User talk:Isaiah Cartwright/Izzy Talk Archive 10

Wand vs Martial Weapon

As everyone knows, a huge amount of the monks (and to a lesser degree, other casters) use spears, swords, and axes because they can have +5 energy and +30 health, while the best a wand can have is +5 energy while health is above 50%, or while enchanted. While it does make sense for warriors to have a health advantage over casters, considering they are supposed to be hit more, giving them better energy mods for their weapons just doesn't seem to make sense. Warriors aren't supposed to rely on energy, casters are, yet warriors have better energy mods on their weapons. Perhaps if wands were given +5 energy always instead of only ^50, or while enchanted, you would see monks using monk weapons more. 69.137.78.47 00:42, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't forget the +20% enchantments which is not available on wands or foci. Sadie2k 02:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Yea I never quite got that. Don't get me wrong though, my monk looks col using her jadesword.......but still.....Ajc2123

Well one would only assume that shields provide more defense. I COULD BE WRONG LOL. 68.35.91.2 03:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't see what shields have to do with it. You can use a shield with either a wand or a martial weapon. 69.137.78.47 12:15, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Another way to improve it would be to inscrease the damage a wand does. It would make casters in general more attractive too, as they wouldn't have to rely on their spells as much to deal DPS. Nicky Silverstar 08:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Because it mixes things up. It gives casters a choice of weapons with benefits and drawbacks, like having more reliable mods in exachange for not having your wand attack. Also it means that swords, axes, spears and sometimes shields get seen more, and they're the weapons that have had the most work on them visually. The reverse is sometimes true, no-one really bats an eyelid when a trapper chooses a staff as their weapon of choice due to its inherent mods being more useful than any bow you might imagine. --Ckal Ktak 11:27, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

As a primary pve player, I gotta say I wish that monks would use monk weapons. They're pushing the price of swords up. Its an expensive life being a warrior :( Sadie2k 12:03, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't see what the fuss is about. You're only gonna be using a sword if you in a defence set as a monk. For 20% enchants a staff is the best way to go as you get the 40% cast mod on it for aegis and stuff and for normal casting a 40.40 set or staff is genereally better. And I havent even mentioned how good wanding targets while you arent casting is.87.194.104.90 18:09, 5 December 2007 (UTC)Burton

I think what he meant is that casting weapons seem to be more powerful than wands/staves, for spamming casters who don't wand that often. That whole problem could be fixed with making a wand attack a reasonable alternative to casting a spell in the same way that a normal attack is a reasonable alternative to using an attack skill: the skill will always be more powerful, but attacking with your weapon is not useless. Nicky Silverstar 20:28, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't think wands should have their damage increased. They have a good relation to melee auto damage right now, and to make it higher would probably cause some balance issues. You would start to see things like Conjure Vow of Strength, which could cause quite a lot of pressure and still have 6 slots left on your bar, and warriors might even become obsolete. I think wands should just be given more powerful caster mods. 69.137.78.47 20:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I think all that is needed is to give the +5e, +al, +20% enchant mods to wands to make them viable, and update all weapons so that you don't get full benefit if you don't meet the requirements. So if you don't meet the swordsmanship you get +2e instead of +5e etc. That would give a motivation to use weapons on attributes you've invested in. Sadie2k 04:59, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

The first part of that sounds like a really good idea, but as for the second half, everyone would get really mad if you nerfed all their expensive weapons into the point where they are unusable. 69.137.78.47 16:14, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

If you do that, then don't forget to boost the staves as well, since they are perfectly balanced with the wands right now (and otherwise become underpowered) Nicky Silverstar 18:47, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Give Wands and/or Staves a damage bonus to spells, not autoattack. Even the tiniest damage boost would be worth it for a damage-dealing spellcaster; something like an extra 5%, or even 10%. Have something like that built-in to a Wand or Staff would give casters a really good reason to use a Wand over a Sword or Spear... if you want the +enchanting mod, you lose that damage ability.

Another option would be a simple built-in 10% HSR in Wands, just like how Staves have the built-in 20% HSR mod. Gives a Wand a little bit more usefulness, considering you lose out on a few other options by using a Wand in the first place. All in all, I think Wands just need a little something that Casters want, to make them a better choice then a martial weapon with better mods. -- Jïörüjï Ðērākō.>.cнаt^ 21:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Casters generally have 4 weapon swaps and only one of them is sword/shield, they then have a staff, +energy wand/focus and then usually another staff to swap to since most casters use multiple attributes. In tons of other games casters use 'caster' swords and what not, just because GW doesn't specifically say "this weapon is for casters" doesn't mean casters are only meant to use wand/staff.

(Reset indent)

No, I like my wands with 20% recharge of the attribute. If I wanted to use more than 1 attribute profusely I don't carry a wand, I use a staff. 20/20 wand and focus is basically the only reaosn to use a wand right now. To "buff it" to HSR10 all is actually nerfing it. --Life Infusion «T» 23:02, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I think Jioruji was suggesting 10% HSR in addition to the existing bonuses. -- Gordon Ecker 03:28, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

4 words... Learn to weapon cast.. GG 24.141.45.72 19:03, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

If physical professions were using caster weapons as often as caster professions use martial weapons, it would be seen as a siginficant problem with martial weapons. The staff buff was great, but wands are still lagging behind. -- Gordon Ecker 03:42, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely no point in using a wand over a sword these days on a caster except when you rely on wand damage 0.o Wands desperately need a +5 energy always. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Powercozmic (talk).

Lol did some1 say make wands do more damage, thats funny. LEARN TO WEAPONCAST PEOPLE. get 40/40 set (healing for example) 20/20%ench 20/20 (prot set) High E set and ure standard 25-35 sword shield. Now stop whining and learn to play 24.141.45.72 03:08, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Smiting Prayers

Hello there, I don't normaly (Ever) post on the official Wiki but I just had three quick ideas I'd like to share with you. Bear with me now because they might sound a little funky..

• Give Ray of Judgment atleast nearby range. This skill could use a bigger buff than that but that's really in small priority, and a small buff like this could do wonders.
• Give Smiting Prayers a basic attack spell. Make a new spell, or use Banish or something, just make a spell that you don't have to wait 10 seconds to recast for mediocre damage.

