User talk:Shard/Archive7

Hex Stacking

lol they fixed it: Peace and Harmony

lol no they didn't, 7 second recharge.

Let me explain the concept of "fixing something." Fixing something requires that you change it - NOT that you change everything else. You do not fix a broken lightbulb by waiting for the sun to come up. That's what anet is doing. Instead of fixing problems, they're just changing everything else (usually buffing everything else). When you have idiots who don't know how to balance a game, and all they do is buff things, you get a pwoer creep. That's what this update was. The next update will buff rangers and warriors so they can compete with eles who can now spike for 170 damage a piece. ~Shard 07:59, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, hexes do hundreds upon hundreds of points of damage to each person affected (either punishing damage like Spiteful and Visions or from simple degen like Lingering and Suffering). PnH does nothing to heal that, and since it's elite, you have to sacrifice RC or WoH (which are the only things powerful enough to heal the ridiculous amount of damage hexes put out).

Like Shard said, this lightbulb isn't going to start working until they get non-elite hex removal on par with non-elite hexes. 2 second recharge on every removal skill would be a nice start. - Auron 08:08, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

5E, 1/4 Second Cast time, 7 second recharge + immunity to any form of shutdown. Also, this isn't a primary monk skill. You run this on a midline.

I herd midliners have strong Divine Favor. Raine - talk 16:34, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

He's right, you can run it on a mesmer. You cast it in 1/8th of a second, it removes 0 hexes and 0 conditions, then you become immune to hexes and conditions for 0 seconds. Pwned. ~Shard 11:51, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

All you need to do is run it with Sig of Illusions and it'll work great! -Binary 09:51, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Which, in order to work, would require that mesmer to pack Arcane Mimicry and your monk to carry it (PnH, since that's what they're talking about), since both - Peace and Harmony and Signet of Illusion - are Elites. Yeah, works great on a midline, then! - 84.178.74.153 10:41, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Binary's comment was obviously sarcasm. - Auron 10:49, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Shh! Don't shoo away the people who might have taken both posts seriously. I want to see a team trying to pull it off... but honestly... yeah. Maybe it was sarcasm. I should go check my detector. Seems to be broken. - 84.178.74.153 11:18, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

All hexes need their recharges raised, and aoe hexes need a 2s cast at least. Then hex removals can be buffed. ~Shard 21:32, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

You would know....

Was some high-end PvPer recently banned from GW? — Wolf 03:34, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

To specify, and well-known particularty notable person, and in the last day or two. — Wolf 04:13, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

No. Shard is still playing PvP. Borotvaltgandalf 07:40, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Wolf, who were you suggesting? ~Shard 07:49, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Stop trolling please.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 08:12, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

It wasn't trolling I misunderstood wolf's question. Borotvaltgandalf 08:48, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

No, not trolling, serious question, and no, it wasn't aimed at shard, and I'm not suggesting anything. It was a simple yes/no question. Over the past few days, I've been seeing a lot of guilds and players winning halls with names such as "Wtf Give Vics Acc Back Stupid [NGGR]" and "It's Fun Being Banned" and other such names along the same lines. I realy don't follow PvP much, so I wouldnt know any names but, I drew the conclusion that someone of note must have gotten a ban. Just wondering if I was correct in my conclusion. — Wolf 18:05, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Nobody important, just a tombs nobody ;) — Skakid 18:12, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

People get banned a lot, usually for having PG rated names. Whoever it is, I don't think it's a permanent ban, anet only perma bans ebay accounts and gold sellers. ~Shard 22:26, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, who-ever it is, someone has seen fit to make a huge deal over it. — Wolf 22:29, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

they also ban people for buying/having/getting more then 1 acc despite them not breaking any rule or just for not having pink armor Lilondra *gale* 12:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I guess it's a good thing I've never told anyone about my other two accounts. Osht! :O Vili 12:05, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

I have two too. Due to my inability to buy from online store. Anyway I now have a PvE account (borotvalt gandalf) and a PvP one (+para +derv +perma pre char) Borotvaltgandalf 13:47, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

O and before some smart-ass says you have no prove ! its just a story they banned me for it.Lilondra *gale* 17:42, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Four WS to BOOM BOOM

As title says, Imagine four wounding strike dervishes, one signet-smiter, one water snarer and a standard monk backline... Boro 19:20, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Dervishes are terrible. It's a miracle people still use them. Just goes to show you can be a complete idiot with no knowledge of the game and still win by running something overpowered. ~Shard 00:29, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Boro, something tells me that team stands to get rolled by most compitant teams. — Wolf 00:50, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

(I was thinking for HA) I know much about skills. And If I can find a combination that can surprise the opponent with a tactic that can devastate the team, I'd try that. I like making original combinations. I was just thinking what would happen if 4 conjure wounding dervishes were attacking the enemy team with the old signet-smiter, and a water snarer ele to give some support. Ofc. one dervish would bring Song of Concentration, one Make Haste... Boro 07:13, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

It's hard to win if you care about originality. Just a reality check for you. Vili 08:03, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Umn, you are aware that DW doesn't stack, right? Backsword 08:05, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Well clearly you need four copies to compensate for the two-second recharge on WS. Those damn RC whores are overpowered and all... Vili 08:08, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Can't dodge a simple Dervish?--65.23.199.100 11:13, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

With a 3r instant kill skill? No. No, you cannot. - Auron 11:18, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Use Melee hate.It doesnt do any +damage. That's overrated.--65.23.199.100 11:27, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

No, it just does 100 from the scythe hit and 100 more from the deep wound. Oh, and it covers deep wound. Oh, and it recharges in 3 seconds so even if you prot one target he can swap to another immediately and deal said 200 damage instantly. All it takes is a rodgorts or two and the target drops. - Auron 11:29, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Wild damage:9-41, lucky if he gets 100. Throw it back see how he likes it, the dw, bleed and fire.--65.23.199.100 11:33, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

...lol? Are you pulling my leg or are you serious? - Auron 12:04, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

What? You haven't try it out?--65.23.199.100 12:12, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

9(+12+13)-41(+12+13) Wild Damage from Auto-Attacking. And crits are about 58 by themselves. Now x 4.

Outside of AB and TA, Condition transfer skills suck hard. --Riddle 12:31, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking that it would be hard to try to prot/meleehate 4 ws dervishes choosing four Different targets, while each of them are capable of killing casters in 3 and lightly armored foes in 4 seconds. Boro 13:53, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Casters, bring some block and weakness.--208.43.6.211 14:01, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Monks bring weakness, true story. --Riddle 14:10, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

The following tables compare scythe damage ranges of a character with 12 Scythe Mastery hitting a 60 AL target and a character using 16 Scythe Mastery against a 60AL target. The damage calculations came from Damage calculation. Note that these are RANGES, so the lowest number in each set is when the game rolls 9 with the weapon, and the highest number is a critical hit.

Because the actual damage formula and the way GW rounds numbers is not fully known, these values may be off by a maximum of 2 damage.

16 Scythe Mastery	Base Range	+20% ALPen	40% ALPen
Nonskill	13-92	17-113	21-140
Conjure+SoH (+30)	43-122	47-143	51-170
Low Skill Dmg (+20)	33-112	37-133	42-160
Chilling Victory (+80)	93-172	97-193	101-220
Low dmg + Buffs (+50)	63-142	67-163	71-190
Chilling + Buffs (+110)	123-202	127-223	131-250

~Shard 21:43, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Hey, can you put the nonskill math on my talk. I think my Windows Calculator Skillz are failing me, but the math I am getting is a bit off. --Riddle 05:33, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I use a calculator made specifically for and tested against GW. ~Shard 07:16, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Anyway the combination might surprise some HA players... also got new siggy :) Boro 19:36, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Dervishes are terrible. ~Shard 00:41, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Challenges

Good ideas. However I would add this one:

• 100k for the developer who deletes all miniature polar bears.

:)

Boro 13:38, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't get it... ~Shard 19:33, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

He wants to fix the economy by removing rare miniatures from circulation. And ANet would do that, since it wouldn't solve the real problems. Vili 19:41, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

As a question: how much time does it take to program a 3d miniature polar bear? Boro 20:05, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

what about pay 100k for izzy to do his real job instead of keeping bad skills that are game breaking alive so bad players can play pvp with out having to get better? and yes i know it prob a matter of numbers keep the Majority happy but still this game was ment to be about skill...--92.10.218.198 20:35, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

You're absolutely right. It's unfortunate that Anet doesn't care about GW1 anymore, it's a great engine. I don't know why they think people want to buy GW2, considering it's under the same management as Abandoned Wars 1. Someone obviously wasn't thinking. ~Shard 21:24, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

They are certainly setting up a shinning example of future expectations, aren't they?--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 21:46, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Let's try my hand at this odd phenomana people like to call "argueing", however, I would simply like a good discussion. Shard, let's have a retrospecive look at Guild Wars. I'm sure you will agree with me when I say that Guild Wars was very well balanced and in very good shape for a year or so before Factions was released. From a PvE aspect, Factions did a lot right. Now, when we take a look at skills, is where we hit the pit-fall. The trouble with Factions is that it had to work as a stand-alone game, which meant a whole new set of skills, just as large as the skill set of Prophecies. Here we hit the killing blow for PvP. You have to recreate a massive amount of skills, all of them having to be atleast remotely different and useful at the same time. The same problem arose with Nightfall and Eye of the North. With that sheer number of skills, your bound to run into some that just don't work, for any number of reasons (unbalanced, weak, nich skill, ect.) Arena Net needed a way out, and after Nightfall, I'm sure Guild Wars as a trilogy looked unsalvageable. To fix Guild Wars would require a massive amount of time, effort, trial and error to finally fix and get balanced, and at that point you might as well be reinventing the game. At the same time, they still needed to be producing content, as Expansions like Factions and Nightfall where their source of income. By Nightfall, it was made clear to them that their current business model of reinventing the game every 6 months was not the best approach, and was a heavt strain on creativity, and a huge limiting factor. What Arena Net needed was a clean slate to work on, and apply what they learned from their first three games and Eye of the North. Even if you look at it from a purely skills perspective, Guild Wars 2 is justified. Whether they admit it or not, I think Arena Net sees Guild Wars as a lost cause, and a warm-up, and Guild Wars 2 as a the main event. Yes, Arena Net made a good deal of mistakes with Guild Wars, and Guild Wars 2 is their chance to fix them. Tag, your it. Your thoughts please. — Jon 23:05, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Factions had the worst PvE of all four campaigns. Vili 02:55, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

That's not the point. Please do not pull the conversation off on tangents that aren't relevant to the main point. — Jon 02:59, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

"From a PvE aspect, Factions did a lot right." is not a tangent. Public conversation is public...! Vili 03:00, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Please see your talk page. — Jon 03:25, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it's hard for an unimaginative group of people to come up with interesting skills for a game this complex. That's not my beef. Arenanet would rather have tons of broken skills ruining the game than having half of them balanced and the other half useless. The thing about keeping players happy is bullshit, at least for pvp. I can understand not wanting builds to change in pve, but keeping ridiculously broken builds in pvp does absolutely fucking nothing to keep people happy. ~Shard 20:42, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

From the looks of the update, Hexway and WS were pretty much ripped from the meta.

