quotation he got from a 1980's self help book for small business owners.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gun pierson

Gamers are at their prime around 16. Once you are above 25, forget it if you want to compete with those teenagers at a serious level.

The most consistent winners in HoH are guilds of mature players as far as I can see. Maybe not at Pokemon though.

Gli · Feb 28, 2007, 12:27 PM // 12:27

I'm not offended or anything. I didn't even read it until the 'controversy' started, because frankly, the title of the article told me I wouldn't care about the subject matter. And I was right, I didn't care and still don't care.

I have to say though, as I did before in this thread, the article starts off on the wrong foot. I'll repeat my opinion here because Kuldebar conveniently ignored it when he criticized (quote) "all objections to the article have been based on such stellar commentary as these". Perhaps because I was right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gli

Just one observation: one thing that's wrong with the article is its approach. If you want to offer people advise on anything, you give them pointers on what to do. You don't tell them what they shouldn't do. A negative approach like that will always, without exception, come across as condescending.

Tell people what works, don't tell them what doesn't work. Give examples of what works, and as an aside, add some examples of what doesn't work for illustrative purposes. Don't start off with the latter and build your case from there. "Dos and don'ts" not "Don'ts and dos".

Gun Pierson · Feb 28, 2007, 01:46 PM // 13:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rene Saliere

The most consistent winners in HoH are guilds of mature players as far as I can see. Maybe not at Pokemon though.

Could be but actually I don't know those people. When I played warcraft3, I knew who the best players and clans were, like 4k.Gruby, Tillerman etc. It's a fact that in this RTS game, the best were under 20, same goes for FPS like Unreal etc. So no it's not only in Pokemon. Would be interesting to get a list of core pvp players and their age from the top 200 guilds or so. Also we don't have gosus like in wc3. PvP in GW is too small and too incognito on this part. It doesn't live amongst the majority of the playerbase like in wc3. The 8vs8 is not an easy format to follow or learn from. Too much happens at the same time. It's not like a soccer game where you follow the ball. The entertainment value of the beholder in PvP is too low to please the crowds.

Maybe a 1vs1 format with ladderplay and ranks can bring some new life to pvp, don't know. It's an RTS I know but if we look at wc3 again, 1vs1 was the most popular, played and watched format. It's an ideal platform for potential gosus, people need human heroes to admire and learn from, gvg and 8vs8 are too unpersonal.

The future of this game is pve imo though.

Etta · Feb 28, 2007, 02:11 PM // 14:11

I myself as a pver/pvper can understand why so many are offended by the article. The wrong choice of words as Ensign pointed out earlier in the tread was one of the reason that so many here, are angry with.

There are those who did agree with the article, also there are those who were not offended by it. But all in all the damage has already been done.

And now the space between the PVE & PVP is growing bigger and bigger.

Str0b0 · Feb 28, 2007, 03:08 PM // 15:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

So, someone says that this will be an issue "until it is satisfactorily addressed" or something of that nature.

How?

Let's review:

Someone wrote an article.
Our Editing Team reviewed it, edited it, and we posted it.
Some readers didn't like it.
I personally found parts of the article less than warming, but that's ok, because I recognize it's one person's opinion, and I don't demand that everything I read be lockstep with my own opinions -- in fact, I like seeing a diverse representation of many different opinions.
I took the complaints to the Editing Team; they reviewed the document with heightened sensitivity to possible offensiveness, and they determined that, because it's an op/ed piece, and because it's not written with intention to offend, they stand behind approving it.
I respect their opinion, and I commend their professionalism in both the willingness to give the article a second consideration and in the thoroughness and thoughtfulness of the review.
I suggested that we should clearly call out the opinion-based nature of State of the Game articles, and see to the addition of that note to every such article.
I continue to communicate to you, here, what we've done, and give the best and most straightforward explanations of the events that have transpired.

And here we now are. Some people saying we're being corporate, some implying that we're dishonest, some suggesting there is more that we are obliged to do. Really? I'd say we're being pretty upright about this, and that we're taking a pretty direct and active approach. So if you need more, tell me expressly what that would be. I see the demands for something, but I don't know what. Is it a demand to recognize that we have two communities in PvE and PvP, and to admit that they are often populated with different people? Done! Is the request that we state that the communities are often a loggerheads, or may fail to see eye-to-eye? Yes, that's true. Is it a request for more information about playing PvP, so that this article does not stand alone? Let me introduce you to the nearly two-dozen PvP Primer articles! Is it a request that we censor all controversial articles, that we fire the writer in question, that we upbraid the editors, that we only write articles on "safe" topics, or... ? You tell me, because I really think this issue has been addressed and we're well beyond issue and into needless drama and pointless, circular discussion.