This last one you might not like, but please read my justification for it below:

• Give Smite, Banish, Spear of Light (And perhaps Bane Signet) area of effect of Adjacent. Spear of Light would basicaly be a Fireball. (If you impliment this idea, and use Banish for the second idea, don't give it AoE)

Smiting Prayers have always been extremely underpowered offensively, and this would give it more usage in both PvP(Any chance for multiple hits is good), and PvE (Mobs). It would allow Smiting to take on Minion Masters in Alliance Battles, and would allow Smiting enemies in PvP to take on Minion Masters in PvE.
My reasoning for making these spells AoE: As I said before, Smiting is very underpowered as a damage dealer, and while I agree it should not be directly as powerful as other spell-casting diciplines, it should have its edge (Armor ignoring damage is not enough of an egde, seeing as its damage is extremely low + very long recharge times), giving it a Range advantage is perhaps what it needs. By giving it this kind of buff, rather than say damage (Would be too powerful and contradicting to Smiting [Retribution]), or lower recharge times (I doubt Balthazar has that kind of time to be smiting every 2 seconds for every Monk in the world). We have seen Smiting's tendency to do AoE in a few skills (Signet of Judgment, Ray of Judgment, Smite Hex, Smite Condition, etc.) already, so it fits in rather nicely, it also goes with the theme: A smiting prayer is call to a God to unleash his wrath somewhere, and it's usualy in the form of light, and light is a bit hard to contain to a single spot.
Now I bet there's thousands of you out there thinking something like: "Smiting isn't supposed to be for damage." well tell me then, why are there attack spells? Don't tell me you can splash some smiting skills into another built, because I know that's highly unlikely, as Smiting skills usualy need high investment (There are some exceptions like Defender's Zeal). And besides, don't we have better defensive support in the other three Monk skill lines? (Zulu Inuoe ingame and on un-official wiki) 68.62.233.226 06:42, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I owuld have to agree with point one, and mabe even point 2, but not with point 3. I wouldn't like to see smiting overpowered with aoe. But I would like to see more smite monk in HoH/GvG just to get them in the mix. I would enjoy experimenting with this if it ever became an update.

Make Ray of Judgment cause burning even if it doesnt hit a minion, make word of censur better and make it cause bleeding against targets with less than 33% health, we need more secondary effects on smiting skills as direct damage with long recharge isnt killing anything --Cursed Angel 11:30, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Izzy's always been somewhat averse to buffing smiting - mainly because monks are already a fairly cornerstone class in the game as a healer, and thus he doesn't want to make smiting too powerful. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 11:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I think this all comes cascading down from the design flaws in guildwars. There wouldnt be as many problems with the game if things were a little simpler, im talking about having 10 professions with over 500 skils in an 8 man team with only 64 skills in whole. The game is already very crowded ( skills and profession wise) and trying to push all of these professions and skill lines up to the same standard is a horribly complicated task. When you buff one line it directly effects another line of skills. Say if you buffed minion masters to be able to have more armor on their minions per level, this would cause smiting to see a huge influx of use as minions would be too tough to take down with conventional means. I think we need to get used to having a constant shifting imbalance in the game, there really isnt anyway to balance all of these skills and professions completely, especially when you start thinking about all the exceptions. (pets, cross-profession etc) that's just my 2 cents ^^ --Lou-Saydus 18:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

How would making a 58 damage (At 16 Smiting Prayers) spell that needs 10 seconds(15 seconds with Spear of Light) to recharge have Adjacent Range AoE be overpowered? Sure Smite could theoreticaly hit all targets for 95, but it's highly unlikely, same with Spear of Light. Just look at simpler things like Fireball and the like which cause heavy damage(In PvP) even though they don't ignore armor. Remember how small a range Adjacent is please. And to Cursed Angel: I think the skill line needs a little buff overall before we get into details about buffing the elites. I only suggested the Ray of Judgment thing because it's a simple to do fix, though Burning to all targets sounds good I guess. 68.62.233.226 19:21, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

In my humble opinion, a monk that focusses solely on nuking should be just as powerful as an Elementalist focussing solely on nuking. Just a little different. In smiting's case, that would be the fact that all spells are armor ignoring (which in itself is fairly powerful in Hard Mode) but I don't mind if some skills got a little boost. They just shouldn't become more powerful than other, comperable spells, especially if they can be combined with healing or something like that. Nicky Silverstar 20:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

To have smiting on level 14-16 reduce you effectivity in healing as you only have a few attribute points to spend on it. either 13-16 in one of the other attributes which is either healing, protection or divine favor, which alone is as good as ritualist healing. Monks need both healing/protection and divine favor to heal better than ritualists, and if they use smiting they cannot spend enough in both healing and divine favor to heal good and can be compared to a ritualist that use channeling/restoration. Smiting needs secondary effects like what channeling spells have, something conditional like it needs an enchantment, also the recharge of at least a few skills needs to be reduced, bannish, spear of light and smite for example. --Cursed Angel 21:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with giving smiting more direct damage. The AoE idea is not totally bad, but still not good. Any buff that makes smiting competitive with eles is a very very bad idea. The way to go for smiting is developing hybrid heal/damage skills like smite hex or smite condition. Smiting's direct damage skills could be reworked into those or otherwise stay forgotten. --Xeeron 22:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

While I'd preffer the AoE and don't see how it's going to put them against eles in a group's spot since they have such horrid recharge times, I'd be perfectly happy with Xeeron's idea, except with forgetting the direct damage spells, no skill left behind I say! 68.62.233.226 22:28, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

If two professions can perform the same role, the should be able to perform that role equally. A healing ritualist should be able to heal just as well as a healing monk, but in a different way. I am not saying to create uberpowerful smiters, just that if they focus on damage through spells (and nothing more), they should be just as EFFECTIVE as an Ele that focusses on dealing damage through spells. That doesn't mean: give all the smiting spells the same stats as fire magic spells. It simply means that his overall damage output during a fight, at different targets with different armor levels and defenses, should be about equal. One way to achieve that are his armor ignoring spells. The smiter does more damage vs armored targets, while the elementalist does more damage vs unarmored targets. The absolute damage value of smiting prayer spells may be low, but because it is armor ignoring, he will do relatively much damage vs armored targets. Nicky Silverstar 13:13, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Okay, then how do you propose that be done? It's hard to slice it in a way that's new and innovative, especialy since smiting does have more passive skills, making the Offensive smiting powerful might make it too powerful a skill line. 68.62.233.226 13:28, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Nicky, your are forgetting one important fact: A smiting monk is not just a damage dealer like an fire ele. Especially he can dual spec into healing or protection prayers as well. Monks that do very well at direct damage output and healing will make the game horribly imbalanced, so there is absolutely no way smiting can ever become about as strong as fire magic in terms of direct damage. It needs to stay WAY weaker. --Xeeron 13:31, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

But not useless. 68.62.233.226 21:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

And why can't someone go Mo/E and spec into Fire Magic and Healing Prayers? Because you just don't have enough skill slots and energy to do both. Things just work better if you dedicate to healing or damage dealing. Specing into Healing Prayers and Fire Magic is no different from specing into Healing Prayers and Smiting Prayers, other than you can get that +1 Smiting Prayers from the rune. 69.137.78.47 10:45, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

