On February 28 2011 08:59 Deft1 wrote: GW1 was completely instanced, so there wasn't any open world PvP. The 5v5 and other types of PvP took place on instanced maps, almost like first person shooters. I'm hoping GW2 will include not only WvW but also some form of open world PvP. From what we've heard so far PvP will take place in a game area called 'the mists'. It's basically where spirits go when people die.
Oh, damn. Doesn't look like this is the game for me then. I was getting excited to haha, thanks!
On February 28 2011 08:59 Deft1 wrote: GW1 was completely instanced, so there wasn't any open world PvP. The 5v5 and other types of PvP took place on instanced maps, almost like first person shooters. I'm hoping GW2 will include not only WvW but also some form of open world PvP. From what we've heard so far PvP will take place in a game area called 'the mists'. It's basically where spirits go when people die.
Oh, damn. Doesn't look like this is the game for me then. I was getting excited to haha, thanks!
I belive they said in an interview that they are making the game like WoW i.e non instances unlike how Guild Wars 1 is
On February 28 2011 08:59 Deft1 wrote: GW1 was completely instanced, so there wasn't any open world PvP. The 5v5 and other types of PvP took place on instanced maps, almost like first person shooters. I'm hoping GW2 will include not only WvW but also some form of open world PvP. From what we've heard so far PvP will take place in a game area called 'the mists'. It's basically where spirits go when people die.
Oh, damn. Doesn't look like this is the game for me then. I was getting excited to haha, thanks!
I belive they said in an interview that they are making the game like WoW i.e non instances unlike how Guild Wars 1 is
As soon as i thought i was out, you pulled me back in! haha, i really hope its open world
Not saying i want WoW like game, just open world pleasE!
Yes i do recall them in a few interviews describing their game as "open-world", and wanting to separate themselves from "alienating the server population from each other". Basically hitting on non-instanced areas, without bashing gw1.
Some things obviously will be instanced, like the giant realm vs realm world pvp areas. But if you watch the old PAX videos, and raids etc, they are all non-instanced. City -> world seamlessly.
you have also your characters house instanced and some other stuff of your characters storyline (this looks really cool from what i saw on videos) , its not UO housing but it will do for me ^^
On February 25 2011 01:04 Obelisk7 wrote: We have members who've played competitive Guild Wars, WoW, Warhammer, Team Fortress 2, Dota, and many other games. All looking forward to GW2, and hoping our different backgrounds will allow things like our theorycrafting to really shine once more details come out.
I've played FPS's mainly before deciding to look for a MMO to learn to get good at, that being GW2, and I'm both nervous and excited to see if my experience can transulate to the MMO plane.
I'm pulling for the big guys from the MMO background to help me with managing my skill bar.
For a while I made the builds for ScaR (a top 50 GW1 guild) so i guess you are referring to me.
Never heard of anyone who (dedicatedly) "made builds," builds were 99% mainstreamed with very little adjusting, especially if you weren't even top 10. Plus, most players liked to fiddle with their own bar anyway, I never would have just accepted some build someone gave me unless I would have chosen exactly the same skills. Can you elaborate please?
I dedicatedly made builds in a top 20 GvG team, and almost singlehandedly made water eles usable in halls because of the holding setup I made. Team wide skill synergy is incredibly important. EP's edrain monk setup, for instance, wouldn't work vs competent offhand switches, but prior to people even learning about that, the build would have fallen apart if the entire double bond defensive net was broken. That means nearly every skill on every character is placed to deal enough damage to prevent pushes, and to deal with the current field of opposing teams.
If we're running an offensive earth ele, for instance, to drop foes in their monk line, I'll NEED that if I'm running a position based offensive. I'll also need my offense running position based damage to maximize on the game plan. Additionally, the typical 2-3 defensive characters on a team generally need to have answers to all of the prevalent offences in the game, which means carrying the right mix of removal, healing and protection on the right heros. But that's not all. If you're running a midfield warrior, for instance, part of your defensive strategy might be forcing a mes or ele to keep moving and not enter range of a certain monk. Maybe you'll lock him in place with something like a bull's charge, or maybe you'll just run a warrior with huge deeps to punish over extension.