Come on now Gaile. Seriously that entire statement was pointless because all that was basically said was," We stand behind our procedures, which we followed, and you guys are just out of luck." That's rubbish. I think that what is being asked is that the editorial staff try to consider the community more before approving these things. I still fail to see how anyone that had spent any time on these forums could possibly not know that this would be an issue. I think a lot of people, myself included, would like to see a public apology on the main site, not just plastered up here in the fan forums and a few words of contrition from the author as well would go a long way. I don't think any of those requests are unreasonable.

No one is asking to be compensated in any way other than the balm of an apology to ease sore feelings. I understand that the editorial staff has reviewed this and stands behind their original decision. I'm glad they took the time to make a second review, but right now that's a moot point. It doesn't matter anymore whether or not the editorial staff thought that they were spot on or not. What matters right now is that a lot of people were obviously offended by the content of the article and rather than copping out and saying," Well we weren't wrong.", it's time to just knuckle under here and do what every person who has ever worked in a customer service industry has had to do at some point and that is apologize. It doesn't matter if you think you are right. It doesn't matter if you think your customers are nuts and wrong. What matters is good community and customer relations and all this tripe about editorial review and lack of culpability is just hurting the situation even more.

I know that I personally have gone from offended to livid. I was offended by the article. I am livid with Arena Net's tepid response. Basically I am forced to do what all dissatisfied customers are forced to do when their needs are not being met or their issues are being inadequately addressed at the base level of an enterprise, I'm moving up a rung. Since Arena Net will not own up and do the right thing I'm going to see if NC Soft will and if they won't then I'll find somewhere else to spend my money. I hate resorting to such tactics but at the end of the day the only way to get corporations to listen is to start hitting them in the wallet. While I don't pretend my 80 bucks is more than a drop in the bucket you better believe I'm not going to be the only one that is going to pass on your products. I'm probably just the most vocal about it.

So as someone who has to work with customers and clients every single day I urge you to do the right thing and make the apology, publish the apology and be more considerate of your community before your green light articles. I'm not saying you should put it to democratic vote or anything like that, but try to get a better grasp on the people you serve. The first step towards doing that is to soothe this situation.

Kuldebar Valiturus · Feb 28, 2007, 03:11 PM // 15:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gli
Just one observation: one thing that's wrong with the article is its approach. If you want to offer people advise on anything, you give them pointers on what to do. You don't tell them what they shouldn't do. A negative approach like that will always, without exception, come across as condescending.

Tell people what works, don't tell them what doesn't work. Give examples of what works, and as an aside, add some examples of what doesn't work for illustrative purposes. Don't start off with the latter and build your case from there. "Dos and don'ts" not "Don'ts and dos".

You are critiquing more than actually objecting to the existence and presence of the article. I, for instance, would have titled the article differently. But, I do not reject or express outrage at the article because of my opinion.

So, your assessment didn't have a place in my example spread, consider that a good thing. You have a reasoned position, not an emotional or hysterical one.

crimsonfilms · Feb 28, 2007, 03:22 PM // 15:22

It is really sad people are offended and wanting an apology on an article they claim that is 'condescending' and 'common knowledge' ???

So common knowledge is now offensive?

Wow - just wow.

As for the gap between PvP and PvE - its moot. GW PvP is dying. Koreans left. Americans are half way. Europe will eventually join IMO.

Drazaar · Feb 28, 2007, 04:41 PM // 16:41

I dont think an apology is an outrages request at all.

When you have accidently or unaware that your oppinion/action/words hurt someone, the decent thing is to say some of the most powerful words to mending broken relations. "Im Sorry"

If Anet and/or the author made some kind of "Im sorry that this action offended you it was never intended for that. Ill be sure to take these complaints to heart for future articles to be better at avoiding offending people in the future". If something like that was given im sure a hell of a lot of the outcry the article would be gone the people would accept the apology.

Right now the damage control "we reviewed and still dont think anything is wrong"/"Its not us its you" attitude is only hurting more.

As was stated and from someone whos worked with customers all my life of working so far and always will really you cant alow a large portion of people to harbor such ill feelings to your company.

