User talk:Gem/Request for balancing PvE/Archive

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Discussion

Ha. I think Anets idea is that those items are only to be used in Hard Mode (by good players) to even the odds. Backsword 08:21, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I think that the idea originally was to present a couple of fun but not too important items to the game during the first Wintersday. Players liked them very much so they decided to do it again next year. And when players liked them even more, they decided to add more of them. And with the recent EotN expansion they decided to make them a regular part of the game insted of holiday items, allowing everyone to access the items any time. At the same time they needed a skill point sink, so they combined he ideas. The problem, which they apparently didn't realise, is that players have hundreds of unspent skill points, allowing anyone to get hundreds of those imba full party items. I think it's partly an accident that the situation got so bad, and I don't hold high hope for this being fixed soon, but there's always a slight chance that we might get what we want. (Hey, they even changed Mhenlos elite due to player requests!) -- (gem / talk) 08:29, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure I get where you're coming from. My first reaction is: so what? I don't mean that in a rude way, I just really don't understand the reasoning for it. I agree that it does make HM somewhat easier (I mean, it's still not a cakewalk), but if you want HM to be hard, then wouldn't the answer be to just not use consumables? Other people's using them has no effect on you, nor anyone else, really. Kokuou 08:36, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Quote: "This doesn't only take the fun out of playing the PvE part of the game but it also dimnishes the titles and other achievements of players who play through the hard mode and the hard areas without these items. Basically titles only show time used in the game now, not the skill of the player. The original game box said something about "no grind, just skill", but the game is the exact opposite at the moment." -- (gem / talk) 08:37, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Another solution might be to limit the effects to one PvE-only item at a time. Or just make a Nightmare Mode for people who want challenge :) - IronHeart 08:43, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

But there are so many titles that are just time/money spent already anyway. Ones like Drunkard, Sweet Tooth, etc. Heck, even Legendary Defender of Ascalon isn't about skill--it's about who can afk the most. For the ones you're likely displeased with, like Vanquisher, I still don't see your point. So what if someone got the title a little bit easier than you did. That doesn't make your title less valuable or deserved. YOU know that you did it the hard way, why do you care so much about what others think of your title? So what if they don't believe you that you worked for it, they're not your friends, and the players that are your friends will believe you.

If you are talking about personal enjoyment, like I said above, how other players play has no bearing on your enjoyment of the game. If you're talking about status, then, as I just explained, it doesn't particularly matter about 3,999,999 other players and how they achieved their titles. Do you feel that you have to prove that you're better than someone else? ANet is merely giving you the option of using them--why force people to play the same way you do? Kokuou 08:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I can understand your points but I do disagree with them. I feel a bit stupid achieving my titles the hard way when there's a lot easier way to do it, but at the same time the easy way feels very stupid too. Also, it does matter if my title is worth something in the game world or not, if any of my in game accomplishments aren't accomplishments at all why should I play the game? I'd be better off playing a game where I can actually achieve something.

And yes, I'm aware of the grind titles and I've ranted about those too, though they don't bother me as much. The grind titles which actually give you bonuses are a stupid thing, you can read more about my rant on them on my thoughts page, but the pve-only items are a more serious issue. -- (gem / talk) 09:03, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I guess I can understand where you're coming from, and I do agree to a certain extent. For me, though, it only really matters if what I'm doing is fun or not, and I'm sure that's the thinking behind ArenaNet's implementation of these items. Some players don't have the time to wait around for others to form the perfect party with perfect skill for each area, but would still like to achieve a Vanquisher title. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. :D I do agree that some treats are a little overpowered, though. Perhaps reducing durations to 10 minutes max would help? I mean, 30 minutes is a little overkill. Kokuou 09:11, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

The ones with durations are not the bad ones really, especially since you lose them when you die. The bad ones are the resurrection, dp removal and morale boost ones.

I know that not every player has the ability or the friends to complete the hard mode and vanquishing titles without these items, but are the titles meant to be achievable by everyone? Someone probably thinks so, I don't. This is the biggest problem with MMO's, everyone has a different view on these things. :) -- (gem / talk) 09:18, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Speaking of Death Penalty, I dislike how far down it goes. Dying once or twice can be worked off, but if a player gets down to -60% it can be very frustrating trying to progress at all. Especially against some of those massive mobs with multiple healers. Like slamming your head into a wall and waking up at a shrine. Over and over and making absolutely no progress. I don't find that very fun, and when it isn't fun it's wasting my time. An item that can remove Death Penalty, therefore, is a much-appreciated addition. Then if I'm still dying to the same mob, I know it's my strategy and not because I screwed up a few times prior and came in half-cocked. -- Hercanic 12:26, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

The DP system is almost perfect, and a limited amount of 15% DP removal items or even a very limited amount of full DP removal items (for a single person, not a whole party) are good. The problem is the unlimited reserve of these items and the whole party effecting nature of them. -- (gem / talk) 13:12, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I have to agree that Death Penalty is well balanced, especially when I've not only finished goals with max DP, but used DP to my advantage. Yukiko 00:52, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I'd say the worst one (hands down) is Essence of Celerity. SMS usually uses three consumables to speed things up, but Essence of Celerity is the winner on imba. It produces a Chimera of Intensity; which was reserved for like, the hardest part in the original game. Being able to throw that on yourself at will is just a bit broken.
Short of removing them from the game (or making them do different in-town stuff, like special emotes or different enchantments), the one-consumable-at-a-time idea isn't bad. It would still allow a greater amount of grind over skill than I'd like, but if ANet's idea of a good game is one where you can afk all of DoA, I guess we can settle...
Kokuou; half the point of titles is to show off. If you spent an assload of time and effort on Leg. Vanq and 90% of the players just breezed through with consumables, your title effectively means jack shit. People will look at you and assume you used consumables, because that's how they did it; and that reaction is exactly what kills the game for people like Gem and I. I wouldn't care if everyone else had an EZMOED LOL button, but the fact that they can be absolutely terrible at the game (i.e., zero knowledge of game mechanics, poor skill choice, etc) then press their EZMOED LOL button and get exactly the same titles and rewards as me is where it becomes a problem.
Especially in DoA. Domain of Anguish is a PvE area so elite, there isn't even an NPC that tells you about it - you pretty much have to happen into the guy at Chantry of Secrets after you've beaten the game to learn of it. ANet's entire selling point of DoA was its exclusivity; something the bad players (or new players) simply won't be able to reap the rewards from. With the addition of consumables and PvE-only skills (terrible idea, there :/), they threw the entire "elite PvE" aspect out the window as complete scrubs rolled areas with retarded crap like obs flesh "tanks." Buffing PvE is a must; make the elite areas challenging again. Too challenging for the bad players - as catering to their badness does not improve the game at all (in fact, it does quite the opposite). -Auron 12:42, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with most of this, except the part about DoA being only for the Elite PvE players, as its very simple, just copy a build of the forums, and you can join in the set group that's always there and always the same, you happen to have a profession that isn't in the mainstream build? bad luck, you may try again later and hope that PvP nerfs don't require you to have another profession.Rhydeble 23:19, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

DoA is very simple? Oh, okay. Glad you pointed that out to me. -Auron 23:31, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

The team builds for DoA are terrible, and the tactics to complete the area are even worse. It goes to show the average player has no idea how to optimize their team without resorting to some degenerate gimmick. --Racthoh 08:43, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok no one has commented in a while so I'll fire it back up. I for one agree... to disagree about consumables. First I would like to comment on the Skill >time:Time>Skill. PvP is where Skill>Time. PvE=Time>Skill. It doesn't matter how much skill one has in PvE; give that person enough time and they will succeed in PvE. It's AI for goodness sake. Although I think the AI is better in GW than in some games, it will never be as good as a human. Second titles: For the simple fact that PvE titles are not to impress other people. But to do it for YOU. How does what one person do in an instanced game effect anyone else in their instance. Feel free to not use consumables. But I will if I want to. Do I need them? Who cares! But what about that person that might need them. I don't give a rats patooty if someone uses consumables. Besides not everyone has access to them. And if I want to throw in a consumable I like the option to save time. What do I care if someone has Legendary Vanquisher using consumables. It doesn't effect my experience one bit OR MY TITLES. This is PvE for goodness sakes. If any of the people that has signed this petition had a problem with PvE then I would question their intelligence. Of Course you don't need them. We are at the point in the game where nothing is hard for us. But even if Ned the Noob uses them what does it matter. Let him/her be a forever noob, come on,It's PvE, INSTANCED. It doesn't effect YOU! It's so funny. "I want my title to mean something" Well it's doesn't mean jack to anyone but you anyway even if there weren't consumables. Even without consumables all of the titles a farmable anyway. So I guess should we put a tag on that to. I know what: let's balance that out where LGaurdian,LSurvivor,LVanquisher cannot be done in a human party. O and no heros either. NO farming! Let's make sure you "earned" that title, puuleeze.I'm sorry the GW:EN consummables don't hurt the game. They don't effect anyone else in this game but you, if you use them. And if you choose to use them or don't it doesn't matter one bit either way. With that being said I would conceed in Challenge missions they shouldn't be allowed. It's a direct competition with other people. Everywhere else it doesn't matter. Please if you want more challenge don't make the game so uber hard that a new player couldn't play. Just PvP. I would bet money you will find the challenge you seek.Empty Skull 03:37, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts. I totally understand your point of view, but I still disagree. The achievements in the game do mean something to me when I accomplish them, and I don't really care about other peoples' achievements. Still, if there is a terribly easy way to achieve the titles, there's no point in going the hard way. It feels very stupid to do something the hard way when you could make it a lot easier, and it feels stupid to use 3 hours for something when you could do it in 2, saving so much time that you get all of the titles a lot quicker. If I don't use them I feel that I've accomplished something, but that accomplishment isn't very notable as I know that anyone could have done it easily. And if I do it the easy way I don't feel like the game challenges me.

