Curse

lyra_song · Nov 16, 2007, 02:57 AM // 02:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom Bangalter

because it's wrong. It was nerfed because of corpse exploitation skills ruining gameplay.

Yes. that is the why, in terms of PvP balance.

We both know that.

But the (flawed) reason i gave doesn't contradict the PvP balance issue at all. It supports it and reinforces.

Azza · Nov 16, 2007, 03:17 AM // 03:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Faer

So why is it such a problem in PvE? There are a few hundred enemies in a zone, and a good fifty or so (sorry, I never really cared to count) in each level of ToPK. That's more than enough corpses to fuel MMs, don't you think?

Additionally, "other sources", in PvP, are human players. Human players are not usually expendable, however, pets are. They can be resurrected on demand cheaply and quickly, without hurting the team's chance of success (burnt Resurrection Signets are key), thus creating a theoretically endless supply of energy to the Necromancers, whereas human players provide an incredibly small theoretical energy pool in comparison.

The change to pets was good for the game as a whole. It will serve (as well as other recent changes) to encourage players in PvP to move away from a very gimmicky build and to hopefully play something more balanced, and will do the exact same thing in PvE.

Sorry for the long spiel but...What the??? It was good for the game as a whole??? are you being paid for saying that. ummm, YES U ARE

It is truely sad when a GW Tester comes on and treats the GW players with contempt. have you not read any other posts in here? If you had then as a tester you should be giving a better explanation to your response other than a personal or company point of view, obviously its not seen as good for the game as a whole or no one would be here objecting to this nerf so strongly, can you give an explaination as how this has made the game play experience better for PVE, other than there are hundreds of corpes to exploit in a Zone, umm not all zones have exploitable corpses.

You make the point of why people are so ticked off about this nerf your self

Quote:

Originally Posted by Faer

The change to pets was good for the game as a whole. It will serve (as well as other recent changes) to encourage players in PvP to move away from a very gimmicky build and to hopefully play something more balanced, and will do the exact same thing in PvE.

I don`t want to PVP for the same reason a lot of others don`t want to, there are too many people there who are rude, arrogant and just down right nasty, i want to ENJOY the game not stand around arguing with "TOOLS" or waiting for 20 minutes to get in an AB battle

and again i say this and will use your part of your QUOTE
"It will serve (as well as other recent changes) to encourage players in PvP to move away from very gimmicky build"

so you are saying PvE play is being Nerfed because of PvP, Seperate the 2 Skill requirements for PvP and PvE and stop with nerfing stuff that has nothing to do with the PvE side of things, all you are doing is alianating the PvE players and make us feel like the unwanted side of GW.

After over two years of playing GW and hearing the disallussionment from your loyal players on this thread one would think you would actually listen, but no you seem to more like a trotting horse, Blinkers on, blood pounding in your ears making it impossible to hear anyone or anything and being guided buy a rein held by jockey who listens to the trainer who is instructed by the owner who sits in the Bahamas gettn drunk because he has 50 other trotters all over the place and only needs one winner. Guess what?, in your race to the finish line there are 20 others that have the same goal but there is normally only one winner, Which trainer got it right???? Me thinks your trainer hasn`t been looking at the track on which you are racing

Faer · Nov 16, 2007, 03:48 AM // 03:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azza

ummm, YES U ARE

No, I'm not. Where did you get that idea?

Azza · Nov 16, 2007, 03:56 AM // 03:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Faer

No, I'm not. Where did you get that idea?

so out of the whole post, you only want to respond to this part, Mr Guru Bug Tester, who Guru admits to having a close professional association with and is an Offical GW listed support Site. errrrr

and also with you being an administrator i think it VERY unproffessional of you giving an opinion that is totaly one sided especially when you are trying to make a valid point and not backing it up with anything of revelance. It only proves more that you have to side with GW decisions and can`t give an honest opinion, "Blinker Guru Tester Man"

PS take out the Gestapo word from your posts please, you do realise that it can be very offensive to the Jewish Community don`t you?

