Talk:List of PvE-only skills

DPL
I have added DPL for some of the Sunspear and Allegiance skills, as well as brought here the Celestial DPL done before, so this page looks more like the other skills lists linked from the Skill page. Thanks to poke for the help : ) However, I'm not sure how to add DPL for the Junundu skills (or even if I should add DPL for them), given how they follow a more complex pattern (one replaces another, one may be replaced by three different ones, and so on). Any opinions? Erasculio 15:34, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Norn title track
The DPL for this is a little messed up. Currently it doesn't show adrenaline, but when you change it to {skill infobox}.professionpve the description and energy get messed up :/ --Santax (talk · contribs) 12:07, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
 * You're right, that's a known problem on the templates I made. I don't really know how to use this stuff, unlike Cohran (who thankfully should be back anytime now), so the templates I have made (both the PvE one and the "Profession PvE" one) are somewhat limited - the first works for non profession specific, non adrenal skills, and the second works for profession specific, adrenal skills. It would require a new template for non profession specific adrenal skills, something I have not done yet (that's what the Junundu skills need, for example) since I want to ask Cohran (apologizes if I'm misspelling his name) first if there's a less messy way to do that. Erasculio 14:00, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
 * CoRrRan should get back today.. poke | talk 14:11, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Polymock skills
Do you think it's a good idea to add polymock skills to this list? Guildwiki choosed to do so but I'm not sure it's very wise. Here's the List of Polymock skills that we know for now. This list will probably expand after release as we find more info in game. So the PvE-list could become very long and loose its interrest. Maybe just a section ===Other skills=== would be ok? Chriskang 20:53, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree with you that it would not be a good idea to add those skills here. I think we don't even need a skill list of those, to say the truth; as far as I know the Polymock skills are linked to each individual piece, so a piece of a given kind will always have the same skills. Therefore, I think it would be wiser to make a list of Polymock pieces, and there (and only there) list the skills, under each specific piece that ownes them. We would not have a skill list, rather a pieces list. Erasculio 21:42, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * We already have what you suggest in the Polymock article. And for the summary of all Polymock skills, I thought it was interesting to have an overview of all the mechanics that are involved in this minigame. For example, with the Polymock list, you can see that most of the usual game mechanics are simplified (no knockdown, no shouts, no melee attacks, important use of glyphs, and so on). Chriskang 00:17, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Almost - the current Polymock page lists the pieces and the name of the skills. I was talking about something bigger - nothing we may do right now since we don't have all that data, but to make DPL lists (just like the ones here) describing the skills each piece has, as opposed to just naming them (such as what happens on the current Polymock page). The idea is to do exactly what you said - have one place with all the skill mechanics - while still keeping it on the Polymock page. Erasculio 02:24, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, this suggestion will result in a page much bigger than the current one. For now, the List of Polymock skills has 55 entries and I suppose that most of them are shared between a lot of pieces (if you just look at the 2 pieces we already now, they have 3 skills in common). Repeating the description of common skills for each piece would produce 27 tables of 8 lines each (if there are indeed 27 Polymock pieces). That's 216 lines in total, much bigger than any profession page. I don't really see that fitting. The other option would be to create a separate page for each piece. Do you have a better idea? And, as a side note, could you please explain to the wikinoob that I am how to create custom DPL like the ones you suggest. I suppose we just have to create categories like "Polymock Fire Imp Skills" "Polymock Gargoyle Skills" "..." and, if a skill is shared between 2 forms, we add it to both categories. Is that right? Chriskang 08:38, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * You're right about how to get the skills within a category for each piece in order to make a DPL list for them (as far as I know - I'm as much a wikinoob as you : D). And huh, you're also right about it becoming a huge page...Your idea about making a page per piece is a good one, but it would nice indeed to have one central page with everything...I'm out of ideas this time. Erasculio 16:40, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think Polymock skills should be considered PvE-only skills, rather arena skills or something like that. Kind of like Dragon arena skills and snowball fighting skills. - anja  [[Image:User Anja Astor sig icon.png|talk]] 16:46, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Would a page like this or that be OK? Chriskang 07:19, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Both of those look great, nice job : ) Erasculio 12:18, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Disco colors
I know those colors come from the profession of the related skills but... isn't it a bit too much for this page? Would it be possible to let a neutral background when we want to display skills from many different professions? Chriskang 20:21, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that is my fault; sorry. I tried to keep a background override parameter when I implemented the auto-color-by-profession, but my first attempt was flawed. I think I could implement it correctly now if we want, though. --Rezyk 20:32, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I forgot to say you did a great job on all those templates Rezyk. Congrats and thanks for all that work. Chriskang 20:48, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

