User talk:Isaiah Cartwright/Izzy Talk Archive 5

=Skill feedback= Sorry I haven't been posting in this stuff as much, I've been super busy with the GW:EN skills, but please keep posting I'm building a list and checking it twice, and marking each skill as naughty or nice for my next balance update, so keep the feedback coming it all helps. ~Izzy @-&#39; 07:58, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Any chance of having a Overpowered Skills in HB and a Underpowered Skills in HB?Kiteeye 04:18, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think it really matters where a skill is over- or under-powered, just the fact that it's over- or under-powered is enough. That said, Hero Battles itself has a big effect on a lot of perfectly balanced skills as it is; keep in mind that a skill being over- or under-powered there doesn't necessarily make it an imbalanced skill.
 * Just post the skills in the regular sections, and mention where and why they're overpowered... -- Jioruji Derako.> 04:28, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

What about at least cleaning it up a bit? Like removed recently nerfed/buffed skills from underpowerd/overpowered skill lists. Like those rit-spike realed nerf calls that are now pointless. Zweistein 09:47, 14 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Several people are archiving them as they spot them. -- Gordon Ecker 09:53, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Going to start something for the GW patch today (Aug 16)? ~Seef II &lt;☎|→&gt; 04:35, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Izzy, the Paragon community at GWOnline.net is looking for an explanation for the recent nerf to "There's Nothing to Fear!". The doubling of the recharge timer has dramatically neutered the Paragon's PvE ability, and it is quite difficult to get into PuG's now. An adjustment to the Seed of Life nerf was already made; Paragons are hoping to bring the recast time back down to a more reasonable level like 15s. In the past, you have posted the reasons for skill balancing, but nothing was said about the TNtF or Seed of Life nerf. Could you supply a 2-3 sentence explantion? The GWO community has also come up with some great solutions/alternatives to the concern that x/P's (secondary Paragons) were abusing the skill. One involves adjusting the recast timer to 15 and then making the duration of TnTF equal to the number of points in Leadership. Or... adjusting the recast back down to 10 and then add "50% Failure at 4 Leadership or less." The latter suggestion seems to be more widely accepted.--Veraci 16:48, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Another good source of feedback is the "There's Nothing to Fear!" discussion page.--Veraci 19:25, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

=Misc=

Suggestions
As I'm just getting used to this wiki stuff what kind of things would you like to see from me? The notes on skill updates seems to go over well, but if you have any suggestions for other things I could add let me know. ~Izzy @-&#39;
 * It might be cool to see what kinds of things you're currently working on, if that's possible. I like your notes though and it's great to be able to see responses from you and know that you're getting people's suggestions :) skaspaakssa 03:30, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Maybe some notes on the skill creation process? I for one would love to hear what you're thinking when you make some skill effects, or what inspired some skills. Mirrored Stance for example, maybe. That's just such a strange/cool effect, it makes me wonder how you ever came up with it... have any skills that are personal favorites of yours from a design standpoint? -- Jioruji Derako.> 03:43, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I wish we could change tokens for gold or make it count as reward points(1token = 1 reward) cause tokens are pretty much useless right now.Tricolor 27 July 2007 (UTC)


 * So...shame theres no Golden Mantis Thrust or something :( Would be nice if there was one :D InfestedHydralisk  [[image:Shadow_Prison.jpg|19px]] 17:09, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Not take so long to implement cape trims every season.--Yue


 * Implement balance patches at the beginning of each month.
 * Promote skillful play
 * Do something to encourage activity in the game, even go back to the old ladder system and just use AT's for the monthly (a ladder works for all other competitive games) --Daemon


 * Yeah some thoughts on what angle you took for skill design would be great. Maybe a "fix-this-skill" column where you bring forth one skill that you are looking at, and have the community attack it.  Also PvE skills!  Come on!  GWEN is coming why don't we have more spoilers!!!! :) --Ravious 17:12, 6 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Fragility down the mesmer "Illusion" line needs AoE plz, kthks 85.168.232.8 19:46, 16 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Luminous dyes, Camoflage doesn't work in GW so I might as well glow in the dark Sadie2k 02:32, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Specific GvG Map Imbalances
A quick list of notable asymmetries on GvG maps:


 * Warrior's Isle: Home team is significantly more vulnerable to the catapult. The home base has a clear catapult alley that cannot be avoided while coming out the front gate, and the catapult has good coverage of the entire courtyard.  Compare with the visiting base, where a team can travel directly from the side gate to the front gate while spending only minimal time in the catapult's kill zone.


 * Hunter's Isle: Home team is significantly more vulnerable to the catapult. Same problem as Warrior's Isle.  In addition, the home base has a path leading directly from the front to the back door outside the base, unlike the visiting base where you must travel either through the base or the long way around.  The boat on the home side is also exceptionally spread out, with multiple entrances that make it much easier to invade.  Easily the least balanced of the maps available.


 * Wizard's Isle: Home team is virtually impossible to hit with the catapult. The kill zone is off to the side, does not hit the door, and a team can avoid the kill zone entirely by using the path between the front and side gates.  Also, the outside archers are much more difficult to kill due to the geometry of the ramparts, and the home boat is less dangerous as NPCs can be aggroed through the walls.


