Trending Games | Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn | Elder Scrolls Online | Guild Wars 2 | Firefall
Network: Mist League FPSguru RTSguru
| 183 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
2/29/12 10:17:00 PM#161
Originally posted by aguliondew No, I'm not talking about a balance issue with trait lines. I'm talking about synergy with your skills when you choose one trait line that disappears when you choose another. I am literally begging ArenaNet to rethink this change on GW2Guru where I've posted literally 17 times in one thread and haven't even expressed all of my objections to this system. In addition to all my other problems with it, I'm starting to think that "it must be so complicated that I can't even adequately explain what is wrong with it" is itself a sign that there's something wrong with it.
What I am talking about is a person who took 30 points in Defense having to use a rifle for a particular encounter. If I have to use a rifle, even if I can switch my major traits to something in defense that would help, I end up with something like this: Adept Vigorous Return: Increased health on rally. Not useless, but really not optimal.
However, if I could switch my 30 points to Arms, not only would I have +300 Precision which buffs crit, I'd also have Malice which increases the damage of bleeds. Adept Precise Strikes: 33% chance to cause bleeding on crit. Look at the synergy there.
The problem I'm having (one of many problems) is that switching your skills kills the synergy between your skills and your traits. You either go up against this boss in a suboptimal configuration, or you need to go back to town and respec. ArenaNet doesn't want us to respec. I don't want us to respec. I want traits to be tradeoffs. If the boss is very hard, it's either tuned for people running optimal specs for it (and balanced specs struggle), or it's tuned for balanced specs, in which case very synergistic specs have an easier time. Right now, the trait system lets you pick these ultra synergistic trait combinations. They don't feel like customization bonuses to me, they feel like things people should be doing to min/max, which they can't without going back to a trainer.
What I'm proposing is a way for people to take 15 traits but without these obvious synergies. If you like axes, you can take an axe trait. If you like greatswords, you can take that trait instead. If you like neither, you can take a physical utility trait. Whatever you prefer to customize your playstyle. Then if you do run into a situation where you took an axe trait but have to use a rifle, you don't feel like you're totally screwed because it's just 1 trait out of 15 which doesn't apply for this encounter.
Can someone please show me love and let me know they get what I'm talking about?
|
|
|
2/29/12 10:30:19 PM#162
Honestly, this isn't even my latest objection, which is also something I can't seem to get anyone on GW2Guru to take seriously.
Colin Johanson gave this interview where he said that one of the reasons they tied skills to weapons in GW2 was because there were people in GW1 who were bad at making builds. http://www.necrobator.com/features/i...nson-part-two/ One of the things I truly love about GW2 is that even though there are fewer choices overall, you can't really make a bad build. You're always going to have a weapon, a heal, at least somewhat useful utilities and elite. Please please please take a look at this trait build. http://www.gw2tools.com/#t-el-QQhVV:Waa.daa.Zaa.aaa.aaa
This build is awful. Because of terrible trait point placement, they get access to 3 Major traits instead of 7. Furthermore, it's possible to take completely unhelpful major traits, like in this example if the elementalist didn't have any glyph, signet, or conjured weapon skills. Granted, nobody should do that, but maybe they make a mistake or swap skills and forget to change traits.