Quote: "Please if you want more challenge don't make the game so uber hard that a new player couldn't play. Just PvP. I would bet money you will find the challenge you seek." Making hard mode harder doesn't make the game too hard for new players. I don't want to play PvP, and I shouldn't be forced to play it for challenge. PvE should be challenging and fun too. PvP and PvE are different games, not just an easy and hard version of the same thing. PvE normal mode and hard mode are similar but with different difficulty levels. Hard mode was designed to offer challenges to PvE players. Currently it's just normal mode but you just need to use a few more consumables to get through it just as quickly and easily as normal mode. That's not what it would be. -- (gem / talk) 04:59, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I'd just like some clarification on your reply.I quote; "I don't really care about other peoples' achievements". Yet you go on to say "... as I know that anyone could have done it easily". Your mind doesn't seem to be made up on the matter. Also "And if I do it the easy way I don't feel like the game challenges me." Sounds to me like you're stating the obvious. Of course if you do it the easy then you'll find it easy. If you want to be challenged, then don't do it the easy way. Vanquish eigth-man zones with a party of six or four. There are very few constraints to what can and what can not be done. If you want a challenge you make it for yourself, you don't succeed in making it by taking away the options which are made available to other players to facilitate a more enjoyable gametime.

Quote: "PvP and PvE are different games, not just an easy and hard version of the same thing." Not so. PvE is Humans versus pre-scripted non-intelligent unlearning pixels. PvP is Humans vs. Humans. The gap between the intelligence factor of the two is immense. There is no PvP farming build, because every build has a counter. If a build takes precedence in PvP, people make counters and the two builds eventually cancel each other out. In PVE you can run the same build against the same monsters in the same zone in exactly the same way in the same amount of time. Over and over and over.

I guess what I'm trying to get at is, if you want a challenge in PvE you make it for yourself. If you want a challenge in Guildwars, PvP. If you don't want to PvP then thats your choice not to be challenged. Just because you don't want to take that plunge doesn't mean that others don't.--Sparhawk 02:19, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll start by replying to the more off topic PvE vs. PvP stuff.

PvP is not a harder vsion PvE. It's a completely different game mode. Yes, high level PvP is definitely harder than PvE, but that's just like flying an airplane is harder than making breakfast. Note that there is a AI version of PvP, the Zaishen Challenges, but they are not usually referred to as PvP even thoug it's players against AI. PvP is a team against another team, competing over what ever objective there is. PvE has a story or a goal that is often more varied than those in PvP and I like the diversity that I get in PvE. In PvP the diversity is not in the goals but in the teams and builds. It's a good play mode but it's just not for me. PvE also needs a challenging mode, just like PvP has, and that's what ANet tried to do with hard mode, butthen screwed up with the PvE skills and consumables.

Then back to the actual topic. To me it's not contradicting to say what I said. I honestly don't care if you or another specific player has a certain title or item. But when I'm getting my own titles and achievements it does matter how hard or easy that achievement is to get. For example in real life making breakfast isn't an achievement that I can be proud of. I have the option to make breakfast making a lot harder by creating artificial problems that I need to solve or that require extra work, but that A) feels stupid B) doesn't make me feel any more happier about having successfully made my breakfast. The same goes for the in game titles. If I have the option to get a title in a couple of hours or days easily, doing it the hard way is just stupid, especially since I know that I am able to achieve the title in both the hard and the easy way, but the other just takes more time. Any limitations and difficulties that I put on myself, like not using consumables or not wearing armor or fighting uninfused against the Mursaat, are artificial and feel stupid just like I explained. -- (gem / talk) 07:17, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Hm... although I agree that the indiscriminate use of consumables should be... controlled, I can't agree with the idea as long as it stays as 'radical' as Gem wants it, even asking to remove the consumables completely. Let's take it in parts:

• PvE is 'roleplaying'. That means that it's all about choice. People have to choose. But since GW has some serious limitations, you have few things to choose about. Skills you bring, things you do, paths you take, quests you make... playing in Hard Mode is another choice. People tend to thing that Hard Mode is an 'elite' mode for 'not for noobs', but that's not true, it's a choice. By playing in Hard Mode, you choose to take more risk in order to increase the rewards. That's all.
• Now the hard and the easy way. There are no 'hard and easy' ways. There are 'the faster the better' and 'better safe than sorry' ways. Gyala Hatchery is the best example. You can make the mission quickly by risking the young turtles in many fights, or make the mission last much longer, and risk them only in two fights. Consumables and title effects are the same, you can play without them, but if you invest time getting the consumables or increasing titles, things get a bit easier.
• PvE vs PvP, PvE has its limitations they can't make perfect AI and making variable builds for all creatures would take a hell of a work, so to make up for it they buff the monsters. But in the buffing process, some monsters may go beyond the point of 'possible without dying', when they are combined with other monsters in the same area, because we can't change builds, nor make a build for the whole area. The GW:EN consumables are there for that case.
• Time. The average GW player plays between 5 and 14 hours per week. Like in all games, if there are people playing more, they will get more stuff. Average players get some consumables and use them while playing, long-time players will have time to farm and hoard consumables, going beyond price and drop limitations. You can't punish the average player because of that, and remember that Hard Mode IS for the average player too. All GW is for the average casual player. So, what's the difference with players that want a challenge? Players that can play with 'over-average' skill, do not need so many consumables. That's all. Even if you increase the prices of the essences, you only help the 'hoard to play' players, and hurt the average players that may get a consumable just for a certain spot.
• Limits. Of course, in the same way there are max limitations in skill bufs, there should be in consumable buffs, since in Hard Mode you 'take risks', if consumables remove the risk, there is no Hard Mode. What would be the 'perfect' max buffs? A combination of the GW:EN consumables. No consumable combination should bring the stats above the buffs that the GW:EN consumables give combined, they are already the most powerful ones. They give you a lot of neat bonuses, but all those bonuses combined are still under the monster bonuses. For example, monsters in HM have +33..50% attack, casting and movement speed, and the Essences of Celerity can only bring them up to 25%. They may have attributes over 20, and you can only increase yours up to 17 with a Grail of Might.

So, what has to be made? Prevent hoarding and effect stacking so those that rely on consumables to play can't do so forever, without affecting in any way those that use the consumables normally. MithranArkanere 13:51, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, the strict examples for handling the situation presented on the article pages aren't the current list really. See the list on this talk page for a more complete and well thought out list by you. :) I'll remove the list from the article page and put a link to the list here.

Quote: "Now the hard and the easy way. There are no 'hard and easy' ways. There are 'the faster the better' and 'better safe than sorry' ways. [ ... ] Consumables and title effects are the same, you can play without them, but if you invest time getting the consumables or increasing titles, things get a bit easier." What ever you call them, the other method is easier than the other. Let's face the reality, not all players would be able to complete hard mode missions and vanquishing if there weren't consumables and a couple of overpowered PvE-only skills (unless of course they have very capable friends to help them). Guild Wars was originally about skill, not about grind, but now with consumables everything in the game is grindable. If you get enough consumables there isn't a way for you to fail in hard mode, since you will never reach the 60DP as you can remove all your DP and you can always res people with the res items. Just reserve a bit more time and you'll get through anything without knowing how to play well. That's sad. -- (gem / talk) 20:54, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

That's EXACTLY why its use MUST be limited, but not removed. MithranArkanere 00:14, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Reset indent..<< My two gold says that no matter what, consumables or not, PVE will be easy. That argument of making it hard again (sorry if I heard you wrong) is void, it never really was hard. Also, I couldn't find a counter argument for my argument: don't like it, don't use it. Please respond. :) (PS. Shame that just because Raptors didn't get any big action taken against him, it's a shame you'd just give up on the GW wiki that is quickly becoming more useful than the unofficial one.) Mango 01:59, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

There are different levels of easy, and the current level is WAY too easy, even on "hard mode". That we can all agree on. What comes to a counter to your argument, if you insist on not understanding what I (and multiple others) have said on this page, then be my guest. Basically this is just a matter of preference.

And I hate to say this, but I really still don't think that this wiki is as usefull as GWiki for information on the game, and I guess it never will be. GWiki is still way ahead in most aspects, even new stuff. The best part of this wiki is the guild section and the presence of developers. Some time ago I also thought that the user community here is better, but I've been shocked by the community behavior here lately. Anyway, if you wish to discuss this matter further, please use my talk page instead of this talk page since this issue is not related to PvE. -- (gem / talk) 10:08, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

No big action? "01:32, 2 December 2007 Aiiane (Talk | contribs | block) blocked "Raptors (contribs)" with an expiry time of 1 year (Blocked per ArbComm decision: http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Guild_Wars_Wiki:Arbitration_committee/2007-11-15-User:Raptors)" --Xeeron 10:40, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

My Thoughts

I *SEMI* Agree with you.

Yes, PvE Items can cause an imbalance, and indeed it seems like a cop-out for people who can't handle the more ridiculously vicious stuff.

I generally never use PvE items unless I'm either farming (e.g. speed related items) or am absolutely desperate. If I used them in general play however, I'm sure I'd storm the place, and i've seen others who have done so.

As you know, I generally don't like playing solo. I don't like playing with strangers either. Playing solo in hard mode is an incredible challenge, and is mostly *TOO* hard (possible, but requires some very 'odd' builds).

Playing with another person (or more) makes things much more square.

What I'm thinking is that there's a bigger issue to address in guild wars. A lot of people play with at most 2-3 people. Very rarely have I been in a full player party that's NOT a PuG, and I've had ZERO success with PuG's in Elite missions (and indeed had more success with a single other friend!)

Items can offset the lack of hero Intelligence somewhat, but it still makes a lot of things very simple (Elite missions not being one of them!).

So the problem is: If people use items unsparingly, they can just kick ass unrelentlessly in all but the hardest of places.

What may be a better idea is to BALANCE ITEMS like how skills are balanced. By that I mean: Let these items that give you a definitive advantage also incur some sort of disadvantage TOO.

This can add more DEPTH to the game rather than just simply making it easier. And that is what I think items need, a good ol' balancing.