 * Burning Isle: Minor issue: the visiting boat is significantly smaller than the home boat. Teams boated on the visiting side are more vulnerable to AoE, and are unable to move to the other side of the boat to avoid being in casting range of an opponent hugging a side wall outside the boat.


 * Frozen Isle: Minor issues: The visiting boat is significantly smaller than the home boat. In addition, the path leading up the hill to the flagstand is more narrow on the visiting side than the home side, making it more prone to bodblocking.


 * Uncharted Isle: The outer archers are put in a much better position on the home ramparts than on the visiting ones. The home archers are close enough together that they tend to aggro together, and their reach will hit any foe passing by on the home side's path to the flagstand.  The defending ramparts archers, on the other hand, are more spread out, and can be avoided entirely by hugging the far side of the path nearest that base.


 * Corrupted Isle: Misplaced archer on the home team's side. On the visiting side, there is an archer on the mound overlooking the path into the front gate, allowing him to fire down on any foes entering the base.  On the home side, that archer is on the other side of that path, behind a wall and unable to hit anything.


 * Uncharted Isle: Bug: Players and Guild Thieves get stuck inside gates/doors as they close and remain there until someone else opens the door or until they die.


 * I'd just like to say that the Home team in Wizard's Isle is suffering from splitting possibilities, it's harder for them to move in their own base and moreover, i think i remember that home team's flag is further from the flagstand than the visiting team's. Home Team has more defense but Visiting Team has more offense imo, that keeps everything balanced and it shouldn't but changed.  Azul  [[image:Frigid_Armor.jpg|20px]] 13:35, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Druid's Isle - The defending team can kill the attacking teams bodyguard with a longbow relatively easily from the raised land where the 2 archers stand next to each other. Absolutely no fear of aggro'ing the knights and also only 3 archers in this path, one of which could probably be avoided if you really wanted to. The defending teams lord is camped in a cave, impossible to reach him without aggro'ing knights. Yesitsrob 19:35, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Weeping stone isle seems WAY too tight, worse than the old Jade flagstand area. Slap a couple steady stance guys in there and half your team is getting worked by fearme spam. Gus 10:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch I'm doing a full rework of all NPC spawns and how they path during VoD I'll try and fix as many of these as I can. ~Izzy @-&#39; 21:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Shouldn't the GvG maps have different things you can exploit? I guess Warriors kinda sucks because of that catapult thing, though. Why should a team pick a map like that? Otherwise most of that stuff seems like reasons you might want to pick a map. --TimeToGetIntense 01:07, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Since they are used in AT's and you are just assigned a side, Maps with exploits can create rather big (dis)advantages for one team and this makes it an unfair contest. The winner should be the best team, not the one who was able to exploit the map.-- ChronicinabilitY [[Image:User Chronicinability Spiteful_Spirit.jpg|18px]] 11:27, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * More specifically, teams should be able to tailor their builds to a particular map to get an advantage. However, a team should not gain any particular advantage or disadvantage for being either the blue team or the red team.  Maps with peculiar strategy elements are ok. -Ensign 23:26, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Wizard's Isle still has the bug on the attacking team's base where you can get in without the thief by pushing someone through the corner. - Chiizu