As you said: "It's unfortunate that Anet doesn't care about GW1 anymore, it's a great engine." This is true, and it will be mighty unfortunate to see Guild Wars empty once Guild Wars 2 launches. You also said: "I don't know why they think people want to buy GW2, considering it's under the same management as Abandoned Wars 1." Guild wars 2 is shaping up to be everything you would hope and dream for in the ways of PvP, and I think is aimed more at the PvP crowd then one might think. Consider this, if Anet only cared about PvE, and didn't care about PvP, would we still be getting skill balances? Would they have abandoned Guild Wars for an entirely new game? Probably not. Arena Net knows it's backed itself into a corner and is now between a rock and a VERY hard place, and thier only hope at this point is a fresh start. They said the skill system would consist of fewer, less complicated skills, that would have slighty different effects depending on how theyv are used, like being more powerful if done will jumping or soemthing. The over-all goal of Guild Wars 2 is a system that can easily be expanded, without the need to reinvent the game each time. If you don't have to reinvent the game each time you want to add a major amount of content, you don't end up adding things to the game that probably shouldn't have been added in the first place. Think about it, everything that ever broke Guild Wars came from the results of having to reinvent the game for the soul sake of more content. Plus the skill system as a whole needs a good revamp to prevent gimmicks and broken builds. As long as ONE skill exists that can do a decent amount of damage in one use (aka, just about every ele skill) they will get abused, and you end up with gimmicks. The goal for Guild Wars 2 is simpler, skills with more strait forward effects that work differently depending on the conditions you se them under. In the end, you end up with a simple, easy to balance system that depends more on your skill in HOW you use the skills, and not so much on what skills you bring, and when you use them.

You know, I used to be of your persuasion. I though Prophecies was the best thing to ever happen to MMOs, and that everything Arena Net added since took it one step farther towards being total trash. I ranted and raved and cried for change, and threw out all these examples of things that were blantenly broken and needed fixing. I saw Arena Net trying to fix them, but always falling short. Around the time Eye of the North was announced, I was fed up, and almost quite Guild Wars several times. Then theya nnounced Guild Wars 2 and I had pretty much had it. Then a friend of mine, understanding my frustration and being of equal mind, threw a PC Gamer article my way saying: "They [Arena Net] have shown that they realy do want to fix things, but they just canlt without reinventing the game several times over again. They needed a blank slate and a fresh start." They words "blank slate" rang through my head for several days after I finished the article, but my mind was the same, until one day all the pieces just clicked. A little bit of faith, and patience goes a long way. — Jon 22:40, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Guild wars 2 is shaping up to be everything you would hope and dream for in the ways of PvP

And you know this how? Are you working on GW2? Here's what I know: The same guy shitting on pvp in GW1 is doing the same job in GW2. I'm sure izzy has talents, but balance is not one of them.

Consider this, if Anet only cared about PvE, and didn't care about PvP, would we still be getting skill balances?

The last skill balance we got was like 2 years ago. In order to be a skill balance, an update has to balance something.

[Anet's] only hope at this point is a fresh start

Or to know what they're doing. I heard being intelligent solves problems.

As long as ONE skill exists that can do a decent amount of damage in one use, they will get abused, and you end up with gimmicks.

Big damage skills don't cause gimmicks. Big damage, easy to use skills with no risk cause gimmicks. Look at warriors. They do big damage. Bad people can't play them well. That's why warriors were never really a problem.

[ArenaNet] have shown that they really do want to fix things, but they just can't without reinventing the game several times over again. They needed a blank slate and a fresh start.

And you believe that? It came from Anet. That's not a reputable source, considering how wrong they always are. Remember when they "fixed a bug that allowed attack speeds to go above the 33% cap?" except they REALLY fixed it 8 months later, after continuously saying it was already fixed? Remember when "We test the changes internally to make sure you can't abuse Aura of the Lich's ability to create minions out of oxygen." Anet lies more than they fail, which is pretty bad considering failing is their 24/7 job.

Faith and Patience...HA! I've been playing since beta, and here we are almost 4 years later, and Anet still doesn't have a clue. Look, GW2 is not a way for them to start with a fresh slate. GW2 is the excuse they use for failing at GW1. What will GW2 have, technically, that GW1 can't have? Persistence? Ability to jump? . . . . . . . . nothing else? If they really wanted a fresh slate, they would have taken more time to develop and test the expansions. They just don't think.

Too many people, in fact most of the vocal community are practically putting these great suggestions directly into arenanet's faces, and how many get implemented? The last thing players asked for and got was skill templates...that was when Nightfall came out. Honestly, if you still believe they care, you need to ask yourself "what have they done for us recently?" They made outrageous pve titles take less grind to get, but it's still grind. Tombs has been dead since 6v6. GvG is a joke. Heroes in pvp are a joke. Pve has been a joke since nightfall, and especially since consumables and pve skills. Even the skills that have been bugged since release are jokes. Kim Chase's ability to change skill descriptions to say the skill is bugged is outstanding. I've never, EVER seen a game company acknowledge a bug, then intentionally not fix it. You think they care? You couldn't be more wrong. ~Shard 01:11, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Keep in mind I've been playing since release day (comp was broken during beta). Before I dive into more, please answer me one question first. Do you have work expirence with a major software firm? Major constituting a developement of over 100 people. — Jon 02:37, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Forget that last question, and answer me this one, no matter how irrelevant it might seem. Do you belive all people are born evil, and are of evil intent unless thoroughly proven otherwise or make a concious effort not to be evil? — Jon 05:47, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm not catholic, so no. I believe people are born neutral, and their life molds them into being good or evil. You'll also have to explain what that has to do with how incompetent arenanet is.

Have I worked in a software team of 100+ people? I'd have to say no to that, but then so would arenanet. I doubt if they had more than 20 people involved in non-artistic parts of the game. I have worked in software teams with groups that big, so I do know what it's like. I really have no idea why arenanet is failing so hard. It could be that the management is power-hungry and doesn't let people do their jobs. It could be that people at anet are low-quality workers who don't have a clue how to do their jobs. Idk, but I haven't seen this much carelessness from a game company ever. ~Shard 07:12, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

"Guild wars 2 is shaping up to be everything you would hope and dream for in the ways of PvP, and I think is aimed more at the PvP crowd then one might think."

If turning GW into a WoW clone is what most pvp players want, then the majority of them have left to play WoW. The issue is GW set up and style were fine...its the power creep of NF and lack of consideration and testing that has devistated the game. With the track record presented with GW1, GW2 is going to be more of the same. "Faith" isn't going to make people purchase a new game at this point, a proven track record of a good business model will.

"The trouble with Factions is that it had to work as a stand-alone game, which meant a whole new set of skills, just as large as the skill set of Prophecies."

Aside from Ritualists being a class that encompasses far more than a class should, Factions has never been a major issue, in fact, the Prophecies and Factions era was my favorite time in GW PvP, and I know Shard, Purge, Alleji and most of our crowd who were PvP regulars at that time all agree.

"Consider this, if Anet only cared about PvE, and didn't care about PvP, would we still be getting skill balances? Would they have abandoned Guild Wars for an entirely new game?"

Until a new product is released to cover the financials, Anet cannot just abandon their current game. They continue on with GW1 with the hopes they will maintain a customer base for GW2. The Sims is the same way, they will release expansions, updates and content up until the release of the Sims 3 to ensure they will continue to get every $$$$ they can before the new game is released as a customer hook. Record labels do this as well...particularly when a band changes labels...about 20 different Greatest Hits albums, B-side releases and live recordings are produced and sold to get back every penny spent in the original production.

"To fix Guild Wars would require a massive amount of time, effort, trial and error to finally fix and get balanced, and at that point you might as well be reinventing the game."

The game's downfall was easily avoidable. But the main issue is, they are admitting they have failed, which is sad, by creating a new game for the wrong reasons. Spending this "massive amount of time", as you call it, would probably save them more money that starting from scratch. However, they have dug themselves in such a hole, they would rather take a quick fix...bankruptcy as it were, rather that do the responsible work required to fix an engine that is wonderful and stylish the way it is.

"A little bit of faith, and patience goes a long way"

Maybe with love, family, friends...but where purchasing a product and being a customer, again...a good business model and better example of care, workmanship, and a professional track record would be a more realistic approach to making people support and maintain loyalty to Anet and their product.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 08:39, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

@Shard: I've been working with a major software firm for quite some years now, and in that time, we have made some very unpopular choices, because our only other option was to cease and desist as a company. There are times when we have been backed into a corner, between a rock and a hard place, and our only options have are detrimental to the customer. There are also issues we have been forced to ignore for a time, or all together, as to fix them would require a complete rebuild of a certain tech, which is too time consuming and we just did not have the resources for, or there are much more important matters going on. For a while, our entire developement team was split into 4 urgent, time sensitive projects, so any support given to current products was at a minimal, and recieved shotty support. Be careful not to mistake simple incompitance for something different. Also, there are times when management has to call some tough shots, and in the end, take a hit and be very unpopular for it, even internaly. A software developement firm is a very complex machine, and throwing out accusations of incompitance without realizing the full implication looks liek extreme ignorance on your part from my end. If you where one of my customers and called out company incompitant and you where face to face with me, i'd have to slap you. I'm not privy to the internal working of Arena Net, but we've been forced into many similar situations, and I'm sure other firms have too.

@Yasmin: Pulling some features from WoW != WoW clone. WoW has a good feature set, this much is true, but it has a very distinct mechanical set, that is very different form that if Guild Wars, and the mechanical set of Guild Wars is what makes it special, and Arena Net has shown no signs of wanting to change it. If Guild Wars had mounts, would you call it a WoW clone? If Guild Wars 2 gave characters wings and the ability to fly, would it be an Aion clone? Games steal features from each other all the time, that does nto make them a clone of the game they took said features from. Features != Mechanics. A clone of another game is oen in which the new game completely mirrors the other game's mechanical set.

Factions was the step to the top of the slippery slope, Nightfall was the step onto it. Do you honestly think if Anet took the time and effort to balance EVERY skill in the game, and continued to release expansions per it's business model at the time, do you honesly think they could keep the game balanced while adding 400 new skills and 2 new professions every six months? Do you think they could have even made 400 new skills and 2 new professions without repeats far enough down the line? Their business model was the source of most of what was going wrong with Guild Wars, and they needed a way out. It takes a lot of guts to drop a current MMO, and start over, something I would be surprised to see Blizzard do with WoW, and God knows that needs it more.