Avarre · Nov 16, 2007, 04:03 AM // 04:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azza

so out of the whole post, you only want to respond to this part, Mr Guru Bug Tester, who Guru admits to having a close professional association with and is an Offical GW listed support Site. errrrr

This thread is long past the point it needed closure, really.

Quote:

BECAUSE the pet is really just an extension of the ranger, the ranger and the pet can only be considered as ONE body. So a dead pet is not a corpse.

Why didn't anyone say this against me?

Lyra, it's because most of us don't think in terms of game lore for things to make sense the way they are. Things make sense because that is the way they are. It's a game, not a real world.

It is a clumsy fix. It's possible Anet will implement something more solid. Either way, any build that relied on the pet dying was pretty pathetic (rebirth exploits, pug barrageways...)

Faer · Nov 16, 2007, 04:07 AM // 04:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azza

so out of the whole post, you only want to respond to this part, Mr Guru Bug Tester, who Guru admits to having a close professional association with and is an Offical GW listed support Site. errrrr

Yes, I only respond to that part, because your entire response seemed to be based upon the assumption that I was being payed to speak highly of the choices of the development team, which in fact, I am not; essentially, this makes your post full of nonsense entirely void.

But let me set some facts straight for you, so you don't make the same foolish assumptions again:

Guild Wars Guru does not have a professional relationship with ArenaNet or PlayNC. Guild Wars Guru is a site run by fans of the Guild Wars game, for other fans of the Guild Wars game. Guild Wars Guru (and the staff here) is not being payed, in any way, shape, or form by ArenaNet or PlayNC for the service we provide.

On a personal level, I am a Guru Bug Tester. This means simply that I spend many of my own hours, taken from my own free time, to test bugs that the community reports, and organize them in such a way that ArenaNet and PlayNC may easily find bugs that are in need of fixing by simply browsing one section of these forums. I am not being compensated in any way, shape, or form for my services by Guild Wars Guru, ArenaNet, or PlayNC. While it would be nice to be payed for the hours and effort I put in, I do not expect any such payment, as it is a free, volunteer service that I provide because I genuinely care about the core functions of the game that ArenaNet and PlayNC have provided for us.

More often than not, I disagree with many of the changes that are made to the game. The most recent set of changes, however, I agree with, and therefore I have expressed my positive feedback on this, a Guild Wars fansite, about them, along with the reasonings behind the changes for those that are less than fully informed on the matter.

Furthermore, I am a moderator, not an administrator. Again, you are making assumptions before actually researching the matter. Just like any other member of the community, I am privileged to express my opinions on matters as I see fit, as long as I am complying with the Guild Wars Guru site rules.

Now, hopefully this all sets the record straight for you. If it does not, please feel free to send a PM to Inde, who is a site administrator, and can probably clear up any more confusion you may experience regarding this matter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avarre

This thread is long past the point it needed closure, really.

I agree, however for the moment I think it should be left open in the hopes that more constructive conversation might blossom from it. However, if it continues down the track it is currently on, it will probably be locked very shortly.

RhanoctJocosa · Nov 16, 2007, 04:10 AM // 04:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azza

...umm not all zones have exploitable corpses.

Then don't bring skills that need exploitable corpses, it's really that simple.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azza

I don`t want to PVP for the same reason a lot of others don`t want to, there are too many people there who are rude, arrogant and just down right nasty, i want to ENJOY the game not stand around arguing with "TOOLS" or waiting for 20 minutes to get in an AB battle

There are just as many rude, arrogant and nasty players in PvE, and definitely more tools. Also, if AB is the only "PvP" you've played, I'm sorry but you really have no clue as to why the nerf was necessary.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Faer

It will serve (as well as other recent changes) to encourage players in PvP to move away from very gimmicky build

QFT

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azza

so you are saying PvE play is being Nerfed because of PvP...

Barrage: increased damage to 5..20 damage.
???

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azza

Seperate the 2 Skill requirements for PvP and PvE and stop with nerfing stuff that has nothing to do with the PvE side of things, all you are doing is alianating the PvE players and make us feel like the unwanted side of GW.