Pets, Minions and Clutter
I know there's an issue with "clutter" when you're playing against teams with a large number of pets and minions - would it be reasonable to fix this by adding a "target next enemy player" hotkey instead of just "target next enemy"? --Tankity Tank 09:34, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe that is part of the balance? :P --Deathwing 13:28, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Seriously i'd be very happy if tab just tabbed through PLAYERS and give another shortkey to target minion/spirit. It's true that one of the most annoying thing against those HA spam team using multiple spirits + minions + pets is that while heroes function correctly in this mode it's EXTREMELY annoying for players to try to target properly AND to follow people when you get bodyblocked by some NPC thing every 2 seconds. This build is the main reason why i can't stand HA these days because facing it, even if you win, is so tedious and annoying that i just don't have fun in there anymore. Patccmoi 13:39, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I've always wanted this myself :) ~Izzy @-&#39; 18:16, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * That sounds like a yes to me! Woot! Counciler 03:43, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Minion Targetting
Sorry to change it from enemy minions to friendly minions, but honestly, MMs have it tough. First the Minion Cap, then the various skill nerfs, finally the Soul Reaping nerf... Is it sad that Heroes are frequently better MM than we are? It's one thing to be beaten down by Mallyx or "Nightfall" Shiro, but when a cookie-cutter-build Hero can manage and target minions better than anyone but a certain Mes/N Minion Bomber, it's simply wrong. Izzy, please read [url=http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3047544]this[/url] and [url=http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10185905]this[/url]. Even the non-Necro-mains are begging for better minion support. Maybe buff Jagged Bones again? --BarGamer 23:13, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * There's already an article here . Antiarchangel 14:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Post-GW:EN Skillz + Mini-rant
Are there any plans to add new skills to the game after GW:EN, or will it be all GW2 and augmenting old skills from there? I personally feel that adding new options will help you solve a lot of your nerfing troubles with metagame builds. I know that not nerfing things will lead to power creep, but a lot of the time a meta build is used simply because it's the best available and making the skill subpar only hurts the variety in GW. Also, this rant is kind of old now, because you are updating skills again, I just felt it needed to be said. :D | GD Defender /  contribs 05:30, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * People run what is good. If you add more good, then people will just make a new meta. However, I would MUCH rather prefer new Elites/Skills added then just re-balancing over and over again. Perhaps just my opinion. Readem   Sorry, I'll stop trolling now.  05:43, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd rather have new skills than switch between nerfed->buffed skills that have been around for ages. Like Poisoned Heart, it has had several buffs, but it is still crap. The only way it would not be crap is if it got buffed to an insane amount. I don't want that, I want new skills to play with, not old skills with halved recharge. But again, these are going to be the last batch of skills for this game, so that's that really, at least we get nerfs/buffs. --Deathwing 06:10, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It's still not too late to make the factions duplicates into unique skills. --Ckal Ktak 09:41, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * To Readem, if there is enough good stuff people will actually have a tough choice and meta itself will be less meta. There will be more variety and you won't have the "this is best, gogogo" builds that reduce the strategy of creating and working as a team.  Of course, that's only if Izzy can hit the balance just right, but I'd say it's possible with some work and time.  The question is whether it's worth the effort with GW2 beta coming up in less than a year.  [[Image:User GD Defender sig.png]]| GD Defender  /  contribs 16:35, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * By what I have to go on, GW2 looks baed. Not going to bring up the GW2=WoW copy thing, as it already has multiple threads/Forums already :P. Readem   Sorry, I'll stop trolling now.  00:42, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Some skills have no potential with the current design. These skills should be tweaked and functionality changed. I'm talking about skills such as Protective Bond. After tweaking these skills you basically get new skills and there you go. The number of skills doesn't matter. The number of playable skills does.Servant of Kali 20:32, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I actually think the game has already way too many skills. I would be happy if skills were actually removed from the game, but that's not going to happen (would be horrible marketing anyway). I only wish GW2 will have far less skills than we currently have. I believe that thanks to how hard it is to balance a game with so many skills - and instead of having everything balanced, what we have are some skills which are used often and are balanced, together with dozens of skills that are weak enough to be useful, and that won't be buffed anytime soon as buffing takes time and that kind of thing simply cannot be a priority. So between having 100 skills, but 25 being really good and really useful with 75 being mostly useless, I would rather have only 50 good and balanced skills - the absolute number would be smaller, but we would have more options (viable options, anyway) than we have now. Therefore, I'm against introducing any new skills on GW1 - now that new skills won't be introduced anymore (or at least apparently we won't have more of them after GW:EN), I believe the game may be made more balanced than ever (or at least more balanced since the release of Factions and NF). Erasculio 21:49, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm personally in favor of more skills, myself. More skills equal more combinations, which equals a more diverse metagame. Even bad skills can combine to make good skillbars. Adding skills that aren't necessarily "powerful" will still have a good effect. My current favorite example is Glyph of Immolation and Steam. Both are decent skills on their own, but Steam hardly sees play, and Burning isn't a popular condition with such a low duration. But combined, they work great - Steam turns into a decent damage-dealing spell, and causes blind and burning thanks to the Glyph. Adding the Glyph works better then any buff to Steam, unless you made Steam's conditional effect unconditional, which would result in more balancing needed.
 * Even if everyone's running variations of the same build, the fact that there's enough good skill choices for there to even be variations is a bonus in my book. -- Jioruji Derako.> 22:03, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Erasculio, I'm not sure I understand your point. What is your logical reasoning for less skills? I'm sure it's not balance because then we can just go play chess. Now, you said you're PvE only player, which makes this even more suprising. Is there anything that forces you in PvE to use all those skills? What professions do you play? What forces you to use non-Prophecy skills? Heal monks work just as good with Prophecy only skills, Ranger will work in PvE just as good with Prophecy skills, same for all other classes. What is your reason against lots of skills? It's not like monsters use all those skills, they usually have only few on their bar, so it's not like anything forces you to memorize all skills (which btw isn't that difficult). Just because you don't intend to use all these skills, doesn't mean no one else will. I for one like to have as many *playable* (so, not dead weight) skills as possible because I love creativity - that enables me to make all kinds of weird fun builds. If we were stuck to Prophecy only skills I'd quit the game long time ago, because the variations only go as far. Servant of Kali 09:06, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I think exactly like you, Kali - I also like variety, and I also like being able to be creative when making new builds (to me that's 50% of the fun I have in the game). My point is arguing for that, not against it - with less skills, I think all of them would be more balanced, to a point in which there is no underpowered (nor overpowered) skill in the game, and everything is viable. Right now, there are plenty of underpowered skills that are simply not viable, even when considering skill sinergy, and I doubt all of them are going to be buffed, as that would take years of effort. Imagine it - think about all skills that today are underpowered, imagine if the game lost half of them, and if the remaining half were to be reworked so they're as good as everything else. I think we would end with less absolute options, but far more viable ones. Erasculio 14:16, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * OK so let's get that to extreme. Less skills better balance = chess. We don't want to play chess otherwise we'd play chess. We want more skills and more balance. This does not contradict each other. Look at the game. Do you really think that game now is more imbalanced than it was in Prophecies? I don't think so. I think balance is good now. Also, you're right, there are more underpowered skills but with less skills overall there would be less *playable* skills as well. Do you think that 100 perfectly balanced skills is better than 1000 skills of which 500 are playable and balanced? Sorry, but i'd rather have 1000 skills of which half are useless, than 100 skills of which all are useful. Servant of Kali 16:15, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Without new skills, FotM never shows up again. People figure out the best skillbars, then they stick with them, and the game gets stale. Saying that less skills equals more balance is flawed logic; take Magic: the Gathering, for example. That's got hundreds upon hundreds of cards, with about 300-400+ cards added every year. They still manage to keep everything balanced for all six million of their players. Sure, we've got a strong metagame running in M:tG all the time, but with every new set, it changes entirely. Sets come in, bringing new answers to old decks, new combos make appearances, and decks are constantly changing. Standard alone (which is restricted to the two most recent "Blocks" + the newest Core Set) has a strong meta that changes from week to week, and entire decks rise to power and fall out of grace merely from a single set to another. With so many cards to choose from, it sometimes takes months before someone figures out a strong combo, meaning that even without any new cards being released, the metagame changes on it's own. And let's not forget, there's no such thing as buffs/nerfs in that game. If such a huge game as that can keep itself running smoothly, I don't see how it wouldn't be possible for GW to do the same with even more skills. GW also has the option to change entire skill effects at any time, after they're released, making game balance much more fluid. All in all, more skills = more diversity = more fun. -- Jioruji Derako.> 09:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Remember that they've had to ban large amounts of MtG sets from tournaments due to balance issues. Too much is too much. -- [[Image:User Gem sig.png|Gem]] (gem / talk) 20:25, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think GW needs 10k skills, true, but the current amount IMO is not too much. I could handle much more of it ;))) Servant of Kali 07:40, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * FYI Gem, the only cards we currently have banned are, for the most part, all from the very first set. There has never been full sets banned from play; you must be thinking of the tournament formats? There are four of those, generally; Standard is the two most recent "blocks" +the newest Core Set, and that rotates on a regular basis. Extended is like Standard, but stretches back across quite a few more sets, and also rotates sets out as new ones are released. Then, there's Legacy, which features EVERY set, and has a banned list of 64 cards currently. Vintage is just like Legacy, but only has two banned cards, with the other previously banned cards restricted to one per deck.
 * There are other sets that aren't tournament-legal, but they're like that on release. Nobody wants to play against this card in a tournament. :P --[[image:User_Jioruji_Derako_logo.png]] Ĵĩôřũĵĩ Đēŗāķō.> .cнаt^  14:54, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