"The game's downfall was easily avoidable." That's a lie and you know it. See previous point. a rate of 400 skills and 2 professions every 6 months is only going to make things worse. The answer is less skills, not more."....where purchasing a product and being a customer, again...a good business model...." Exactly, a good business model. Their current business model was forcing them into a corner, where their only options where a fresh slate, die as a company, or screw Guild Wars over. The business model of a new game every 6 months was heavily flawed, and in need of replacment. The best arguement for Guild Wars 2, and ultimatley, the one that amkes the biggest difference, was that Guild Wars' business model was the source fo all bad things happening to Guild Wars, and should not be allowed to persist. — Jon 17:41, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Section break

"their only options where a fresh slate, die as a company, or screw Guild Wars over"

- GW2 is your fresh slate, in so much as they've admitted, because they can't fix the game code without creating a "New Game Experience" as they posted in a review.
- Game companies die when one slanted view of how things should be is shoved on all of the players, and that's what happening now.
- GW1 is being screwed over by an admitted caster-obsessed, melee-hating "balancer".
The real problem here is that people are leaving in droves, districts are shrinking, less and less people are interested in GW2 because of how GW1 is being run into the ground. They might break 1.5 million copies of GW2, but it will be far cry from GW1. ArenaNet's sole chance to pull their company out of the fires of a single-minded spiral is to hire people to help GW1 retain its playerbase. And keep the GW2 "balancer" far from the original as he's proved time and again that he is either too busy, or too bored with GW1 to do it right anymore. Seriously, FTW, seperate teams - one for PvP, one for PvE. Both completely seperate from GW2. And most of all ... find a team of players to test your updates before they are released. The more people you annoy, the less people that will bother with GW2. Ghosst • Talk • 19:10, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

"GW2 is your fresh slate, in so much as they've admitted, because they can't fix the game code without creating a "New Game Experience" as they posted in a review." Creating a "New Game Experience" out of an existing games, is one of the worst PR moves you can make. If your going to be creating a "New Game Experience" it better be in a new game, or your really going to get it from the players. You may keep a piece of the very vocal community, but at the risk of alienating the vast majority, that are probably perfectly satisfied with the state of the game.

"The real problem here is that people are leaving in droves...."People are always leaving in droves, and for different reasons than you think. I used to be in an aloiance of close a thousand, it's collasped since, because people have gone inactive. 900 left because they jost had other games to play, got busy, ect. Only two people quite because they were dissatified with the game as a whole, and one of them basically wanted it to be a free version of WoW. Two of our guilds were Avid PvPers, and never expressed the thought of leaving because they where dissatified. When you can show me these "droves" leaving becaus eof disatification, I will give that statement fair air. Until then, I'm going to assume it's a lie, as all facts on ym end point twards that.

"....less and less people are interested in GW2 because of how GW1 is being run into the ground." Prove it.

"ArenaNet's sole chance to pull their company out of the fires of a single-minded spiral is to hire people to help GW1 retain its playerbase. " Yes, they do need more people on the Guild Wars live team, but their working on it. It's not their only hope. The game is still on shelves everywhere and selling.

"- Game companies die when one slanted view of how things should be is shoved on all of the players, and that's what happening now." Have a look at WoW. Same deal, still running strong.

"And keep the GW2 "balancer" far from the original as he's proved time and again that he is either too busy, or too bored with GW1 to do it right anymore." Define "do it right". I guaranteethat it won't be in line with portions of the community. I guarantee it won't be in line with what Arena Net thinks is right. Heck, I'd almost guarantee it won't be in line with what other people that think Arena Net needs to "do it right". What's right is a bias. period.

This goes out to all the wanna-be balancers out there. You are a small minority. Your opinion does not reflect that of the entire community. The self entitlement and the amount of people that think THEY represent the voice of the community, and that think their voice is the only voice that matters is appauling. Every time you try to speak for the community, you've already failed, as you don't know what they think. Your not the community. What gives you the right to speak for them when:

1. Your voice is mostlikely comming from a small minority if your here and advocating for balance in the name of PvP
2. You have no way of collecting the opinion of the masses, and haven't tried
3. There is a very good chance the majority of players don't even care about PvP, which is the grounds for most of your arguements.

Try again when you have some solid facts to back up your arguements. — Jon 20:14, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

lol, sorry, I don't have the energy to write a novel for you and Shard's page isn't the place for it. But really, just try watching public chat once in a while. Instead of watching posts on a forum, watch people that actually play. Between the spam (that depsite the login warnings really is not a priority) you might see people who are too tired to care anymore. And BTW, I don't PvP. Ghosst • Talk •

Go ahead, write a novel, You have my assurance that I, for one, would read it all. Also, not all my comments were directed at you specifically.

I've spent a large amount of time, in towns, watching, reading chat, and having discussions (some like this), and the one thing that screams at me is that there is no single person that cna speak for the community. Yes, there are people to back up just about every statement, but only vague generalizations are the closest to being true. While I may see people that are too tired to care anymore, I also see people that are completely enjoying themselves, people that are just killing time, people that are dissatisfied with the game, but have the courtisy to not rant, rage and cause trouble with there woes, I see people just like Shard and Auron. It's a very diverse group. The second biggest thing that struck me was that, no matter how vocal the dissatisfied are, they are always the minority. — Jon 21:50, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

"Exactly, a good business model. Their current business model was forcing them into a corner, where their only options where a fresh slate, die as a company, or screw Guild Wars over. The business model of a new game every 6 months was heavily flawed, and in need of replacment."

Maintining new expansions and new content was not a bad model...it was a very good idea, and was in no way what drove them into a corner. The issue was the lack of testing and consideration that went into each expansion in regards to new professions and overwhelmingly bad skill ideas or dumbing down the content with over powered PvE only skills and insane consumables. That is what hindered their game. If they had just added more areas like Sorrow's Furnace, or used all the wasted map space or even utilized their own lore, and took the time to make it enjoyable or challenging the game could have continued along just fine. Some of the ideas used in GWEN were a step in the right direction, but again...the lack of forethought in skill creation, maintenece and having the nerve to "copy paste" the same dungeon areas over and over again hurt GW. Anet rushes their games and it shows--it really ,really shows. For me, that is not a good model of how to run a business at all, and with the track record I have seen here, GW2 will likely be much of the same lackluster gameplay, rushed content or good ideas with poor execution seen since NF.

I would also like to add that I am not a "liar", and being accused as such is both rude and insulting to my personal integrity. My statement that GW could have avoided the isssues it has, in my view, is as true as Simon Le Bon being English. The introduction of dozens upon dozens of over powered and even useless skills was not needed or warrented, worse still, the idea that Izzy can handle the overwhelming amount of skills in this game was not the direction they needed to go. Copy pasting dungeon areas was avoidable. Power-creeping was avoidable. Dumbing down content with skills like Ursan was avoidable. There were a lot that should not, and did not need to be done, and was therefore, in my view AVOIDABLE.

"Do you honestly think if Anet took the time and effort to balance EVERY skill in the game, and continued to release expansions per it's business model at the time, do you honesly think they could keep the game balanced while adding 400 new skills and 2 new professions every six months? Do you think they could have even made 400 new skills and 2 new professions without repeats far enough down the line?" Again...they didn't need to keep adding as many as they did--less is always more. A good sales strategy is to "keep it simple", overwhelming your customer with details and crap they don't need turns them away from the product...to quote Nick Rhodes "In the end, the simple things are usually best...A good pop song is a song you can whistle." Adding more skills is fine, and great, but the could have added more slowly over time. People will appriciate strong, solid, thoughtful work over rushed, sloppy, careless work any day of the week. Instead of making +400 skills, why not just work completely on testing and perfecting the new classes, then adding new skill in later updates after the appropriate amount of work and care is made? That makes sense to me, it seems reasonable.

"It takes a lot of guts to drop a current MMO, and start over, something I would be surprised to see Blizzard do with WoW, and God knows that needs it more. "

Really now? With 8.5 million people subscribing to the game and Lich King selling 2.8 million copies in it's first 24hours they need to quit and make a new game? (please check the game sales numbers and Blizzard's stock to correct me if I'm wrong, ok? I'm pretty sure I read what I quoted correctly.) Okie dokie...that sounds like a successful game right there, with some happy customers, but my sarcasm here could be completely wrong...and Simon Le Bon could be American, but I doubt that.

"There is a very good chance the majority of players don't even care about PvP, which is the grounds for most of your arguements"

GW was originally a PvP/competetive based game. Coming to Shard's page to argue about anything other than PvP is a waste of your time because that is what we play, what we care about, and what we originally began playing this game for. As far as my arguments go, they are across the board, as both PvP and PvE in this game have both been brutally damaged. There is an equal amount of players on both sides, or who are PvX and stating that "the majority of players don't care about PvP" is absolutely obnoxious. Considering that this has been a majority based PvP discussion between Shard, me and a few other people here, on this page, you are the minority here...that being said, we can agree to disagree.

Let compare my view on GW2 being a likely WoW clone:

WOW-Players choose a "Realm" for their character.

GW2-Players are assigned a "World"

Difference?-WoW charges to move "Realms", (though "Established" characters on WoW I understand may often move with out charge?) GW2 will not charge.

WoW-"Rested Bonus" system allows lower level characters to level quickly with higher level players in certain areas.

GW2-"Sidekick" system allows lower level characters to level quickly and partake in certain content with higher level friends.

GW2 and WoW will of course, both utilize persistant worlds rather than instanced.

WoW-utilizes "World PvP" where both main factions battle each other. This is also similar to Warhammer where the different order/chaos factions battle each other.

GW will be adapting a World PvP system similar to those stated above.

GW2 will feature "World Events" similar to WoW's.

To me, GW2 sounds like a WoW clone, as a "clone" is defined as "a copy or duplicate". And for those GW players who sought these features, they have long gone to WoW or even Warhammer. For me, I liked how GW was set up, I felt it was unique unlike any game I have ever played. Now, these unique features will morph into what everyone else is doing. Hey, thats fine and dandy...however I doubt Anet's ability to deliver the content these other games do.

@Ghosst. I completely agree with your comments on both your edits. I think you hit the nail on the head.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 22:30, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

First off:

"I would also like to add that I am not a "liar", and being accused as such is both rude and insulting to my personal integrity." I'm sorry, that was not my intention. Better word choice was in order on my part.

And now for the main event:

"Maintining new expansions and new content was not a bad model...it was a very good idea, and was in no way what drove them into a corner." They weren't adding new content and new expansions per say, they where reinventing the game every 6 months. Each "expansion" had to work a a stand alone game, and be 100% playable without any other "expansion."

" Again...they didn't need to keep adding as many as they did...." Yes, they did. Like I said, each "expansion" had to function as a stand alone game. Prophecies set the bar. To drop below that bar is not advisable.