Yu Takami 16:05, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments Yu. The rebalancing was actually my first idea, but I soon realized that since ANet has stated that they aren't investing much time to GW1 anymore it would be pointless to petition for larger changes, so I kept the change ideas simpler so that they are quick to implement and we might actually get some sort of improvement instead of no improvement at all. Well, I'll add the item rebalancing idea to the list. -- (gem / talk) 17:16, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I can see an Izzy item-balance page already...Anyways, I agree with Yu, for the most part. I'll go into FoW with guildies, and we're all above average players, all three of us with KoaBD - PKM(5,8,13 titles). We'll go Ursanway, with great heroes, because PuG's are below average. And with Essences of Celerity and Armors of Salvation. 1h 30m ~. That shouldn't be happening. Sure, we enjoyed it, we got the monument in HoM, and a few shards each. FoW and UW were a grind-for-three-hours, elite, best-of-the-best player area. Then came CC's. Those were fun, removing a bit of DP and a little holiday fun. But now with EotN and late NF, we have all these rigged items dropped on us making everything as simple as 1-2-3. I like reaping, the benefits, but I also enjoy challenges. Where's the challenge now? Calor — talk 17:34, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Nowhere, and we'll have to wait a year for gw2, also something makes me think that izzy now doesn't care anymore at all, probably due to everyone whining on his talk page and calling him things. you can take a look at his contributions, long time since he was active here enough to bother. --Cursed Angel 17:40, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Aye, ANet tried to incorporate the player's thought into the game through Izzy's skill balances, a very wise decision, but Izzy's just been overwhelmed, poor guy, by OMGWTFBBQ THIS NEEDS TO BE NERFED DUMB S*** F*** U U SUCK. And, yes, it does seem ANET's given up on GW1 to work on GW2, but they fail to realize is that the entire community is still on GW1, and GW2 is some wonderful, mythical paradise as of right now, at least in our eyes. Generally, you need to tell people to forget the past and get with the here and now, but its currently the opposite for ANet. Stop devoting everything to a year or eighteen months in the future, and start working to keep GW1 working. That doesn't mean drop GW2, but it means help GW1 before it crumbles and dies, and the community as a whole is nonexistent for GW2. Calor — talk 18:09, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

facepalm.jpg

→ moved from User talk:Gem

Seriously. It's no wonder you love GW so much - you hate a rewarding experience. Of course your petition will do nothing, but now you want to make our gold and skill points even MORE useless by "making pve harder" by removing stacking effects of consumables. Question: how does this affect you? Don't use them if you don't like them, or only use one. It's not like these things are cheap to buy. You're not making PvE harder, if anything you're making people wait 30 minutes for a group that might dissolve due to an internet connection time out. It's bad enough we're limited to 3 heroes, and now you want to go making my gold and skill points more useless than they already are. I hope they make GW2 so rewarding that you will shrug it off and say it's not for you. >:( Vael Victus 18:37, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Please read the talk page of the petition. I hate repeating my reasoning over and over again. -- (gem / talk) 19:17, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

but the reason I want the changes is because I LOVE a rewarding experience. Getting a title that everyone with no skill can get isn't a reward for me. Using my skills to aquire something that everyone isn't capable of is very rewarding. -- (gem / talk) 19:17, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

While I think the idea of your petition is well meaning, and probably a step in the right direction, perhaps its to big a step. People who have already managed to earn a title, with out the use of in game steroids, should still have some means of bragging about it, such as the title. However, since many people find some things in normal mode PvE more frustration than challenging, may I suggest a compromise(?) Golf, uses a system called the handicap to allow players of different skill levels to play with each other, and share a good game together. Maybe the handicap could be implemented as another title on its own. The more consumables you use in a PVE area, add points to this specific title, maybe based on minutes of effect. A lower score not a higher score is desirable. Call it "Teachers Pet" or something.... However, for myself I would have given up GW long ago with out the aid of a candy cane or two from time to time. Maybe, the handicap should be displayed when clicking on the other player in town like the profession and level, rather than a show or hide item. Lefick 20:20, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I'd appreciate if this discussion would be held on the petition talk page. Anyway, I am not proposing something that would make the normal mode any harder than it is. This petition concentrates on hard mode, which was added to be a challenge for the more skilled PvE players, but which has now degenerated to a PvE item and PvE skill feast. I'm also not really in favor of totally removing the items from the game, some sort of adjustments that make the items also cause negative stuff to balance off would be great. -- (gem / talk) 20:23, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

That handicap title would be more frustrating as I know that some people would only look for players with handicap level 1 and lower (for example) - this would make it harder to find some groups for some people; so they would go on their own with heroes and use more items because it's harder with heroes (at least for some :P) poke | talk 20:28, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. -- (gem / talk) 20:30, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Can you just move the whole conversation to that talk page? I replied here, as I have this page watched, and didn't flag the other one yet.....Lefick 20:38, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

(reset indent) Okay, I read 'em all. And one thing is not clear - why you give a damn about other peoples' titles. Vael Victus 22:29, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Titles = Skill = Experience = Wanted for elite areas, as opposed to just-turned-level-twenty-with-one-elite not-so-expert person. Calor — talk 22:45, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh darling! I wish it was like that. But unfortunately you must not have very much experience with getting a group in Guild Wars. Because then you'd know that people don't care what stats you have (except maybe lightbringer for DoA) simply because people cannot be picky. Are you really going to reject a monk because they aren't pro enough? Vael Victus 17:52, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I give a damn about my titles, and My titles are worth nothing if others can aquire them in a no-brainer way with no skill at all. I also mind about the challenge presented by the game and the items remove that challenge. Yes, I can refuse to use them, but that's a bit stupid too. -- (gem / talk) 22:46, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

One more problem of items (and overpowered PvE skills), IMO, is that they make the game easier (Easy Mode, almost). That's bad for the game - an easy game is one that may be finished faster, and thus we end with players that hurry to beat the campaign and paradoxically enter a "What am I supposed to do now?" moment. This leads to players demanding more content, only to beat said new content in a few seconds (thanks again to overpowered stuff), and demand even more, until Arena Net adds the kind of content that is easy to make and keep players busy for a long time - grind. The result is a very easy game filled with grind, the very opposite of what GW was at its beginning.

A game that is too easy is not fun. You may say "How can you speak about what is fun to other people? Different players have different opinions" - and that's true...To a point. Go back to Ascalon City - how many level 20 players do you see there going outside to kill low level enemies? I doubt you'll see many (or even one) most of the time - there's simply no point in doing so, because it's not fun. Giving everyone the option to get into easy mode risks introducing the same kind of problem, but in the entire game. Just as players today don't play without armor, because it makes no sense to artificially cripple themselves like that, there is no reason for them to cripple themselves and not use the stuff that turn the game into Easy Mode - and the time said Easy Mode can keep players around is much less than what the normal game could.

And, of course, there's the matter of design - originally Guild Wars was meant to follow "skill > time" (and yes, both in PvE and PvP, before someone says it's only for PvP - Jeff Strain mentioned so in that old IGN interview before the release of Prophecies). A game in which a skilled player is the same as a non skilled player who grinded to buy consumables and who grinded for reputation point, well, is not one in which skill is more important than time spent. Erasculio 23:39, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

No, your titles are worth what you put in to get them. I can see if they brought Sunspear's R10 from 50,000 rep to like 25,000 rep, and all the people who worked for 50k would have been gyped. But for whatever title you're getting (farming rep with the dungeon books, maybe? I dunno what you're doing now) you can simply not use the items available to you. And since, as you've just said, you care only about YOUR titles (otherwise you'd have mentioned that you cared for others' also) then why does it matter what other people are doing? You're not forced to use a stat-boosting item. Vael Victus 17:52, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I understand your way of thinking and appreciate it. I however think differently, and I hope you understand my reasons from the above posts. -- (gem / talk) 22:07, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Just wanted to say one more thing. I was playing hard mode today, which is the first I've logged on all weekend, and I got four pumpkin pie drops in an hour. I understand how this can be frustrating for you, I'll say right there even though I'm in love with consumables, I don't exactly agree they should be dropping like that. Vael Victus 19:48, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Are you really going to reject a monk because they aren't pro enough?
Unless I was specifically helping newbies, Yes I would!
Sometimes my heroes outheal some PuG monks i've played with. HELL, I've outhealed some PuG monks, and I'm an elementalist.
After too many bad experiences with PuGs I have basically limited myself to playing only with friends and/or heroes. Here are some classic bad-experinces I've had with PuGs: monks that prefer to smite and don't tell the party, leechers who don't play, or leave mid-way at the first sign things might not be going their way, or players who would leave when a party is after m+b just because they wanted the bonus.

However, such players as mentioned above get rewarded just as equally as I would. Even if they're a monk and don't know the difference between a hex and a condition, they just have to go online, find their local friendly gold/item seller and buy craploads of items that make them 100% safe, and they get the exact same reward as someone who actually knows how to play the game. Is that fair? Yu Takami 02:33, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll agree it's not fair. And I will also agree that my monks will over-heal human monks, too. In fact, I think human monks are really over-rated. I mean yeah, of course a human has the potential to be better than an NPC. But the problem I'm seeing is, that sometimes they're not. :( And people will hold up groups for that. I've got a question for you: DO you reject the monk because they don't have a pro enough title, or WOULD you? Vael Victus 05:27, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I make them ping bars. And 90% of the time I kick them and grab Dunkoro or Tahlkora to dual-monk with me. Armond 06:24, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Bad monks are bad monks; those humans you complain about aren't bad because they're human, they're bad because they suck at the game. Get a competent human monk and you'll be quite impressed with what he can do (as a decent human monk severely outperforms any hench or hero monk period, for several reasons, not the least of which are ability to use prots and ability to manage energy). -Auron 06:44, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Auron, for reinforcing my point by repeating it. Vael Victus 19:48, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't pick a monk based on their title, I pick them because I know them personally and I know they're a good monk. I've all but given up on PuG's. A solid monk can outdo a hero any day, but a crappy monk is inferior to a hero it is quite simply that simple. But alas, I digress. Yu Takami 10:32, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Supply

One thing worth considering is that there is current spike uin usage. As bad players use up these items faster than they get them, and most of the currented supply is from skill points made before GW:EN, evetually the situation will change. Backsword