That also works in reverse: if you have a certain monk that's going to be slightly more forward than your back-back line monk, the types of skills he's going to need to keep your offence going are going to need to synergize with your back-monk's ability to keep him casting those. Your midfield monk might want to be running lots of condition removal vs a blind heavy meta. Your back monk will probably want to have him pre-veiled to prevent hexes from shutting him down while he keeps your offense chugging.
Lets look at the example of aegis against thumper offenses. Aegis is a fucking baller spell, because it almost completely neuters adren building. Its a skill you'd want vs the majority of the team comps you'll come up against because 50% block rate makes warriors less than 50% as effective because warriors scale based on hit frequency, and 50% block rate makes ranger spikes a whole metric asston weaker. Can't kd the aegis caster because he had aegis and guardian up for the entire duration of the last aegis, and you couldn't work up the adren needed? Looks like you're boned. Hammers had a way around this: they would toss out Irresistible blows, which grants the hammer warrior an unblockable hit which kd's and spikes for a fuckton of dmg if the target would have blocked. If you run a runner that's got, say, heal party, you can drop aegis casts while he's got a flag time advantage to prevent IBs, which means you'd take more overall damage and get comboed faster, but you'd be able to disrupt the combo by running a midfield mez hero to disable the fully adren'd thumper when he hit 7-8 adren charges, which neuters his combo. If that's not your response, you might simply aegis up and eat the IBs, but then bait out IBs by pre-protting, then faking a high value spell (cast, then move as the warrior swings, costing you energy, but not the spell's cd.). Doing that would keep the warrior from spiking you, give you a comparatively small kd time, and keeps his adren low.
If you take out a single element out of your planned defensive net, you're going to lose people. If you take a single element out of your planned offense, be it a spike, pressure, flag interdiction, or split push, you might lose the game there too. Nevermind the skills you'd need to establish reliable 4v4 and 3v5 splits. Your build might not have answers to everything, but it needs to have answers to the most common problems. Most fotm builds end up having very specific counter builds which develop, which means they need to start changing what they bring in response as their opposition shifts to challenge them.
A concrete example:
Our hall holding build became a fotm. We specifically held in highly spectated fights to prevent people from just obsing us and taking our full build down. A week later, we still had complete dominance despite playing against our build in 70% of matches, holding 12+ times regularly, because our guild actually had enough people to run 3 groups, and 2 of those groups ran dummy copies of the build that left out 2 key skills. I've had hall holds in which 3 of the teams were all from the same guild because of that. That's the power of tailoring every skill to deal with problems on the field before they manifest.
TLDR the spoiler, but my initial reaction made me think this was done when the game was young. I didn't get competitive until about 3.5 years after release. Every guild (except rawr) did exactly the same thing (pretty much, one of 3 builds), so maybe my assumption was wrong. Am I still missing something? Did this go on late into the game's life as well? I was top 50 for quite some time and was definitely not aware of it o_o
Edit: My TLDR wasn't a demand =P it was me saying I didn't read all of it. Don't wanna sound demanding
Yah when the game was young every guild ran different builds I even made a 2-3-3 split build at one point and it was sucessful for a while. Builds didn't get mainstreamed for a lot longer than you think.
On February 25 2011 01:04 Obelisk7 wrote: We have members who've played competitive Guild Wars, WoW, Warhammer, Team Fortress 2, Dota, and many other games. All looking forward to GW2, and hoping our different backgrounds will allow things like our theorycrafting to really shine once more details come out.
I've played FPS's mainly before deciding to look for a MMO to learn to get good at, that being GW2, and I'm both nervous and excited to see if my experience can transulate to the MMO plane.
I'm pulling for the big guys from the MMO background to help me with managing my skill bar.