"....but the could have added more slowly over time." You cannot release a game with half its skills missing.

"Instead of making +400 skills, why not just work completely on testing and perfecting the new classes, then adding new skill in later updates after the appropriate amount of work and care is made?" Like I said, you cannot release a game with half its main, important content missing on day one.

"Really now? With 8.5 million people subscribing to the game and Lich King selling 2.8 million copies in it's first 24hours they need to quit and make a new game?" Did you know when Burning Crusade was released, WoW was loosing players for a while? And that it was several months before the numbrs stoped dropping? Did you know reports are out that the same thing is happening again with Wrath of the Lich King? "Okie dokie...that sounds like a successful game right there...." This is true. "....with some happy customers...." Far from true. WoW PvP is more blighted and unbalanced than Guild Wars. You know why Blizzard lost so many subscribers when Burning Crusade launched? Because it broke PvP even more than it already is. Bliizard doesn't know or care a thing about balance. Their are proffessions in WoW that have been broken and over powered since day one, and Blizzard has yet to list a finger. In fact, it got worse. The Death Knight just put 4 proffessions out of the works at once. It out damages Hunters (second most broken proffession), has more armor than warriors, can out-heal a paladin, and makes the rogue look completely useless. Balanced PvP in WoW is a joke. It's basically a rock-paper-scissors combat system anyway. WoW PvE is a joke, It's a broken grind-fest that has nothing for you, except a grind for better gear, and leveling and getting skills for broken PvP. In WoW time spent = skill. It's mechanics are broken on a fundamental level.

"..stating that "the majority of players don't care about PvP" is absolutely obnoxious." remember where I said "There is a very good chance...."

I feel the need to restate myself. Pulling some features from WoW != WoW clone. Every game barrows features from other games. Features are not what make a game, the game it is, they just give it a little more something special. Servers or "worlds" (w/e fancy name given to them) is not something unique to WoW. "GW2 and WoW will of course, both utilize persistant worlds rather than instanced." Name me one MMO that's not 100% persistant. This is not unique to WoW. "WoW-utilizes "World PvP" where both main factions battle each other. " This is not organized in any way, and is not limited to an arena, like Guild Wars 2 World PvP. "GW2-"Sidekick" system allows lower level characters to level quickly and partake in certain content with higher level friends." City of Heros also did this, probably first.

And yes, Eye of the North, for the most part, was very rushed, and not quality at all, but by then, the vast majority of their resources were already alocated to Guild Wars 2 before production began on Eye of the North. — Jon 23:12, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I think they went wrong at making all the games "stand alone", but I understand that they needed to charge $60.00 a pop to make back what they spend in production--but then again, with a very strong expansion including a much larger amount of content, they could have gotten away with $60.00 without having to "reinvent the game". Doing so took on too much, it was too overwhelming and the game wasn't really reinvented--with the exception of adding heroes. Besides, very few people bought the games stand alone. Where I am coming from in regard to each addition to GW is that they could have focused on stronger content and limited skill release. The amount of skill was, again, not needed.

Secondly with WoW...IMO it blows. I played it for 2 hours and hated it--the game was ugly, boring, cartoony and childish looking--which is why I am dreading GW becoming the same game. I was making an outside view comparison to the changes GW2 will feature that were, again, taken straight from WoW. Its disapointing, as I felt GW was always the better game. GW is unique and unlike any other game I've played. Making it into something its not makes me uneasy. Anyway, I took all of the similarities I saw and compared, seems to me they're copy pasting. 1 MMO that isn't? Guild Wars...they dared to be innovative.

As far as PvP how do we know GW World PvP will be organized? Because Anet says so? How do you know for sure? You must obviously have some inside knowledge the rest of us don't. I believe Shard even asked if you worked for Anet. For me, Anets words and promises don't go very far with merit, especially with the disorder in current GW PvP. I'm sorry Jon, but I will believe it when I see it. "It's basically a rock-paper-scissors combat system anyway. WoW PvE is a joke, It's a broken grind-fest that has nothing for you, except a grind for better gear, and leveling and getting skills for broken PvP"...since you seem to be more of a PvE player by the course of this discussion, that statement sounds like Guild Wars PvP. Shard would agree.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 23:58, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

"I think they went wrong at making all the games "stand alone"...." Exactly.

"but then again, with a very strong expansion including a much larger amount of content, they could have gotten away with $60.00 without having to "reinvent the game"...."You have the idea.

"it was too overwhelming and the game wasn't really reinvented" I think you see why their old business model with Guild Wars was a flop.

"Besides, very few people bought the games stand alone." This is also true, and another flaw of the old business model.

"Where I am coming from in regard to each addition to GW is that they could have focused on stronger content and limited skill release. The amount of skill was, again, not needed." I'm pretty sure we are mostly on the same page.

All WoW is, is a super generic version of every other MMO before it, with a Warcraft skin thrown over it. I did nothing new. Guild Wars dared to be different. I did a lot good, but it also slightly missed the mark a little. It could take a few small tips from WoW, as it did some things right.

"Secondly with WoW...IMO it blows. I played it for 2 hours and hated it--the game was ugly, boring, cartoony and childish looking" Unfortunately, my expirence lasted MUCh longer.....

"I believe Shard even asked if you worked for Anet." He did? Must have missed that >.<. No, I do not work for Arena Net.

"As far as PvP how do we know GW World PvP will be organized? Because Anet says so? How do you know for sure? You must obviously have some inside knowledge the rest of us don't." I'm sorry, perhaps I should have specified a bit more. Organized, as in there is a specific place for it, where that's all you do. Such as Team Areas, Jade Quarry, ect.

"since you seem to be more of a PvE player by the course of this discussion...." I PvEed pretty intensively through most of Prophecies, and a decent amount through Factions. About that time, I got realy busy, and played rather casualy, and dropped PvE for PvP. Ever since then, I've played pretty infrquently, but when I do, I realy go at it.

I think I need to post my speach about features, mechanics and UI and how each ties into the game and such. — Jon 00:17, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

MWOI. Lord Belar 00:02, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Wow Shard...look how much I've made for you to archive. Some of my best work is in there. I'm proud.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 00:48, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh crap, this section has exploded in the few days I've not paid attention. :O I'd like to make a random interjection and say that Guild Wars has always been PvP-centered. PvE is designed to draw you into PvP, and also serves as a breather for bored PvP players. (read: top100 pvp monks pwning PvE missions for lulz) I don't think there are any hard numbers out there to show the percentage of PvE to PvP play, but I'd be willing to bet that even if more people play PvE, it's only because it's the "opiate of the masses" so to speak. It's for the casual gamers.

Then again, this argument is easily countered nowadays when you look at so many of the updates this year which have continually made things easier than ever for the casual gamer. Read: title grinding. Vili 06:28, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Somewhere amongst the TL;DR's I lost the whole entire point of the argument. What are you trying to argue again? From what I am getting, we're trying to justify the validity of GW2. Let me just say this: In this state, it is currently impossible to say whether GW2 will be good or bad for various reasons, mainly because we haven't had any new information released since about a year-and-a-half ago and ANet is bound to have changed many different things since then. --Riddle 07:18, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

it is currently impossible to say whether GW2 will be good or bad for various reasons

Then I'm about to do something impossible:

GW1 was balanced by izzy and it failed for that reason. GW2 is being balanced by izzy.

GW1 was maintained by Arenanet and it failed for that reason. GW2 is going to be maintained by arenanet.

GW1 forums/wiki are ignored by arenanet and GW1 failed for that reason. After GW2 comes out, the same forums and wiki will continue to be ignored by arenanet.

ArenaNet does not know what players want in GW1 and it failed for that reason. The exact same people are making GW2.

I boiled water yesterday and got steam. I am going to boil water today...what do you think will happen? ~Shard 07:30, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

You'll blind someone with Water Magic? :) Vili 07:32, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually It could be better designed as (the skill system); A strong core skillbase, (even to paras and dervishes, so a few skills from prophecies and factions could be added to them), with let me say: 20 or less skills added to each profession per expansions.

Section break 2

Now I tell you the short story of the section: started with my suggestion to remove Mini Polar Bears fron the game, wich was followed up by a suggestion from another one to pay izzy for doing his real job, and ended up with a (GW!=WoWclone || GW==Wowclone) and anet shouldn't have made so many skills and anet needs a fresh start argument. Wich was ended with an agreement that arenanet Ruined GW. Boro 07:58, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry but so far, I've only read up to Jon's long post. Jon, there's a big difference between what you think is happening at arenanet and what really is happening at arenanet. You think they abandoned the game and pissed on their players fr financial reasons. If that were true, this last update would have been well thought out, tested, and free of bugs. So would the last one. And the last one. And the one before that. That's not happening.

It's fine for companies to have new projects, but anet isn't just making a new game. They're making a new game and unnecesarilly making the old one suck more and more. I don't base their incompetence on wanting to abandon the game. I'm basing their incompetence to do these kinds of updates right. These updates are so bad, it almost looks like they're TRYING to make the game worse. Even one person balancing a game can do better than izzy, given that he or she has passed the third grade. A bug hunter for any other program would fix bugs instead of blatantly ignoring them. If you're going to do something, especially to a game you NEED to sell a sequel for, you need to do it right, you need to not half-ass it (you need to full-ass it?). ~Shard 12:22, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, and I may be wrong, but I find it hard to believe that someone who spells as badly as you do and has grammar as bad as yours is out of high school. I'm not trying to be mean or offensive, but your posts read like they're being written by a kid. ~Shard 12:25, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I make tons of typos, and I often don't reread my posts to correct mistakes, so things come out rough. I'm a busy guy. The time I take to type those walls of text is pushing it for me.

To sum everything up:

• Arena Net fell victim to it's own business model
• Said business model was heavily flawed
• Six months is too short of a time to reinvent a game
• Less is more
• Simple is better
• Arena Net needs more staff members working on Guild Wars
• Borrowing featurs from another game does not make it a clone of that game

I think that's everything. — Jon 19:14, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Don't be naughty now Shard. Lets keep it civil, we don't want any Carebear Police involvement.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 19:21, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Shard && Jon && Yasmin are right. you are equally right (especially shard :D ). GW is now ruined state and arenanet ruined it. There may be many different reasons: Business model, complexity, inability to assign more people to guild wars. But it doesn't help now with us. What we need is a redesigned skill system.

Sol1:Half of the skills that exist should be locked now. including the most OP, skills, of the game. Now think about how to balance the remaining ones. Now start rethinking the skills which are locked. see why are they locked, solve the problem, and unlock them again.

Sol2: delete duplicate skills, make the originals core skills. Make searing flames core. (ofc Design some new bosses to cap the skills from. (fow and uw or realms of gods or separate bosses for each campaign)). Now delete the worst skills ever, make skills which are overpowered normally powerful.