Not necessarily. A trip to The Underworld, Fissure of Woe, or Domain of Anguish will net each player well over 100k experience. Divided amongst a team of 8 human players, you will be gaining more than enough skill points to continue crafting. --Racthoh 07:48, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Yup, it wasn't that bad if they cost more. Actually, I'll add that to the list. :) -- (gem / talk) 08:25, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

A trip to the UW/FoW nets me minus 1 plat and 20 seconds of my life. I phail at GW :( Mind you, 3000 plus hours and 17 maxed titles (and counting) shows that even us nublets can grind our way to fame and fortune ^^ I have to say that a petition to make PvE harder that is signed by Racthoh, the god of PvE himself, is very scary. Please, don't make it harder - I'm too old to cry. --Snograt 14:11, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

No such thing as imbalance in PvE

Imbalance comes when one side has more than the other. But in PvE, you don't fight against other PvErs, you fight with them. You fight agains't mosnters. And those has many sides.
So, if you really want 'balance' it should be just like PvP, not being able to join battles until level 20, enemies with the same level as you and somehow variable builds, etc...
Where is 'imbalance' when an enemy can have level 33, Death magic 25, 6000HP, deal double damage, cast two times faster, receive half damage and conditions and hexes last half in him...? Hey! Monsters cheat!
PvE items and skills are meant to be a way to match such monsters for players with a bit less of skill, and they are not free, they cost time. Time getting materials, time gathering them in events, time getting gold to pay them if you buy them from other... Plus all players have equal access to them, anyone can make a them, and anyone (now more than ever with the favor update) talk to a god and pay for blessings... PvE too easy by using them? Well. Do not use them. Problem solved. If it is not Player versus player, what others do do not affect your gameplay. Or is it a bother when one of your party members gets killed by a lag hit, but fortunatey he had a candy cane and goes back to 0% morale?
On top of that, such items have quite 'high' prices, or low effects, or do not last forever. If too many items are dropped, they can always reduce the drop the next event. What's the big deal about raising a level 34 Flesh Golem if you can do that only once or twice? I do not use those things myself(other than candy, that I eat quickly as soon as I get the item and can use it, regardless of its effects, XD), but slaping other children's candy from their hands because you don't like the flavour yourself... well... is that mature? If a player wants to spend 3 months gathering GW:EN consumables to vanquish Cantha, let him be. It's a choice he can take. It's better than him getting frustrated for being wiped 10 times trying the same area and leaving the game.
And here's the main point of all: never forget that ALL THINGS get devalued over time:

• The first Green Bone dragon was a 'wow!'. Now there are few, but enough to be able to buy them for 100k and some ecto (and more will come)
• The first Colossal Scimitar as a 'wow', now look how many of them are...
• The first Shiro's Daggers seen were great to show off, now almost no one want that thing with req13.
• The first Obsidian armor was waaaay much more spectacular than the last one made.
• The first Legendary Survivor was a hero. Now you can get that in a month with Canthan questing and Dwarf Boxing.
• The first Cartograhper was a crack, now you see a lot of them with TexMod.

Trying to stick in the past times, never to change, specially in an online game, will be always... well... futile... as time passes by, things get easier. And that is completely normal. Anet do not want people to stick in GW getting titles when GW2 is launched MithranArkanere 23:55, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I disagree, though. I think there are many kinds of balance in PvE:

• How powerful one profession is in comparison with another. If there's one profession able to play through the entire game with easy, and another that is far less powerful, players of the second profession are going to feel bad; not only thanks to their lack of power, but also thanks to how less desired they will be in PUGs.
• How powerful one skill is in comparison with another, in the same profession. If one skill is just better than the other, there's no reason to take the weaker one - and so not only we end with one less skill, but also those unable to get the better skill (for example, a Necromancer who does not have Prophecies and so does not have access to Spiteful Spirit) suffer as they will be weaker than everyone else.
• How powerful we are in comparison to how Arena Net expects us to be. The kind, number and power of enemies in any given area have not been set randomly: they are part of the game design, aiming to create a specific level of difficulty for the average player (in one of those nice bell curves). Each area is designed so it's not a walk in the park nor completely impossible; and both those extremes have their own problems. Something that makes us far more powerful than we were wracks this kind of balance, as an area that was meant to have a specific difficulty suddenly becomes much easier than intended, and therefore its design has failed.

Preserving all those kinds of balance is something important for GW, IMO. Erasculio 00:47, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Players with gold are able to buy consumables to breeze their way through the game. This goes to show that time > skill; why bother becoming a better player when I can grind out mountain trolls until I have the gold to craft a stack of essences, grails, and armours then go achieve anything I want with ease? Grind your consumables, grind your LB title, grind your Ursan, and mash the one key on your keyboard. Elite zones are a joke, there is no challenging high-end content left because of the direction that was taken with the introduction of PvE skills and consumables. --Racthoh 01:27, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll asses the points of the OP in the order that they pop up in the comment.

• "If a player wants to spend 3 months gathering GW:EN consumables to vanquish Cantha," No need to do it for 3 months. Anyone who has been playing for a year or two, even if that playing is very casual, will have enough skill points and gold to buy a few dozen of the powerful items. And this doesn't require any farming at all. If we take someone who is incompetent at the game but farms a lot using a cookie cutter farming build from the internet, he can mass enough skill points and gold to buy more than enough of the powerful items to complete almost anything in PvE without any skill at all by just rushing forward, killing what he can, ressing, removing DP, repeat.
• "And here's the main point of all: never forget that ALL THINGS get devalued over time:" Agreed, sort of. Yes, all the things in your list have become more or less devalued over time. But they are still only smaller parts of the game. But what if the whole PvE part of the game becomes devalued? If everything I do is devalued, what's the point? Nothing really, I'd go looking for a challenge somewhere else. And since I'm not into GW PvP that would be another game. But I'm not ready to do that yet, I'm trying to fight to turn things to the best.
• "Trying to stick in the past times, never to change, specially in an online game, will be always... well... futile... as time passes by, things get easier" They introduced hard mode to be a challenge for those who liked playing PvE but had nothing else as a challenge. Now they have taken away the challenge, leaving us in a similiar situation. Ok, instead of the fixes suggested here they could do a new 'Elite Mode', but it takes far more time from the team that is busy creating GW2.
• "Anet do not want people to stick in GW getting titles when GW2 is launched" But they should want people to stick in GW1 for the development process of GW2 or they wont be around when GW2 is released. GW2 is still too far ahead for us to relly be waiting that. WE are still playing GW1 and will be for a long long time. -- (gem / talk) 07:36, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

You take again the wrong way. It doesn't matter is a profession is better than other in PvE, since a player can play as all profession. Such things only matter in PvP. Since there are many skills that are shared between PvP and PvE, PvP get priority in making all professions usable. And PvE is 'fixed' by adding PvE skills. No one gets your Assassin in parties? Get an Ursan Blessing! See? Easy. Done. As it has been already stated many times by others, no one forces you to use such items, no one forces you to form parties, guilds or have friends that use such items. It do not affect yours, affects others gameplay. It's a matter of personal choice. In the very same way certain areas are easier for certain professions. No matter how many times I see this petition, it keeps sounding like: "I want things that can be done by some, not by all, and remove any way to make them easier with those with less skill". And that's... well... that do not sound nice at all. On top of all, if you look at the bonuses, they almost never are used at the same time, and separately are not really a great deal. +2 to all attributes... pff... so what? I've played some times in Hard Mode with the wrong rune (Wearing my +3Water headgear instead my +3 fire) and forgetting activating lightbringer (I'm quite absent-minded, :P), and felt no real difference. And Ursan Blessing? Do not really help much, it's just a bit boring mashing. Who cares if people base their builds in that as long as I don't fight against them and they are not in my party? The whole point you start from is that other's gameplay affect yours, and other than trader values decreasing, which is good, and people getting titles faster, which is completely irrelevant, I can't think any other way it can affect your gameplay. I don't play GW to show-off my characters I play to see the maps, see enemy deaths, pick items regardless of what they are, see monsters dying, whatch the cinematics, killing stuff... you know, all the fun things. MithranArkanere 15:44, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it matters that a player can play all professions - having one character who's worse than any other is not good, be it for a player or for the game. And worse, someone who begins playing and later realizes that his options are to keep an inferior character or restart the game, well, is not going to be happy. PvE skills don't really help it - a Warrior with Ursan Blessing is still better than an Assassin with the same skill.

Likewise, I think it's too easy to say "no one forces you to form parties" - yet something that makes one player unable to join a party thanks to something outside of his control is not going to be good to said player, as it is effectively limiting his choices, whether he wants it or not. If someone told you that sorry, everyone else is allowed to play the entire game, but you can only play in Pre Searing, would you be happy? Yet no one forces you to leave Pre Searing.

Lastly, there's the matter of what you want to reward. Skill, or time? If you reward skill, there is something that will not be available to those who don't have as much skill. If you reward time, there is something that will not be available to those who don't have as much time. GW has both, but PvE skills (and the grind required to make them more powerful) together with the consumables (that reward those who waste their time farming them) are making the focus on time more important than the focus on skill. Is this good? IMO, it isn't.

This isn't a matter only of "what is good to ME" - thinking only within those parameters is, IMO, short sighted. It's a matter of what is good for the game (especially when you consider that what is fun to one player may not be fun to someone else, and the other way around). Erasculio 15:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

For starters, this discussion isn't about balance between profession in PvE. I don't really care about that at this point when there really isn't a difference in what profession or build you are using.