Guild Wars was originally intended to be a PvP-orientated game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azza

After over two years of playing GW and hearing the disallussionment from your loyal players on this thread one would think you would actually listen, but no you seem to more like a trotting horse, Blinkers on, blood pounding in your ears making it impossible to hear anyone or anything and being guided buy a rein held by jockey who listens to the trainer who is instructed by the owner who sits in the Bahamas gettn drunk because he has 50 other trotters all over the place and only needs one winner. Guess what?, in your race to the finish line there are 20 others that have the same goal but there is normally only one winner, Which trainer got it right???? Me thinks your trainer hasn`t been looking at the track on which you are racing

Bad analogy is bad.

Also, I would like to say that ANet should fire Faer because he's doing a terrible job.

Azza · Nov 16, 2007, 04:50 AM // 04:50

Faer. you still dont give a valid reason as to how this has been of benifit to the PvE community and it doesn`t matter if you are an administrator or a moderator, its still highly unethical of any person in a position of authority and responsibility to be giving a one sided personal view without giving a totaly founded view of your original post. Which you still haven`t

PS Take the Gestapo word out of your post. It is offensive, Screen printed and taking that one further if not removed asap

RhanoctJocosa are you entirely engrossed with that thing in your hand, your response is not actually a reponse at all is it. Just you looking at that thing in your hand and mashing the keyboard with the other,
nothing more to be said on your non response as it smacks of utter nonsense and trash

lyra_song · Nov 16, 2007, 04:58 AM // 04:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avarre

Lyra, it's because most of us don't think in terms of game lore for things to make sense the way they are. Things make sense because that is the way they are. It's a game, not a real world.

Im talking gameplay sense. Lore is irrelevant.

The ranger and the pet are connected. They are controlled by the same player. In essence the pet and the ranger is really one character. One could use this to justify the change from a gameplay perspective, if they do not accept the PvP reason.

I accept the PvP reason, but i still think its stupid.

Quote:

It is a clumsy fix. It's possible Anet will implement something more solid.

Thank you for at least acknowledging this.

Quote:

Either way, any build that relied on the pet dying was pretty pathetic (rebirth exploits, pug barrageways...)

and you just like taking shots on PvE?

Faer · Nov 16, 2007, 05:05 AM // 05:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azza

Faer. you still dont give a valid reason as to how this has been of benifit to the PvE community

Yes, I did. You may not wish to acknowledge it as such, but I gave it nonetheless. If you do not agree with my reasoning, that's fine. It's not my problem.

On a totally unrelated note, not that it's any of your business: I am Jewish.

RhanoctJocosa · Nov 16, 2007, 05:11 AM // 05:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azza

Faer. you still dont give a valid reason as to how this has been of benifit to the PvE community and it doesn`t matter if you are an administrator or a moderator, its still highly unethical of any person in a position of authority and responsibility to be giving a one sided personal view without giving a totaly founded view of your original post. Which you still haven`t

PS Take the Gestapo word out of your post. It is offensive, Screen printed and taking that one further if not removed asap

RhanoctJocosa are you entirely engrossed with that thing in your hand, your response is not actually a reponse at all is it. Just you looking at that thing in your hand and mashing the keyboard with the other,
nothing more to be said on your non response as it smacks of utter nonsense and trash

If I may, I'll reply to your question to Faer, since it's well on topic. The update has been of benefit to the PvE community as it is a small attempt to increase the amount of skill and competency required to 'win' PvE. While I don't think it's changed much, personally, players will have to re-think their builds, especially in ToPk which most people are complaining about, and adapt to the new changes. PvPers have to do this ALL THE TIME. I mean, hell, you should be thanking ANet for trying to increase the difficulty of PvE- 5 B/P (which now does +20~ damage, mind you), an MM, whose energy was previously filled with pets dying, who was free to make minions and blow them up (insane damage) and an orders, who also didn't have to manage their energy, adding +17? damage to each hit is completely insane. And ToPk was supposed to be a higher end PvE area!

As for what you said about me, I have no idea what you're talking about. Stop being a complete moron.
EDIT: I am actually quite "engrossed" with my bottle of Vanilla Coke, thanks.