Sol 3: Hire shard as a game balancer. He can redesign the skill system.

sol 4: Uninstall gw...

Boro 19:53, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I wouldn't hire Shard (no offense), but I would hire someone that would listen to everyone around here that's got a thing for balance. — Jon 20:13, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

You have to get to know Shard before you judge him, Jon. I've known him for almost 4 years, and my entire GW career has been successful playing with him. If you ran a few matches with us, you would see he knows what he's talking about. He doesn't just pull things out of thin air. I've even heard him talk to Izzy, he can be sensible and civil when needed. But as far as "hiring a balancer" no one deserves that more, or could possibly do a better job than Ensign.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 20:24, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I never said he doesn't know what he's talking about. This is true, I don't know Shard that well, and I wouldn't hire someone I don't know too well. Sometimes a neutral party is best though. Someone that will losten to everyone and can take everything into consideration. I could be wrong. I'm not the person in charge of personel and hiring at Arena Net for a reason. :P — Jon 20:55, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Trust me. In game balance, you do NOT wants someone who listens to everyone. You want someone who listens to knowledgeable people. ~Shard 08:37, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Case in point: ANet listens to "everyone"; bad things happen. Game balance and democracy don't mix...(although it may have worked better if PvE and PvP had always been split?) Vili 10:42, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

TBH I could live with 95% of people's view on how GW should be balanced. It may not be as good as Shard (or any other expert in this field) alone, but the truth is: most people know exactly how GW should be balanced (just like everybody knows what "justice" is without majoring in philosophy). The only people that don't get a feel for balance is those that are responsible for this. There only solution is to make skills more powerful. And these people are deaf to the community, too. A great business model. *sobs in his pillow* --82.82.176.65 16:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

New Human League album...coming soon

That is indeed true, but since you don't know who they are, or care, come on vent so we can roll stuff.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 01:26, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Be on tomorrow...yes? Ok good. --*Yasmin Parvaneh* 08:44, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Probably not. Sorry :/ ~Shard 11:41, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Why? Do you have a date? J/K, you don't have a date. Anyway...Purge and I are going to QQ without you.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 19:02, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

WTB Shard...one ecto ok???--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 03:02, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

So I herd

Anet lieks powar creep. Dark Morphon(contribs) 17:01, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Damage rly needed buff badly!!1! I wonder for some time why they don't just add a skill that just kills? Like Death Touch Signet, cost: 0, activation time: 1/4, recharge: 1, Kills target touched foe and all foes in the area with a probability of 75%. They could get rid of 99% of all those indistinguishable skills that more-or-less do the same for all classes... --82.83.50.92 17:21, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, like a nuclear missle skill or Mushroom Cloud Blow up target foe, all enemy team members, baby kangaroos, and small puppies. When the cloud clears, a Terminator 2 style flame disentigrates the universe and the game automatically uninstalls because it is pointless, stupid and retarded to play anymore. Please await the release of SC2, Diablo 3 or some other game that cares about it's customers.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 20:20, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Yesterday I saw the update. They said they think shadow form farming is fun and they WANT to keep it. It was the last thing I could take in pve. So I moved to PvP. Had a good/normal afternoon in JQ, with a Cultist's N/Rt (It worked wonders with Angorodon). Then after the afternoon I went to HA to see if I can get a group with non-insane people. Everything is same. Rspike ruins HA. Rank title ruins my chances to get a decent group. Why the fucking hell did they make the title wearable only from R3? It's already the trigger of /rank. Now I can't find a decent group accepting me. But overally I say to arenanet Thank You because I now see ma goal of life: Become a programmer and not making the same shit.Boro 07:32, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Lul. If you're trying to compete with arenanet, you win by doing nothing, because you do nothing better than they maintain games. ~Shard 07:49, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

LoL! I'm already better than them! rofl Boro 08:59, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Scythes at 15 Strength...

...may be better than PvE, but Searing Flames is better than everything. =/ Mr.Hobo 18:15, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Ele # 1:

Ele # 2:

Add that Ebon Vanguard ward and A. Echo Intensity & what not and you got yourself a stew...thank god you cant take those skills into PvP yet.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 22:37, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Tell me again izzy, why do eles do more damage than warriors? ~Shard 07:32, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Warrior's are tanks, duh! --Riddle 07:38, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Yasmin, that 'yet' part really scares me... Koda Kumi talk 09:50, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Don't be shocked if they make that happen. Stranger things have happened in this game.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 19:23, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

SF made Fire Magic viable, since it only kills freaking everything... Mr.Hobo 19:38, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I will never forget when NF first came out...I was going though the game on my Necro to get armor, and when I encountered that first SF enemy...yeah. Needless to say, Shard, Adrin and I went immediately to GToB, rolled eles with SF and spiked a load of free faction at the Zaishen Challenge before going into HA and being evil.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 20:27, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

And it still deals loads of damage.Boro 07:18, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Mmm...that build seems more trouble than it's worth to me. Because you still need energy management skills after that, leaving you maybe 1 free skill slot if you don't bring a res. Sure, you'll deal a lot of damage. But that will be all you can do. Spam SF. 145.94.74.23 08:42, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Er... that's all you need. - Auron 09:31, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

SF fails, too. Consider that and just are to say that SF deals more damage than Wammo spamming Power Attack. Sure, it has AoE but one and a half minuts before energy depletion is not acceptable, it only kills weak stuff, well and of course only destructible stuff. Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 11:53, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

we are discussing about PvP. PvE is imbalanced, ruined, and taken the finishing blow . Boro 13:59, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Balance != Equilibrium. And even being either it does not justify to make a general judgement. Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 17:41, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay. Also personally I dislike using searing flames (except in PvP when I have just enough energy to demolish the entire group). It's very hard on energy, and it doesn't do enough damage in Pve. I like when a separate letter is a separate link :) Boro 18:15, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Fire eles need energy management? ~Shard 20:20, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Energy storage isn't energy management. And energy management which works at 90% is not energy management enough for said purposes. Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 22:04, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

What? ~Shard 22:38, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

(Resetting Indent) "and it doesn't do enough damage" Name one skill that does more AoE damage for the cost, cast time, and recharge... Mr.Hobo 02:56, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Base Defense, or BAMPH!. Vili 03:15, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Can you honestly say that your 6 skill combo would be better than all other 6 skill combo's? Can you say that it is that much better than most 6 skill combo's? Even when the second build can only use SF 33% of the time? 145.94.74.23 12:49, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and 1 more thing: you can't use glyph of lesser energy if you already use glyph of elemental power. 145.94.74.23 12:50, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

That's why you use GoLE when you start to lose energy. SF Spike kills your team unless none of you are closer than nearby. Even with pre-prot, SOME of you die. Look at Auron's page for further info. And you don't need Double Dragon, anywho. Mr.Hobo 20:43, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok, then you need 7 skills lots. 7 skill slots, and you still don't think it should be allowed to deal damage...145.94.74.23 15:49, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

BAM! You were dead by the time you said the first word. How is that balanced? Mr.Hobo 21:12, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

The only reason that wouldn't be balanced if you would be stuck with the same team for the rest of the month. Any good team will have no more problem with that team than they have with the old SF team. 145.94.74.23 11:42, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

shuuut

dont tell anyone,but i think brains doesnt like you Lilondra *gale* 08:23, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Skill of the Day

What are you going to do when you run out of skills? — Jon 00:02, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

1000 skills later, I'll start thinking about it. ~Shard 01:22, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

How many have you covered so far? — Jon 01:24, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

idk, go to the archive and count them. Maybe 50 so far. ~Shard 01:25, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of skills of the day, I nominate Primal Rage for the next one. Vili 01:36, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

The Defy Pain one made me lol. It always struck me as a more PvE centered skill. Shall we start a list of what skills should have been the PvE only skills? — Jon 01:40, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Who is "we?" ~Shard 01:41, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Idk, anyone that would like to contribute. — Jon 01:44, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

How about "Aura of the Lich: Spontaneous Generation grants you one free minion (50% Failure with Biology > 5), and 1... 20... A LOT... of minions spawn, if you've killed anyone. Oh, and your Death Magic goes up. Mr.Hobo 02:52, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Or "Vampiric Gaze" Steals up to 18...52...60 health from target foe, then after 8 seconds, get owned by a friggin tenth level charr because this skill takes ages to recharge. Koda Kumi talk 17:05, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Vampiric Gaze: Twice Vampiric Spirit , Same as Vampiric Spirit , Same as Vampiric Spirit : Steal Vampiric Spirit + 10 health from target foe. For 10 seconds, you have +0...number of balanced PvE skills...0 health regeneration. If you are a Necromancer henchman, you are forgiven for using this skill, otherwise you suffer from Fail for the duration of the game. Vili 17:27, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

NWN

Adrin has a dedicated server to run Sanctaria 24/7 now. Very exciting! Now that we can link with Hamatchi I can send you the quests and such I've completed over the network.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 18:20, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good. I need to teach you how to use the persistent quest system. It saves you from making separate scripts for each "if a player has this quest" check. ~Shard 21:28, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank god...I was wondering if there was a way to do that. Its tedious doing it the way I;ve been doing it.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 16:55, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Well shit

(Block log); 19:27 . . Brains12 (Talk | contribs) blocked Shard (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 1 month (account creation disabled) (more misuse of User talk:Isaiah Cartwright, more trolling)

Epic wall of text discussion is over for now I guess. You can hit me up on PvXwiki if you prefer, but I tend to just ban people who disagree with me there. Misery 17:32, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

O lawd, you done got blocked son! Now whose contribs do I watch daily for a month? :\ Vili 23:48, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Accept that he paid attention to you, that you made your point and you are heard. Don't try to circumvent the block because it just makes you look bad. People have and do pay attention, but they can't always acknowledge it. I'm not telling you lay down, just lay low for the duration of the block. Show that you can play ball, and that you understand you can't call everyone out in public. You might be surprised what comes your way. Merry Christmas, a New Year, and enjoy some time at a distance from all this drama. Ghosst • Talk •

When, in the future, I ask you in argument, "when have I ever been anything less than civil?", you can point at this post...

This is bullshit.

I'm going to assume that there was some injury caused by the "talk page misuse" (lol!), probably in the form of a cutting insult that describes the current situation in some less-than-carebearish way. "Carebearish" is an awesome word. I'd wager it was somewhere along the lines of "Izzy isn't doing a bloody thing to improve the balance of the game."

Izzy (and team) isn't doing a bloody thing to improve the balance of the game. FFS, look at the last update...

D'you know how I farmed glad points today? It looked something like this:

Enraged Smash

Hammer Bash

Blank

Blank

Blank

Blank

Blank

Blank

D'you know how I farmed balth faction today?

Palm Strike

Blank

Blank

Blank

Blank

Blank

Blank

Blank

Lux faction?

