Curse

IMMORTAlMITCH · Jan 31, 2008, 11:33 AM // 11:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaon

40/40 Sets are a chance element in the game that snuck in mostly after Nightfall release with the new PvP characters. It serves no purpose but to let lucky (and lesser skilled) people give a better shot.

I disagree, it won't give lesser skilled people a better shot as more skilled people will swap more efficiently.

Quote:

I'd say remove them and nerf interrupts massively while buffing other forms of shutdown (gale, blackout).

While I agree with this in principle, I don't think it is wise to make changes of this magnitude at this point.

Maybe an idea for GW2 is to have 10-20% Faster Cast and Faster Recharge sets rather than a chance for Half Cast or Half Recharge.

TheOneMephisto · Jan 31, 2008, 12:53 PM // 12:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by erk

In that case lets do away with other random chance things like critical hits from Critical Strikes and Weapons Masteries.

Or perhaps the random chance of a successful block etc. I am sure people would love Guardian to offer 100% block.

Chance has always been part of the game design.

Micro management of caster weapon sets, eg. knowing when to switch to a 40/40 set, is one of the key indicators of good players vs scrub.

Critical hits are rarely gamebreaking and also have a reduced chance to them (constant crits while fleeing).

And block chance really isn't a random thing. a 50% block chance simply makes it so that it's impossible to pressure a target, almost no matter how lucky you get. A 50% blocked character might as well be a 75% or 100% blocked character in the mind of a melee (unless it's at like 5 health), as they're not going to be doing anything useful against it either way.

The problem with 40/40 weapon sets is that the entire interrupting game revolves around that chance. Gamebreaking plays can be created or foiled based on whether that FC activates or not. That's too much luck for me.

And don't think that I'm arguing against weapon sets. I'm simply saying that the luck-based weapon sets are bad. If they could find another caster-buffing things to use I'd be perfectly happy, even overjoyed.

Kaon · Jan 31, 2008, 01:03 PM // 13:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by IMMORTAlMITCH

I disagree, it won't give lesser skilled people a better shot as more skilled people will swap more efficiently.

What the hell are you talking about? In a 3v3 getting a fastcast on weapon of warding is incredibly deciding. Weaponswaps have nothing to do with it, just plain luck.

I personally don't think weaponswapping takes so much "skill" anyway. As i said you're 90% of the time on your 40/40 set and switch to high set when need energy and switch to shield set when attacked.

IMMORTAlMITCH · Jan 31, 2008, 01:25 PM // 13:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaon

What the hell are you talking about? In a 3v3 getting a fastcast on weapon of warding is incredibly deciding. Weaponswaps have nothing to do with it, just plain luck.

And vs say a WoH monk with Guardian you will land a lot more interrupts vs someone that barely swaps than vs someone that swaps constantly.

Kaon · Jan 31, 2008, 01:49 PM // 13:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by IMMORTAlMITCH

And vs say a WoH monk with Guardian you will land a lot more interrupts vs someone that barely swaps than vs someone that swaps constantly.

That's such a minor thing. Weaponswapping is just as much skill as is putting up paragon shouts. It's automized execution and doesn't take any insight or reaction time. It is a laughable reason against removing fc sets.

AshenX · Jan 31, 2008, 06:18 PM // 18:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by pah01

Guildwars GVG is a competitive game which attracts people because it is "fun" to play and so direct comparisons between actual real-life warfare is not the best way to think about a competitive computer game.

I am not against innovation. The issue is not with the fact that there "was" innovation. It is the actual content of those innovations that the GVG and PVP community actually take issue with.

The innovations by arenanet in factions and nightfall should have brought to the table a set of professions that brought "active" types of play to the table. The fact that they brought more and more "passive" types of play to the table is the problem.

I have a question, do you understand why I say that teleporting is bad for the game? If you can see why this is the case for teleporting and especially why I am hating on Melandru then we can try and reach a sort of consensus.

On Ward Vs Melee

Joe

I agree completely with your point about the difference between a competitive game and real warfare and have, through your response and rereading your original post had a new insight into your point. By "dumbing down" play through the addition and inclusion of professions/skills that actually require less skill to play effectively A-Net has actually encouraged a lower grade of play and is discouraging those who have invested a great deal of time and effort into mastering a more active style of play from using those skills if they want to be competitive. In this sense then yes the examples you have given are bad for the game.

From my background in sports, wargames (live action, board games, and computer games) and the military I have developed an attitude that regardless of what an opponent throws at us the challenge is to overcome and win through better tactics and better play (and sometimes just a stubborn determination to not fail). If the other team is using simplistic techniques designed to take advantage of weaknesses in the game and is therefore playing from a point of great advantage then I take more pleasure in the victory even if in such a case the actual play is less satisfying because you dont truly have an opponent whose play is a pleasure.

I do see your points and upon reflection find myself in agreement. Thank you again for your response.