A company when they screw up and disatisfy a customer have to go out of there way to make amends to the situation. If they give the customer a faulty product they give em a new one and say IM SORRY for the inconvienence. A food indostry when brought forth with a complaint of bad food gives the customer a new fresh plate to there standards, often on the house with an IM SORRY the first dish wasnt to your standards. Not every time do you give out faulty or broken furniture, cds, clothing, food, etc so not everyone is obviously offended but hurting them happens and when you get that percent whos upset the good successful companys say those little powerful words and it goes an incredibly long way to making the disatisfied cstomer happy. In fact it makes em happier then they would of been if they got it right the first time cause it shows that that business cares for there customers and they want to keep there business.

To even extend that further a business BEST advertisment is Word of Mouth. They can give all the comercials, billboards or radio or TV ads they want but the best way to have there product or service promoted is through the customers they have allready.
I believe the figure is for every 1 happy customer you get they tell 1 person about how good your company is. But for every 1 upset customer you have they tell 10 people about how bad your company is.

So no its not unreasonable for the upset people that article offended to expect an honest apology. Its only natural and an honest fair thing that anet and/or the author to make would be to take some humble pie and hand really just say those powerful words. "Im sorry"

GloryFox · Feb 28, 2007, 04:55 PM // 16:55

State of the Game— February 28, 2007
(a re write) From PvP to PvE

By GloryFox

Quote:

Special note: Each State of the Game article presents the opinions and insights of one game observer. These observations are personal in nature and do not reflect the opinions of ArenaNet. While ArenaNet does review each State of the Game article (except the one below) to assure that it offers content that is respectful of all players, we intend to allow our reporters the freedom to inject some personal opinion into descriptions of the current atmosphere of competitive play in Guild Wars, and to express views based on their experience and observation.

The Guild Wars community is deeply polarized around PvP and PvE. Very few players dedicate a lot of energy to both, and fewer yet are successful at both. One reason is the difficulty in learning PvE when you're accustomed to PvP; the two sides of the game are designed differently. There's a huge hurdle here. Someone who has learned the game while just by creating a PvP character has a lot to unlearn to have a chance at playing PvE at a high level. It causes a lot of players to miss out on the beautiful PvE system, which, to my mind, is the shining feature of the game.

In this article I'll try to point out the most common mistakes PvP players make when trying PvE, as well as basic concepts a lot of beginner players don't immediately grasp. Hopefully this article will help experienced PvEers as well, in that they can post a link to it when they don't want to explain why Mending isn't a good way to stay alive.

First, some concepts to internalize if you hope to succeed in Mission based objectives:

1) Versatility in teams, not in characters
In PvP you can't always count on your allies to cover your back, so it's understandable when you bring some defensive skills even if you are a damage dealer. In PvE, if you can't count on your teammates, then you can't hope to win at all. Make sure your character focuses on what it's best at, rather than spreading too thin.

If you are a Monk, don't cast Fire Magic spells. You have the Divine Favor primary attribute, so your healing spells are inherently more effective than anyone else's. Use your Energy for that and leave the Fire Magic to the Elementalists.

The exception is the split character. If you're running a character designed to split off on its own to Draw aggro or protect NPCs near an enemy base, it is perfectly fine to bring several self-sustaining skills.

2) There is tanking against Enemies
In the same vein, run Shield Stance or Dolyak Signet on your Warrior to help hold aggro. A PvE Warrior needs to focus on holding aggro, because opponents do not ignore defensive Warriors if he can hold them and won't go after softer targets. If you do enough aggro containment, you accomplish two goals: 1) you force the opposition to pay attention to you, drawing fire away from weaker allies; and, 2) your allies kill enemies before they kill your allies. A Healing Signet to lighten the load off your Monks is a bad thing as it affects your armor keep it up, but don't try to be too aggressive. Alone against several skilled enemies, you will accomplish everything. As a Warrior, your ability to keep your teammates from dying is very important. Focus on drawing aggro to yourself before your teammates die and let Monks, Paragons, and Ritualists handle defense.

3) Resurrecting is a Monks job but not always.
Though most resurrection skills are Monk skills, they're not best used on a Monk. If your Monk begins to cast something that takes six seconds to complete, the enemy team has a huge window to bring all of their damage to bear while one of your Monks is rendered completely useless. Expect a good Ai to get at least one kill in such a window. It is better to bring several Resurrection Signets on damage dealers and one rechargeable resurrection skill ("hard rez") on a midline character like an Elementalist or Paragon.