I see a huge inconsistency between their desire to make it so nobody can gimp themselves with skills, and how badly you can potentially gimp yourself with traits. |
|
|
2/29/12 10:34:01 PM#163
I get what your saying Cali and I wonder about it with my Warrior build that I want to use. But we have no idea how often this occurance will happen. If it crops up every hour or so of gameplay then its a big problem, every dungeon- problem, every so often?? all well thats the price of specializing. As stated before hand the weapon gives the skill at a decent base level. So your not a total gimp if you have to switch out your prefered weapons to one that your only baseline in. Change your skills and elite around, even change a major if you get the chance for some new synergy, and try the encounter. If you want to use up a bunch of bag space, make sure you have all your weapons and a different set of generalized runed armor (yuk i know but ya gotta do that sometimes) Eh was trying to write more and it just wasnt comin out right so im gonna stop. Hope i got my point across. |
|
|
2/29/12 10:34:08 PM#164
Well, they could always introduce "Dual Spec", or Multiple Specs. It's inevitable that people are going to be trying different specs for certain fights and encounters. This still wouldn't fix the problem though. An Earth attuned Elementalist might do better as an Air attuned Elementalist against a certain boss or encounter. Earth magic line gives Malice (Improves damage done by conditions) Air magic line gives Prowess (Improves damage multiplier on critical strikes)
Now why would i use the Air magic line on a boss if the Earth magic line would be superior by using conditions? I would be gimping my stats. Will the group actually wait for me to go back to town and respec? I highly doubt it. |
|
|
2/29/12 10:44:28 PM#165
Originally posted by cali59
I used to TL;DR, but then I took a bullet point to the footnote. |
|
|
2/29/12 11:42:12 PM#166
Originally posted by grimm6th Their goal with the skill system was to make a system where you couldn't gimp yourself, but which allowed for expert players to get more out of it with synergies (presumably tying in traits as well). Don't you think they've succeeded in doing that? Can you even make a skill build which you can say that's really bad? Can you even point to any utility skill that you could say "given the rest of their build, this isn't going to help them at all?"
Forget about my other proposal above and look at the trait system as it is now. Suppose instead of getting one point per level, you got 1 point every 5 levels and each one by itself was enough to unlock a minor or major trait. That would be a simpler system. That would be a system where you couldn't go 19/19/14/9/9 and completely screw yourself. Yet the functionality would be near identical to what is obviously intended. Suppose they didn't make major traits which tied to particular weapons/glyphs/seals etc and they were all just generic bonuses so you could pick which ones you liked to fit your playstyle. That would arguably be a better system because then people couldn't (for whatever reason) have selected traits which didn't benefit them.
You call it idiot proofing, but based on the interview it's clear that there are people who just made bad builds. GW2 seems like it's going to be an extremely casual friendly game. Making simple changes so that people always have a totally functional baseline yet still allowing for more experienced players to get more out of the system seems like something ArenaNet really should be doing. |
|
|
3/01/12 3:19:38 AM#167
Oh c'mon now cali. I could come up with a purposefully useless build in your proposed system as well. That's hardly a convincing argument against the current one. Other than that we're running in circles. We DO get what you're talking about, we just don't agree with you. |
|
|
3/01/12 3:28:30 AM#168
Originally posted by cali59 That would be a horrible system. That is in fact a criticism i have with the current system. There are still too many flat damage bonuses in there. More damage is not a choice. Those always seem mandatory, and players feel like they need to pick them up. |
|
|
3/01/12 3:50:29 AM#169
Originally posted by grimm6th 1. Have you played games online? Some people are bad. Some people are really, ridiculously bad. 2. That isn't going to be enough justification for the inevitable min-maxers that WILL be playing GW2. 3. You're right; which is why this system should not exist. |
|
|
3/01/12 3:58:45 AM#170
Originally posted by cali59 Ok Cali, I'll play again... First off, I'd be willing to bet money that the reason we have 70 Points is they wanted a system that rewarded players at every level gained as changes in (a certain other game) weren't well-received. Since based on beta feedback it'll take a player 20-40 minutes to unlock their weapons, there does need to be some kind of tangible feeling of "reward" or "progression" as players level up. You might disagree, but I've heard them talk about it before. Second, as people have said you worked really hard to come up with a bad build, and even if somebody really did that it would be easy enough for them to correct it with a respec. Third, let's take a look at a Warrior with that ranged fight in mind. Here's a build that I don't consider particularly good for that dungeon or even for play in general, but I can see people taking it as a kind of "Paladin/Tank/Support" concept: http://www.gw2tools.com/#t-w-afppa:aaa.baa.Wgc.WfX.aaa Like I said, not particularly good but it's got a "Sword & Board" Support theme going. Now we get to that nasty Spider and "Omgz whatever are we going to do?!?..." Well, we can try something like this http://www.gw2tools.com/#t-w-afppa:aaa.Xaa.Wdc.WfX.aaa and we spend the fight Supporting with Shouts, shooting when the Spidey isn't looking/running at us, and we can reflect missiles sent our way while our Shield is out. The 25-point Defense Minor Trait means that (especially if we really went Tanky and stacked as much Toughness as we could on our gear) we will still have a very respectable Power rating for consistent damage, and the 25-point Tactics Minor means we're making everybody else hit harder