One table to rule them all?
I actually liked more the old approach, of having many different tables, one for each kind of PvE only skill. I think it made it easier to find exactly what I was looking for, especially given the division between campaigns. Does anyone share that opinion? Erasculio 20:56, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * That's exactly what I told on IRC a few minutes ago. You can sort by attribute by clicking on the little arrow on the top of the column but even with this sort, I still find it unclear. Chriskang 21:12, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Not that I disagree, but can you guys give more specifics on the type of searches that you are doing (maybe some examples)? I tend to see this table merging as "evening out" the search depths for various kinds of searches -- it's less fitting for "campaign->attribute->name" searches, but tends to be the same or much easier for others. Example: Suppose I want to find Air of Superiority, know only that it's PvE-only, and forgot how to spell "superiority". How would I find it with the old tables?
 * I don't mean to argue for my merged version, and really don't mind at all if anyone wants to revert it. Maybe the various other search types are just too uncommon to give weight to, etc. I'm asking so I can get a better idea of what other kinds of options are worth exploring. --Rezyk 21:45, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I think it's more likely players are going to know a bit more about a given PvE skill before trying to find it - for example, someone who wants to find Air of Superiority and knows only it's a GW:EN PvE only skill, and so on. For those, I think the current tables are more confusing, as everything is mixed together - I think clear divisions help players to find anything, especially if they're able to narrow a bit more their search. Erasculio 22:07, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * This has turned into a big mess, revert please. Maestro Ed 23:58, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, there could be 2 main reasons for someone to come to this page:
 * Either you have maxed (or at least made good progresses) on a given title track and you want to know which skill would be interesting for you in this specific title track. Let's take my personnal case: i maxed the sunspear title and have a level 0 in both allegiance title tracks. When I come to this page, I don't want to see luxon/kurzick skills in the middle of sunspear ones because I know my progress is too low to make them attractive.
 * Second case would be for preparing my progress through Gwen. I want to know which title track (Asura, Deldrimor, Ebon or Norn) has the most skills that interrest me. For this, I want to have a quick overview of all Asuran skills and to be able to compare then with Deldrimor ones, Ebon ones and Norn ones. In this particular case, I don't want to see sunspear skills in the same table as those ones, even if I maxed the title.
 * To summarize: I see no point in sorting the table by skill name. The table would be OK for me if it was sorted by default by campaign and then by attribute (but I think it's impossible to have 2 sorting criterias and I also think it's impossible to have the table already sorted on page load). Last point: as far as I remember, the skills where exactly sorted this way with the previous version, that's why I said I prefered it but if you can resolve the sorting problem, I'm OK for this one. Chriskang 00:01, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I like it a lot right now. Great work Rezyk. Chriskang 10:00, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Why can't heros use PvE skills?
I really like some of the new PvE skills but I don't understand why my heros can't use them? I play a warrior tank a lot and most of my skills are build around tanking, some skills like the Vanguard Wards would be great to chuck on Sousuke in the backlines to add a bit of support. Dancing Gnome 17:17, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * That has been asked here, and Isaiah (he is the main skill balancer of Arena Net) replied to it there. I hope it answers your question : ) Erasculio 21:38, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * btw, they also can't gain them via using echo skills. There has to be something programmed to them similar to normal players if trying to copy a monster skill. &mdash;Zerpha[[Image:UserZerpha The Improver sig.png|talk]] The Improver 14:19, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

2 Skills only?
I fail to put in more than 2 PvE skill in my skill bar at the same time. Shouldn't this kind of limitation be mentioned here? --Xer 15:39, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I thought it was a limit of 3? (ofc, this is an old comment so it may have been changed) In any case, I agree that it should be mentioned --Dfscott 03:01, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * If you put the identical skill for both Kurzick and Luxon, it will give the "no more than 3" error. Also, don't forget about Sunspear Rebirth Sig. --JonTheMon 03:07, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * For more precision, it is not possible to have a Kurzick and Luxon skill on the same bar. Regardless if it is a different skill. Vezz 23:27, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

reword or edit
Article would imply you can only equip 3 of the Junandu skills as they are listed as PvE only for nightfall... This is not the case as the skills replace your bar when disguised 192.203.160.241 13:46, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Too strong even for PvE
In my opinion, some of these skills (mainly the EOTN ones) need to be nerfed in order to bring at least some balance back into PvE. To keep things short, I'm just going to give my opinion on a couple of things: 1. Hard mode is the new normal mode. Reduce the number of PvE skills allowed in HM from 3 to 2. That way it's at least a little harder. I remember when hard mode first came out, it was actually hard. Now that many people have figured out how to abuse some of these PvE skills, it's easy to see that some of them are overpowered. 2. A couple of skills shouldn't define a whole class. Ex.: Imbagon > (Any other 'single' paragon build/elite combination). And even though a bunch of paragons together can be pretty powerful, at that point some other party composition will be better. 3. PvE skills overdue the role they're supposed to fill. Most profession specific PvE skills fulfill the role they're supposed to fill, such as Critical Agiity allowing sins to tank in PvE, making them more flexible in PvE; and Summon Spirits allowing rits to be more mobile, allowing them to keep up with the group and contribute more. However, some skills like Great Dwarf Weapon overdue whatever role they were supposed to fill, overshadowing many other legitimate skill combinations [(dwarf weapon + barrage) > (most other elite/skill combinations for rangers)]. 4. I look forward to seeing the changes Anet makes to the dervish to increase their PvE and PvP presense, but personally I think the profession that needs the most help in all formats is the paragon. In PvE the only paragons most teams want are variants of an Imbagon, and in PvP they're almost non-existant in every format. This profession needs a complete rework and rebalancing (specifically how Leadership works), and a rework could probably fill in the holes made by nerfed PvE skills. That is all. -Nova 74.235.62.209 06:42, 30 December 2010 (UTC)