Originally posted by Izik

Originally posted by redman875

Originally posted by Eir_S

  

+1

You guys are absolutely delusional if you think GW2 has good graphics. Please do yourself a favor and educate yourself before posting next time. Bloom and post processing effects are used ad nauseum in this game to disguise the low polygon count and low-res textures.

Check out: TSW (best looking game in the genre currently), Tera, Rift, Lotro, and Age of Conan's Rise of the Godslayer zones. 

Hey, I'm sorry you don't like the graphics of GW2. 

That's fine, because the term "good graphics" is entirey subjective and not in any way quantifyable.

I think GW2's graphics are great, as do a large number of reviewers out there, and not just amateur reviewers either.

But again, it's fine if you don't like them. Just don't act like your opinion is purely objective and that there's some abstract right or wrong answer.

p.s.: I play with bloom and all post-processing turned off. That's not what I'm referring to when i say I think GW2 has good graphics.

Originally posted by stragen001

Error 42 is rapidly becoming the new Error 37

Any coders here that could set up a nice monitoring tool that sends me an SMS or email when the login servers come back up so I dont have to sit in front of my computer spamming the login button?

 

The login servers aren't down - they're just overwhlemed with requests. So even if such a tool is made, if it gets through to the login server, there's no guarantee you will.

It's also counter-productive to have an automated tool like that, since spamming login requests is the equivalent of a DDoS attack - it will just slow down the servers even more.

Originally posted by MosesZD

Originally posted by Maki2

I too can't log in.

Everything was fine, I just started today and I played for about 2 hours maybe, then came the new build and since that I've been getting error 42 when I try to log in. Expect one time when I got into the game but then, just like you, I got the error message when I clicked 'play'.

 

 

GW2 Twitter:

Guild Wars 2‏@GuildWars2

We are aware of some conectivity issues within the EU region. Please bear with us while our team looks into the problem.

Well, at least they're working on it, that's all I can ask for I guess...

Originally posted by grapevine
Just got in, but the game is doomed.  Launch day and nobody is around ;)

That reminds me of the old joke: No one drives in New York anymore - there's too much traffic.

I haven't been able to login for the past 2 hours or so. Twice I was able to get the game to launch, but pressing Play on a character just results in "Unable to reach the login server" message, and eventually kicks me out to the launcher.

I know this was an issue on pre-launch, but I thought that Anet was prepared for the number of people at launch.

No one else has posted threads about this, so I'm wondering - am I the only one having this issue?

Those pictures are inaccurate.

According to http://en.support.guildwars2.com/ , and I quote:

We apologize for the inconvenience and our best Asura engineers are furiously working on it!

So, they actually got some aliens in to do the work. Talk about outsourcing! :)

Originally posted by miguksaram

Originally posted by VaultFairy

Hmm.. I've noticed that to but mine is going 1KB/s after a couple of seconds i get a "Connection error detected. Retrying.."

 

Please tell me someone is having the same issue.

I think it's safe to say this is probably just as common an issue currently as error 42 was just prior to it.

This is the case. We all get this error since there's probably a few hundred thousand, maybe even up to a million, trying to download this stuff right now.

I managed to get about 5 hours (with occasional 15min kicking me out) this morning. Wasn't that bad, but I'm guessing when people started waking up (I was up at 6am), it's getting even worse.

Hopefully the ANet engineers can work well under pressure, because they're sure as hell feeling it right now.

Mounts only serve to get you from point A to point B without caring what's inbetween those two. Quick Travel does that, without making exploration a joke. I can't tell you how often I've just used mounts to run past all challenges...

Also, I think it's a very defining feature of GW to not have mounts. Every other game has these, and they never really feel real, they feel cheap in my opinion.

Why is 'run around feeling useless' not an option...cause its certainly what I've felt like I was doing the past few times... :P

Note: the following post is sarcasm.

Aggghhh RAGE! You subbed to WOW? Teh enemy! You betrayed us all! E tu Brute?

WoW is like the ANTI-Guild Wars, the beast who's number is 666! You've fallen into the hands of evil comrade!

Funny title, I was about to question why you'd post something like that here, but your post is obviously not what we were expecting!

Man, I read these threads, and I don't know what could have influenced people to say these things! 

I've never felt GW2 was grindy. It's never made me feel like I was doing unecesary things, and as far as I know none of my friends who've tried this have had simllar experience.

So, sorry, OP,  maybe you had an unlucky day? Maybe you have some radically different tastes? Whatever it is, It's not really a feeling shared by the majority of people I've talked to.

