Feedback talk:Game updates/20100720

From Guild Wars Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

So blurred vision makes you less aggressive? — Raine Valen User Raine R.gif 0:49, 21 Jul 2010 (UTC)

Way to go nerfing mesmer spike...now we just use overload instead of wastrels. Spike is the same--24.63.116.169 00:51, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

It was just too spammable. I think this is a needed nerf, its hard enough to monk in RA. SuperJ User SuperJ SuperJSignaturePic.jpg 00:59, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
That's because RA sucks. Previously Unsigned 01:03, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Wait, how is Overload the same as Wastrels. Overload needs you to hit a skill in order to deal it's full damage and recharge faster, Wastrels condition is to not hit a skill and it still deals less damage. Lou Wolfskin 09:01, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Mesmer spike used Wastrel's for the 40 damage. Overload also does 40 damage. — Raine Valen User Raine R.gif 9:03, 21 Jul 2010 (UTC)

Entourage[edit]

i dont exactly understand the last part of it. are the archers considered the defending NPCs and the knights attacking? in other words, what needs to be killed in order for the guild lord not to use this skill --76.229.219.167 01:44, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

To quote from here, "The Guild Lord starts with five defensive NPCs around him: the Bodyguard, two Knights and two Archers. If all five of them are still alive, Entourage can be prevented by five attackers. Pets, spirits, and minions do not count. Only players and henchmen count as attackers and only while they are near enough to the Guild Lord for combat (in casting range or close to it). Each lord room NPC killed reduces the number of attackers required to prevent Entourage from being used." G R E E N E R 01:51, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Both the knights and archers are defending npcs. In other words, there has to be more players inside the base attacking him than there are npcs surrounding the fort or else Entourage will activate. It makes it much harder to kill him solo. Before people just ran in with sins killed the body guard then the guild lord. Now you have to kill practically every other npc near the guild lord to deactivate the defense buff, if your soloing that is. The Emmisary 01:53, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Urgh so annoyed with this update. I hate having to kill archer(s)... unlike knights you can't lure them away so if you face a decent flagger/prot who splits back, the archer just never falls if you're only a two-man split. Splitting already has it's costs, why make it so much more difficult? >.> 60.234.212.190 09:33, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Cause splitting is lame? Bring back Victory or Death and let's fight like men. The Emmisary 20:58, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
TBH, even with all the various ways people came up with to stall until VoD and then raced who will AoE the NPC's faster, I still preferred it over this aggressiveness deal. Also one has to take into account that most of the various passive defense webs which maintained the status quo until VoD have since been nerfed, so maybe a reworked VoD wouldn't be such a bad idea. There's still AI being stupid when it comes to standing in AoE issue, but meh. RazoR39999 02:57, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

HA[edit]

Glad to see that BBSway is still being ignored. Keep up the good work. I mean, broken, unbalanced teambuilds that need their own direct counters. That's the Build Wars way isn't it? Rolain1 02:36, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


glad to see GW still nerfing everything all the time..so glad i quit :)

So am I. — Raine Valen User Raine R.gif 7:17, 21 Jul 2010 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure why you're here...-08:23, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
If you quit GW then your oppinion on the updates really doesnt mean anything, nerfs are needed in this game as anet buff skills as well, its called balancing, without it the game would be monotonous and youd never need to think about skills imoSpark-TBa 15:08, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Oddly enough they could nerf BBway by buffing tranquility and or natures renewal so that they effected weapon spells. It would make those */Rts just collapse. 70.233.74.199 16:51, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
@Sparky. So Decent players with solid understanding of the game who have realized its balance is fail and therefore quit should be silenced and unable to voice their thoughts on GWW? SylvXIII 19:19, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
I think Sparky meant that people who haven't experimented something firsthand you don't have enough of a grasp of it to comment about it. In this case, the above I.P. seems to not have played guild wars in a while and so its comment has less weight behind it. I am not disagreeing with the I.P's comment just clarifying what I think Sparky's point was. The Emmisary 20:57, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Learn to beat BBway? Only 1 skill required: Ward against Melee. A 10 Earth Magic anything can just drop the ward at the right location amd BBway chains fails, no spike. Ask your snare to bring it along Grasping and Foes? Ward against Melee can also do good against Iway or Fragway Dervishes...I never lost to BBway/Iway when I brought WaM, k? BBway got no AoE dmg, so just ball in the ward. YES! I SAID IT! BALL! Whoever told you ball = instant lose is fail. Real Tactics > Build Wars.
"Lern beet bbsway"
"use WaM to buildwars"
"buildwars < real tactics"
So bring WaM to buildwars... because buildwars is... bad? What? — Raine Valen User Raine R.gif 5:19, 22 Jul 2010 (UTC)