And smiting sucks. 68.62.233.226 01:46, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Like whatshisname said, any damage dealer can triple spec to add some more healing. As for smiting, I think the recharges of the weaker direct damage spells could be lowered slightly. Or maybe divine favor can add a little bit of damage or lower the recharge a little bit. That way, primary monk smiters just might become playable, instead of any smite being called noob and then kicked. I am all for boosting underpowered attributes, as GW has way too many of those and many of them can easily be fixed, if the metagamers weren't so afraid to accept new things. IMHO of course.Nicky Silverstar 18:46, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Keep in mind that Smiting skills ignore armor, and can be used together on a team of smiters to spike down targets. That's one reason why they're underpowered. My beef with Smiting is that there aren't enough support skills. Reversal of Damage made playing a Smiter-protector ALMOST viable. It just needs a lot more spammable utility. --Reklaw 21:24, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

There are several armor ignoring skills that do way more damage than Smiting Prayers, so that shouldn't be too much of a problem. Maybe instead of damage buffs, Izzy could add burning to the direct damage skills. That would increase their damage, but not their spiking danger, and it would give it a holy flame idea. And I like the idea of more support, though not neccesarily spammable. Nicky Silverstar 21:28, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

As I said in my initial post, armor ignoring plays a very minor factor. And you can't say "You can coordinate spikes" because you can do that with practicaly any attribute that deals damage. I'm replying to Reklaw. To Nicky: I like the idea of burning, but I know that's going to bring some resistance. 68.62.233.226 03:20, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Terrible Weapon Mods

+20% while health is above 50%, and +20% while hexed mods are just absolute crap. No one wants them, because they are so painfully useless. If you get an uninscribable weapon with either of those two mods, you know immediately its nothing more than merchant food. These two mods need a huge buff if they are ever to be used by anyone other than absolute beginners that have no idea what they're doing. Getting your health below 50% and keeping it there is not only incredibly hard to do, its also very dangerous. Getting hexed is not so difficult or dangerous, but as a warrior, its pretty rare so 95% of the time, a while hexed mod is doing nothing and 20% damage instead of 15% does not make up for that. I think below 50% mods should have their damage increased to around +100%, and while hexed increased to around +40%. Those numbers might be a little off in terms of balance, but I think they're relatively close. 69.137.78.47 21:07, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I would rather make it so all weapons become inscriptable (or all new weapon drops, if the old ones cannot be changed), and that gold items don't get those mods. Changing them would upheaval balance too much, I think. Erasculio 21:22, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Unlike skills, you can bring as many weapons as you like without repercussion, beyond taking up inventory spaces. The conditional effects are minimal because they're so easy to swap in to. If they're ever good enough to really warrant bringing, then the only balancing factor will be the annoyance of having to manually drag and drop equipment occasionally, and that's already down at times with +10 AL vs damage type equipment. MA Anathe 22:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

My suggestion to make the less than 50% health on par with more than 50% health is to change the percentage from 50 to 75. That way, you can either have +15% when above 75%, or +15% while in a stance/enchanted, or +20% while under 75% health. That would seem like a choice between equals, rather than the 15^50 always being the best. While hexed should be increased to 25 or 30, as it is generally not a very good idea to attack while hexed (blurred or SS anyone?) Nicky Silverstar 13:05, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Highly conditional mods should do +25% dmg, less conditional mods +20% dmg, other almost unconditional mods +15% dmg, thats it. Examples:

Damage +15% (vs. Hexed foes): should be increased to 25%.

Damage +15% (while in a Stance): should be +20%.

Damage +15% while Health is above 50%: would stay +15%. 87.189.234.59 20:49, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

You should be happy that after an intense brain storming they did not come up with a +12,734% while dead. Oh...and..how's the Jade Quarry ? Still full of... space ? And the lvl 20+0% ->lvl 20+99% ? Still playing yoyo with your dmg output ? I almost forgotten those wonderfull collisions detection algorythms that make any open source multi-platform sdk look like it have been coded by a genius in comparison. Ever wanted that terrible "I hit opponents from under/above a bridge with melee attacks and traps but not with a bow" bug to be fixed? Fear not the buggy-man: ArenaNet have the answer, it's called "sorry we cant fix this 2 years old bug, we are working on GW2!". I would continue but I have to stop for a moment so I can laugh after I heard that one of their coder used bitwise shifting operators on signed values. 90.27.132.118 22:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations, you make absolutely no sense. Lord Belar 23:40, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

You're right belar, i read trough it and it made no sense at all, why do people write these things when it doesnt have anything to do with what others talk about? --Cursed Angel 23:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually I find the x% while dead to be pretty funny but well,for the other things I think I already heard AB players complaining about it - ***Flavored Chicken***

I wonder if it would work with vengeance... Lord Belar 00:24, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

you cant attack while dead --Cursed Angel 00:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

If you lag enough you can. :P Lord Belar 00:48, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Strength and Honor is just too good. It needs to go like this:

20% while health is under 75%

17% while in a stance (if you're a warrior you should be in a stance almost all of the time anyway, and many sins will use a IAS stance in their chain)

20% while hexed or under a condition

17% while enchanted

Just noticed Nicky's comment. About the same thing. --Reklaw 01:52, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't think "vs hexed foes" is highly conditional. That would apply to all assassins that use Shadow Prison, Dark Prison, Siphon Speed, or Augury of death. It is more conditional on warriors and dervishes, however. 69.137.78.47 04:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

It's not that the weapon mods seem weak, it's just that you don't know how to weapon swap. Think of it this way: Your 15%^50 becomes a 20% always when you're hexed. Shard 08:14, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Weapon swapping has always been clunky and awkward. It's one of the nearly essential mechanics of high end PvP that I'd love to see removed from the game in GW2. --Reklaw 08:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

This game would suck with out weapon swapping because you said it yourself, its essential. And I dont know of any games that dont allow swapping weapons.--Thelordofblah 02:42, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't buff the vs hexed foes. Hex sins already use it to great effect. Armond 03:05, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

My vote goes to lowering the 'almost always' weapon mods (+15% while enchanted, in a stance or health is above 50%) to 10% (IMHO, 15^50 may even be lowered to 5%). While hexed should be increased to 25%. That would not only make all the mods more equal, but also help fix the 'high physical damage' problem somewhat. Remember that we don't want even stronger physical damage dealers, we just want to balance the weapon mods. Nicky Silverstar 18:32, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Sins use it to great effect? It's +15% damage so 1)They're probably better off using ^50% Hp, and 2)Daggers have crap damage and +15% crap damage = A little less crappy damage. Most sins are better off with +5 energy mods so they can afford more expensive combos. 68.62.233.226 17:20, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Not to mention hex sins are almost gone because they've been nerfed so much. 69.137.78.47 00:05, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