Skills

The following are some skills I see constantly in Hero's Acent, Random Arenas, and Team Arenas, almost always on the losing team. Most of them are useful in PvP, but they just don't work.

Mending
Mending – Hailed by many PvPrs as the most useful skill in the game, it provides a constant, accessible, and fairly cheap source of healing. However, it has no place in PvE mission, and is actually a long-standing joke in the PvE community. Skilled Ai try to kill in one of two ways—either by spiking you out or overwhelming force. A spike is designed to kill a character in a fraction of a second, during which Mending offers little help. When faced with a spike build, Monks need Energy for skills like Infuse Health and Protective Spirit. Running Mending reduces the Energy available for other healing. Overwhelming damage is similar to how players try to kill you in PvP, but in PvE it's far more versatile, pinpointed, and coordinated. A good Overwhelming Ai carries Enchantment removals, Energy denial, and similar things. To counter this, you need truly Damage Management spells like Spirit Bond, Spellbreaker, Reversal of Fortune, and Convert Hexes.

Healing Breeze.
Healing Breeze – This one returns quite a bit of Health for the Energy investment, but it suffers from one of Mending's problems: it requires ten seconds to have its full effect. Though seemingly less efficient by comparison, Monks need spells that replenish Health immediately. A strong Ai can overcome the Health regeneration of Healing Breeze and kill a character in a few seconds, not to mention remove the Enchantment and destroy its efficiency altogether. Healing Breeze isn't useless though, as it can sometimes be effective in split situations against fewer enemies.

Remove Hex
Remove Hex – A popular and straightforward spell, but never used in top level PvE play. The reason is the two-second cast time, during which a monster spike team can easily drop one of your allies. A better choice is Holy Veil, which has a shorter activation time, the added benefit of pre-casting, and potentially immediate Hex removal. It takes a bit more player skill and hand speed because you have to quit maintaining it right after you cast if you want to remove a Hex, but it's easily worth the work.

Rebirth
Rebirth – Useful in PvE for resurrecting allies and pulling them out of monster aggro range, but thats about it. Ai's aren't dumb; they will see you casting a resurrection spell if in aggro range and pounce on you right away. Rebirth is probably the worst resurrection spell you could bring in PvE if cast in the middle of a fight. The best replacement is usually Resurrection Signet, as the full Health leaves the revived character much harder to kill immediately. Make sure there is a boss nearby to kill to make sure it recharges. If things are going very bad make sure the one with rebirth (usualy a monk) moves to a safe location.

Heal Area
Heal Area – This skill attracts a lot of new players because it produces big healing numbers. However, large numbers don't matter if you can't get close enough to help your allies. The most effective way of staying alive in PvP when targeted is to move away from the source of damage, rather than standing still and trying to heal through it. While the second approach is sometimes necessary, you should avoid it if possible as it quickly drains your Monks of Energy. Heal Area also has the negative side-effect of healing enemy monsters in range.

Illusionary Weaponry
Illusionary Weaponry – While not a completely useless skill, it is mediocre at best yet very popular amongst beginner PvP players. Even though it cuts through blocking skills, armor, Blindness, and anti-melee Hexes, it is susceptible to simple counters such as Enchantment removal. Also, the damage it produces is far less than an Empathy spell on a Boss monster, and placing a Mesmer in the front lines is like waving a steak under a dog's nose. Mesmers are much more effective positioned in the midline with ranged spells and thus not exposed to immediate attack.

Animate Flesh Golem
Animate Flesh Golem – A good tank and destraction in PvE. Most Ai ignore the Flesh Golem and kill your Monks instead, making you wish you had brought an elite skill that could deal more damage, but thats ok Animate Flesh Golem is fun. (hint: FUN IS OK IN PvE) One such elite skill for a minion-based Necromancer is Jagged Bones, which has excellent synergy with bone minions. Make sure your team has a minion master on your PvE team though, because corpses are very abundant in PvE both monsters and yours. Also it gives the Ai something to pound on other than you.

Frenzy
Frenzy is a warrior’s best friend in PvP by its popular use, but in PvE missions and quests it will get you killed faster than a henchman monk can physically respond. Don’t’ get me wrong you need to attack faster when you need to attack but please find another suitable fast attack skill such as Berserker Stance, Flail or Tiger stance. Remember you’re a tank do the job of a tank and reduce the damage you take not increase it.