Like Erasculio said, the PvE game is just about challenges and rewards, nothing else. I don't feel rewarded for doing something if everyone is able to achieve the same thing very very easily and I don't feel rewarded when I do something the hard way when there's the 'stupidly easy way out'. There shouldn't be the 'stupidly easy way out' at all. Normal mode is there for those who either aren't looking for challenge or aren't that good in the game. Hard mode should be there for those who have played a lot, are good at the game and don't find easy playing interesting or challenging at all. Do you like playing games designed for children of age 3-5? I don't, because they don't offer me a challenge. The same thing goes here. -- (gem / talk) 16:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

So here's the problem: "I don't feel rewarded for doing something if everyone is able to achieve the same thing very very easily". That's what I can't understand. Why? Your challenge is there. You can even try the maps without armor, or something like that if you want challenge. Just because you find more fun to play the game without armor, would you force other to do the same? I don't like motorbikes, but I would never forbid them. MithranArkanere 20:47, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I, and many others, don't find it very reasonable to do something in the hard way if there's the easy way to do it. That's why I haven't been playing at all for a couple of weeks now, I don't want to use the easy way, but I feel it's stupid to do something harder than necessary. -- (gem / talk) 21:09, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

So... It something like a personal conflict between you wanting to do it in the easies way possible and you wanting it to be hard...? Eh... I still can't understad. Why? Isn't easier and funnier just to play the game they way you want, regardless of what others do? MithranArkanere 21:18, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Not always. It's not as fun if your accomplishment means nothing because it can be done alot easier. It's just a personal preference :) - anja 21:21, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh well, I guess you just wont understand. (btw, do you play HM without the items or do you play HM at all? or the elite areas and missions?) -- (gem / talk) 21:25, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I actually play Hard Mode quite a lot. And excluding a couple of Vabbian areas and one Desolation encounter that I hate (one Undead group of 12 enemies that you can't reach with junundu that took me more than half an hour) I do not usually get real touble in hard mode until the first wipe, then all goes down, XD. The thing about me killing margonites with the wrong headgear and without Lightbringer was in Hard Mode, when I was killing them in Domain of Secrets for LB points)... but... take it like this: I got all Cartographers without the TexMod cheap trick. But I would never ask Anet to fix the GW client to make impossible using TexMod. Some people love TexMod for testing their own stuff and such, and other have been trying Cartographer for a year and they are tired. Are my titles that took 4 months less that the 'easy' ones got in under 1 week with the TexMod update? No. So, why should I be bothered by that? My personal achievements are not less due to others. Let them be! Who cares?

But... if you really are concerned about this, they could always add a 'Best before' tag for items so they rot after a couple of months or so (well, the ingame behavoir would be to delete all items in all inventories upon loading if they are 'out of season'), and also make those not usable in outposts (that is, all but Sugar Rush-like and alcohol) customized for the character. That way you prevent hoarding and they get used the way they were meant to. Some other games make 'seasonal items' vanish after a while too, so they can't be accumulated. MithranArkanere 21:38, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I also got my cartographer without TexMod and I don't care if others get it with or without now because at that point there was no easy way to do it. I'm not comparing my titles to some specific people. It's just that if something can be done in two ways which are almost exactly the same, but the other is easy and the other is hard, I don't see a point in using the hard way. But at the same time I don't see a point in playing a game that offers no challenge. So I choose not to play, instead use my time on the wiki or irl, and wait for either a fix or a new game that offers me something.

A deletion of items after a certain time from an event has passed would be one method to help with the situation, but note that the game breaking items are aquirable from NPCs areound the year now with the release of GWEN, the holiday items aren't too bad. -- (gem / talk) 22:09, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Or, saying the same as Gem said in other words, if players were expected to make Normal Mode harder by removing their armor, lowering attribute points, using less skills and etc, there would not have been a point to Hard Mode. I don't think players are expected to artificialy cripple themselves. Erasculio 22:25, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Exactly. Forcing yourself to play with one hand (or to play while singing Mmmbop) because the PvE is boringly easy doesn't make the game more fun. -Auron 23:00, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I usually play while watching TV lol Gotta love it when I actually have to turn it off to succeed. It's true, PvE has problems, but I don't use grind items and still deal with some of those problems, it's in fact a big issue.reanor 02:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

RIWell, I tend to play GW while doing 2/3 of these: editing the wiki; reading a book; playing the guitar; chatting on MSN. It normally ends up as me stopping everything else so that I can read/play guitar :P. —Ebany Salmonderiel 21:01, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

No items, cleared Grenths Footprint in 35 mins with 3 friends and heros (I was the only ursan there i believe, though you may complain that one or two of the others were save yourselves spammers:) ) I do not use PvE only items, just because i do not have any money management skills (just watch, i will get 50k and buy a cool looking sword/axe that i will probably never use) Killer Revan 22:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Imbalance does exist in pve. It's just not a "this skill is better than that one" situation. For non-competitive games, "balanced" is when the game is both challenging and fun. There isn't really any math to go with that, you just have to play your own game, something anet doesn't do a lot of. ~Shard 02:55, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

discussing recommendations

1. Re-balance consumables.

Peppermints are way too strong, but wintergreens are still pretty strong for their abundance (5/10% would be more reasonable, or do the clover random number thing 5-15% tied into the luck title---people would like that more than wintergreens I think).

Most other items are fairly reasonable in strength, from golden eggs, candy corn, and candy apples to drake kabobs and skale fin soup. +1 health regeneration is practically insignificant. 10 armor is pretty sweet, though most players aren't aware of that by half (see also: The One and Only Green Defensive Staff of Defense).

The craftable consumables are a little too strong, since they affect the *entire* party with all of those effects. Either the effects should be reduced closer to the holiday drops, or the effects should be per person (which I would find unappealing, since consumables appeal to me for doing HM with herohench, buffing them to somewhat counter their drawbacks).--Carmine 03:08, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

One and only? Morgriff's Staff 71.34.159.173 22:07, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

2. Increase cost; decrease drop rate.

I think the cost is mostly reasonable as is: an Essence of Celery will cost you a "minimum" of 1 skill point and 750g, estimating the cost of feathers and dust at 5g each (currently, feathers are about 25g and dust is about 10g, so it's more like 2k). The vast majority of players would go bankrupt crafting 50 of these. Keep in mind that if many players were to do such a thing, prices for, e.g., feathers would rise well above 50g each, putting the crafting of more than a handful out of the range of over 95% of the community.--Carmine 03:08, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

3. Only one PVE-only effect at a time.

This is very reasonable for party-wide effects and goes in line with the limitation to 3 PVE skills. However, how do you manage individual effects with party effects? If I eat some skale fin soup, and a couple minutes later, some PUG whammo takes some armor of slavation, why should I be stuck with my meager +1 health regen while everyone else gets +1 health regen on top of several much more significant benefits? Alternately, suppose the PUG whammo ate some celery while I ate a drake kabob, and I really wanted that +10 armor boost. Thus, no override is reasonable (party over individual, first over last, or their converses). Perhaps the limitation should be one party-wide consumable, and one individual consumable?

The other question is what should be done with instantaneous effects from scroll of resurrection (which I think is sketchy anyway) or DP-removal items? My thought is to allow them to be used arbitrarily, but decrease their potency (decreasing potency is better than significantly decreasing availability, primarily for popularity and economic reasons). I still think scroll of res is sketchy.--Carmine 03:08, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Maybe instant consumables could count as consumables and cause a debuff preventing the use of personal or party consumables. -- Gordon Ecker 06:48, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Solutions

Ok, I've Vanquished some GW:EN areas this weekend and they were surprisingly easy. And not, I don't mean with the consumables. I meant without them. I found around 20 Honeycombs while playing and I had to use only 2. And not for me, for the Henchmen, when a couple of elementalist bosses I was not prepared for killed them, but nothing else. So I'm for it, as long as the solutions are logical, never drastic.
Let's see them all before adding them, one by one. No need to rush.
At all times, remember that Hard Mode is an option to get more rewards for playing more time against 'harder' enemies, not an exclusive mode for those that play more or have more skill.

Removing the consumables

Unfeasible. They are already part of the game. Like all existing skills, they cannot be removed, only changed. We are no longer in the Beta. MithranArkanere 00:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Sadly this still seems like the only option that would completely fix the game. The others are just patches here or there. -- (gem / talk) 01:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Increase prize

Unfeasible. Only helps gold farmers and gold eBuyers. Solution should be for the 5..15hours/week average player. On top of that, many items are available for free. Currently a player can make one Irontoe's Lair, earn 1 and 1 and pick a Powerstone in 10 minutes before going to real action. That's perfect for the average player so he can spend 10..30 minutes picking the items, and the rest of 1..3 hours playing. MithranArkanere 00:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Yup, no real use. -- (gem / talk) 01:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Decrease drops

Unfeasible. Most of the items that drop drop in weekends, when most players may have 0..10 hours to play or so. Someplayers having no life and getting too much items are not a reason to decrease income for the rest. Things like the Zaishen Chest are proof that Anet do not want that.MithranArkanere 00:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Most of the items are not from drops anyway. -- (gem / talk) 01:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

One at a time

Unfeasible. Since many items have many different functions, and some affect all the party. Activating one item should not prevent a better party-wide effect from affecting you. Aditionall, some consumables are meant to be used together, like the 4 'Unique' consumables of each of the 4 reputation ranks, or the 3 dishes in Istan. Specially when the effects are not too powerful, being able to activate just one won't do.MithranArkanere 00:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, there are lot of problems with this one. -- (gem / talk) 01:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

No items in hard mode

Unfeasible. There are many 'hard spots' in hard mode that give real headaches to some players(regardless of the reson being playing alone, bad hench/hero AI, one hit-kill bosses or whatever it is). The GW:EN consumables are meant to 'fix' that, instead of having to rework every single boss fight, they just add a way to make some easier. The problem comes when people hoard such items to use in the whole hard mode, instead of such 'hard spots'.MithranArkanere 00:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Mmm... Since removing the items completely won't happen, this one would be a very good alternative. Imo one of the best ideas. Yes, hard mode has hard spots. No, consumables aren't needed for them. Yes, consumables make them easier. But they make them too easy. -- (gem / talk) 01:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Downsides

Possible, but not very logical. Items are meant to be bonuses to help. Not to work just like other skills, with conditions and downsides and such that do not help at all, ad remove the 'bonus' feel. On top of that, some items would be used to fix the downsides of others, at the end, becoming nothing. MithranArkanere 00:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

To complex, they wont bother. -- (gem / talk) 01:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Customization

This one is one of the most logical ones. Do not want to use it? Trash it. That way the buy-to-hoard is completely prevented. Of course, any item that do not affect gameplay would not be customized, like tonics, rush sweets, and alcoholic drinks. Resurrection Scrolls and Stars of Transference could be also an exception to this. But market-lovers would hate this.MithranArkanere 00:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't solve anything. I'll just buy the items with the character tta I'm going to use. The droppable items aren't the problem anyway, the buyable ones are. -- (gem / talk) 01:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Party wide to single player