Originally posted by Macecard

Originally posted by ZenonSeth

Originally posted by Fangrim

Wrong,just because you fuck up and can't manage  more than 5 buttons dosn't mean others have the ability to.

Edit: How can having less abilities to use at any given time be more strategic? The mind boggles with these casual pew pew I shot you your dead I want the loot now! type players.

 

You just lost all credability with me this that one sentence. so Strategy = loads of options! No it doesn't

Google says Strategy is:

 

1. A plan of action or policy designed to achieve a major or overall aim.
2. The art of planning and directing overall military operations and movements in a war or battle.

 

A tactic = one of those skills used in a certain way. A Strategy is using those tactics to create a plan of action to complete an aim. 

 

It looks to me its you that doesn't understand the meaning of strategy and tactics.

 

If you kill a monster using ONLY your auto attack - this can still be called a strategy (its a bad one) but its sill a strategy. Having more skills (tactics) at your disposal increases your options for a strategy but doesnt necessarily mean a better strategy.  Just because a game has 50 skill doesn't automatically mean it has a deeper strategy than a game that has only 10. You have to look at the content for those skills and how the gameplay/combat works to really get an idea of how deep a games strategy can get

 

Your example about soldiers is dumb. You cant use ALL your skills at the same time so having 1million skills instead of 1 skills does not make you 1million times stronger......

Wait, wait wait. You misread something horribly. Fangrim was originally making the argument that he thought having less abilities meant less strategy. Read his original post. My question of How can having less abilties to use be more strategic? Boggles the mind?" paraphrases his original " How can having less abilities to use at any given time be more strategic?" I then answered his question...I was trying to make a counter-argument to HIM, that less abilities DOES mean you need MORE strategy...

Your definition of Strategy (from google) is correct... and what's interesting is that in your following paragraphs, you go on to make an argument that "just because a game has 50 skills doesn't automatically mean it has a deeper strategy than a game that has only 10" ... which WAS my argument.

My example with the soldiers wasn't to illustrate that if you have more skills you're more powerful. IT was to illustrate that if you have more skills you need LESS strategy (planning) about which ones to bring, since you have them all at your disposal. Whereas with only a few skills, you had to use MORE STRATEGY, because you had to figure out what you would need in a future situation.

I think we're actually on the same side of the debate... and all your insults towards me are wasted (friendly fire! :) )

Let me say this as clearly as I can, my arguments were that:

Having less skills at your disposal at any one time requires you to be more strategic in a game.

Having more skills available to you at the same time requires far less strategy from the player.

Originally posted by Odinthedark1

Originally posted by ZenonSeth

 

Rarely do melee fighter's have cast times is the thing tho, in WoW i did it simply because it helps reduce damage intake if even a little, IE they cant hit you if walk through them and are behind them while they are spamming a keybind, they have to turn around. in this game it actually helps for pve to have the habbit because if you're moving the mobs can and will miss if theyre not directly in front of you, that is of course if they're not using an AoE in which case you would utilize the dodge to escape the radius or stun to prevent the skill. And no offense to you when i say this, but GW2 seemed like a more hardcore player game so it would make no sense to appeal to the casuals as most would be turned away by the difficulty of the game, unless theyre stubborn. as i said in a post recently you probably didnt see i would be fine with 2 bars just so im not conistently using the same 5 skills, it will likely get better later on in the game where you HAVE to switch weapons, but even then switching weapons would be purely situational.

I wasn't talking JUST about melee fighters, but I'm talking about all classes in general.

No offsense taken if you think GW2 is more hardcore... I disagree, but that's a highly subjective matter in my opinion, so I'd rather not get into a pointless 'my opinion is better than your opinion' argument over hardcore-ness.

Also, I'm not sure how far you've played, but yes, switching weapons gives you two totally different sets of 5 skills. You also have all your utillity skills unlocked by level 30, which gives you more skills to use.

Engineers get toolkits which give you more skills, and Elementalists get 4 attunements per weapon, giving you 20 skills (though eles don't have the weapon switch-out because of that. They only wield one weapon, no quick-swap)

I've encountered it with both my ele and my warrior that switching attunements/weapons is tremendosly helpful in fighting effectivly. 

Originally posted by Fangrim

Wrong,just because you fuck up and can't manage  more than 5 buttons dosn't mean others have the ability to.

Edit: How can having less abilities to use at any given time be more strategic? The mind boggles with these casual pew pew I shot you your dead I want the loot now! type players.

Sure, others have the ability to. Now, some of us have the ability to solve differential equations too, while you probably can't at all. That's absolutely no reason to include solving differential equations into gameplay. Your years of playing MMOs give you skills others don't have, and while some games will accept that and give you an advantage, a lot of games try to just cater to regular players instead. If you don't like it, either suck it up and just play, or find a game that you do like. 