We have so many disfunctional skills and completly destroyed skills that if we just got back all of the skills already in the game, we would have endless options. Just redeveloping the recharge and costs on alot of spells, and bringing back widespread AoE damage as well as Paragon Shout advantages would bring both professions back into interest. Fixing the Shadowsteps with frequency and allowing regular hit and run techniques to be used by Assassin would put Assassin where it needs to be, and developing multifunctional counters on existing skills would help cover the opposing skill options without forcing players to diversify their defense. Redeveloping Ritualist spirits, effects, and costs would bring them back into play, and offer even more combat strategies. There are so many broken and unused skills, even many ineffective and underpowered Elites, that just going through all of them and repairing them would offer us more skills and gameplay diversity than we need to keep us revolving and experiementing builds and strategies for a decade.--BahamutKaiser 20:39, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Enchantments last 10% longer offhand

 * http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10189050
 * http://gw.gamewikis.org/wiki/Talk:Diessa_Icon
 * Look like existing ones are not patched. There could be more of these lieing around. --Evenfall 23:37, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

It happens. Random Degen Weapons as well, that are not Vamp exist. Readem  Sorry, I'll stop trolling now.  00:35, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I've personally got an axe with +15% damage always, -1 energy regeneration. Don't think those were ever meant to be removed, though; were enchanting offhands supposed to have been removed from the game or something? -- Jioruji Derako.> 07:09, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I believe you can still find damage mods that aren't inscriptions (like 15%/-1 energy regen, or the more efficient +15%/-1 health regen), they're just very rare. I found a 15%/-1 health regen Shadow Bow shortly before Nightfall was released.  I even think you can still get the quest reward wand which gives you +5% to attack speed, even though its damage is too low to use in pvp.  People would kill for that 10% offhand. Shard 10:37, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Funny that you say people would like to have that off hand...i think the Price check on it was around 25-30k.--Coridan 10:44, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Nobody knows how good it is because they're pve nubs? This is the only offhand that gives extra enchantment time. Shard
 * yea i had a hammer like that too. +15% dmg, -1 health regen. 74.134.153.177 23:50, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Seriously I would pay above 100k for a +10% enchantments offhand. 10% is a big deal for a prot monk!!! --216.113.201.30 04:49, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Ladder wait times
I can understand you want to pair around equal opponents, but the waiting times at the top of the ladder are a joke nowadays: We have to wait up to 15 (!) minutes to get a match for +0. This means we can't even do ladder when we get a forfeit win in an AT, unless we don't care about resigning out in case of a longer match.