Ray of Judgment

Earthen Shackles

Blank

Blank

Blank

Blank

Blank

Blank

This cesspool of imba shit brought to you by the wonderful people at Arena Net Balance Co.

I can't name one thing that got more bal-- I take that back. Onslaught is better for the update. A month of deliberation yields a bundle of fail (minus Onslaught, of course). A "team" of "balancers" spend a month producing a pack of balance-destroying updates;

A team of people failing at their job.

But heaven forbid saying anything about it.

Suggestions, criticism? What is... blasphemy?

Most of us wouldn't risk blaspheming out balance gods for fear that... Well, I can't say what. I have no idea. That things will get worse? As scary as that thought is, I really fail to see how it's possible (within reason, of course). Perhaps they fear the ban hammer (and not without good reason, 'tis a very real threat!).

Or maybe we've just resigned, because when we talk, no one listens. When we get attention, censorship comes with it. What are we to do?

I'm no good with conclusions, either. But I'll leave you with this:

"The purpose of the wiki is to document the game." If the game is fail, are we not obligated to document such fail?

Some of us have tried to do that.

Now let the flaming begin... Raine - talk 05:35, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Palm strike is surprisingly easy for me to beat, as a monk, but I do agree the rest are pretty broken.Pika Fan 05:38, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

as a monk yh the thing is its fucking imbalanced if more then just palm strikes is on you.Mark of insecurity,palm strike,wastrel's collapse,ether prism,icy shackles,wounding strike,....

are all skills that should be toned down tbh.Eles should never have this much self defense combined with energy.WS should never bee spammable.Icy shackles also has an exhaustion causing version remember?.Were going back to fucking nightfall only this time the SoGM like skills arent a bug Lilondra *gale* 08:20, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I am as much a critic as the next guy, but I still believe this was good update. Nothing that has been introduced is more broken than we already have, especially if you look at the total picture, instead of individual skills. 145.94.74.23 10:41, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Aura of the Lich anyone? Minion Factory looks to be back + (and this surprised me) A Deathly Swarm spike?!. — Jon 16:29, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Yupp with AoTL, your deathly swarm spike is deadlier.Boro 20:13, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Nothing's broken? Mark of Insecurity says otherwise. Why? Because there's no counter to it.

Let me explain.

Though PnH got buffed to counter non-counterable Hexway, it doesn't work. Why? Well, because no one can carry it.

In 4v4, your Monk must run WoH. In 8v8, your Monks must run WoH and RC/LS; RC was necessary because of the insane amount of conditions and damage in the game, and LS does about the same thing. PnH addresses the conditions, too... every seven seconds. And heals for naught, doing nothing for the damage.

RC and LS are still required, as is WoH. There is no room on a standard backline for PnH.

So back to MoI. It recharges in ten seconds. Even if you Veil yourself and double-pull hexes, you can remove it twice before you fall behind, assuming that you're not removing any other hexes. Then you die because you can't defend yourself except by kiting and redbarring.

Even though the update as a whole may seem balanced, it did nothing to fix the meta. In fact, it made things worse because the "balanced counters" introduced with the same update are simply not viable.

I use MoI as an example, but I can make a case for just about any skill buffed in that update.

On a separate note, I read the post that got Shard banned. Just... wow. I'd like to see the logic behind that ban, because I don't see why that comment was anything less than appropriate. Yeah, it was kind of a dick way to say it. But honestly, what else gets any attention at all? We get pointed to the skill feedback pages, on which there are no responses, ever. Ever.

In conclusion, the end. Raine - talk 21:10, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the update doesn't fit the current meta. But I see no reason why the meta cannot adept to the changes. Protection Prayers have always been better than Healing Prayers, both in design as well as casting time, recharge and energy cost. Healing has 2 specific counters though, where Protection Prayers had none (enchantment removal doesn't count for short term effects). Now, they do have a counter. I know the meta leans heavily on Protection Prayers to keep them alive...well, you just might need to spread your defenses a bit, maybe bring a Blinding Surge Elemenatlist, or a defensive ritualist. That's not a big deal to me. Having to play differently doesn't make this update bad. Saying that it's bad simply means that you cannot adapt. Not 1 elite added in this update is stronger than the most powerful ones we already had. Except Blinding Surge maybe, but it will do nicely as a counter to Primal Rage and MoI, so that can be justified. That's my opinion though, you may disagree with me. But changing my mind with the same old arguments will be difficult. 145.94.74.23 11:41, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Protection Prayers have been "uncounterable" for a good reason: they are necessary. Each update has made damage more and more accessible (as in, it is now easier to do a lot more damage than it has been in in the past. Read: Palm Strike), without buffing protection prayers or Restoration or self-defense in the process, but the game has continued to run as intended because of the nature of some staple prots: Protective Spirit, for example, doesn't give a damn how much damage it's reducing. Guardian doesn't care how much damage the hits that it blocks would have done. Conversely, other small prots became less and less effective as the numbers got bigger (Read: Shielding Hands, SoA). And on the other extreme, some prots got more effective as the numbers increased (Read: Spirit Bond, which has suffered a nerf). And though the power of prots alone hasn't kept up entirely with the increase in damage, buffs to redbarring power have taken some of the pressure off of good prots.

MoI destroys protection prayers. Hex removal? Cover hex. The only thing a Monk can to to keep someone alive through MoI is redbar like hell.

Redbarring like hell doesn't depend on player skill, it depends on the power of the heals being pumped into the party.

So MoI causes skilled monks to forgo skill in favor of mindless heal spamming. If you'd like to scrim so I can show you this, I'm more than willing.

This leaves active defense in the form of off-monk skills, like bsurge, WoRemedy, Blurred Vision and general melee hate.

Now let's talk about resto rits. They excel in dealing with pressure, but they lack something that monks require to mop up damage in this meta: Word of Healing. The Ritualist heal that closest matches it in terms of pure heal power is Spirit Transfer, and that requires, well, a spirit.

Spirits are bad. A resto rit cannot replace a heal monk at the stand. Resto rits have one great prot at their disposal: WoWarding. A resto rit cannot replace a prot monk at the stand.

Let's talk about air eles. They have Blinding Surge, which is good. But there's an opportunity cost. An air ele wouldn't replace a frontline or either monk. That leaves the dom mes, the water ele, the ranger, and the flagger. Losing the water ele would mean even less melee hate, which would be counter-productive. The purpose of the bsurge ele would be to take pressure off of the monks at stand, so it couldn't replace the flagger. Rangers are invaluable in splittability and interrupts; it would be a costly swap. And swapping out the dom mes would be exchanging pressure for counter-pressure. Losing either the ranger or dom mes would come at a cost; is a bsurge worth it? I won't say no; to each his own, right? But it would be a sacrifice in a balanced team.

That leaves creating a new type of build to accommodate meta-breaking changes in skills (Read: Sway, Perma sins), which seems to be what you're advocating. While there's nothing wrong with that, per say, it would make a lot of players unhappy. You know, the same players that look down at Hero Smiteway and Sway and Hexway.

When "adapting to the changes" means creating the new Sway, though... 99.166.142.149 21:31, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

To start with : WTF an IP that actually makes sense creepy,Since when is izzy's job to change the meta  ? You know that if he would balance the game there would be no meta ? You know that all izzy has done the last updates is ADD power ? You know that most of the time it was DAMAGE on a CASTER ? You know that every fucking time izzy nerfs caster utility he just ups the energy costs ?

tbh if you dont have a clue about gamebalance dont even start talking about it.I'm not ensign almighty either but atleast I can say I know SOMETHING about it Lilondra *gale* 18:21, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I do have a clue about gamebalancing. I just don't share the popular opinions that reign on this website. It is easy to say that I don't have a clue when everyone around you agrees with your point of view, so I won't hold it against you. Yes, I agree there should be no meta (I have been a supporter of originality and versatility ever since MTG). How do you create a game without a meta? Not by making everything equal. You need to make sure that there are several solutions to the same problem that are all equally viable. The difference being that if everything is equal, only certain professions can perform certain roles. In a metaless game, you have the option to select between several professions to perform the same role, but each with their strength and weaknesses, which when taken as a whole, are equal in power. Taken as a whole means including the amount of attribute points & skill slots used, the equipment the profession can use, how easy it is to shut down such a build by taking out a key skill, wheter it combines damage and effects on an attack or not, and so on. Limiting damage dealing to physical characters, or (even worse) just to melee, is the best way to ensure that a meta will continue to exist. 145.94.74.23 10:01, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I never said that only melee should be able to deal dammage.However casters dealing 130 damage with one spell in AOE is what should be taken away.shure they can hit 80 ish damage no problem.Shure they can deal huge pressure.But giving them high damage skills results in defenseballs with the ability to spike wich is bad for the game Lilondra *gale* 11:47, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you on that one. 145.94.74.23 15:47, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Happy New Year Shard

title explains all Boro 23:10, 31 December 2008 (UTC) Happy New Year!!

That's what you think, but does it? Also, happy new year! Dark Morphon(contribs) 09:42, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

The day I feared most

I always feared that this day would come, when Aura of the lich Minion Factory/Deathspike teams discover how to use lingering curse and Wail of Doom. Now how can we stop them? (maybe one additional infuser for teams?) Boro 06:54, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Smiteway! Woo!

On a slightly more serious note, 8 Mesmers running Symbols of Inspiration. Vili 07:02, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Just go play pve. Eventually, they'll get bored of waiting and go away. Lord Belar 16:53, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

I also figured out that people usually run heroway. They don't understand that any people with brain (very rare species of GW) can counter Hero AI hex removal. (heroway people run smiter heroes usually). Also planning the most cruel part-lichway build. Boro 15:34, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Heroes have godly omniscience and are thus good for micro-managing minions. On top of that, cat-like reflexes. Otherwise, they suck. --Riddle 06:42, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I like when I am a me/n and shoot parasitic bonds at them, and they fail to interrupt it.Boro 13:08, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

build making? anyone?

Many people who know this game well (yasmin, jon, lilondra, shard and more...) have complained about the balance. I had made my complaints too. I just want to know one thing. What is the BEST build of guild wars? I had started a contest yesterday. (it can be found on my userpage) I just want to know your opinions so would you be so kind to participate? it's on PvXwiki, but if you make the build on this wiki, on my talkpage, or on any other userpage and link them to me, then I can transfer it into wikicode. Thanks for your time in advance Boro 13:29, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Here is a tip, watch obs. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Misery (talk). 13:35, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

The thing is there is no best build not only because counters etc but also because a build can work wonderfull in one team build and worse in another.Not all uber combinations are known and often only the obvious are taken.Builds should be taken for there time wich means that for example the recall warriors of team evefrost would have a high chance imo.Also Best has many ways if you want physicly best you can say a WS is technicly the most powerfull however a eviscerate warrior is much more powerfull in some cases (read: bull strike) Lilondra *gale* 17:49, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

There is no best build, assuming you waste your money on all chapters. If you don't have Grindfall or Grind of the North, you can't run the best builds because Anerf wants to award the most wins to people who pay more.