Unfeasible(Aren't you starting to love this word? XD). Party-wide items are mainly meant to be used for heroes and henchmen. If a player do not speak English, and play in a empty timezone or can manage only to find one friend and go with Heroes, he is in his right to play too in the same conditions as others.MithranArkanere 00:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

This wouldn't solve anything really since you can hoard these items anyway and get the benefits for all hunman players. This would nerf heroes a bit, encouraging human player teams, which is one of ANets aims. -- (gem / talk) 01:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

that would be terrifyingly bad for those that are somewhat antisocial (me for instance) and it would also make pve go from moderately hard for experienced players to insanely hard for everyone...i've completely given up on PUGs, as fewer than 1/15 PUGs that i've ever been in have not been full of morons, that i was shocked that they could even read...in the crystal desert, i've been called a "n00b" by a healing prayers wammo with less than half the base AL of my elementalist...i've seen a monk trying to act as a minion master, who claimed to have no idea why he was consistently failing an easy mission...i've been in PUGs where i was the only one doing substantial damage...and because of some of the most noobtastic warriors in both pve and pvp, i now hate hundred blades, healing hands, and sundering mods on low-base damage weapons (they are ok as minimal-downside upgrades to boost damage a little on high base damage weapons, though)...i suppose that was a rant...sorry about that...i mean no offense to the experienced players (including warriors, and the warriors that know the methods of utilizing hundred blades correctly kinda pwn imo), and newbies, and though it may seem that i am trying to start a flame war against gem, i intend no offense to him, but i do not believe that PUGs, or even attempts at organized multiplayer pve should be at all forced, or encouraged upon people...in game status isn't based on titles, items, or how much gold you bought from some bot farmer...it is about skill, knowledge, tactics, and creative adaptability thereof, so my advice is to put n00bs on the iggy list, or pwn the crap out of them in pvp, and laugh as they ragequit due to their incredible lack of skill, and the failure of their cookie-cutter builds...but treasure, and assist newbies, so that they do not become n00bs, but that they may one day become seasoned, helpful players themselves... the previous has been a caffeine-fueled rant, flame me at your own discretion Omnipresentgnome 08:11, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Note that I'm one hell of a anti-PuG player too. :) -- (gem / talk) 09:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

i'm glad to see that you agree with me that PUGs are terrible, and sorry about the gigantic rant Omnipresentgnome 20:19, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Working only in controlled AI

This would be for the heroes of the player that uses the item ,and for henchmen when the Leader uses the item. Could be something to consider, but nothing that really would fix anything, since would encourage AI-playing.MithranArkanere 00:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Encourages hero usage. -- (gem / talk) 01:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Maximum limit per account

This would be only viable along with 'Customization'. That way the total amount of items a single player could acquire would be really limited, even if they play too much. For example 25 items of a certain type per event, 10 for another, etc. For those 'craft-able' consumables, the limits would be weekly or daily.MithranArkanere 00:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't really solve anything since the buyable consumables are the problem, and you don't need to buy too many of them for a single area/mission. -- (gem / talk) 01:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Use limit per instance

May work in some cases. Specially for the Morale-related. Recovering from a wipe once it's cool. Being able to use Powerstones of Courage to kill enemies one by one instead of finding a working build is not. The best limit would be variable, and dependent on either remaining enemies or initial enemies (already calculated for Vanquish). I doubt such Limits being necessary en Normal mode, there is no '60% DP, KO, go-home' in there.
THere must be noted also that the limitation would be upon 'effect' not upon item. That is, it would not matter if you use a Honeycomb or a Candy Cane or a Powerstone of Courage. The limit would be decreased for all items that 'decrease/increase DP', the more % the item decrease. So if you start with a "+20%" and "-120%" counter, the third +10% MBoost won't work on you, and the third 'remove all death penatly (-60%) won't work on you, either.
Also, items that affect the whole party would decrease the count for all members, a player that brings single player morale items and abuse them, may find that after some uses, the leader's Powerstones do not work at all on him.
So this would cause moderate and wise use of consumables. MithranArkanere 00:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Some sort of item usage limit per instance would be cool and might work. -- (gem / talk) 01:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Decrease stacks

It would work quite a lot, but I doubt it being possible. The 'uses' thing is only in kits and some items like the ice stones in the Cold One quest, but uses won't stack. Everything I've seen stack in 250 packs. Making them non-stackable would be almost impossible now... there are many people with stacks so big that... too much work now. Too late for this. A shame, since it would really work limiting abuse on consumables.

Wouldn't solve anything id stack limit was lowered, large stacks aren't needed for single areas/missions. Like you said, making them unstackable is not really possible now. -- (gem / talk) 01:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes it is. Remember the Dye Stack update? The dyes dropped before the update didn't stack, the dyes after the update did. It's not the best solution, but it helps - consumables acquired before the proposed update would still stack. Consumables acquired after the update would not. MiraLantis 21:23, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Activation upon pickup

Maybe possible. Some items could be activated upon pickup, instead of be saved to sell or hoard. That way they work more like they are intended to be: Bonuses. One typical behavior of pickup bonuses in all games is being activated when picked up. If this is too much, items could be picked instead of directly activated when the character is already under the effects of the item. So at least one item ever <duration of the item> would be picked up. Would help decrease hoarding, but I'm afraid not many people would like it. A shame, more things should work upon pickup, treasure hunter, collector of wisdom... would fix a whole lot of buy-able titles. MithranArkanere 00:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't help since the problem are the buyable items. -- (gem / talk) 01:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Maybe change the buyable ones to activate upon pickup aswell? The effect could be something like: "The next time you enter a harm mode mission or zone, you will recieve the effect of: *effect* ".That way people will be able to recieve the bonuses right from the start and as they work their way through the mission or zone, if they get lucky, they could get another bonus. Also I woul suggest making some of the bonuses still activated as normal, but change them so that they dissappear if a player enters a safe area like a town or a mission staging area. 80.230.17.66 05:57, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Overall limits

This is the most logical of all. The real 'rebalance'. The effects activated with items are just like skill effects. In the same way a 9th skill was available in certain situations in the Beta, items can be considered the '9th skill'. So, what is this 'Overall limits'? Just in the same way that two separate skills can't give more that 25 armor, or 33% IAS, or 33% movement, and so on, the item skills would have limits too. No matter how many items you activate, they won't go over those limits. They could be more strict that normal skill limits in hard mode. Hey... they could even add more limits, like HP limits, killing the symbiosis tanks, that would be fun, XD.
I will not decide such limits, but they could be different in hard and normal mode. Like... some limits in normal mode, and half of those limits in hard mode (I mean, if +100HP in normal mode, +50 in hard mode). I'll let Anet decide what would the limits be. Its something that those with statistical data can decide better than players. The better part of this is that it would be less noticed by the average players that activate 1..3 at a time, never more.
I don't know if making the limits include also God blessings would be fine, since they are dependent on Favor, and having favor should be something good. And the Title effects are also in my gray zone, after all they are quite limited to certain regions.MithranArkanere 00:00, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Limits like this wont solve anything since the best items are the DP removal, res, and activation time decrease and attack speed boost. The effects that could be limited aren't the big problem. -- (gem / talk) 01:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Reward Decrease

This one is found in many games, to make it simply, Vanquishing rewards would be higher if party members do not die (not only the item user) and they do not use items, same goes for endgame chests, dungeons and missions. Keeping the whole party alive the whole mission or dungeon would make rewards better, and using items would make them worse. This would work better with the 'use limitation', since a player that get worse rewards after beating a dungeon still gets the entry in the book. MithranArkanere 17:32, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Decrease duration

make the buyables have a duration of like five or ten minutes. Easy to code, too. If you have to spend six times as much money on them, are you really going to want to hoard them? Perhaps combine with "no more than one at a time" so they're like PvP stances. Armond 08:14, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

It seems that Gem thinks that the buyables are the main problem, but they were added with the intention of being used together, at the same time, just like God blessings, and last 30 minutes. It seems that the best option, after all, is the limitations per instance, so people can use them once or twice, but not rely on them to play. MithranArkanere 12:57, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

A smaller duration doesn't help with DP removal and res items, but a 5 min limit would make the other items so that they could be used for the hard parts where you are more likely to need them and wont degrade the whole area. In addition to a short duration something needs to be done to the DP removal and res items, maby some sort of a limit on how many can be used. -- (gem / talk) 13:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

wtf!

NO... This is just plain stupid. If you think that PvE is so imbalanced from the consumables... how about you STOP using them? That ever come to mind? Also consumables cost MONEY... if you have problems with others... why are you playing an MMO? Just so you know, it stands for massively MULTIPLAYER online... Please stop this idiotic idea. Besides, most people use consumables for fun, for example when me and my guild are bored, we will go out with as many consumables as possible, and run around like gods... its fun, we dont ruin the economy. I don't see why you want this nerfeD? Once again, if you dont like it, DONT DDO IT! dont take the fun away from others because you dont use it. Get a life please

I guess you didn't read anything above this. -- (gem / talk) 00:47, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Exactly, that was a [read article name->post] quick-response.reanor 07:45, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Agreed

Hi Gem. While I may not agree with some of the other things you've written about skills and/or game balance I think you are spot on in your analysis of what I not so affectionately call "the Guild Wars easy button". Like many things though this is a double edged sword. I'm not sure how often you frequent the elite missions of GW but let me assure you the gap in skill even with consumable items becomes very obvious. Knowledgeable skilled players can use consumables to blow through elite content at blazing speeds, ~30 minute HM Deep is not unheard of with celerity. The teams running hackneyed bars with no coordination are lucky if they last an hour and get half way through the mission without burning through most of their supply of goodies. The same is also true of Ursanway. As easy as one would figure pressing 123 and producing enough damage to rival the best elementalist spells, groups somehow manage to produce catastrophic failures. Look on the bright side, at the end of the day the good get better and the consumable/ursans will continue to skip the basic fundamentals to never be taken seriously in any real group...good thing for heroes eh? It think it goes without saying I voted in favor, cya around. 67.191.245.177 18:43, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Ursan Blessing

I am missing Ursan Blessing on this page. Last week, I had trouble with Morostav Trail on Hard Mode (annoying three healing ritualists) and yesterday, I tried again, with a little help form an Ursan Blessing warrior. It turns out that, combined with a Minion Master, the already high damage dealign UBW can make each minion deal additional damage as well, with a total of over 400 armor-ignoring damage per second being done just by his skills. No need to mention this, but vanquishing was easy. So why isn't he on your list, when consumables are? Nicky Silverstar 13:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

N.B. +15 damage per ally, with 8 party memebers, 10 minions and a pet deals about 285 damage per second. The warrior himself adds another 120 damage each second. That is quite a lot, even with 7 party members doing nothing but wanding and healing. Add a Spirit Spammer and a few asura summons, and I doubt even Kanaxai's healing could keep up.