We've started a smurf guild now, but it's kinda gay you're pretty much forced to smurf. -Void 11:50, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Could this be based on Rating rather than Rank? Since you guys are so far ahead in rating would be why you're taking longer to find opponents? If they based it on Rank may get you games a bit quicker, (Even +0's) And yeh 15 mins i can easily belive, i can imagine at times you guys may have to wait even longer since i know guys in Draak that have to wait around 10 Minutes in bad times. -- ChronicinabilitY [[Image:User Chronicinability Spiteful_Spirit.jpg|18px]] 05:16, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, currently it's based on rating. And i have to admit, i would rather prefer to fight some lower ranked guilds than wait for ages. -Void 10:30, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * But would the lower ranked guilds prefer to fight YOU? Counciler 22:24, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeh because it gives them options for nice rating gain, which is what they want, and they don't suffer badly if they lose. As it is because they are forced to smurf, the lower ranks are stillplaying them, just with more rating loss, and less reward if they win. -- ChronicinabilitY  [[Image:User Chronicinability Spiteful_Spirit.jpg|18px]] 23:04, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delta Formation plays on tons of different pugs and smurfs just because the wait times for matches are so long. Chiizu 04:24, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

GW:EN skill bugs?
Alright, so far, there seems to be a few bugs (which are to be expected with an early release like this, but just thought I'd list them off for your benefit). I get the feeling some of the updates to the skills while they were in development never went through... Such as Way of the Master being called it's original (and cooler IMO) name, Way of the Warrior.


 * Rapid Fire works with all weapons, not just bows. Not sure if this is a bug or not; you mentioned before it was meant for Bows-only, but the skill's description never got changed. Did you decide to keep it the way it was?


 * Expert Focus applies the energy cost reduction before Expertise factors in, making the total energy reduction barely noticeable. At the moment, it's just a Read the Wind with less damage and no speed boost, because the energy reduction basically has no effect.

Not sure if there are any others, or if any of these are even "bugs", but figured it would be best to have them all listed in one spot, for other's benefit as well as yours (I'm sure you've got every skill page on watch anyway though). Aside from those "bugs", the rest of the skills are looking awesome... I've just found that Rapid Fire, Broad Head Arrow, Feral Aggression, and a pet makes for some sweet DPS, and you can interrupt 1/2 cast spells half the time as well, hehe. Can't wait to get my hands on the full game. -- Jioruji Derako.> 13:04, 25 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Cracked Armor appears to not be working at all. I tested spells from all four Elementalist attributes and physical damage from a candy cane weapon - all unaffected.--Mysterial 14:16, 25 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Smoke power defence blind lasts only 2 seconds instead of scaling like it should.87.194.104.90 12:28, 26 August 2007 (UTC)Burton