In the right build however, it can be of use though. Stuff like necro hexes and that. It is easier to use than it seems, though it isn't as useful as the stance/enchantment and 15^50 mods. Mistress of Trade 14:54, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I think the +15% in stance mod is the best one for a Warrior who's using Rush. How can you have any trouble keeping a stance on unless you're not hitting anything, in which case you're not doing damage anyway? For when you're not using Rush this is not the optimal weapon mod, of course, but for many Warriors I think it is the optimal mod. I don't think this mod should be buffed. It has it's place, so does the 15^50 mod. The other mods seem useless though. The 20% under 50% mod should be more like +40% or +50% imo. I mean, are you going to Frenzy below 50% health? Maybe as a desparate attempt to do something when your team is wiping, in which case swapping to a weapon (taking up a half second or so) should be more worthwhile than +5% damage. --63.197.80.39 07:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

The reason I suggested lowering the damage is because of the discussion on physical damage. It has been stated a number of times that physical damage dealers deal a little too much damage. For that reason, I see more use in lowering some of the more powerful mods than increasing the power of less versatile mods. It might kill 2 birds with 1 stone so to speak, but even so, it should hardly touch fighters, just make them think about their equipment a little. As you said, while in a stance may be the ultimate mod for some warriors, but 15^50 will be active during 95% of that time, so it is much more versatile (since it will work with any build, and even when you cannot get enough adrenaline for the stance and overshadows everything else. Being above 50% health all the time is simply no requirement at all, since you strive to be all the time. Nicky Silverstar 09:09, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Paragon suggestions

Why did you make the paragon proffesion so unbalanced? Its been on the table several times, its just that Paragons are starting to get pretty much useless in 4 player parties (exception for some spearchucker builds, how many are there two or three that actually work almost decent?) why did you make them that way? How about changeing leadership so that paragons gain 2 for each partymember affected instead of 1 but only in 4 player parties? I've been quite annoyed at this for some time especially since you keep balancing shouts and chants for 8 player parties. And please set a max number of uses on Finales. Btw I have a suggestion to fix the proffesion further or rather the game in general its about team builds that uses the same sets of skills. My suggestion is that you increase the cooldown for a skill that exist on multiple character in a team with an additional 5 seconds for each other party member that has the same skill this way players would be forced to use less similar builds.--85.225.131.176 05:10, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

It has all been suggested before...and as of yet the suggestions haven't been used in the game. I like your ideas except for the cooldown, which seems too 'artificial' to my taste. Nicky Silverstar 21:24, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I have thought about the cooldown, they should make it 25-50% longer per duplicate of the base cooldown instead of a set time of 5 seconds per duplicate. I think that would make the game abit more challangeing instead of making a mirror builds across the whole team that only differs by one or two skills, it would add a new flavor to GW. A test weekend with this would have been real fun. They should also buff alot of skills useless skills while lowering mirrored teams efficeny, I would really love to have the old GW feeling back when your own build felt unique.--85.225.130.47 22:04, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Thats y there's RA.. go back there 24.141.45.72 19:02, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Thats where I am most of the time but Paragons are unusable there hence the post... shouldnt every class be able to play in every part of the game?--85.225.131.126 21:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

HoH Gank

→ moved from Talk:The Hall of Heroes (arena)

I would like to share my concers about hoh ganking. In every hoh game mode the wrost team can just decide who wins by ganking. While this is in theory a good way to keep peapole from winning too much in a straight, it just doesn't work. First, it makes the players angry and it's not fun. Second, if you're in a good ha alliance you can be helped and win, leaving fair ppl outside any chance to win even if it's stronger. This should be adressed easly kicking out team who matematically or statistically lost.

And since nobody seems to listen, i'll post some screens too, here there was a good game at capture points, and the score were like 16(others) 20(us) 20(GANK), and see what happens at 1:30.

As anybody that play this game knows, it's impossible to win with a team dedicated to make you lose in a three team map. What could have been a good fight just turned out to be the weakest team choosing the winner. I'm really deluded by halls, i want to lose vs a better guild, not to lose because the weakest of the three doesn't like me. Am i so wrong?

--YukoIshii 00:48, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

HoH is bad. Don't play it. Do what the smart people do and GvG, where its 1 team vs 1 team. 69.137.78.47 10:45, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Smart people stopped playing. Shard 12:47, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

What are they playing now, may I ask?--Thelordofblah 02:40, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

They play wiki. :) Lord Belar 16:54, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

They play the Whine at Izzys wiki game--85.225.130.47 00:24, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

That's the bonus round. :P Lord Belar 01:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Observer Glitch

Last night, the last match my guild played of the night, we lost. Then this morning I get on GW, and one of my guildies asks why our status tab says we lost the match and got -3 rating, when observer says that we won the match. So I checked observer, and this is what happened. Up to around 20 minutes into the match, everything is going just like it did. But after that, things started happening nothing like they did last night. It shows that we wiped their team and NPC's at the end, when in reality we were losing pretty badly. Then it shows them ressing, coming to the stand, and us wiping them again, then killing their guild lord and winning. I'm not complaining about losing rating or anything, it was a genuine, fair loss on our part (as fair as it can be with an err7), its just obs that's doing something really weird. 69.137.78.47 01:00, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Um wow. It's really hard for computers to make things up... Perhaps it switched team colors at some point, and somehow mixed up names and personal textures so it would "make sense" to you as you saw it? Did the exact situation you describe actually happen, only with them wiping you, you resing, etc? Armond 10:21, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Also, did the party list show the err7 (either by one person's name grayed out or by the list only showing seven people)? That could somehow be the source of the problem. Armond 10:22, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't think the problem is in the game switching colors or names or anything, because my team's skills were entirely different from the other team's, and ours is a spike build that only spikes once every 15 seconds and best, while the other team was a heavy pressure build. It showed us spiking the enemy repeatedly until they were all dead, so the computer switching sides in any way is pretty much out of the question. As for the err7, it happened near the end of the match and displayed "[this person] has lost connection with the server", and the name was never blacked out in the original match or in obs. 69.137.78.47 13:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

This bug has been around for a while on obs, it comes and goes. I've seen guilds spend 5 minutes running into a closed gate and people ressing in base and then running upto the fence and just staying there. And yes sometimes obs mode does give an entirely different result to the match. It doesnt mess up too often though. --ChronicinabilitY 13:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

It's something how the ops runs. you get infos like player a uses skill b under condition c on target d. but it seems like you dont get infos like d loses x life (i guess the server itself doesn't know this stuff and computes it on the fly). this means if the skill was changed to inflict +y dmg someone can die in ops who didn't die in the game. and because this someone didn't die in the game nobody rezzed him. you get a team wipe, because everything he did in the game he can not do in the ops. and if he is rezzed in base you still get the same stuff he would have done if he would be still with his team.