Pretty much the day that factions came out, Ranger spirits have been second-rate. And what's the usual response? "We do not have the manpower to fix all of the crap in GW1 that we should have fixed years ago because we're busy implementing the same problems into GW2 122.106.76.208 01:14, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for that insightful comment >>. The Emmisary 01:15, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
NP Rolain1 01:16, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Sway. You don't know what you're talking about, love. — Raine Valen User Raine R.gif 2:59, 22 Jul 2010 (UTC)
Kindly look up Shelter, Recuperation, Recovery and Weapon Spells. Add a dash of Ether Prism. Rolain1 08:01, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
I was referring to Nature's Renewal, Tranquility, and Infuriating Heat, actually. — Raine Valen User Raine R.gif 8:48, 23 Jul 2010 (UTC)
Dont forget the ever-fun EoE. 98.248.90.248 08:56, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Lol IH.Play with Coward War/Sins on your team and it helps a lot.

I loled at EoE Rolain1 11:45, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

if people look back to how some skills like shadow form were before they made it perma then so many players should be gratefull that anet buff and nerf all the time, so many people earnt alot of gold before they renerfed shadow form and sliver armor, my comment was aimed at those who rage quit cause the only skill they use gets a nerf.Spark-TBa 13:30, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
On a side note, some of you (Raine in particular) make it sound as if buildwars was somehow not a part of GW (and HA in particular), while in fact it was always there. Especially in HA where gimmicks and ways to counter them were in from almost the very start. Buildwars-ing became more obvious after Nightfall, and its corresponding power creep, but it was always there. RazoR39999 13:49, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Codex[edit]

gg Anet. Nerf Dervish in Codex even more. O WAIT Waar Kijk Je Naar 06:46, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

The AoS banning didn't nerf dervishes. It nerfed invincibility on all professions. On rotations where this skill was pooled, 3 out of every 4 characters brought it. ~Shard User Shard Sig Icon.png 08:01, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Wait, ppl actually care about codex? What? Tyraelxy 08:23, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
@Shar- its still a nerf to dervishes even if other professions use it, better to make it a dervish only skill that just cut short the already relatively tiny dervish skill pool. Afterall the armor of sanc buff was to increase dervish survivability as they needed it.Dinsy 10:24, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
I have no sympathy for dervs until scythe no longer lolwutpwns EVERY other weapon in the game. They just need to seriously rework the class cause as it is now it's either godmod (remember Mystic regen?) or majorly underpowered.BurrTheKing 00:30, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
No, Dinsy, they did not "need" it. The professions aren't supposed to have damage, defense, and support all at the same time. There's a reason there are ten professions instead of one. Each is supposed to excel in only one or two of these areas. Dervishes have cripple on demand, deep wound on demand, free aoe damage, and huge damage potential. They do not need defense. In fact, if they had defense, they would be broken. ~Shard User Shard Sig Icon.png 01:48, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
"Wait, ppl actually care about codex? What?" I know, rite? Last I checked this wasn't getting any more use than TA was. The codex fixes only make the skill imbalances of the game even more apparent. 67.149.248.3 02:11, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
I disagree with you shard, and i think they and i did need it and i found it a highly useful skill, the fact it was used by practically every class just went to show how it was a useful skill and that it was needed, ofc as soon as something starts to work people, pvp especially scream "OP! NERF NOW!". Tbh some professions are surposed to have attack defense and support at the same time just look at Mysticism skills Attack, Defense, Support it all depends on your play style.
While some people seem to have a very narrow playstyle not open to any ideas other than you kill, i'll heal, guild wars is all about changing your skills to play the way you want to and limiting one of the smallest skill pools in the game just makes this alot harder to do. Dinsy 11:46, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
I understand where you're coming from. Unfortunately, game design doesn't care about what each individual wants, and pure opinion (as opposed to justified opinions) don't matter. Whether or not you like a skill has nothing to do with whether or not it should be changed. The ways it affects game play and other players are factors that determine what happens to it. It turns out that invincibility doesn't belong in most games. That's why this skill was changed.
Being useful and being grossly overpowered are different things, although they are related. The goal of most games (the ones that want people to keep playing anyway) is to not have anything that is grossly overpowered.
Yes, Guild Wars is about bringing a small selection of a wide variety of skills together to play however you want. However, there should be limitations. If skills are too good, the game becomes a joke, and everybody loses interest in it. Games are supposed to be challenging, not a psychology lab experiment where you press buttons in response to simple events. Games should make you think, not perform work.
The test krewe is working on major changes to dervishes, the specifics of which I can't talk about, but these changes will make dervishes a lot more fun to play. ~Shard User Shard Sig Icon.png 22:45, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Developer Updates. There's a reason why Defy Pain was nerfed; why should AoS not be given the same treatment, by that reasoning? — Raine Valen User Raine R.gif 19:01, 22 Jul 2010 (UTC)