Why isnt anyone responding to this?--Atlas Oranos 15:39, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Patience. They're not required to respond, nor have you given them much time to do so. [[Image:User Aiiane-a.gif|Go to Aiiane's Talk page]] (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 16:18, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I think that Expert's Focus is supposed to be applied after Expertise. Energizing Wind and Primal Echoes are also applied before. Elemental Shift can be reused immediately, I suspect this is because it replaces the skill bar. Ebon Vanguard Assassin Support appears to be bugged, the Assassin dies in one hit, and apparently also dies as soon as it gains any condition. Also, I'd prefer it if "... the Assassin lives for X seconds. If target foe is not a Charr, the Assassin lives for Y seconds." line was replaced with "... the Assassin fights for X seconds before vanishing. If target foe is not a Charr, the Assassin fights for Y seconds." to make it clear that, if the Assassin survives the entire duration, he simply vanishes rather than dying. -- Gordon Ecker 20:37, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I think 24 hours is a pretty good amount of time, but ok. Just wondering whats up.--Atlas Oranos 21:51, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It often takes Izzy a week or more to get around to every conversation on his pages - there are a lot of them. [[Image:User Aiiane-a.gif|Go to Aiiane's Talk page]] (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 00:48, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * In the case of Expert Focus then, it's severely underpowered. If it's meant to apply before Expertise, then the effect needs to scale more aggressively for it to actually do anything. As it is, it's reducing energy costs by less then half a point, which just gets rounded back up to the original costs. -- Jioruji Derako.> 00:44, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I remembered another bug. In the skill monitor, the tooltip for "You Move Like a Dwarf!" erroneously displays the damage range as rather than . -- Gordon Ecker 01:15, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Waste Not, Want Not currently does not give you back energy if the target is doing anything except running around. It is only supposed to not work if a foe is spell casting or attacking, but Signets, Stances, Chants, etc. still cause it not to function like it is described to do. --arredondo 21:32, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Rapid Fire doesn't work with shortbows. I tested this with all kinds of bows (recurve, flat etc.) and they all had increased attack speed except for the shortbow. 81.216.254.222 16:26, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to add another bug with GW:EN skills. The healing monk skills don't get any extra healing from Healer's boon. I was severely disappointed when I tried running healing ribbon and cure hex on a healer boon bar in byob gvg. Pluto 03:58, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Feast for the Dead/Veratta's Sacrifice bug
Using Feast for the Dead on a minion only heals the minions of the player who used it and not ALL allied minions as the description states andVerata's Sacrifice also states it affects all allied minions. In comparison, Blood of the Master heals all allied minions, as it's description states and Order of Undeath works on only the caster's minions, as its description states. Is this an error in the description of Feast for the Dead and Verata's Sacrifice, or should they both work on all allied minions are are currently not functioning correctly? It seems like a balance issue, after all BotM effectively limits the number of minions a party can have; if you have too many the sacrifice will do massive damage or even kill you outright, whereas Feast' would be a very easy heal for all allied minions. Maestro Ed 14:16, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Vereta's Sacrifice was purposely removed from viability because Izzy did not like it, so you are barking up the wrong tree with that one. --Deathwing 06:37, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * He's not asking for a buff to Verata's Sacrifice, he's stating that it's effects don't match it's description and asking weather the actual behavior is intentional or the written behavior was intended. - [[Image:User HeWhoIsPale sig.PNG]] HeWhoIsPale 12:41, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Nerf to the PvE skills
Okay i agree 'There is Nothing to Fear' and 'Seed of Life' could use a small nerf, either one was a tad overpowered, but they are PvE skills, they are supposed to be good for PvE. Now Seed of Life is just again one of the monk skills i have i'll never use again in my life, and i made a paragon alone for the purpose of using there is nothing to fear and save yourselves. I maxes my Sunspear title with my monk just so it would last 12 seconds with enchanting, and i spend like 40 k on gear for my paragon wich i'll probably just delete soon because 50% of his purpose just died thank to this nerf. Okay they needed a nerf, but why not give 'Seed of Life' just 30 recharge and 'There is Nothing to Fear' 15 or lower the dammage reduction scaling. I mean i Spend like 5 Whole days working towards 2 builds, leveling up titles, grinding stuff, doinf FFF runs, just to get to the points i want. Tthere is Nothing to Fear isn 't overpowered, Save yourselves needs to gain less adren and less armor, both builds will be tolerable as support and not overpowered that way, but as they both are now, para 's will just run this build sill with 'There is Nothing To Fear' because its still like 50% of the time a lil extra dammage redux, and Seed of Life will never see the daylight again. or simply said, Seed of Life is overnerfed, and There is Nothing to Fear shouldn 't have gotten a nerf, Save Yoursleves shouldve gotten one.84.192.118.21 13:33, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I think if a change absolutely has to be made (which is entirely possible), there's a good compromise between the current extreme and the old version. Taken from my entry on the TNTF discussion page:  "I think the 20 sec recharge would be fine if the skill were modified to add a second to the duration per rank of Leadership, rather than one per two ranks. It would still hinder */P builds (presumably the reason for this change), would be a slight nerf to people with 12 Leadership (like me) without being as crippling, and could still be maintained fully with 16 Leadership." - 4 sec base, + 12 for paragons like me (or 16 for someone with headgear + superior rune).  You'd get 75% to 100% duration as a primary paragon and still screw over the rest.  Since this is the first time I've felt Anet was too heavy-handed with a nerf, I thought I'd try to provide alternate solutions rather than just whine about the change. -- Marand 20:34, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


 * While i agree that a Seed of Life nerf was desperately needed (if you are bored as the healer in DoA Hard Mode with a 2 monk backline something has to be wrong) i think you made the same mistake as with intensity. Drastically altering BOTH duration AND recast can quickly lead to an overnerf. You killed intensity with it and i think you went over the top with seed too (though i have not tested yet if it is still worth a skill slot). I think the sf approach, slowly finding out the right amount of nerf, was wiser. Although i agree that especially with seed time was pressing if you did not want to get GW:EN beaten within first day of release. 134.130.183.235 14:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * "There's Nothing to Fear!" was incredibly overpowered. It made all of PvE incredibly easy, and it was by far the most powerful PvE skill among the Sunspear and K&L ones - it needed a nerf desperately. The fact players made a Paragon just because of this skill proves that - no other PvE only skill caused such reaction. As mentioned above, as TNtF currently is, Paragons will still use it, so I don't see a problem with nerfing it. And Seed of Life was way overpowered as well - it also needed a nerf, more even than TNtF given how Monks are already very powerful in PvE. Professions that are "weaker" in PvE need better PvE skills so they have a way to overcome those "weaknesses" - and Mesmers and Paragons got better skills than everyone else. The other professions don't need skills that are that good - hence Intensity and Seed of Life as they currently are, strong enough to be like other Elementalist and Monk skills without being as overpowered as they used to be. Erasculio 20:42, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Not convinced. I thought these skills were always supposed to be overpowered as a) an way of avoiding some classes from being unpopular in PvE e.g. Paragons, who are now even more hideously unpopular; b) something back for those who had bought all the games.  For example, an Ele with high Energy Storage and a cheap long lasting hex can, with Necrosis, punch 90 armour ignoring damage holes in supposedly tough targets every few seconds, all day long, while still retaining other skills for more standard use.  Izzy, I'd be grateful if you looked at the TNTF discussion page please (I'm sure you've heard enough about this already :) )--PantsOfGlory 15:33, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I for one am glad that they nerfed it. Makes people to at least look at Motivation skills. Nicky Silverstar 06:05, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Then look the other way.--Atlas Oranos 16:48, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * /agree Motivation is worthless..-.- --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:122.167.18.3.
 * motivation isnt worthless..24.47.18.113 19:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I think the problem with Paragons shouts, here and before has alway been lack of AoE circulation to make the proximity requirement a liablity. Character control and grouping risk was never as strong as it needed to be, and Paragon as a whole will continue to be suppressed as long as this natural risk is suppressed.--BahamutKaiser 00:31, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