Exactly, I think. The obs mode isn't a recording, but a reenactment, I would think. (probably takes a lot less server power to remember moves then to remember everything visually.) That gives the obs mode the ability to sometimes mess up, I would think, and it won't know how to continue the battle if someone somehow isn't in the spot he's supposed to be in. -- Jïörüjï Ðērākō.>.cнаt^ 12:38, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

9 month old gate bug on Uncharted Isle

Please fix it. I know arenanet is lazy but come on. 72.235.48.41 11:05, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

It's not just Uncharted. Meditation is just as bad, and on Hunter's and Warriors it can occur as well, it's just gates in general. --ChronicinabilitY 13:45, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I've never seen or heard of people getting stuck in other gates. Those gates were fixed long ago. 72.235.48.41 12:05, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Can still happen, saw it in GvG only a few days ago. --ChronicinabilitY 04:11, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

It occurs more on Uncharted ISle, because the defender base doors are actually wider than others, leaving more of a chance to get stuck. But yes, It does happen on maps with a Gate.

Observer mode reverted

The latest update seems to have kicked back guild battles displayed to 4. — Skuld 10:33, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Temple of the Damned 600/Smite

Is this going to get nerfed any time in the near future? Would be the logical next thing to nerf considering previous nerfs to things (spirit bonder, .25 second cast time SoA, droks run, etc.). --- Ressmonkey (talk) 22:38, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Droks run is still doable, and the other two you listed are what the 600/smite build uses...so wth? --Deathwing 00:07, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

OMFG NERF EVRYTHINFV U CANN FARMINF SOMTHING WHIT CUZ U SHOULNDT BE ABLE TO FARMMG CUZ TEHN U GETH GOLD --Cursed Angel 00:13, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, exactly a-net's approach to farming is (somewhat). --- Ressmonkey (talk) 00:31, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

And droks run became much, much harder after the introduction of nightfall, so much so that a w/mo couldnt do it, but then came along vow of silence. As for the other nerfs, a-net nerfed them to kill a quite different build, not 600/smite. 600/smite was made from the ruins of the other 2. --- Ressmonkey (talk) 00:35, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Didn't VoS come with nightfall too? Sort of making it easier? -Auron 01:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but I believe a-net's intention was to prevent Droks running. VoS probably unintentionaly made the run easier. --- Ressmonkey (talk) 01:40, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I think anet wanted to keep it doable, but just barely so that it would make lots of cash, but only to the finest runners. I remember for a brief period where me and a few other W/Mo's were doing the run for 8k a person and getting loads of customers. That was right between Nightfall coming out and the Dervish runner becoming popular. We were earning 40k a run, which only takes about half an hour. It was insane cash, if you were experienced and skilled enough, and I think that's exactly what anet wanted. 69.137.78.47 02:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Good point. But some of a-nets other nerfs (such as the spirit bond nerf) were designed to completely destroy the build and not just to make it worse. --- Ressmonkey (talk) 02:35, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Not true...it did not entirely destroy the build. It is true that you can no longer tank 123896497812498172963 enemies at once, but the build does still work.--Deathwing 03:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

U can tank more with a 55, so why wouldnt u. The nerf made 55s more effective than a spirit bonder in almost every way. So explain how that didnt completely destroy the build? --- Ressmonkey (talk) 03:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

It didn't completely destroy the build because of um....oh yeah 600/smite that this topic is about. If spirit bonded monks didn't work, this topic wouldn't be here. --Deathwing 03:33, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Spirit Bonders are still much more durable then 55s, life steal and degeneration don't kill them or weaken them nearly as much as the other. Spirit Bond's nerf made it harder to do, but it didn't make it impossible; so long as a build isn't so easy that everyone can farm everything, then I think ANet is happy with it. -- Jïörüjï Ðērākō.>.cнаt^ 04:27, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

You honestly think SoA was changed from a .25 cast because of PvE farming? --Racthoh 06:12, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Would be the logical next thing to nerf Ressmonkey considering previous nerfs to things. 87.189.237.187 10:33, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't think he's that leet, but a slightly longer recharge on him wouldn't hurt. :P -- Jïörüjï Ðērākō.>.cнаt^ 11:25, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Okay, sure, you want it nerfed now. But a few months from now when every damn farm is nerfed, and superior vigor is 50K+...Who's to blame? YOU. Farming shapes the economy, and really I don't think 9 health is worth an extra 50K. Don't nerf it keep the economy still. It's the way the game was meant to roll. Supply and Demand. Rella 07:09, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

How would nerfing 600/smite decrease the supply of superior runes or increase the demand for them? -- Gordon Ecker 07:45, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

How can you possibly max reputation points without farming? I hate farming but it's part of the game. --SK 13:18, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

WARNING: This page is 328 kilobytes long; some browsers may have problems editing pages approaching or longer than 32kb. Please consider breaking the page into smaller sections.

Archive time? — Teh Uber Pwnzer 11:09, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Naw, he's trying to break 500. Go go mindless spam! (no offense to anyone posting here, I'm sure whatever you just posted is very meaningful and important.) -- Jïörüjï Ðērākō.>.cнаt^ 11:24, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Meh, only 328. Calor — talk 19:54, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Please read

Assassin Utility --The Gates Assassin 03:46, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Lawl at your buffed Jagged Strike....Cripslash with +20 damage? Added with the buffed Seeping Wound and you have a Cripslash + Eviscerate + Conjure Phantasm. Edit: Also for being named Assassin Utility, you request to ether renewal nerf one of the Assassins viable utility skills. --Deathwing 20:34, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

yah, take a look at Crippling Slash which is elite and doesnt add damage like ur jagged strike would. Also wth with deadly paradox? its already excecuted and u lenghtens the recharge to 20 sec and reduce duration to 1..3 and call it a buff??? Deadly haste.. who wants a running skill that recharges by attacking someone? Ur mantis touch idea would be a nerf, its a ranged snare as it is, +30 dmg, why? Scorpion Wire, nearby range is much closer than the range u can cast this skill with (withing earshot) check that out first, this would make it a direct teleport if u cast i on someone outside nearby range. --Cursed Angel 21:15, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Wow. Are you joking, Gates? Because if you aren't, wow. --71.229.204.25 21:39, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Crippling Slash is also in sword, which means its more damage than a dagger. +20 damage attacks on an assassin isnt that much. Maybe make it 1-10. The point of the Deadly paradox one is to make it so runners aren't out of the game for assassins, but the SoJ sin doesn't spike every 7 seconds. Deadly haste is suppose to be for Shattering assault kinda builds, frontline sins. yeah thats right running skills aren't only useful for PvE. Scorpion wire like I said I wasn't too sure about yet. Mantis touch one with be a buff because in its current state you have to get to them first and use a skill THEN they get crippled, which to me makes no sence at all. As of now that skill is 100% useless to me, because there are way better options. Seeping wound might be a little much tho. you request to ether renewal nerf one of the Assassins viable utility skills.