How can having less abilties to use be more strategic? Boggles the mind? You're obviously not familiar with what Strategy (not tactics) means.

Suppose you had an army of 4000 soldiers to take a city of 200 people. Each soldier has some somewhat unique ability. 

Now if you were allowed to just march in all 4000 of them in the city, you'd easily overwhelm the enemy, even if you make a few mistakes like using the wrong soldier for some task.

However, if you were only allowed to take 100 soldiers with you to take over the city, how you use your soldiers becomes a far more important part of your strategy. What if you picked the wrong ones? What if the city was all fire-based beings that can't be set on fire, but all you brought is guys with torches? What then? You have nothing to fall back on.

That's strategy. Limited skills means you have to plan more carefully and think ahead. Unlimited number of skills, sure, you still have to figure out which one to use, but it doesn't require any planning since you have all of them at your disposal. 

Originally posted by Odinthedark1

Originally posted by ZenonSeth
<snip>

See now this is just me but i never sit still in ANY mmo...im more of a pvp'er than a pve'er and when i do pve the pvp habbits kick in IE playing smarter, constantly kiting even on melee, and watching cooldowns to make sure i always have an o-shit cd ready for when something goes wrong or unexpected, and after playing WoW for so long i dont have problems with a ton of keybinds :P even tho its useless since i quit WoW i still have my cata WoW mouse with 15+ buttons that i can still vaguely remember from my rogue. the things you say arent necessarily wrong maybe for some people but the UI, and memory and movement are all instincts to me now and take up split seconds of my time so i lose no fun with mmo's that have said features.

Edit: And to people who say it takes strategy and it takes a bit of intelligence, thats true. but at the same time its just an excuse for an otherwise pointless limitation in my view

I get that a melee fighter can move around the field and kite, but last I checked in WoW and a lot of other MMOs, any skill that has a casting time (i.e. shows a cast bar) requires you to stay still. I call that a pointless limitation.

As for the ton of skills, sure, I'm not saying that EVERYONE likes having less skills, but consider that you bough special hardware to play WoW. Not everyone is that dedicated, and some people don't have money to spend on that stuff either.

Even if you accept that limited skill set requires intelligence, but still think its a pointless limitation, you have to admit, that having only a few skills at a time is certainly less overwhelming to the casual player. Hell, some people like me, who're semi-casual, semi-hardcore players, DON'T like to have over a quarter of my screen covered by Skills, most of which I barely use all the time, but I keep there because I might eventually need them, and I'm allowed to. 

I don't know if its overhyped, but its certainly fun to play. Mobility while fighting and the dodge mechanic introduce a strategic element. Seriously, try playing a light armored class, and take on an enemy while standing still vs actively moving around. It makes a huge difference to how much damage you take.

The limited number of skills on your skillbar add two things. First there's a small element of planning which skills/weapons to equip, and testing their various interactions to get the best effect. Since you can't just pile all your skills on skillbars you have to actually think what you'll need in combat.

The second and more important thing is, I think, that with a 10 skill limit, and fixed skill location, you can focus more on playing the game and less on playing the UI. What i mean is that you would memorize key presses quicker which lets you use skills intuitively instead of fumbling to find them on your skill bar (for example, if I need healing my fingers jump to 6 without much thought, just instinct)

It's not a completely revolutionary system, but it still introduces enough changes to make it far more fun than the typical stand-in-one-place-and-mash-buttons fighting.

Originally posted by grimm6th

I am pretty sure zotoh zhaan would have been a sylvari water elementalist or necromancer, not a monk.

Anyways, there isn't really enough in your basic outline that makes this seem distinct enough from the current classes.

<snip>

Not that I would WANT this class, but if you are going to make a suggestion, make it detailed.

My original post is more of an idea than a detailed suggestion. Fleshing out ideas with others works best in my opinion.

Anyway, as for your more detailed suggestion:

• Armor I agree, Light seems reasonable, though it's risky to put a melee fighter in light armor.
• I don't like the idea of making F1 and F2 special skills like that. I know the warrior has a special skill, but to me they seem more like utility skills. I don't seem to use them that often anyway. I also don't see how movement + stability counters the negative of 4seconds without skill usage...
• Weapons - Hand Wrap seems like a good addition, I think. Throwable daggers, yeah. But I would get rid of sword.