Jumping in late here. The best THING about Guild Wars is that there is no "Best Build." (unlike WoW....) While there are builds that are noticably better than others, there is still room for creativity and adaptability and change to certain degrees. Gimmicks aside, it's not so much the build that matters (unlike WoW....) It's how you run it. (unlike WoW....) My guild and I often run run strange new takes on balance in GvG and HA, often to success, and sometimes to failure. As long as there is still room for those new and creative interpretations, there is still hope for the game, and it's still doing something right. — Jon Lupen 03:17, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm sry but you fail to mention how the originality is declining rapidly.Where is warriors cunningto breach evils wards,Where is recall to teleport to youre opponents base and fucking rape it.Where is arcane thievery to take gale from the opposing warriors.These things I just find genius just got lost somewhere you do have a point however Lilondra *gale* 11:45, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

DangDangDangDang (headbutting table/wall/floor) Forgot to say: Teambuild. <continues>DangDangDangDang.... --Boro 12:59, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

You also didn't mention an arena or anything. Misery 13:12, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Cripshot. --71.229.253.172 13:16, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

arena[1]=HA arena[2]=PvEBoro 15:08, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

soya

Iread yer page. Iagree wif most of your point, everyone does assuming that they arent exploiting the imbalance. But srsly, why are you doing all this? All those speeches n shiz. Last time i saw someone asking this your troll/worshipper/annoying (Hi raine, get a life btw) cunt ran in and started flaming the guy. Seriously though, There is no reason for you to keep making all these pointless idiotic speeches. Dungetmewrong, they are correct n stuffs. But what does that help if anet will NEVER EVER change it the way you want? I'm also sure that you even yerself stated that you knew that they would'nt. People can also read the link why guildwars failed and understand 100% why you are doing all this. Thus you've correctly stated yer opinion. So why are you still doing this? you wont talk sense to anyone, and you keep repeating the same point over and over. Soye. Stop being so fucking srs bsns and get over the fact that gw isn't like it used to be.Oni 23:53, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Shoo. --Jette 23:59, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Shard is on ban atm for NPA violations, so an answer to this will be long in the comming. His ban may have expired by now, and if so, he has yet to resurface.

A note on NPA, calling someone a "cunt" is a violation of NPA, please use more respectful work choice in the future. Thank you. — Jon Lupen 00:01, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

The answer eventually came last time someone asked: I wrote it for people who are interested in game design, management, or balance. Many people on the wiki want to become (or are) game designers or programmers or something along those lines. I'm giving them my angles, some of which they might not have seen. Anet already reads 0% of what the players post here, so you're right, it wasn't for them. The stuff I pm them in game is the only stuff they read, and I almost never get to do that as nobody at arenanet plays GW. It wasn't for my "fanboys." The only fanboys I have (or, the only ones I want) are the ones who like me because I know what I'm talking about. ~Shard 22:53, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Does that answer your question for you Oni? Misery 00:13, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Not really, just read his page.

There is more than enough info there. So why keep going? Attention sez hi.

Also, fanboys come not because he knows what he is talking about but more because he creates fucking epic drama.Oni 00:38, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

In case you didn't know, you yourself are creating some epic drama. Just go back to the hole you came from little troll.Pika Fan 00:41, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm a fan of Shard because he's funny. So I hope he continues his idiotic speeches. Vili 08:24, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

-GASP- I AM?! WHAT!? Zomfg, i so didnt know that :O. MepointisthatshardisonlyrantingbecauseshardfapfapshardtothenapswhowantstohavesexwithhimforsayinglolraoisopOni 12:16, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Shard has the point. If you had really read trough all his writings, maybe checked his page history, you should have seen why is he making all of this: He thinks that GW is a really nice engine, and doesn't want Anet to waste it with bad (and I mean Really bad) balance decisions.Boro 15:08, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Did you even read what i said or did you just see a negative comment about shard and decided to act? Read again; Anet wont change the game to the way shard like it. Izzy himself stated that his balancing is to please the majority, and the majority=noobs. Read nuklears page, my actual comment and then go bury your head under the sand.Oni 15:57, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Oni, please indent correctly. Oni, I read what Shard has to say because for the most part, He knows what he's talking about. He has a fair and expirenced insight into the game. Ablbeit some of his methods are questionable, but that's another issue for another time. Think of his writings as propaganda. Propaganda is not aimed at the people in control, it's aimed at everyone else. If shard can make his point to enough players, then his point of view suddenly becomes the majority. You said it yourself, Arena Net is out to please the majority. — Jon Lupen 18:47, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Lol at you if you think the majority of guildwars players spend time in guildwars wiki reading these rants.

What im saying is that he already has stated more than enough to convince pretty much anyone. Constantly making more speeches now is just ranting. Oni 19:42, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

I never said that I think the majority of the community comes to the wiki. Please do not assume things I have not actualy said, or put words in my mouth. Opinions and such are often very viral. One person could read Shards rants, convince their friends of the same thing, and so on. People don;t have to come in contect with the source of an opinion to share it. — Jon Lupen 20:05, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

On another note, there are still a good many people even here that refuse to listen to Shard. — Jon Lupen 20:07, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Shard is far from always correct and Oni is a troll. Why on earth people are still talking to him is beyond me. Misery 20:52, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Still talk to Shard or Oni? — Jon Lupen 21:02, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Oni. I don't think being wrong on ocassion doesn't mean people shouldn't talk to you or I wouldn't talk to anyone. Misery 21:03, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Lol, fair point. Although, no one deserves to be left at the mercy of trolls, especialy when they can't fight back, unless you are a troll of equal or greater magnitude. — Jon Lupen 21:05, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Good plan that, combatting trolls by reasoning with them. Misery 21:08, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

*In Darth Vader voice* I find your lack of faith disturbing...... — Jon Lupen 21:10, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

k --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Misery (talk).

I don't see any reason for Shard to stop writing stuff until it actually changes something. Vili 23:20, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Even tho im a godlikemanly troll my argument still haznt gotten lolraped. Shard has no reason to keep ranting except for the fact that people go (L)_(L) over it when he does so. Even though he WANTS to change anet, constantly whining even more doesnt really help his standing with them. because you should already know that HE IS A CUNT TOWARDS ANET, calling them incompitent monkeys n such. And pretty much 60% of the time he just recycles the same thing over and over; GW IZNT LIKE IT UZD TO BE NAO ITZ NURT BALEANCDZ WHIZH I DUN LAIKZ. RAOISBADSOSEXANYONE? Also, in trollvstroll battles i always win, nubfgts.Oni 23:31, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

k

Try using grammar if you want your opinion to be taken considered of. Boro 07:02, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

And you should learn from shard: in expressing your opinions. Boro 07:10, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Shard says the same thing over and over because the same things are being neglected over and over. If you were drowning, would you just call for help once?

Most people don't care about their standing with anet; we all get equally ignored.

Also, let me undermine any hopes of this post being construed as "constructive":

I write things like this so that people can better understand me, as a person. I'm dissatisfied with the state of the game; that's not a question. I advocate change, in the relevant places. But other things, rants like the one in question, things not specifically made to get anyone in particular's attention, I post on my own user space (there are a lot of pages in my user space that aren't linked to). The ones that have been made public aren't to somehow indirectly tell someone how much I hate them, but merely to make available some insight. "What's your position?" It's not a debate, it's the reference material to be called upon when there is a debate so that people won't have to ask what my position is. Of course, I can't say for sure that that was Shard's reason for making said post, but that's what I'd conjecture. Raine - talk 00:25, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Raine, that's an acceptable answer to me. Thank you for taking the time to answer me in a polite manner, without any passive aggressiveness as some others have done. I truly appreciate it. 145.94.74.23 08:15, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Quit being an idiot. Know what the hell you're talking about.

Once again, in case you're too dense to understand:

Quit being an idiot. Know what the hell you're talking about.

First time's a warning, right? Totally worth it. Raine - talk 12:34, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

You guys suck balls. Seriously, i expected alot more fanboirage against me if i ranted against shard. You better rage soon or I'll be sad :(. Also; how the fuck do you compare DROWNING (Ie; a situation where you are DYING) to a point where you are not pleased with a current state of a GAME? Thats just retarded logic. I'll say it again if its that fucking hard to understand for you nubish rabbitsh hamsters: ANET WILL -NOT- MAKE THE DRAMATIC CHANGE YOU WANT IN THE GAME BECAUSE THEY HAVE ONE FUCKING SKILLBALANCER WHO WORKS 1/15 ON ANOTHER GAME (gw2) AND NEVER EVER EVER PLAYS THE GAME. MMk? Also, do not bring up the bullshiz that THEY SHUD HAIER ANUTTAR BALAZNZARR because you should know that the odds of them doing that is 0%. Nubfgtz.Oni 13:05, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Nobody cares. -Auron 13:10, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

k

Recently lilondra had extracted (I know it's a bad word for describing their talk) some information from Regina about Izzy's job, and the conclusion is: Oni has the point in the first allcaps sentence. It's another thing that he is trolling. So two things need to be done: First, oni stops trolling, second, we stop harassing izzy. Fine? Boro 14:23, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Linsey Murdock and Joe Kimmes. They are responsible for what we have here in GWBoro 14:26, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

gud 1 m8, letz go harras them! Misery 14:33, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Misery, Shard already succeeded in alienating Izzy from the community, do you REALY want to repeat the feat with Linsey and Joe? Do you want to cut one of our last links to Arena Net? — Jon Lupen 16:29, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

See Jon, that was sarcasm. You could tell because of the terrible spelling uncharacteristic for most of my contributions. My point is Borotvalt seemed to be suggesting that people should "stop harassing izzy izzy", then suggested who he thinks people should be responsible. Truth be told, I doubt anyone has any power to change the game significantly as I am sure upper management is happy with sales figures and doesn't want to see sweeping changes. Misery 16:47, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

I should also bring this to everyone's attention. — Jon Lupen 16:32, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Lol. Izzy izzy was a mistake, repaired. Boro 18:05, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

(RI, because whatever) Borotvalt has a point, though. People keep making questions about balance to Isaiah, but Regina has recently indicated that he's not responsible for GW1 balance anymore. Apparently the Live Team is doing everything about GW1, including balance, and Isaiah only gives some opinions once in a while. Erasculio 18:58, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

@Misery: Sarcasm fails on the internet. use less please. — Jon Lupen 19:08, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

O rly? Raine - talk 20:44, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Sigh. You people suck >.> My point, in reply to Oni's original statement here, is that people have been poking Isaiah about balance problems for ages now. However, he...