spirits
im not sure if this is a bug or what but at the moment my spirits arent attacking properly they useually attack once then stop for ages then hit once or twice and stop again ive only done this vs yetis in mount qinkai in hard mode but its realy becoming a problem any ideas?
 * I had that too, a long time ago in Factions when I played w spirits. Their AI is buggy. Sometimes it helps if you wand/hit the target, sometimes not even that. If someone goes out of range of over the cliff... you're messed up. That's how it was before. I dunno how it is now. Servant of Kali 08:31, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

GW:EN skill names
Are the in game skills going to be renamed as they have been here? (Nonsensical Spear to Maiming Spear, etc) Or are they pretty much locked down? I want the GWW names to match the in game ones, just trying to find out if they should be (here on GWW) renamed back or left as they are. Cloud 01:28, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

AT+GWEN = Error
GWEN skills don't work in ATs... incase you didn't get the heads up --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Kenshin.

URGENT: Remove Heroes from GvG
It's about fucking time! I can't play GvG anymore because of it. I can't stand it. It's been so long and still nothing is done. WE DONT WANT TO PLAY FUCKING ZAISHEN CHALLENGE OK? I wouldn't mind if teams were running normal heroes when they can't find players, but 99% of teams are running gimmick heroways with overpowered hero setups. Sure it's not doing anything to top10 guilds who rarely play anyway but everyone else is destroyed. Oh and don't complain about my language, i bought this game to PvP and if i wanted to play against heroes i wouldnt fucking buy online game, there are plenty of better offline games for those who want to play against AI. I can't believe how this can even be debatable and that people actually discuss whether heroes belong or dont in PvP! It's beyond me. Servant of Kali 15:39, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Once again, im pretty sure your terribad anyway, so stop complaining.