...what? You mean augury? --The Gates Assassin 22:45, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

You have a non-elite 5en 1sec recharge lead attack doing everything Cripslash does, except faster and with more damage. If you can't see what's wrong here you might as well just uninstall. --71.229.204.25 22:49, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

And with the modifications, you now have a non-elite 5en 10sec recharge lead attack doing everything Cripslash does, except 3.7 seconds slower and with more damage. Can't see what's wrong here, might as well uninstall, etc. --71.229.204.25 22:53, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Jagged Strike needs bonus damage, not more conditions. It's useful as it is simply because of the short recharge, but the fact that it really does you no good to spam it is what makes it undesirable. I think someone suggested +dmg if it hits a foe suffering from bleeding, at one point... that looked good. Same thing as Poison Arrow, which is basically the same skill (except better condition and Elite). Just needs damage.

The Deadly Paradox tweak is what I was hoping for in a nerf, not the current form; make it impossible to keep up forever, but make it cheap enough to be useful when it is up. You could go as high as 5 second duration I would think, and still be in the safe. -- Jïörüjï Ðērākō.>.cнаt^ 03:49, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

The only useful thing you can do with jagged strike is run around the enemy team making them all bleed, while that is a certain amount of pressure, haven't you got better things to do with your sin? --Ckal Ktak 13:21, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

As it is, it's useful for the recharge, not the conditions, damage, or lack thereof. If you need a quick attack chain, Jagged is the fastest you can get, aside from Unsuspecting Strike (which costs twice as much). Adding damage or something to the skill would make it actually worth spamming. -- Jïörüjï Ðērākō.>.cнаt^ 13:47, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

What would be better? +10 damage 1 recharge or cripple(And raise recharge to 6ish or something). Personally I like the cripple more, it combines with other skills better. Also what about 0-4 seconds on Deadly paradox. It would have to been something that makes it so you cant spam the SoJ combo but you can still do shadow form runs (all they need is 2 seconds, inbetween the cast of arcane echo.)

Repeating Strike Add: If target foe was above 50% health, you strike twice. change damage to +10-25.

Discuss Maor--The Gates Assassin 23:17, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Jagged-Jungle-Trampling-Falling-Twisting LOL NOT HAX AT ALL. Black Mantis and Leaping Mantis both at least have have requirements for cripple. --71.229.204.25 23:24, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

And Repeating-Horns-Moebius LOL NOT HAX AT ALL. --71.229.204.25 23:24, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Check Repeating and jagged again. Good points--The Gates Assassin 23:49, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Jagged Strike is better, Repeating is still very exploitable. --71.229.204.25 23:59, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

True, hmmm idk, Repeating is a tough one.--The Gates Assassin 00:40, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

What about this one:

Shadow Fang Shadow Step to target foe. After 0-6 seconds you shadow step back to your origonal location. Lower Recharge to 30.

Mirrored Stance Target foe loses one stance and that stance is disabled for 1-15 seconds. This skill is replaced by that stance for 1-15 seconds. Do it now. --The Gates Assassin 11:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Does Izzy Still Read This?

It's been a couple of months at least since Izzy has said anything on this talk page, so it makes you wonder, does he even read it anymore? 69.137.78.47 03:48, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Izzy only reads the overpowered skills section.

Nobody can tell what he reads or doesn't read. We've seen him buff skills that have been brought up in the underpowered section, so I'm pretty sure he reads that; same goes for overpowered. And occasionally, if it's a topic that actually benefits from his comments, he'll post here, so I'd like to think he keeps an eye on his talk page, despite the fact that it's an awful lot of reading... -- Jïörüjï Ðērākō.>.cнаt^ 15:17, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, I don't blame him if he doesn't after what some people (hopefully excluding myself) wrote here, but it would be nice to have some confirmation that we're not writing this for naught. Regardless, I'd like to wish you a merry christmas Izzy and a happy (and flame-free) new year. Be careful with fireworks, we'd like you to keep all of your fingers for the january update (and for your own benefit of course). Nicky Silverstar 16:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

It might help if the pages (at least this one) got cleaned up through archiving irrelevant and old stuff. Maybe to help prevent clutter - and make the page more inviting in general - there should be a separate subpage for 'balance rants' to be moved to. (Just a box) 05:44, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

How about something like this?

Gameplay Balance Rants

Just scoot any rants right into that article. :P -- Jïörüjï Ðērākō.>.cнаt^ 15:58, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I'm sorry I haven't posted much on here, been busy and just haven't had the time, I'll do some clean up / posting today. ~Izzy @-'---- 17:05, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

wtf izzy nerf plz

Has anyone noticed that Christmas trees are totally imba? I mean really.... you put one up and they DOMINATE the living room! I think they should be nerfed. Izzy, I think you really should be taking a long look at these holiday decor items.... they are simply too strong. I can't PvP anymore with them in the room. They use this skill called "You Know You Want to Peek!" all the damn time and it ruins my concentration. Srsly..... they need to go. -- Counciler 06:38, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Please understand that we, XmasNet, cannot take such arbitrary decision unless the Santa Claus Is Leet Committee has stated otherwise. Thanks for your report, please be patient. Yzzyseron

Use FIRE to crush them down and go back to HA, all has counters (except Gaile, and she can't be nerfed) --Rayd 20:22, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Gaile can probably be nerfed, I'm currently thinking about reducing the power of Beastmastery So that her insane combination with GuildaII won't work anymore. Rhydeble 21:33, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

One does not simply walk into Gailedor. -- Counciler 19:13, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

blockway

i'm sick of reading "blocked" for 20 mins. make every blocking skill 55 energy plz? put fun back into the game --87.3.167.17 19:42, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm sick of spam like this make people think before they post.