passively. And all that was accomplished without even taking into account that we can focus on a Bow with Tactics or build for a Banner or Warhorn instead. Hopefully this clarifies my point a bit - you seem deadset on focusing/worrying about not being able to go from "Max Control/Support" to "Max Ranged Damage" on that Spider fight and I'd argue that trying to is "doing it wrong" because Support is still going to be very valuable on that fight, and if you are good at Dodging boy are you going to be able to take a lot more damage before going down with the above build. And finally, once again - that above Build isn't even one I expect to be preferred for that Dungeon and I still think it can work. GW1 was all about coming up with optimized and synergized builds for specific Heroic Missions. As best we can tell, that tradition lives on in Expore-Mode Dungeons. I want a deep and varied system for designing my character to work with a group for those, and I accept that kind of system will also allow for "bad builds" that might work fine in the open world but fail in Dungeon play. |
|
|
3/01/12 4:19:39 AM#171
First, like the original GW, armor is armor - there is no traits really on it. That means no armor grind to get the best. GW2, like it's predecessor, is about your skill at playing not getting 'UBER' anything. Armor look will be about vanity and how you want your character to look. GW1 also didn't let you change your builds, once you picked them, you were stuck. That changed as the game matured. You already have 5 skills tied to your weapon, change weapon change those skills. So in fact, you can change some on the fly. Like most games, there will always be people who want everything their way - the QQ'ers. The developers/designers have a reason to to do things this way. Let's see how the game looks in beta once we are able to play it.
 "You can fool some of the people all the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time." Abraham Lincoln |
|
|
3/01/12 5:17:17 AM#172
Originally posted by botrytis GW2 armor, like GW1, have stats. The power curve is much more shallow than in other games and it won't take long upon reaching the level cap to acquire max stat gear. There is no "End Game" gear grind. GW1 did allow you to change your builds. Originally you earned refund points by earning XP and completing quests ans those points could be used to refund attribute points. As long as you had the refund points, you could change your build mid-mission. Not long after release, they got rid of the refund point cost and allowed you to freely readjust your build, but you had to do so in town or at an outpost, you could no longer change it mid-mission. Yes, most professions can swap between two weapon sets mid combat. Anyone can swap weapons in and out of their weapon set(s) out of combat. Tbe developers originally touted the ability to change trait builds anywhere, outside of combat and for free, as a desirable element of GW2 game design. They made a good case for that design choice at the time. The reversal was unexpected and no explaination was given. Some of us would like to know what caused them to backtrack and are requesting some compromise. Few have asked for a complete reversal, we understand there must have been some reason for the change, but we also see some serious negative consequences to the change, as is. (Inability to freely change builds other than through a trainer is likely to lead to groups recruiting particular, proven, Flavor of the Moment builds. This would be contrary to a major design goal of the game, which is that no group will ever have to wait for a particular profession to do content and no player will have to miss out on a group because they are the wrong profession). Suggested compromises have been limited respecs in the field, or the ability to save two builds that you can switch between in the field, while still needing to visit a trainer to change those builds. No one is demanding "their way", we just would like some communication, feel the need to voice our concerns on this encouraging people to stick to cookie cutter builds and would like to suggest some simple compromises to alleviate our concerns. Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated |
|
|
3/01/12 5:24:03 AM#173
Originally posted by botrytis GW1 armor did have traits, later armors did however allow you to change those traits. GW2 armors will have traits as well, but they will be balanced so one is not affecting the game balance much more than any other. And you could initially change builds outside outposts. This system is slightly different, I agree that we need to try it out before really judging it |
|
|
3/01/12 5:40:13 AM#174
Originally posted by fiontar So if I didn't read wrong, the way they currently have it will lead to the cooki cutter builds and that will limit our participation in the group activities (Dungeons), am I correct? So doesn't that break the game's philosophy just like you said it? Guild Wars 2's 50 minutes game play video: |
|
|
3/01/12 5:46:01 AM#175
Originally posted by nomss That is indeed the criticism. The problem here is that people think of trait builds as if those were the builds in GW1 or talent specs in WoW. They are not, because professions in GW2 are generalists by design. The game's philosophy remains unchanged. You cannot trait to become a healer, you cannot trait to become a tank. You cannot trait yourself 'wrong' so you're not viable as a party member for a dungeon. Traiting allows to emphasize one ore more aspects of your characters abilities, but even then you will never be efficient if you focus on just those while neglecting the rest of your abilities in combat. The purpose of the trait system is not to optimize your character, it is to customize it. |
|
|
3/01/12 6:51:27 AM#176
Originally posted by fiontar Initially they did yes, but after Nightfall, you had to put runes on your armor to get the stats - otherwise max armor was just that - max armor. They also converted the older armor (I had elite Bonelace armor which was converted to Elite cabalist with the runes to make it bone lace). It is not quite the same as WoW or Rift where the interents on the armor make you more powerful.