 * Please don't waste everyones time posting feedback like this, if you can't post constructive posts then please do not post at all on my page thank you. If you want to have a constructive conversation about this I'm all ears but I don't like to read or respond to feedback like this. ~Izzy @-&#39; 21:52, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/User_talk:Isaiah_Cartwright/Overpowered_Skills/General#In-detail_the_Cause_of_Heroway_in_GvG_and_its_solution That's already there, enough of a constructive post along with what everyone else typed. But the very fact that one even has to post constructive post about this no-issue makes it all that sad.  Servant of Kali 08:08, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * IMO the problem is not with the heroes but with the build in general. Surely heroes execute it well but I think that it is the build that should be somehow nerfed. It's damn easy to play, very strong yet unable to beat top teams. It's like spirit spam 2 years ago - boring to play, boring to play against and beats 90% of population. Most of our games vs this shit last till VoD, pretty long considering we could beat top 100 teams in under 10 minutes... --PunkSkeleton 17:11, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No, it's the Heroes. Regardless of builds. It's henchies too actually. I posted my proposal for solving this in Overpowered Skills section where there was Heroes debate. But anyway it's not like anything will get done, things always get done at the last moment when it's too late to save anything and I pretty much had it. So if I annoyed anyone with my request for PvP instead of AI vs AI play, nvm im going to play offline games and am uninstalling GW now, and you wont hear me in this wiki either. Servant of Kali 17:37, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * quite mature. Calm down, you haven't even waited a day for responses. ‽-(eronth)  I gi  ve up  21:12, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I've been waiting since Nightfall. Do you remember the insane flooding of Heroes Ascent with Heroes? No? When people made jokes out of it saying that now it really *is* Hall of Heroes? :) And then with the limitation in HA it moved more to GvG (not that it wasn't here before but now everyone runs it). And now you're speaking of responses. What responses? Isn't it kinda obvious that if people biatched at Heroes in HA, they will biatch even more at them in GvG? Isn't it kinda obvious if people buy chapters to play *online* game, that they expect an online game? And by online I don't mean connecting to server and playing a single-player game. I mean playing a freakin Player vs/with Player game. Do we have Zaishen Challenge? Yes. Do we have PvE? Yes. Do we have Hero Battles? Yes. Then why oh why is it even debated that the highest form of PvP in the game should be exactly that - PvP? Put Heroes to Jade Quarry, no one plays it, use the arena map for something. But GvG is GvG. Servant of Kali 23:06, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Heroway is nothing to cry about lol...sure it is annoying as hell but all through the game, you can rank flash/nub call the other team! How is that not fun?!? Readem   Promote My Ban Here  21:18, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, I wasn't playing when faction or nightfall came out, so no, I don't remember that. ‽-(eronth) I gi  ve up  23:13, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I have been playing since WoH was it, and Shock Axe was omg :O. Readem   Promote My Ban Here  23:26, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * This entire thread is about how to get your suggestion never thought about again.--Atlas Oranos 00:05, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The same logic that got heroes removed from HA should have got heroes removed from GvG at the same time; the fact that they weren't both treated the same is somewhat of an oversight. Heroes in GvG run the same build, and the same problems make it dumb to fight; their party only needs 4 people opposed to 8, their party's defense and reactions (on interrupts or spirit transfers) is greater than yours, and the pressure of the still-needs-a-nerf-RaO plus knockdown/deepwound/daze pushes it over the edge. Heroes should be either cut down to 2 in GvG or removed entirely. - Auron 00:18, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * But what about all the guilds that got R150 with Heroway! What will they ever do :O?!? I agree, nerf to 2. Then people will stop QQ, and my job of Trolling will be over =). What a win-win situation! Readem   Promote My Ban Here  00:22, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No, nerf to ZERO. There are ways to replace Heroes with Players in GvG teams, for those who care and don't bring heroes only because they are overpowered. How can it be possible that the most boring aspect of the game (farming) which people do solo (means, it doesnt make game more enjoyable to others, and it's online game after all) - how can such a mode offer better rewards for casual player than GvG? Of course you're gonna see so few people GvGing then, when it's more profitable to farm instead even if it's dead boring at least there's a sense of accomplishment. Servant of Kali 08:11, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * You ever thought those that use heroway are actually controlling the heros manually? You are NOT playing against AI, but rather...2 characters controlled by the same person. It's not that heros are better, but it's the concept of being able to control 2 character with 1 mind is too good. It's like 2 characters can read each other's thought. Lightblade 00:33, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * ...lol? Having played heroway in smurfs and non-smurfs, I can tell you that nobody is "controlling" their heroes to spirit transfer as fast as they do, or to stack hexes on in a certain order. You just bring the heroes and let them do their shit, and the pressure of your build is stupidly amazing. - Auron 00:37, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Heroes use certain skills uber good. No skill in that. None. Readem   Promote My Ban Here  00:46, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Anyone remembers Discord spike? Exactly. Servant of Kali 08:13, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I thought you weren't going to post here any more? Please don't make promises you can't keep. LordBiro 14:19, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Well too bad that your thinking doesn't define me so you can go back to thinking whatever you want. I never make promises, deal with it. I did uninstall the game and only reply here in this thread, did you see me anywhere else? And if I post somewhere else it will be because I wanted to. I change my mind all the time depending on the circumstances. Setting one's mind in stone is for losers. Servant of Kali 15:11, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Wow, grow up a little. ‽-(eronth) I gi  ve up  15:48, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Just a little? :) jk :ppppp But on a more serious note (just a bit more serious note), if i keep growing up and up more, im gonna be way too tall! :pp Servant of Kali 16:12, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

ANYWAYS.... back to the issue at hand? Counciler 23:15, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * So how much longer do we have to wait? Heroes are bad for GvG Period. Why can't they just be removed? Shendaar 03:59, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Because the designers want rational feedback before they adjust things like this, so start presenting arguments. --Tankity Tank 03:45, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I think the arguements have been presented and it's a simple case of whether they want GvG to be Top-Level PvP...or if they want to sacrifice that in order to make it more accessable. The decision is thiers, and they have to make it. -- ChronicinabilitY [[Image:User Chronicinability Spiteful_Spirit.jpg|18px]] 03:55, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Start presenting what arguments and rational feedback? I haven't seen any arguments and rational feedback *pro* heroes which withstood criticism. On the other hand, I've seen tons of arguments and rational feedback *cons* heroes which have not been countered to this day. What do you expect, people to repeat 10x the same things? Check Overpowered skills section, there are enough of arguments there, far more detailed than arguments for heroes. Check GWGuru and a long thread there. Who wants to see will see and who doesn't can keep repeating "show me the arguments I don't see them" until every smart person becomes too tired to go on. Servant of Kali 07:02, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Welcome to debate, if you don't want to repeat yourself 100x then stop debating. You can save yourself time by drafting things in notepad and storing them for later cut and paste. What you don't want to do is be a dick who says "I don't have to expain myself!!!" That attitude makes everyone ignore you even if you might have something valid to say. In the future if you want anyone to take what you say seriously then START LINKING TO THE ARGUMENTS YOU'RE CITING. People aren't going to take your word that "valid points exist somewhere" without seeing them. --Tankity Tank 10:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * There isn't even a need to debate this. It is called PvP, not Player Vs AI or even AI vs AI. Nobody wants to play against heroes, especially when the sole reason people are using them is to abuse their inhuman ability to use some of the skills. If they are to stay in PvP, then they should be used strictly as a last resort, not a tool to fuel gimmicks. Shendaar 03:59, 13 September 2007 (UTC)