Actually there is a link to another page which deals with the Ursan issue. The reason why I didn't add anything about Ursan to this page is that I wanted to concentrate on one thing at a time, and the skill balancing of Ursan needs a different approach than the PvE items. -- (gem / talk) 23:40, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Maybe just add another broad point: More attention payed to the balancing of PvE only skills. Things like the blessings, Pain Inverter and some of the more powerful sunspear and alliance skills like Cry of Pain and "Save Yourselves!" spread this, 'I need them to succeed' attitude. They haven't been touched since their introduction really. ANet doesn't understand they matter to us. Spawnlegacy 12:50, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

its PvE

No1 cares about PvE.... if u want PvE play WoW.. PvP Ftw 24.141.45.72 22:29, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

You don't, but a lot of others do. There are a lot of players who only play PvE. I don't understand your attitude. Please stay on topic if you post firther comments. -- (gem / talk) 00:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I think that was an Anet employee, lol. josəph 14:55, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

New Sobriety Title, User Titles

Here's a creative solution that's easy to implement: make a sobriety title, like maybe Abstainer that shows up when you make a Legendary title without ever having used a consumable, and Legendary Abstainer when you make 5 Legendaries, or some such. The effect is that some people have "easy" titles but no "Abstainer" to show for it, while the hardcore have the same titles the grinders/farners have with an added "Abstainer" to prove they're hardcore. The way it works is that you may never consume a comsumable yourself except for a Draught of Sobriety or some such, which would be available at next to no cost and could be consumed in town (and outside); then as long as your character is logged in, consumables with party effects that others comsume would never affect you. This should be pretty easy to implement, and it won't affect the consumables economy noticably. It might be impossible for existing characters to get that, but the Survivor title has had the same problem and people learned to live with it.

The other way to enjoy doing things the hard way is to come up with titles yourself. The best example is LDoA, a title that was made because someone achieved it before there was a title. Make a userbox for it to display on your Wiki User page, explain what has to be done to be allowed to place that on your page, and Bingo: instant title. "Freezing Survivor" = Legendary Survivor that's never worn Armor (play the whole game in your undies). "One-trick Pony" = no second profession for neither you nor your heroes. "Patience of Saints" = never leave town without a PuG (at least one player not in your guild or on your friends list). "Teacher" = have 100 different players level up in your presence in an explorable area or turning in a quest you helped them do, "Legendary Teacher" = 1000 of these. "Cosmopolite"=played with players from 20 different countries (I took that one from Ham radio contests). "McScrooge" = never pay money for anything, don't trade with players (this means you can only work with collectors and don't have access to your storage). I'm sure you can come up with better ones than I, a casual player who's been playing for 6 months now, can think of offhand. Yeah, sure, there'd be no way to verify these, but then who'd want to display a title like that who hadn't done it? After all, there'd be zero benefit from it. And hey, maybe if enough users get them, they get programmed into GW2.

To get into a metaphor you used earlier: the easy breakfast is a bowl of cornflakes, an apple and a cup of tea, and it does take a totally voluntary extra effort and time to make scrambled eggs, but I actually do feel happier about having successfully made my breakfast when I do - and even more so when I tried a new dish for the first time. (mendel 84.128.233.162 23:38, 14 February 2008 (UTC))

First of all, it's not retroactive so that will hurt lots of players feelings. That's kinda funny now that I think about it. anyway, the whole idea of abstainer is quite fail imo, because you just want to 1-up those that used consumables. Why would you want to do that, the whole reward in an achievement is that you did it, and I guess you got good loot from it. Mango 22:23, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Survivor wasn't retroactive either, is what I'm saying. The way I read Gem's rant, 1-upping those that use consumables is the point. Gem's complaint seems to be this: if you have consumables, the game gets too easy. So you can a) make the game harder, or b) reward not having consumables. Option b) means that you avoid all of that costly rebalancing that will have most players screaming bloody murder with each new patch, so there's a chance that Anet could actually implement that before GW2. All things considered, what's worse: in case a), making it impossible to play the game without consumables (thus changing the game for a lot of people), or case b) adding a title that leaves everybody's game experience undiminished (because for consumable players, the game doesn't in fact change any)? Consumables make the game easier; if you want a hard game, don't use them. (mendel 84.128.229.36 23:17, 16 February 2008 (UTC))

I think you are onto something here with the "reward those who don't use items in some way", but the title system that you presented wouldn't probably work that well. I'm not sure what kind of a system would be good, but maby someone comes up with a great idea. -- (gem / talk) 06:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

What do you think wouldn't work well, the Abstainer title or the user titles idea? Both? It's not easy to come up with rewards that don't make the game easier. Maybe using consumables could adjust the chance for good/gold items to drop downwards? (mendel 84.128.208.118 23:32, 20 February 2008 (UTC))

Actually both. The Abstainer title is too late now, since many people already have the vanquisher titles and it would be unaquirable for them. Actually, most people have atleast one vanquished area, so the titles would be unaquirable to most of the population. One soultion would be to allowe players to re-vanquish everything without items, but that doesn't really solve the situation, it just further requires us to repeat the same things again.

The own titles thing was a bit vague. I guess you meant that people start recoring ther feats on their wiki page or some other place and inventing them names in hopes that it gives an idea to the dev team. That's what we already do, but it requires hundreds of players to whine for a title for months on different forums to get a new title created to the game. (just see how long Party Animal took to implement) Many people do list all sorts of weird accomplishments, but they don't get recognised easily. -- (gem / talk) 07:42, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Ooooh! Oooh! I know! Make Abstainer a free maxed title! That's right, -free-. I'd love a free title. Every time you use a consumable, you lose a point. So instead of going up ranks, like the titles we have now, you would go down ranks. Sounds silly but it'd work... people would be like, "Let's just try this without that junk first, I don't want to lose my Abstainer title." Of course, that presents problems - group-wide consumables can be activated by the person who just doesn't care about his/her title, and what to do about HoM and KoaBD, etc... but it's a thought, I guess. MiraLantis 21:29, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Nice twist! I love it! It'd also solve the problem of people getting pissed at not being able to achieve that title retroactively, since everybody would get the title when it is introduced.

The group-wide consumables problem made me propose the "draught of sobriety" above, which negates the group-wide effect for the player who took one (presumably before entering the explorable area). Since it could be made to cost, even players who don't use consumables would sink their gold somewhere! (mendel 84.128.205.35 03:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC))

Others achievements do not diminish yours

I hate this kind of reasoning. So what if someone else was able to achieve a title really easily? That dosen't take away from your accomplishment of grinding it out the hard way. You want the challenge then simply don't use these consumables and enjoy the game.

This is the same reasoning people in other MMO use to demand other players have to do silly things like run everywhere without teleporters/map travel. If they really thought it ruined the realism then they could simply choose not to use that feature why deny others?

This same reasoning is used in MMOs to complain that even "average" players can archive their level of elitism. The developers didn't write all that hard mode content for the 5% of the population that is elite. They wrote it for everyone. If you need a challenge go it with half party size. Or do something interesting like see what is the lowest lvl you can beat the game with (I saw a lvl 10 do it).

In short the developers didn't rob you of the challenge, but left you the option(one you don't have to take) of ratcheting down the difficulty by using the consumables. - Myth 2/18/08

I concur, this is pretty much what I believe too. But if I remember correctly, gem and the rest disagree. Mango 18:10, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

this is why i want consumables to be deleted. i want a part of this game that is not available to grinders, farmers, bots and noobs. i want a space where i can meet people on a similar level than me to get some real challenge. when they introduced hm, i thought it's finally there. but through consumables, that became a dream again. - Y0_ich_halt 18:20, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

(Real challenge, try PVP) If you wanted a challenge in PVE, you can still find it by not using consumables. Mango 22:54, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Rival Page?

Is there a place where people who do NOT support this campaign can gather and show their support for the way things are now? I would really like to show my support for consumables to stay untouched, but I would rather not get attacked en masse like I would if I said it here.... which I just did. I'm sure there are others too. Maybe just a list of like minded people. -- Counciler 08:15, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, you could try User:Counciler/Request for NOT balancing PvE :P -- ab.er.rant 08:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Balancing is not a balanced word though, try User:Counciler/Campaign in favor of consumables in PvE ;-) --Xeeron 10:44, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I would rather not lead a campaign. Perhaps if you had a list underneath the 'in favor of' list for those who don't like the idea to post their usernames? -- Counciler

That would be counter-productive for the idea, because there will be more people for them than against them, just like with Ursan Blessing. MithTalk 12:32, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I personally think most of the PvE is fine. Yes, even UB.- Vanguard 12:33, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Likewise. I have only done one run of Ursan for point farming (as its boring and not worth it to me), I think I used one consumable.. I want to say for a dungeon I'd failed at but I can't even remember (I may not have used any). And I don't really care if someone can walk around with Legendary Vanquisher or whatever having used that stuff. For me, its personal satisfaction; I rarely even have my highest title selected anyway - usually if there's not a bonus (ie, Edification in Asuraville) for a title, I don't have anything showing. Doing something challenging is its own reward, regardless of how others have done it. If you want to petition for change, I of course can't stop you, but it is in my opinion wasted effort. Plus I like that backup option of blowing a plat and a skill point for temporary win in a particularly nasty zone (though again, I haven't actually done so). I like a challenge, after all, but I also like not dying all the time. (and yeah, maybe not 100% coherent, but I felt like after reading so much, I needed to at least share SOMETHING). - THARKUN 09:01, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Signed Pulpulpullie 12:11, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Why on earth would Gem put up a rival to this petition? That just wouldn't make any sense... I don't personally agree with the idea of taking out/changing consumables, but I would think it silly if I saw this user page with both sides of the issue. Back to the real topic: As I said, I don't agree with taking out or changing consumables. They are a great thing for people who suck (sorry, but true) to still have fun and feel like they have accomplished something in the game. What follows this increased game revenue because "sucky" players can still feel involved in the game (and feel like they are quite good even) and then they end up buying more GW merchandise. For me, it is an issue of revenue being more important than uber/leet/anti-n00bism (not that everyone here suffers from all of these).