1. Does not know how to use the wiki. He has said so himself.
2. More often than not does not reply to stuff that is asked to him.
3. Appears to be busy with one thousand things.

Linsey, in other hand...

1. Knows how to use the wiki, at least well enough to deal with her talk page.
2. Replies to everything people ask her. She has even taken a look at some userpages people have linked from her talk page and commented every topic there.
3. Is also busy with one thousand things so the replies are slow, but eventually she answers stuff.

Isaiah has been alienated with all the "You fail at balance, plz suicide kthxb" talk, so I don't think it would be a good idea to harass Linsey with that kind of argument. But in other hand, no one has ever made a comment in her talk page simply asking, "Hi Linsey, now that you're also doing a lot of skill balance, are you thinking on nerfing Wounding Strike? I think it's too overpowered thanks to its low recharge and to how Bleeding covers Deep Wound". I have no idea if sysops would move such comments from out of there (she has asked us to deal with her page as if it were a forum, and she doesn't like people to move stuff away from her page, even things that have their own sections like GW1 suggestions), but if we have so many people willing to rant about balance issues in GW, I think asking her (pleasantly and without impossibly huge walls of text) would be worth a try. Erasculio 13:33, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

omg personal attack -Auron 13:35, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I so knew someone was going to say that. I guess it's "halp! halp!" time. Erasculio 13:44, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Halp halp! I'm being oppressed! Was that what you meant? Misery 13:56, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

linsey is the most active arenanet person on wiki and actually answer questions, having shard and say, people like oni on her page would probably make her leave after some time, and we'd be left with regina who is too official, and gaile who don't know much. imo this is a bad idea, losing linsey isn't worth it, and she doesn't deserve it at all. --78.82.75.195 18:02, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Yh screw izzy,screw anet,screw izzy even more but pls not linsey she's actually worth something.Was that what you meant? (To any idiot around its called SARCASM like in I'M not SERIOUS!) Lilondra *gale* 17:10, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

"Misery, Shard already succeeded in alienating Izzy from the community, do you REALY want to repeat the feat with Linsey and Joe? Do you want to cut one of our last links to Arena Net?" No, Izzy alienated himself. Blaming an irate customer isn't fair or professional.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 17:53, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I had the privilage of speaking to a number of Arena Net staff members in the very short time I attended the Penny Aracde Expo back in August. I was able to speak to Izzy for a short time. During that conversation, he conveyed to me that he has been quite deeply offended by a number of individuals, and named a few, Shard being one of them. Yes, it was unfair to single out Shard, but from my vantage point, and certain events I've witnessed, It was the community that did the alienating. I've grown a very thick skin over time, and yet I found myself absolutely discusted and horrified at the treatment of an individual. I wouldn't wish such treatment on my worst of enemies. If Shard's comments toward Izzy had been said to him in person, (or any of his comments about a few other Arena Net staff members), He would have very solid grounds for a harrasment case, and would probably win. Yes, it is fair to blame an irate customer for certain things, and to a certain degree. I respect Shard's insights into the game and balance opinions, but when I weight his other actions and words, that's about where it ends. — Jon Lupen 23:49, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Stop being a carebear. The current balance of Build Wars, oh wait, there is no such thing as balance here is WORSE than terrible. If there was a RANDOM power distribution among skills, it would be better than this. At least 50% of the skills would be viable instead of the 20% that are viable right now. When stuff goes wrong, 99% of the time, whoever is in charge is at fault. It's called being a professional. It's called taking responsibility. Anet hasn't shown either of those, and they have no excuses left.

I wish I could use that excuse at my job when my tennants violate lease policies and are uncouth to my staff members. I wish I could go back in time to my retail days and use that excuse as well...I'd be a millionare. The fact of the matter is, Izzy is a represenative of Anet, and him even talking to a customer in the way you state he did is extremely unprofessional--even if what he says it true--which yes, it is--he still should not speak that way of a customer to a customer. If I were to say to one resident "Joe in apartment 46 is an awful tennant, he never pays his rent and speaks rudely to me" I would 1. be in serious Fair Housing trouble, 2. I would be violating our company policy in regards to resident privacy and 3. I would likely lose my job. I have to remind myself that most of the people playing these games are not adults (though I am aware some of you are) and that the understanding of how a professional work enviornment works isn't as realistic as it should be. If he is being "harrased" Anet and NCsoft need to take appropriate measures...though nothing Shard has said or done would hold up in any lawsuit. Unfortunately, dealing with uncouth, unhappy and disgruntled customers is apart of our job.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 00:38, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Actualy, none of the Arena Net staff HAS to interact with the community except the CM team. Izzy is not part of the CM team. There is a certain level of respect due to any human being, which I didn't see given out by certain members of the community, who I know are fully capable of being reasonable and respectful individuals. And, a very large amount of Shard's comments constitute lible, which would hold up in any lawsuit. Yes, Izzy was being harrased, and appropriate measures where taken. Since he is not required to be a presence in the community, he simply left it. I might also remind you that Linsey is an active presence in the community of her own free will, and on her own time. If she no longer feels it worth the trouble and hassle with dealing with flack, flame, gripping, trolling and insults infesting her page, she can also choose to pick up and leave the community. — Jon Lupen 00:55, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) It's spelled "flak," not flack. It's German. --Jette 01:00, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Yarly. Play more Unreal Tournament. Mori no Kinoko ni go Youjin 01:01, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

We stole it and added a "C". I've been over this with my German teacher. Either spelling is accepted. — Jon Lupen 01:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

You know what i really hate ? when people start picking on spelling instead of content.No offense Jette,Vili,anyone but could you just comment on what he was trying to make clear.I mean he DOES seem to make a point. Lilondra *gale* 16:58, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Someone in this thread has a valid point? I must have missed it. Mori no Kinoko ni go Youjin 17:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Trolling thread contains trolling. Misery 17:06, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

The point he's trying to make is, "the ANet staff has the right to bawwww like a little bitch and then go pout in their room." And they do. Everyone has that right. I agree with him. But you can't expect the community they're supposed to be pleasing to be okay with it. The purpose of any profit-seeking capitalist entity is to seek... profit. Which, in this case, means selling more games. People are far more likely to tell their friends to buy games if said games do not suck, and people who've already bought the game are much more likely to buy sequels if they think they won't be crap. Convincing people to like the game is the function of balance teams and other staff. I honestly don't think anyone would give a rat's ass about balance so long as they're consistently having fun playing the game anyway, but most people aren't having fun playing the game. Most of the people who've been here since the beginning to remember when it didn't suck, anyway. The point I'm trying to make here is that they are not doing their jobs, which means we have every right to be angry about them refusing to do said jobs. --Jette 17:20, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

You are so wrong. Most people love the game. Most people don't care at all about balance or pvp. Most people are retarded. Your money is not important to Arenanet. The fact that you are here using this wiki suggests you are not "most people". Stop trying to use it as an argument. Misery 17:28, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Hating how broken the game is not the same as loving the game itself. I like this game, but I dislike the balancing issues with the game.Pika Fan 17:31, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't see it clear: you dislike the current balance or you dislike the comments we make? In the latter case: I have tried to make my posts more polite and I feel I have achieved something. I am trying to convince you to be more polite with arenanet staff members and to ask questions to the right people (who re actually making the decisions). I am not banned or disliked and I have made some constructive suggestions. Good luck improving their talkpages with good suggestions and discussions. Boro 17:55, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Being told that "You are not the majority, and we're really not listening to you all that much, tbh" would be awesome, were that the case. I'm not saying that it isn't the case; I've said things along those lines myself. My issue isn't with that (they're a company, of course) but in that a massive portion of this wiki would be a gross waste of time and effort, were that the case. Peoples' time and effort. It's really not cool to have people devoting said time and effort (under false pretense) toward whatever ends, when their time and effort is actually doing nothing to move the game toward that ends. Raine - talk 22:43, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Just saying people should stop saying "Stop being jerks Anet or I won't buy your game and you'll lose money Anet!". It's wrong so it won't make them listen to you more. Work out what will make them listen to you more and do that, much better use of time. Misery 22:48, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, we know what makes anet listen to us. Unfortunately, the way to get them to listen to us is in violation of policy. Raine - talk 22:54, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Your ban

is up tomorrow. --*Yasmin Parvaneh* 16:58, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

not today? Boro 17:39, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

nope 1 more day ^^ anyone willing to bet how long it will take before he writes another epic article and thus another 1 month ban ? Lilondra *gale* 18:18, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

An hour. Lord Belar 18:24, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Only as long as it takes to write it if he hasn't toned down any. — Jon Lupen 18:47, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Could already be written, tbh. Raine - talk 20:20, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

This is true. If that's the case, it could be a matter of minutes. — Jon Lupen 20:22, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

This might be a dumb question but.... why bother putting it here then? Why not put it somewhere else that isn't so Hostile (like maybe GWW). I swear this is the most vulgar unfriendly wiki I've ever read, and I'm a regular reader of Encyclopedia Dramatica. Pool's closed... Shard needs to move to another format that better appreciates his contribs. --ilr 00:13, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Because he's a troll. Lord Belar 01:43, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

And, if you think we don't like him because we're just unfriendly, maybe you should step back and take a look at what he actually says and does compared to the rest of us. Although, since you read ED regularly, I suspect his asshattery will seem perfectly normal to you. Lord Belar 01:45, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Because anet is supposed to read and respond to the things in the appropriate places on this wiki; they're not required to do it elsewhere. Though, they don't do it here, either, in many cases. The fact remains, though, that if someone posts in the appropriate places on this wiki, they can justifiably make the case that said post should be read. Raine - talk 02:46, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

They're not "required" to do it here, either. Sometimes people forget that this isn't supposed to be a base for ArenaNet-community communication, PR, or a soapbox for disgruntled players. Just because it may happen sometimes doesn't mean it's required or necessary. That goes for ArenaNet users, and 'normal' users. Everyone here is a user - it just so happens that some of these users work at ArenaNet. -- Brains12 \ talk 03:07, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Someone should block all the ANet employees just to see what'd happen. --Jette 03:19, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

He would be reconfirmed (possibly demoted in the meantime as a precaution), and the blocks reversed. Just like any other case of rogue-sysopism. Not that it would ever happen. -- Brains12 \ talk 03:23, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Summed up my whole point right there... I don't post here often b/c I'd like to avoid any appearance that I'm just "playin it up" for Anet. And I don't believe that Shard would do that either. ...but feel free to label me a troll too if it makes anyone feel better, LoL. --ilr 03:56, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

That would be what would happen from a wiki perspective, but I meant what the employees would do. --Jette 04:25, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

They would probably look at the page of the sysop that blocked them and look for "favorite skills", and the next update, that sysop has ALL of his favorites 25/90'd. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:an ip guy (talk).

(reset) lol. Now where are you shard? Boro 16:29, 18 January 2009 (UTC)