Just learn to interrupt wards and Aegis and you will see a HUGE decrease in blocking. Gaurdian, stances, and various other things do provide some blocking, but rarely enough to matter anyway besides RA. Just put Disrupting Dagger or Power Spike or Distracting Blow or any kind of interrupt on one of your warriors, and have your mesmer camp whatever is putting up the wards. Just learn to play the game instead of whining that everything that everyone else uses is overpowered. 69.137.78.47 21:31, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Or, if the metagame is geared towards blocking so strongly, work to punish people for it. As an Assassin, you can easily run a completely unblockable attack chain, effectively making a foe's skill slot useless. As a caster class, you've already made that slot useless. Other classes have ways of getting through blocks as well, and skills like Defile Defenses really punishes people for using such skills. If someone keeps throwing paper in a rock-paper-scissors contest, don't complain about it, just throw scissors for once. Better to risk getting pounded by rock then to stick with rock yourself and always get beaten by paper. -- Jïörüjï Ðērākō.>.cнаt^ 01:06, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Well said--The Gates Assassin 05:29, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I must admit I have a good laugh casting Defile Defenses then, once its effect have been triggered, apply Rigor Mortis on touch rangers. I even climax when I realize that my target have a wiki instead of a brain ( quick to pick a build, have no idea of the counters used against him ). It reminds me a pve monsters skill: "Monkey Sees, Monkey Do". Yseron

When I write: "work around it" I usually get swamped by fighters telling me that 'unblockable skills' are not worth it...how did you manage to get someone to agree with you? (I agree with you too, better to get an attack through with 50% damage than to get a super attack blocked) 87.210.150.58 08:58, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Work around it in the sense that you don't even attack them, use magic. --Ckal Ktak 11:26, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Cast damage sucks. Melee Damage pwns. It's a fact.--The Gates Assassin 01:32, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

If caster damage really sucks then why is the skills that cause dazed usually elite?Prokiller88 06:04, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Jesus....Please at least try to use your brain before you post. Dazed is for monks. Cast damage does suck, whether or not you think it does. Despite all those elementalist "Target foe takes 135 damage" type skills, their dps is so much lower than a warriors that they aren't really used. Warriors are also able to give steady dps on a target without using any skills whatsoever and aren't as prone to being interrupted (still can be by rangers for example, but it doesn't kill all your damage and generally interrupts aren't focused on you). If you're bringing a bunch of dazed skills and using them on your opponents other casters...you're probably not doing too well in the match. 76.102.172.202 07:25, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Skills that circumvent blocks usually don't benefit your bar. Wild attacks end stances but won't remove enchantments, plus they're low-powered. Most attack skills that ignore block or cause a KD when blocked, etc, lack damage when they are triggered, or are nearly worthless when you're not being blocked. They're also one-time use things. So what if I knock down an opponent that blocks my attack? I can't follow up with a spike, because he's still blocking. Bar compression is too important to waste skill slots on the things people will always say "bring a counter" about. Warriors aren't going to waste skill slots on an enchantment remover, a stance remover, a hex remover and a condition remover, just because they might run up against a 55 monk, an Escape ranger, a SS Necro or a BS Ele in one of countless situations.

Good warriors don't stand in front of a monk and attack him while he's just spamming Guardian on himself, spamming Leviathan's Sweep or whatever else. That's a waste of time, as your bar then lacks the damage to do anything aside from pester your target. It's far more effective to build your spike and then switch to your target. That's why interrupts, disables and KDs are so incredibly important in the meta - they allow you precious time to land your chain before the monk can poop out his precious block enchantments, or recharge his precious block stance(s). Your only other option is to switch targets every time you force the monk to use whatever he's using to block, turning the game into an energy pressure engagement that centers on you setting the pace of the match by making the backline trigger their 5 energy block skills as often as possible while still maintaining DPS on other targets.

So no, working around it is not a good idea. You don't let your opponent dictate the terms of engagement. You force him into your play style, one way or another. Warriors will tell you that anti-block skills are not worth it because... they aren't. The closest you'll see is a RT W/D in GvG.

--Reklaw 04:56, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

It sounds more like they're unwilling to change to me though. Soldier's Strike for example, does quite a lot of damage (unconditional), and you don't even have to bring a shout or chant yourself if you have a Paragon on your team (though you could bring Watch Yourself to help out the casters on your team). Some weapon spells can work as well...and you can surprise an opponent with it when he thinks he's safe. Same with caster damage: sure, it's weaker, but at least it will do damage (and make a good deal of defensive skills useless) as opposed to a blinded, blocked warrior who will do nothing at all. 87.210.150.58 08:45, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

@Prokiller88, Because next to Deep Wound, it is the strongest condition in the game. --The Gates Assassin 21:54, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

The anti-block attacks suck because they don't actually kill anything or cause significant pressure.

Spell damage sucks because enemy Mesmers and Rangers shut down spell casters harder than anything shuts down a Warrior. Even if you can avoid dshots and diversions you're giving up a lot of DPS by not casting or cancel casting. On the other hand, a Warrior can simply attack a different target to get around blocking.

The most effective offense relies on physical damage and is supported by the midline; Rangers and Mesmers shut down the enemy's defenses. They can afford to play around disruption and shutdown because single well placed skills have powerful, lasting effects.

Whoever started this section is just whining though, Blockway wasn't a problem 'till SoD caught on, then it got nerfed. Taking the advice "bring counters" would be good here, but knowing what those counters are is the trick. Generally, interrupts and diversion are the way to go. Attempting to bring more reliable but weaker skills is just suicide because Monks are more energy and time efficient and won't be pressured at all. --63.197.80.39 16:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

People don't brind antiblockskills because warrior energy is pricey with shock, bulls, frenzy and Echarge, all staples to wars btw.

Blockway is a hard problem to fix, we've been trying some stuff out to attack motivation to run it overall, we still understand it's a problem and are still trying to address the issue. ~Izzy @-'---- 17:07, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Guild Halls

I think this has been brought up before, but we never got a response. PvP is supposed to be about skill and intelligence, and not about farming and grinding, which is what makes Guild Wars PvP so much better than any other MMO. There's just a couple of exceptions to that rule, the biggest one being guild halls. Guild halls, while not too terribly expensive, do force you to find a means of gold, which goes against basic Guild Wars PvP ethics. Buying a guild hall really isn't much of a problem, but switching guild halls everytime your guild changes its build, or wants to get practice on another hall is pretty annoying. Having to spend 15k or so everytime you want to change your guildhall, for some PvP guilds, can even result in not changing it just because its too expensive. I believe once you buy your first hall, you should be able to change halls freely. 69.137.78.47 01:12, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Or perhaps just change it for a lot cheaper... being able to cycle Guild Halls on a whim might not be the best idea, but at least giving you the option to change it without buying a whole new hall would be nice. -- Jïörüjï Ðērākō.>.cнаt^ 01:28, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