Cirian · Jan 31, 2008, 07:10 PM // 19:10

Fast casts are similar to critical hits or natural damage variance. Skill is still the dominant factor but there's nothing wrong with a little bit of luck to spice things up, removing the sets is an over-reaction.

TaCktiX · Jan 31, 2008, 07:29 PM // 19:29

I think removing the sets is not what people are meaning. I think they are meaning "tone down the sets" and/or "fix GoLE so it refunds instead of reduces." Either would fix the problem: cancel-casting until FC kicks in, because any disruption worth a crap will catch that 2 second Aegis.

Or we could fix the even more root problem of not enough party healing, forcing a turtleshell just to stay alive under standard melee pressure (not even spikes, just their auto-attack). How about buff party healing so it's actually use-able again. The HB buff was a step in the right direction, but that mostly is only useful in HA where you don't need a dedicated runner. The LoD nerf was a far step backward, removing the compression from monk bars that made them capable of handling party healing and protection fairly well. Relying on blockwebs and really crappy party heals like Protective was Kaolai and/or Heal Party from a runner is killing the metagame's energy, actively encouraging gimmicks because playing the standard meta is so dang boring.

Ensign · Jan 31, 2008, 07:59 PM // 19:59

40/40 sets have been in the game forever; people just didn't care for the most part until the disruptive game switched from being EDenial and lockdown based into being interrupt based.

wuzzman · Jan 31, 2008, 08:15 PM // 20:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by TaCktiX

I think removing the sets is not what people are meaning. I think they are meaning "tone down the sets" and/or "fix GoLE so it refunds instead of reduces." Either would fix the problem: cancel-casting until FC kicks in, because any disruption worth a crap will catch that 2 second Aegis.

Or we could fix the even more root problem of not enough party healing, forcing a turtleshell just to stay alive under standard melee pressure (not even spikes, just their auto-attack). How about buff party healing so it's actually use-able again. The HB buff was a step in the right direction, but that mostly is only useful in HA where you don't need a dedicated runner. The LoD nerf was a far step backward, removing the compression from monk bars that made them capable of handling party healing and protection fairly well. Relying on blockwebs and really crappy party heals like Protective was Kaolai and/or Heal Party from a runner is killing the metagame's energy, actively encouraging gimmicks because playing the standard meta is so dang boring.

The amount of lol's I get when I read "Make more red bars go up faster! That will save the day" is priceless.

Zuranthium · Jan 31, 2008, 09:19 PM // 21:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOneMephisto

The problem with 40/40 weapon sets is that the entire interrupting game revolves around that chance. Gamebreaking plays can be created or foiled based on whether that FC activates or not. That's too much luck for me.

And don't think that I'm arguing against weapon sets. I'm simply saying that the luck-based weapon sets are bad. If they could find another caster-buffing things to use I'd be perfectly happy, even overjoyed.

Remove the fast cast mod and improve the mod that gives a chance of +attribute rank for the cast. This arguably favors caster spike teams, but I don't think it would be problematic.

Fast recharge mod, I can go either way on.

~Z

HolyHawk · Jan 31, 2008, 11:30 PM // 23:30

Correct me if I am mistaken, but since when the chance of a faster casting is the problem? It's sorta of a gamble afterall. I consider a much bigger problem the fact you can eliminate the random factor with glyphs, much like in the same vision soul reaping is trash once you can have deaths at your own will. In that sense, I think passive prot should be nerfed on cost and/or duration, not casting, because we are in a enviroment full on interruption.

Vaga · Feb 01, 2008, 12:01 AM // 00:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHawk

Correct me if I am mistaken, but since when the chance of a faster casting is the problem? It's sorta of a gamble afterall. I consider a much bigger problem the fact you can eliminate the random factor with glyphs, much like in the same vision soul reaping is trash once you can have deaths at your own will. In that sense, I think passive prot should be nerfed on cost and/or duration, not casting, because we are in a enviroment full on interruption.

It's not really a gamble... you pretty much never have to risk anything in order to try and get a fast cast. The idea is also to nerf interrupts so that they are balanced and not ridiculously strong like they are now.

Riotgear · Feb 01, 2008, 12:07 AM // 00:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

40/40 sets have been in the game forever; people just didn't care for the most part until the disruptive game switched from being EDenial and lockdown based into being interrupt based.

I think we can blame the Aegis nerf and Glyph buff on this, for the most part.

pah01 · Feb 01, 2008, 02:14 AM // 02:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by AshenX

From my background in sports, wargames (live action, board games, and computer games) and the military I have developed an attitude that regardless of what an opponent throws at us the challenge is to overcome and win through better tactics and better play (and sometimes just a stubborn determination to not fail). If the other team is using simplistic techniques designed to take advantage of weaknesses in the game and is therefore playing from a point of great advantage then I take more pleasure in the victory even if in such a case the actual play is less satisfying because you dont truly have an opponent whose play is a pleasure.