• Monk
• Special Mechanics:
  • F1 Quick Combat Style
  • F2 Focused Combat Style
  • F3 Defensive Combat Style
• Weapons:
  • Hand Wrap (main + offhand)
    • F1: Skills would cause less damage, but slightly faster recharge
    1. Repeatable Quick Strike that causes more damage for every 3 hits.
    2. A rapid multi-strike that causes Confusion
    3. A quick headpunch that causes Daze. 
    4. A skill for quick rapid strikes of Damage. 
    5. A quick attack that applies Quickness to the Monk
    • F2: Skills focus on damage, slower recharge
    1. Repeatable Focused Strike that ignores % armor on every 3rd hit.
    2. A headkick skill that Knocks Down,
    3. Eye-Poke that causes Blindness,
    4. A Knee-strike that cripples enemy,
    5. AoE spinning kick that hits all nearby enemies
    • F3: Defensive skills  
    1. Repeatable strike that applies Aegis to monk every 3rd hit
    2. A jump-over-enemy skill that causes Confusion
    3. A chest-kick that Launches enemy back and you away from the enemy
    4. A blocking stance that stops next melee attack and knocksdown enemy if it blocks
    5. A jump that escapes any immobilization and causes Daze on nearby enemies
  • Focus (offhand)
    • F1: Self-buffs: 1.Swifness and 2. Fury
    • F2: Debuffs: 1. Vulnerability and 2. Weakness
    • F3: 1. Area based Healing and an 2. Area based Vigor
  • Dagger (main hand only)
    • F1: Fast but deadly strikes 
    1. Fast attack that chains to cause vulnerability on 3rd throw.
    2. A bounced off throw that causes Daze to first target and Confusion to 2nd target it hits.
    3. A surprise throw that causes daze
    • F2: Slow and Precise strikes
      1. Aimed Throw that causes bleeding
      2. A double throw that thows two daggers at once
      3. Hard Throw that cases 
    • F3: Defense-oriented skills
    1. Escape throw that gives you Swiftness if it hits
    2. Heavy throw that pushes back enemy
    3. Skill that Stuns enemy
  • Staff (two-hand)
    • F1: Fast striking
    1. Surprise hit, hits twice every 3rd attack
    2. Jump-strike that moves you to the side 
    3. Spin Staff, AoE, enemies hit from behind are Dazed
    4. Multi-strike, fast hits on 1 target
    5. Unexpected Strike, Confuses
    • F2: Heavy hitting staff attacks
      1. Heavy Stike that gives you Vigor every 3rd hit
      2. Precise Hit that causes Vulnerability
      3. End-on Strike that causes Weakness
      4. Staff-pole-vault, knocks down enemy
      5. Ground-Shaker, Daze nearby enemies, knocking down already Dazed enemies
    • F3: Defensive/Buff moves
    1. Staff Throw that pushes back enemy every 3rd throw
    2. Escaping Jump - Leap backwards, and Confuse enemies at your initial location
    3. Ready-Stance, dodges next attack and knocks down attacking enemy
    4. Leap of Faith - Jump towards enemy, Dazing enemies and giving Vigor to nearby allies
    5. Rejuvinating Sweep - Rejuvinate allies in front of you, and Weaken enemies

Originally posted by Ezhae

There is lore problem with monks. It can be of course fixed, but probably owuld need some pushing of the story forward past the imminent Dragon danger. 

First thing, monks were tied closely to religion. It worked fine when the only playable race were humans but how do you make Charr or Norn or Asura monks? Those races don't belive in The Six. Second issue is the fact The Six went silent somewhere between the GW1 and GW2 and no longer respond to prayers as they used to. Of course if we deal with dragons maybe they will return, but for now it would hard to fit them in. 

Similar issue is with Dervishes which were also tied to religion and really don't have place outside of human race. Norn have their spirits, Asura have th Eternal Alchemy, Charr have their warmachines, Sylvari have..well, messed up childhood :P 

 

Would love to see both of those classes have a comeback at some point, but it will require some proper story background to make it actually work without leaving a giant plothole in the middle. 

Well, the Charr also had healers in GW1, and they only worshiped the Titans, who were pretty much all about destruction and aren't really Gods, tbh.

I don't see any problem introducing Monks at all though. Healing skills can just be attributed as regular magic, but as I mentioned, it's possible to make them less Healers and more Fighters. If even Engneers can get some healing, Monks can surely get healing skills too, without the need for gods. Maybe you can attribute their diminished healing capabilities in terms of Lore due to the gods being gone (or not as active, whatever)

And I also don't think that Guardians' existence prevents Monks. Guardians do have some smiting-like abilities, but Monks are nothing like them, in spirit, or in style. That's one of the reasons I think a more martial-oriented, less healing Monks would make a more unique addition.