To clarify so people don't get the wrong idea about my comments: I have never purchased a consumable from an NPC or player nor have I spent time farming/purchasing collector items to trade for them. I have used consumables that I have found/traded for at collectors, but I frivolously waste them (as in, I will use a candy cane to get rid of 4% dp) as I don't think they are anything special or needed for my game play.

"no grind, just skill" was ruined long before consumables were introduced. Titles are what changed the game to what it is now, not consumables. If you remember, people were upset that they had to delete their main toon in order to re-create so they could achieve all titles (specifically, Survivor). People were also upset that they could not get both the Survivor AND the Legendary Defender of Ascalon. This in particular is ridiculous to me seeing as the rest of the game deals in compromises (ie, you can only bring 8 of approx 1300 skills).

My point about grind, finally, is that changing/removing consumables is not the answer to the real problem. Similarly, removing PvE-only skills would not fix it (incidentally, I think PvE-only skills are abominations). Removing titles would be the only way to remove the grind.

So, back to whether or not to "balance" PvE...It is a similar problem. "Fixing" consumables is not the answer. The bigger problem is that the game is fundamentally flawed in that the developers have to walk the line between the masses and the elite. In a game where intelligence is a major factor, that causes problems. I am also not convinced that the developers really know what their goals are for the game (apart from money). There are so many inconsistencies. For example- why, ffs why! is Spiteful Spirit a Necro hex when it is only an elite Empathy? Why do Mesmers have insignias that give them bonus armor while casting!?! Why are Paragons so much better in groups -- the profession with Leadership works better when there are 2 or 3 of them? Honestly, shouldn't they be more effective when there is only one or two since they are supposed to be the "general" or leader? Why do Elementalists have more skills than any other profession? And why, oh please why, does GvG need so many changes to mechanics? Lastly, why did Hard Mode (which was supposed to be help make mesmers and other underrepresented professions more viable in pve) end up essentially being a lvl boost for foes?

Consumables just aren't really the problem. The game design is the problem, and obviously, game design isn't going to be fixed. My suggestion is to leave consumables and PvE skills alone. If you want to use them, fine. If not, also fine. I know that it sucks that we have to share our elite titles and stuff with the masses (let's face it, most of us probably grew up thinking we are smarter/better than others -- that is why we play GW instead of WoW and why we are having this discussion), but the reality is that GW needs money and can not survive on only the money brought in by elite users. The company absolutely must make nearly all the game accessible to nearly all the interested population. Some areas can still be too difficult. IIRC, there are still people who have never cleared UW/FoW/DoA as well as people who do not have the entire map vanquished. Sorry, I know I shouldn't rant so much.

/not signed --Louai 18:13, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

My only complaint with your otherwise well written reply: most of us grew up thinking we are smarter/better than others. What do you mean by thinking? It's pretty clear I am better than everyone. - THARKUN 18:20, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Well...I wanted to be a little vague since some of us know that we are, some don't realize it yet (not sure how), and some adamantly think that they don't think they are better than others. I figured it would be best to let that last group keep on thinking what they want (since they don't believe it anyway). :P --Louai 20:03, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Yup. Truth is that in other games, those that 'suck' get to places and get suff later, because they have to grind levels to make the same the ones that 'do not suck' can get 20 levels earlier. But in GW there is a level cap, so the solution were the titles, consumables an PvE skills. Those that 'do not suck' could get things earlier, and can get them without grinding. Yeah, it's easier to finish Final Fantasy VII when you are at level 99, but people sill try to finish it in much lower levels. Why? MithTalk 02:16, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Rewarding grind over skill should never happen in Guild Wars. It's a game founded on skill over grind; why do you think the level cap is 20, that max armor and weapons are easily available, and that skills are "balanced" regularly? So people can grind and ignore the part where they need to not suck?

That's the biggest problem with consumables and title grind. It doesn't reward being good, and even if you're good, you still have to title grind to get some skills to a passable level (stuff like EBShonor). That's a concept that shouldn't exist period, and it only does because the vast majority of players didn't want to improve - they wanted to keep sucking and still be able to win. In order to keep their custom, ArenaNet put in crutches for bad players; to keep them paying up until GW2 comes out. They aren't good for the game, they're just good for ANet's pockets. Don't confuse the two, folks. The consumables and PvE skills are the worst aspects of GW - if you don't want to count shadowsteps and the entire shout mechanic. -Auron 02:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Auron summed it up quite nicely, but I'd like to add that I personally don't mind that sucky players get something to make them able to finish something as well. The gripe I have about it is that sucky players shouldn't finish the end-game content faster and easier than good players. — Galil 02:33, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

How about something like the Dishonorable debuff: "Your use of consumables is excessive and a sign that you suck. For each additional consumable used while under this effect, your e-peen shrinks by 10%. This effect will be removed after you gain XP from one hundred creatures without dying." And their character model meanwhile shrinks slightly and becomes progressively more emaciated and dumb looking... in other words, starts to look like a 'sin. Just a thought. - THARKUN 04:44, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Louai hit the nail on the head: The original PvE sin are titles, not consumables, because they changed the game from one where you needed and were rewarded for skill to one where you need and are rewarded for time. There is a huge host of titles (drunkard, sweet tooth, wisdom, chests, cartographer, etc) that need no skill at all. The worst GW player ever can achieve those simply by spending a lot of time. Consumables and, arguably even more damaging, Ursan Blessing simply expand that concept to include even the elite areas of GW.

Of course the reason for titles and the rest is just as Louai described above: The majority of GW players wants them, they pay for the game, so it gets implemented. --Xeeron 12:47, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

But good players do not need to wate time grinding a titles and farming for consumables, they can do the quests on the fly. Arrive then make it. It's somehow normal that PvE characters can do so as opposed to PvP characters. Why? Because they are roleplaying character. When roleplaying, your character may have skills you do not, like being stronger, or faster, or smarter. THe downside is that when you go to where your skill is really needed (PvP) you won't have it. MithTalk 13:32, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I dont understand you. Every PvP character has at least as much or more skills than any PvE character on the same account. Apart from that, while good players do not need consumables or overpowered title-related skills to complete those quests, even good players do considerably better with them. --Xeeron 16:20, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry everyone, I haven't anserewed here for quite some time now, but that's basically because I lost interest in the game because of this shit and I don't have any hopes that it will ever get fixed. I might grind a few titles just because my gf still likes the game and she is sad because we don't play anymore, but I'm thinking that I wont buy GW2. I guess I'll just try out Warhammer Online when it comes out, and if that fails possibly stop online gaming alltogether. -- (gem / talk) 23:35, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

*gasp* *sputter* Stop gaming?! Blasphemy!! :) I have no idea what it's like to have a girlfriend who's also a gamer though. Mine wants me to stop playing :P -- ab.er.rant 03:34, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I remember reading a games magazine two years ago, an article which made me buy Guild Wars. It said something like "it's a game where the skill of the player matters more than the level of the character", supposed to be a comparison to WoW. Nowadays, I see parties with just 2-3 players which are actually skilled, while the rest of it profits from their work, aided by the consumables. If you think you can't handle Hard Mode, it's mainly because you might be doing it with random parties. I suggest playing with friends&guild, with the people you know - since you can tell them what (not) to do and they will listen in most cases. Also, you know what their good points are. There is another thing I don't like, but it's not as important, it's when some people require a high rank in a certain title (which you get through boring, old grinding); don't want to argue much on that since I know many of you disagree. And maybe some don't want to spend so much time in front of the computer to get the thing they want so dearly - though it is unfair for those who worked so hard for it - and if you do want to show off, do it with your brains. I'm pretty sure there are titles that require that. PvP, for example. But maybe you don't like that either. And if I say it's just a game (no I don't say so! there are real people with real feelings in it) you'd all jump at my neck and try to kill me. I support the campaign, make Hard Mode harder, maybe ANet listens, but shit, I'll miss doing things so easy. - Flameseeker Mage (ain't got account on the official Wiki)

8 months?

8x ~30 = ~240 days and not even 1 squeel from ANet. No point. Ninjas In The Sky 10:56, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

It's been that long? Oh my god, how did I even keep my faith for most of that time? No wonder I haven't played for a long time... -- (gem / talk) 14:37, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

did anyone even tell them? - Y0_ich_halt 14:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

There are millions of posts on the cm pages about these things, and even a link or two to this place. It's just not gonna happen. -- (gem / talk) 01:29, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Supposedly we can expect changes to Ursan around the tenth. Maybe. Actually, come to think of it, that's the earliest they said they'd be able to do it.

I'd willingly balance GW for free, but to be honest, at this point I wouldn't do a thing for PvE until PvP is fixed. It's just too late; in order to properly make PvE worthwhile, there'd have to be a whole new title system to replace the old ones, new elite rewards, possibly a new elite area... Not saying the PvP titles don't need resetting, too, but the PvE aspect just deserves so much more, it'd be like doing an entire expansion. -- Armond Warblade 15:10, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Its much more than that. It's a new game. -- NUKLEAR IIV 01:55, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

The current PvE could be so much more even with just small fixing. Better to do a little to get a huge improvement than do nothing and get no improvement. -- (gem / talk) 07:14, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Get flamed like Hell!!!

Everyone add this and sign a petition to let consumables run rampage!Crimmastermind 09:22, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

This user wants consumables to run rampage.