Thrashing various Spike builds and completely obliterating older school versions of sinsplit was I have to admit immensely satisfying in some cases. Coming up with ways to flame them was also fun.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AshenX

I do see your points and upon reflection find myself in agreement. Thank you again for your response.

Thank you

Cass · Feb 01, 2008, 09:13 AM // 09:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by TaCktiX

I think removing the sets is not what people are meaning. I think they are meaning "tone down the sets" and/or "fix GoLE so it refunds instead of reduces." Either would fix the problem: cancel-casting until FC kicks in, because any disruption worth a crap will catch that 2 second Aegis.

This is a misunderstanding.

A fast-casted Aegis is still 1 second, and your phrase applies here too: Any disruption worth its salt will catch that.

The problem with the FC mechanic, in my view, is entirely due to the bug with GoLE, and not the 40/40 sets. GoLE makes cancel casting unjustifiably cost nothing, and people exploit this.
The main protection against interrupts on something as slow as Aegis is not the FC itself, but from the interrupter not knowing when the player will let the cast go through. Cancelling fast casts is common.
The energy should be lost IMO, like with a normal cancelled cast. Protection against interrupts would at least have a real price then (other than 2 seconds of time lost).

Aegis would become less popular I'd imagine.

Dominator1370 · Feb 01, 2008, 04:52 PM // 16:52

40/40 or interrupts need to be nerfed, one or the other. On a lot of skills, fast cast can be the difference between getting the skill off and getting it interrupted. With interrupts in their current state, that's a problem, since it places a huge advantage on getting the fast cast. Having to push a button to switch to the set is a pretty terrible reason for not changing things.

GoLE cancel casting is broken. Please fix it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cass

This is a misunderstanding.

A fast-casted Aegis is still 1 second, and your phrase applies here too: Any disruption worth its salt will catch that.

The problem with the FC mechanic, in my view, is entirely due to the bug with GoLE, and not the 40/40 sets. GoLE makes cancel casting unjustifiably cost nothing, and people exploit this.
The main protection against interrupts on something as slow as Aegis is not the FC itself, but from the interrupter not knowing when the player will let the cast go through. Cancelling fast casts is common.
The energy should be lost IMO, like with a normal cancelled cast. Protection against interrupts would at least have a real price then (other than 2 seconds of time lost).

Aegis would become less popular I'd imagine.

The only place you're really off in the last sentence. The fact is, you're going to have a world of trouble keeping your party alive at the stand without Aegis or something to replace it. With no party healing, that means that people are either going to continue to run Aegis or find something even more annoying to replace it. Motigons are bad enough, let's not make people try anything worse. Party healing needs to be buffed along with any nerf relating to blockweb, otherwise things break.

Oh, and wuzzman, where the heck have you been? It's a pretty simple concept: people need to stay alive. If they can't use party healing, they're going to use party prot. Party prot pretty much sucks for everyone involved, especially since Anet knows it sucks and has decided to nerf it and force people to run lamer templates to try to still make it viable rather than actually providing a viable alternative. Give them the alternative, and party prot will probably become less popular. The only sensable alternative I see is party healing. Can you offer another one? I mean, we could go the sineptitude direction, but I'd hardly consider that a good thing...

Ensign · Feb 01, 2008, 09:53 PM // 21:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riotgear

I think we can blame the Aegis nerf and Glyph buff on this, for the most part.

It was a combination of the nerfs to ESurge and EBurn, the switch from active Inspiration skills for emanagement to skills like the static Glyph, the hammering of Gale, and the repeated buffing of Power Leak. PLeak is the best skill in the game right now and you have to do everything you can to play around it, while the old active edenial and shutdown methods are no longer viable.

Cancel-casting with GLE to get a fast cast is pretty silly, but at the same time it's something that indirectly lowers the effectiveness of Power Leak, so I'm torn on the issue.

zling · Feb 01, 2008, 11:24 PM // 23:24

whats wrong with an interrupt based game? interrupting takes a lot of skill and is pretty fun. bad players either dont catch anything or catch the wrong skills. good players actually make a difference with them.
buffing gale, blackout, shroud of silence, etc is nice. nerfing some interrupts a bit is fine. but interrupts were are and should remain an integral part of the game.

Riotgear · Feb 01, 2008, 11:58 PM // 23:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

It was a combination of the nerfs to ESurge and EBurn

What hits did Burn get? Surge as an e-denial tool seems to have retained its effectiveness, it's just that e-denial in general has fallen from grace, largely because of the shift away from energy-driven templates like Boon Prot which consistently had an energy pool open to attack.

Quote:

the hammering of Gale

I'm still questioning if 3-second Gale would be beneficial for the game right now, considering how easy it is to beat up monks at the moment.

I think the emphasis on interrupts is more due to the relocation of skills that are very attractive to interrupt to the stand.