For a while I made the builds for ScaR (a top 50 GW1 guild) so i guess you are referring to me.
Never heard of anyone who (dedicatedly) "made builds," builds were 99% mainstreamed with very little adjusting, especially if you weren't even top 10. Plus, most players liked to fiddle with their own bar anyway, I never would have just accepted some build someone gave me unless I would have chosen exactly the same skills. Can you elaborate please?
I dedicatedly made builds in a top 20 GvG team, and almost singlehandedly made water eles usable in halls because of the holding setup I made. Team wide skill synergy is incredibly important. EP's edrain monk setup, for instance, wouldn't work vs competent offhand switches, but prior to people even learning about that, the build would have fallen apart if the entire double bond defensive net was broken. That means nearly every skill on every character is placed to deal enough damage to prevent pushes, and to deal with the current field of opposing teams.
If we're running an offensive earth ele, for instance, to drop foes in their monk line, I'll NEED that if I'm running a position based offensive. I'll also need my offense running position based damage to maximize on the game plan. Additionally, the typical 2-3 defensive characters on a team generally need to have answers to all of the prevalent offences in the game, which means carrying the right mix of removal, healing and protection on the right heros. But that's not all. If you're running a midfield warrior, for instance, part of your defensive strategy might be forcing a mes or ele to keep moving and not enter range of a certain monk. Maybe you'll lock him in place with something like a bull's charge, or maybe you'll just run a warrior with huge deeps to punish over extension.
That also works in reverse: if you have a certain monk that's going to be slightly more forward than your back-back line monk, the types of skills he's going to need to keep your offence going are going to need to synergize with your back-monk's ability to keep him casting those. Your midfield monk might want to be running lots of condition removal vs a blind heavy meta. Your back monk will probably want to have him pre-veiled to prevent hexes from shutting him down while he keeps your offense chugging.
Lets look at the example of aegis against thumper offenses. Aegis is a fucking baller spell, because it almost completely neuters adren building. Its a skill you'd want vs the majority of the team comps you'll come up against because 50% block rate makes warriors less than 50% as effective because warriors scale based on hit frequency, and 50% block rate makes ranger spikes a whole metric asston weaker. Can't kd the aegis caster because he had aegis and guardian up for the entire duration of the last aegis, and you couldn't work up the adren needed? Looks like you're boned. Hammers had a way around this: they would toss out Irresistible blows, which grants the hammer warrior an unblockable hit which kd's and spikes for a fuckton of dmg if the target would have blocked. If you run a runner that's got, say, heal party, you can drop aegis casts while he's got a flag time advantage to prevent IBs, which means you'd take more overall damage and get comboed faster, but you'd be able to disrupt the combo by running a midfield mez hero to disable the fully adren'd thumper when he hit 7-8 adren charges, which neuters his combo. If that's not your response, you might simply aegis up and eat the IBs, but then bait out IBs by pre-protting, then faking a high value spell (cast, then move as the warrior swings, costing you energy, but not the spell's cd.). Doing that would keep the warrior from spiking you, give you a comparatively small kd time, and keeps his adren low.
If you take out a single element out of your planned defensive net, you're going to lose people. If you take a single element out of your planned offense, be it a spike, pressure, flag interdiction, or split push, you might lose the game there too. Nevermind the skills you'd need to establish reliable 4v4 and 3v5 splits. Your build might not have answers to everything, but it needs to have answers to the most common problems. Most fotm builds end up having very specific counter builds which develop, which means they need to start changing what they bring in response as their opposition shifts to challenge them.
A concrete example:
Our hall holding build became a fotm. We specifically held in highly spectated fights to prevent people from just obsing us and taking our full build down. A week later, we still had complete dominance despite playing against our build in 70% of matches, holding 12+ times regularly, because our guild actually had enough people to run 3 groups, and 2 of those groups ran dummy copies of the build that left out 2 key skills. I've had hall holds in which 3 of the teams were all from the same guild because of that. That's the power of tailoring every skill to deal with problems on the field before they manifest.