Disclaimer

Eventually parts of this article may become outdated with new balance changes. Remember Monsters don't rage quit or Flash Emotes and that the best way to learn about the game is to observe Monster behavior during missions, and watch the aggro range. Good luck making the transition from killing players to killing monsters.

About the author
GloryFox has been playing GW since it came on the market and misses the days of no Rank Emotes. He has two GW accounts one PvP and one PvE and held rank 11 with his PvP account before he chose to go pure PvE. GloryFox has 10 PvE characters in DoA and has released Razah for 7 of his 10 characters. GloryFox does not like raisins in his oatmeal cookies but prefers chocolate chips.

Winstar · Feb 28, 2007, 05:13 PM // 17:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drazaar

I dont think an apology is an outrages request at all.

When you have accidently or unaware that your oppinion/action/words hurt someone, the decent thing is to say some of the most powerful words to mending broken relations. "Im Sorry"

If Anet and/or the author made some kind of "Im sorry that this action offended you it was never intended for that. Ill be sure to take these complaints to heart for future articles to be better at avoiding offending people in the future". If something like that was given im sure a hell of a lot of the outcry the article would be gone the people would accept the apology.

Right now the damage control "we reviewed and still dont think anything is wrong"/"Its not us its you" attitude is only hurting more.

As was stated and from someone whos worked with customers all my life of working so far and always will really you cant alow a large portion of people to harbor such ill feelings to your company.

A company when they screw up and disatisfy a customer have to go out of there way to make amends to the situation. If they give the customer a faulty product they give em a new one and say IM SORRY for the inconvienence. A food indostry when brought forth with a complaint of bad food gives the customer a new fresh plate to there standards, often on the house with an IM SORRY the first dish wasnt to your standards. Not every time do you give out faulty or broken furniture, cds, clothing, food, etc so not everyone is obviously offended but hurting them happens and when you get that percent whos upset the good successful companys say those little powerful words and it goes an incredibly long way to making the disatisfied cstomer happy. In fact it makes em happier then they would of been if they got it right the first time cause it shows that that business cares for there customers and they want to keep there business.

To even extend that further a business BEST advertisment is Word of Mouth. They can give all the comercials, billboards or radio or TV ads they want but the best way to have there product or service promoted is through the customers they have allready.
I believe the figure is for every 1 happy customer you get they tell 1 person about how good your company is. But for every 1 upset customer you have they tell 10 people about how bad your company is.

So no its not unreasonable for the upset people that article offended to expect an honest apology. Its only natural and an honest fair thing that anet and/or the author to make would be to take some humble pie and hand really just say those powerful words. "Im sorry"

This article was not a mistake and no apology is needed. Please read Kuldebars post its basically right. I dont understand how youre offended unless you simply didnt read the article closely and jumped to conclusions based on content that wasnt there.

Every time the discussion of PvP and PvE comes up it becomes a useless rant fest. People say valueble things on boths sides but it gets largely ignored because people just want bitch. Ive tried in many threads to have reasonable discussion about this topic but it doesnt ever work and Im sick of it.

1) the mentioned skills are bad in PvP contexts generally
2) new PvPers still use these skills with a lot of frequency
3) new PvPers are in most cases coming from PvEing
4) many PvEers think these skills are good (there are about a million mending threads I think...ok thats an exaggeration, but if you dont think there advocates of these skills look around the site)
5) many PvEers realize these are not so hot
6) In general a good player, be they PvE or PvP, will realize what skills are valuble for the task at hand and what skills are not.
7) If you are a good player this article wasnt about you, and it said so explicitly, so dont freak please

I cant help but think the only reason there is such massive annoyance with this article is baggage from other PvE vs PvP threads.

Some people might want to try to get into PvP from PvE...it happened to me and its happened to many others. For those NEW players the point of this article was to help them avoid common pitfalls you still see today. You might be a hardcore PvE player and have tried PvP and found it not to your liking. Great, fine, more power to you. Enjoy the game! But just because this is your expereince doesnt mean its everyones, and it doesnt mean that many PvE players who have never tried PvP shouldnt be encouraged to give it a go since its a huge part of the game and can be a great experience.

crimsonfilms · Feb 28, 2007, 05:16 PM // 17:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by GloryFox

...

Your attempt on putting the shoe on the other foot failed miserably. It moved from mediocre op-ed to unintelligible and sophomoric attempt at satire.

Lutae · Feb 28, 2007, 05:20 PM // 17:20

Damn you, GloryFox, you beat me to making the PvP-->PvE primer...

You win. =D