Let us wait and see. We can conjecture all we want but when we play the game we will know more. "You can fool some of the people all the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time." Abraham Lincoln |
|
|
3/01/12 7:29:27 AM#177
You can't min-max in GW2 and you'd be foolish to try. The dynamic combat, the ability of enemies to dodge and avoid damage, the necessity for you to stop attacking and dodge, move, use supportive or controlling skills all break any attempts to min-max your character, so cast that idea from your head now before you get into GW2 and not only look silly but prove to be one of the least effective overall players in your group. You cannot min-max and be effective, period. Good, now that's settled. As such...
The new trait system works out nicely to be honest. It allows you to build templates for various builds. Within the template you create you'll have what, five to seven major traits you can swap out to give you a specific flavor. So, between swapping traits at need, swapping weapons and swapping utility skills, all when out of combat, you have a ton of flexibility available to you... enough to be a skilled and effective player in most every situation.
If you decide you want a new trait template, head to town, refund all your points and traits and build a new one. You then have a huge number of new builds to play with.
When you forget about the fallacy of being able to min-max and look at it from a balanced, no specific role based system it's actually rather elegant, giving you a large number of options. Oderint, dum metuant. |
|
|
3/01/12 9:20:21 AM#178
In the case of a warrior, while no single trait line has traits for every weapon, all of them have traits that can be used with every weapon which in the case of a line which had a trait of a weapon you wanted to augment, if you put traits for that weapon, your other weapons wouldn't benefit from it. Confusing phrasing, sorry. Examples: If you put the "Axe Mastery" (+ axe damage) trait from the Strength trait line, you couldn't put, in its slot, "Physical Mastery" which increases the damage of all utility physical skills. The trait "Blademaster" (+crit chance with a sword) in the Arms line could be replaced with traits to increase bleeding duration, extra damage to bleeding foes, +50% crit chance versus stunned foes, or Frenzy at 25% health. In most cases you'd be giving up a boost to any weapon you might have equipped to give a boost to a particular weapon. I'm not saying that weapon-specific traits are bad, but you can choose to trait for benefits applicable to every weapon. |
|
|
3/01/12 9:39:14 AM#179
Originally posted by Naqaj I do think it's a valid objection. For instance, I have no problem with the talent system in WoW allowing people to make terrible builds. The problem I have with it happening in GW2 is due to their stated desire to not allow people to make bad skill choices. The response of "they could fix it with a respec" or "nobody should be that terrible", or "if they want to play that way, let them" don't hold water to me. If ArenaNet feels a certain way about skills, they should also feel that way about traits which appear in every way to be a much more complicated system.
My proposed system, where players just pick 3 traits from each category doesn't have the issue of misallocation of points. Honestly, I very much dislike specific weapon traits and I'm also with you in my dislike of generic flat damage traits as well. Traits like "do damage when you dodge", or "reflect missiles when you block" or "using a burst skill restores endurance". These are the kinds of traits that I want to see, because they are all customizations based on your playstyle. That I think the traits themselves are bad is a complaint I haven't even gotten to yet until just now because of trying to argue my 6 other complaints about this system. |
|
|
3/01/12 9:52:08 AM#180
Originally posted by ariboersma Indeed. The flexibility was something I was looking forward to. |
|
Friends: vgchartz.com
Not a member? You can still subscribe to our newsletters and daily updates here!
Jun 19, 2013 10:26 AM
- Page Created in 0.797 seconds -