The only problem I can see that possibly causing is reducing the value of Celestial Sigils. 69.137.78.47 01:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Or, you could learn to play HoH. Or find a farmer, and have 99 PvPers and one guy who likes grind in your guild. Lord Belar 03:16, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I think being allowed to use Alliance members' guilds as host sites for battles and training would be sufficient. IE, not just scrimmaging, but outright using their hall for the map alone. --Reklaw 03:24, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

"Big PvP Guild | Kurzick | +60 members | GvG team | HA | TA | Looking for guild with a good hall so we can leach off you" -- Jïörüjï Ðērākō.>.cнаt^ 04:07, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, pretty much. Lord Belar 04:10, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Yup. The guild system is pretty crappy right now anyway. --Reklaw 05:33, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I suggested it beofore and i will again...allow PvPers to buy GH's with Balth Faction, simple! It's basically the PvP version of Gold anyways. (Or allow us to use our stacks and stacks of tourny tokens on them!) --ChronicinabilitY 05:05, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

ATM this isn't a huge issue (zaishen keys still sell for 4-5k). Hopefully by the time the value of keys drop, they'll have put something in like buying halls with faction (or tournament tokens). -Auron 05:38, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Last I checked, keys were about 3.5k, I would LOVE to know where you're seeing those higher prices though, I really need the gold. :P -- Jïörüjï Ðērākō.>.cнаt^ 05:44, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, the price right now is 3-3.5k per key. 69.137.78.47 20:36, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

People pay more for auron keys. Don't ask, don't tell. --Readem 20:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Auron, I need you to sell some keys for me now... -- Jïörüjï Ðērākō.>.cнаt^ 22:21, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Shrines make pvp boring

^ — Teh Uber Pwnzer 03:20, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

/agree, and so does about every pvper I've ever met in GW ever. And an extra EVER in all caps to add more emphasis. 71.31.152.53 05:09, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

You just met someone who thinks shrines make PvP way more fun than it is without them. Nicky Silverstar 13:12, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

So, you like to just stand in one place in a game and do nothing? Sure sounds fun to me... — Teh Uber Pwnzer 05:26, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Shrines exist mainly to prevent teams from creating certain builds or using certain playstyles. You need an alternative method of gaining an advantage just as a way of keeping people honest. That said, I find shrines to be incredibly awkward. I personally like environmental factors moreso: lava, spikes, spores, etc. Shrines don't really do anything on their own or offer any tactical benefit. They're just nebulous zones marked on the map that players have to control. It could just as easily be a hole in the ground you throw your flag down. I'd like to see GW2 PvP orient itself around the use of using the map's environment, instead of just recognizing walls to hide behind. My ideal PvP would involve a territory system composed of controlling the sectors of the map you have one player of each team residing in, and assigning minor statistical benefits based on your current morale and the flow of the game. --Reklaw 07:18, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Shrines exist to make people actually want to fight. Just like the flag stand, if you wait for the other team to try something and counter it, you usually end up losing. Remember how Broken Tower used to be when it was just who capped it at the end? It just had three teams standing around not doing anything until near timeup, when they changed it to the system where it essentially was the most time held over all, matches had no standing around. Bottom line is that shrines bring people together. --Ckal Ktak 08:40, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Lol "shrines bring people together" CORNY SHIT!!! :P 24.141.45.72 15:01, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Are you dead?

--MP47 (Talk) (Contr.) 04:51, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I was wondering the same thing tbh. He hasn't posted here in forever. There hasn't been any recent skill updates, either. — Teh Uber Pwnzer 19:31, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

If I were him, I wouldn't post here either. And the skill updates are on two month schedules. Lord Belar 21:57, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

He hasn't posted since the eighth of November. And, correct me if I'm wrong, his job is dealing with the community. Which usually involves talking to people. --71.208.141.117 11:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

No, his job is skill balance. And no one is required to be on the wiki, they all do this on their own time. Lord Belar 19:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Said it a few times, I haven't posted on here much, haven't hard a lot of free time lately sorry for the silence. ~Izzy @-'---- 17:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Archived

I moved everything pre-December, with the exception of Izzy Status, to a new Archive 8. I did this in a hamfisted obvious way -- anybody who can better organize this, or decide what's appropriate for archiving and what's not, should step up.

Sorry to archive your page, Izzy, but it's breaking the server.

—Tanaric 22:26, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Lol, I never mind people archiving it, it's honestly a insane thing to manage, and when I get busy it just blows up. ~Izzy @-'---- 17:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Your "underpowered/overpowered skill" section

Izzy,

I just archived about 1Mb of comments on your underpowered skills sections. Looking at (the lack of) your contributions there in the last 3 months, I cant help but feel that you have given up on these pages, due to the extreme amount of traffic there, the sometimes less than civil tone or the previeced quality of comments.

Yet these pages continue to be extremely popular with users, as they give a direct channel to the person in charge of skill balances. I was wondering whether you would be ok with changing the format to be split up into "open discussions" and "community requests", akin to the way Guild Wars Wiki:Requests for technical administration are handled on here:

• anyone could suggest skill changes at "open discussions", which then would be discussed by other users
• only those skills which the community agrees they are overpowered/underpowered would go to "community requests"
• You would only need to read the community requests and not the longer discussions

If you are happy with the way the pages work right now, by all means continue then the way they are, but it would be a shame to stop the whole format simply because the response became overwhelming. --Xeeron 14:51, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. If he stopped viewing the underpowered and overpowered sections just because there's so much useless discussion to look through, this would be a great idea. The question is, did he stop viewing it, and if so was it because of all the useless spam? 69.137.78.47 23:10, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Maybe he just stopped posting to discourage the noobish and non-serious comments. -- Gordon Ecker 01:57, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Sadly, it didn't work. Lord Belar 02:16, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't think he even READS his page anymore. 72.235.48.41 21:36, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

GW1 has officially entered the "token update" phase of developer support. The game is no longer a focus, as a sequel is on the way, and so the game receives only token attention every half year or so, with small bug and "safe to buff" skill updates of no consequence in between. You won't see any real updates to the meta ever again, IMO, aside from a change to one or two "real" skills that actually see use. Hopefully they've learned enough from their mistakes in GW1 and are trying to focus on not screwing up GW2. --Reklaw 21:49, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

42 skill updates and 13 bug fixes today, one week after the last update. Care to eat crow? Lord Belar 22:27, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I got a little busy and just haven't used the wiki much lately, seeming how there is an insane amount of posting here it if I go MIA for 2 months or something it goes beyond unmanageable, I'll try and clean it up. Sorry for the mess. ~Izzy @-'---- 17:24, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

IZZZYYYY

i saw u made contributions on recent changes so u must be alive! now buff Smiting :D --Cursed Angel 17:31, 14 February 2008 (UTC)