Not Works[edit]

Visions of Regret is not only imba in Codex, ok? This elite is overpowered everywhere. And nerfing Wastrel's alone is useless, Unnatural Signet and Spiritual Pain are overbuffed.--TeaCat._. User RedTeaCat TeaCat.jpg 12:11, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

thats cause anet have given up on balance and just for buffing everything one of my one to silly lvls to make them useful... power creep ftl. They should stop with these little buffs and do a complete overhaul get everything lvl. Dinsy 12:17, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
a) Not feasible. b) Take a look here to see where their focus was as of last month. G R E E N E R 17:39, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Where in PvP is Spiritual Pain overbuffed? Lou Wolfskin 18:03, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
...everywhere? Every mesmer and their dog runs Spiritual Pain to blow people up on spikes. — Raine Valen User Raine R.gif 20:03, 21 Jul 2010 (UTC)
okay, honestly i seem to be blind or something. Lou Wolfskin 21:05, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Organized PvP. -~=Ϛρѧякγ User Sparky, the Tainted guided sig.png (τѧιк) 22:32, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Missing attacks and aggressiveness[edit]

What about missing dagger attack skills by not meeting the requirements? Can this be abused?

Fixed a text bug that caused failed Assassin chain attacks to display "miss" instead of "fail." :P RazoR39999 17:00, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
I may be misreading it but haven't the skills ALWAYS said MISS instead of FAIL if you use them out of order? Is this just Anet yet again calling a oversight a "bug"?BurrTheKing 00:23, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Yes, they always said "Miss", but since the attack isn't supposed to happen in a broken chain, it's actually a "Fail." Hence the bug fix.--User Pyron Sy sig.png Pyron Sy 01:38, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
It's like when using Imaginary Weaponry. You are failing, so only skills that trigger when you attack will trigger, never skills that trigger only when you hit or miss. MithUser MithranArkanere Star.pngTalk 18:37, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
"It's like when using Imaginary Weaponry. You are failing"
That made me lol. User A F K When Needed Signature Icon.jpg A F K When Needed 15:49, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
IW doesn't cause you to fail (in game mechanics, at least). Only attacking someone with Aegis (PvP) and using attack skills without meeting requirements causes failure. An update during the GW:NF preview weekend created the fail mechanic for attacks in order to stop abuse with Sand Shards, Illusionary Weaponry, and Vigorous Spirit. At that point, out-of-sequence dagger attacks started to say "fail", but this was changed at some point back to "miss" (still counted as failing, not triggering positive effects). -~=Ϛρѧякγ User Sparky, the Tainted guided sig.png (τѧιк) 16:37, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm just saying it wasn't a bug so much as a oversight and they call it a bug to make themselves feel better lolBurrTheKing 08:13, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
That and everyone wants more fail in the game. Or something like that. -- 24.16.104.137 08:24, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
I think everybody here missed the OP's point. What he meant was "if an assassin were to run up to a Guild Lord and spam a dual attack without using a lead/offhand beforehand, thus causing two "failed" attacks that instantly recharge, would said attacking add to the team's aggressiveness rating and possibly throw the match or not?" 75.200.23.84 18:33, 29 July 2010 (UTC)