TLDR the spoiler, but my initial reaction made me think this was done when the game was young. I didn't get competitive until about 3.5 years after release. Every guild (except rawr) did exactly the same thing (pretty much, one of 3 builds), so maybe my assumption was wrong. Am I still missing something? Did this go on late into the game's life as well? I was top 50 for quite some time and was definitely not aware of it o_o
Edit: My TLDR wasn't a demand =P it was me saying I didn't read all of it. Don't wanna sound demanding
No idea. I was around until factions, at which point I cheaped out and someone tossed me a WoW account. Bad move on my part, but I heard I jumped off the GW train at a good point. A lot of the very strong competitive players left, and I know for a fact that the competitive pool shrunk substantially. I also know that the expansion skill-sets became redundant and somewhat less chess-like.
Generally there would be a dominant meta, but the guilds that would be pushing the envelope would be sitting atop the pile, making new builds to improve. Everyone else was either slightly innovating off those builds to suit them to the meta they were in, timeslot wise, or they were incredibly co-ordinated and winning games based on splits and positioning, rather than optimal skillsets.
Generally, a top-tier new build would give you up to a month's worth of dominance, at which point it would become the standard meta, get counter builded , or get nerfed in the case of some stupid shit. I heard the skill balancing and re-jigs stopped being done consistently at a certain point, so that might explain why the scene got stale. Or the smaller pool of players. Or the shitty new skill paradigms.
But no, shit wasn't standardized at all during my time playing. You'd generally have someone obs your GvG matches and specifically look at where your team is underperforming, then tweak your build. We'd generally run the skillsets in halls for 2 maps to get people used to their bars and get the muscle memory up, then we'd go back and run in GvG and see if the changes paid off.
they updated GW1 with a bunch of new stuff today, including 7 hero parties and a new town. i haven't reinstalled yet but this will be a good opportunity to focus on my monument hall.
I can't wait to make a norn called incontrol. You know why...you really know why.
Still playing GW1 here. 3000 hours played, pretty sad to be honest. 47/50 Halls (only missing those lame mini pets...25/50 there). The recent Dervish update is amazing. I hated that class since NF was released but in the past 2 weeks I've made a new Dervish, gotten it through EotN and half of NF (I do all quests so it takes a little longer than most) and pretty much destroyed the entire game having a ton of fun.
I'm not sure if this game will be what I want it to be though. I'm still playing GW1 exactly because of the way it's made (a story with instanced missions and quests) but this is looking like it will change a lot of things that I love about the original. I will still buy it and give it more than it's fair try though.
Im starting playing gw again with my girlfriend...
How long take to play the whole story? (prophecies, nightfall, xasdadaf and eye of the north?)
i need recomendations to:
-earn money -make a nice build with my Me/E and her N/Mo -get the best equipment and skills
the expansions are funny?
ps: we was very happy playing prophecies, but we left the game because i lost my pw, and now i buy the game again with all expansions, we want to get ready to gw2 hehehehe
those gameplay videos makes me not want to play this game... looks so damn dull.. but maybe the player is just worse then a 3year old to play games i dont know... :/
So the new class is Thief, and my biggest fear about the rogue class in GW2 came true - it has stealth. Why couldn't they keep the original gw1 shadow/teleport fast moving style of the assassin, and instead went the boring way?
On March 07 2011 06:24 Jimmy Raynor wrote: So the new class is Thief, and my biggest fear about the rogue class in GW2 came true - it has stealth. Why couldn't they keep the original gw1 shadow/teleport fast moving style of the assassin, and instead went the boring way?
Well, from the video it seemed that stealth drains the Thief's energy quite fast, so it's not going to be able to be used constantly, but more for just manoeuvring in and out of battle.
The emphasis still seems to be on very fast moving and lot's of mobility, so I don't think it will be boring.
EPT