Azza · Nov 16, 2007, 05:12 AM // 05:12

Faer i don`t care if you are Jewish it is still offensive and just because it doesn`t offend you it doesn`t mean it wont offend others Jewish or otherwise

RhanoctJoscosa read what ... Meh you just write and think trash, your not worth the effort

Nuclfus · Nov 16, 2007, 05:14 AM // 05:14

Saying the word "Gestapo" isn't anymore offensive than saying the word "Hitler" or "Holocaust". Either way, clogging the thread with irrelevant outraged ultimatums doesn't strengthen your argument so do it by PM if it's that big a deal.

Avarre · Nov 16, 2007, 05:19 AM // 05:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

I accept the PvP reason, but i still think its stupid.

I personally thought it was stupid how Shiro betrayed the Emperor, but the only thing to say to that is;

GUILD
WARZZ
!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

and you just like taking shots on PvE?

Well as a PvE'er, I like to see people succeed by killing the enemies as their priority rather than relying on their own deaths as a battle plan. There is a reason none of the 'top PvE'ers' (I almost laughed typing that) use anything related to pet death.

The less people that rely on party deaths to succeed, the more people are going to start winning properly. Promoting better play = good.

Azza · Nov 16, 2007, 05:24 AM // 05:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nuclfus

Saying the word "Gestapo" isn't anymore offensive than saying the word "Hitler" or "Holocaust". Either way, clogging the thread with irrelevant outraged ultimatums doesn't strengthen your argument so do it by PM if it's that big a deal.

you are right, Saying it isn`t, having it posted in a public forum is

RhanoctJocosa · Nov 16, 2007, 05:28 AM // 05:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azza

you are right, Saying it isn`t, having it posted in a public forum is

Don't come to this public forum then.

lyra_song · Nov 16, 2007, 05:29 AM // 05:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avarre

I personally thought it was stupid how Shiro betrayed the Emperor, but the only thing to say to that is;

GUILD
WARZZ
!!

Ya but they could have written a story where the Emperor stole Shiro's kitty. ;P Lore and gameplay should come together to make a good game, but in the end, gameplay is more important because people skip the lore a lot.

Quote:

Well as a PvE'er, I like to see people succeed by killing the enemies as their priority rather than relying on their own deaths as a battle plan. There is a reason none of the 'top PvE'ers' (I almost laughed typing that) use anything related to pet death.

The less people that rely on party deaths to succeed, the more people are going to start winning properly. Promoting better play = good.

Did you read my idea about making Pet DP shared among the ranger and the pet?

That would certainly make a ranger value their pet more, and care more about properly healing it and not just letting it go off to die without rhyme or care.

Minion factory builds are gimmicky, but hella fun, i remember when Spearmen did this multiFlesh Golem build, before the flesh golem was nerfed to only 1 per necro.

It was basically:
one necro sacs
raise a fleshy from the corpse
sac so the fleshy has no master
verata on it
repeat till all necros have multiple flesh golems

On the topic of PvE, i do like things getting change up. I like a challenge and I like thinking up new builds. However i think you'll have a hard time convincing the general PvE community to stray from their old ways and try something new.

In that sense, wish monster builds scrambled and changed uniquely eveytime you zoned (see the thread about increasing pve difficulty). That would be LOTS of fun and weed out all the scrubs. lol.

pumpkin pie · Nov 16, 2007, 05:35 AM // 05:35

put everything back the way it was, and ban pets in PvP

~

Avarre · Nov 16, 2007, 05:38 AM // 05:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

Did you read my idea about making Pet DP shared among the ranger and the pet?

That would certainly make a ranger value their pet more, and care more about properly healing it and not just letting it go off to die without rhyme or care.

It's a possible idea that would be worth consideration. I can't tell you whether it would be good or not because I'm so out of PvP I can't give an informed opinion at the moment.

It could possibly double as a RaO nerf, since teams could repeatedly knock out pets.

RhanoctJocosa · Nov 16, 2007, 05:39 AM // 05:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

put everything back the way it was, and ban pets in PvP

~

That's a terrible solution.

I hope the mods are looking at all the crap being said and planning/discussing its deletion.