|
Visidan posted:The fight is similar to the scarlet ufo fight except significantly less epic looking, even has the three colours and power, condi split stuff. I wouldn't be surprised if they were placeholder models in case it would be super spoilery or whatever. I'd raid to kill 3 trahearnes
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 03:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 11:44 |
|
|
Visidan posted:The fight is similar to the scarlet ufo fight except significantly less epic looking, even has the three colours and power, condi split stuff. well Hole Jockey is ready for prime time I guess
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 03:21
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 04:04
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 04:07
|
|
|
Hey look. Anet does have a dev server. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 04:33
|
|
|
jaegerx posted:Hey look. Anet does have a dev server. Of course we do. A stage one too. We just don't let players onto them because it's where we work.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 04:35
|
|
|
Good to see they've finally set up development servers after the 'no test servers' scandal was exposed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 04:42
|
|
|
jaegerx posted:Hey look. Anet does have a dev server. Don't believe it for a second they've denied it for years.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 05:55
|
|
|
i'm genuinely glad that legendary precursors will have alternates means to be gotten in the expansion. looks like getting legendary stuff will be possible to get now even if you're not a gemwhale.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 06:05
|
|
|
Did any one else notice that there was a little icon by the name of every zone in the map, with what looked like different crafting materials? I could have sworn they said that you could earn crafting mats somehow, but did they ever expand on that? Did anyone spend enough time poopsocking in the old map to find out, or remember where they posted about it? Edit: Found it, about halfway down the page Map bonuses Looks like you get them at random intervals for doing random things. Anyone get a chance to test this? forkbucket fucked around with this message at 06:30 on Oct 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 06:06
|
|
|
Cupcakes for ArenaNet! https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/3nm51z/cupcakes_for_arenanet/ I'm just happy they're outsourcing it. I'd be afraid of home made cupcakes from Reddit. Please don't die Tivac. Let the guy doing the daredevil spec eat one first.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 06:15
|
|
|
AzureSkye posted:The celestial form 3 is spammable and nukes the break bar in a couple hits. To be fair, break bars have just been useless overall because they're affected by soft CC as well as hard. A group of players just randomly mashing skills will usually chew through any break bar. (i'm not saying they should change it, though. having it only be affected by hard CC would suck)
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 06:53
|
|
|
Kessel posted:To be fair, break bars have just been useless overall because they're affected by soft CC as well as hard. A group of players just randomly mashing skills will usually chew through any break bar. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 06:58
|
|
|
Oh Xushin. Every now and then a cog flies off, like the time he -had- to eat his morning pancakes with ketchup cause no syrup was left and having them plain hadn't entered his mind.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 07:01
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 07:35
|
|
|
 Where's Wally.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 07:48
|
|
|
forkbucket posted:Edit: Found it, about halfway down the page Map bonuses That's clearly bs, as it has anet talking about actually dropping giant eyes in the world instead of just spawning them on the AH for absurd prices.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 07:49
|
|
|
Apparently there's a secret achievement for fighting and killing all of the guardians within 10 seconds of each other
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 07:49
|
|
|
Dreggon posted:Apparently there's a secret achievement for fighting and killing all of the guardians within 10 seconds of each other That is not going to be easy / is a recipe for disaster.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 09:08
|
|
|
There was a bit of incorrect information earlier about how you make the current legendaries, you don't have to do WvW ever for the battle gift and you can pick either dungeons or spvp for the dungeon gift. Maybe we can make legendary armour without raids, maybe not. It'd be super lame for it to be that way for those that don't care for the pve in this game. If you complain long and loud enough anet might back down on that like they have other stuff. Just give it a few years, remember dredge fractal! Reclines Obesily fucked around with this message at 09:50 on Oct 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 09:45
|
|
|
I'm quite of a bit of the way to make a legendary, at least I have most of the materials aside from the dungeon tokens. But I'm waiting for what's going to happen with the expansion before I go any further. I'm not tying any materials into more Gifts before I know what's up and down with the new system.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 10:32
|
|
|
I think it's good that you need to raid to get legendary armor because that way you don't have to guess who the autists are
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 10:32
|
|
|
treizebee posted:You don't have to use the staff. Condi druid works well because you are taking the core ranger condi build and giving it even more tremendous sustain. That's still cool. I was kinda hoping for something to add to the build, either staff or glyphs. But I'll take the general improvement overall! It'll be fun poking at it on release, but I'll hold back on grabbing an armor set for it just yet. Because I'm poor.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 12:17
|
|
|
its cheaper to get a full set of legendary armor than it is to make zealots armor
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 13:05
|
|
|
goattrails posted:I'm quite of a bit of the way to make a legendary, at least I have most of the materials aside from the dungeon tokens. As far as we know the only thing that's going to happen is they are adding a way to get precursors.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 16:17
|
|
|
Kessel posted:I've said this before, but you can pretty much guarantee a boss will stick to you like glue if you stack toughness. Anyone who's run the old-school knight+shield engineer in dungeons (looking at you Merc) will know what I'm talking about. This was a few pages ago, but it didn't really get a solid discussion. Is this really how they intend to handle aggro? Because this is the most counter-intuitive BS I've ever heard. Why would the monster attack the target that's hardest for it to injure? And when someone is getting beat up in content, the first thing they think to do is get some more survivability (usually in the form of Toughness). When they do that, though, all that happens (with this system) is they become more of a target 
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 16:18
|
|
|
Blasphemeral posted:This was a few pages ago, but it didn't really get a solid discussion. Shrug, it makes perfect sense to make the person most geared for it be the tank in a game with no real taunt.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 16:28
|
|
|
Blasphemeral posted:This was a few pages ago, but it didn't really get a solid discussion. Supposedly, different mobs have different aggro mechanics, but since they are a secret 
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 16:29
|
|
|
Blasphemeral posted:This was a few pages ago, but it didn't really get a solid discussion. This is how aggro's been handled in GW2 the entire time--it just wasn't as much of a factor because nothing really encouraged/allowed "tanking." There are other factors that determine threat, but Toughness seems to be far and away the most important one. It's very weird.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 16:31
|
|
|
Blasphemeral posted:Why would the monster attack the target that's hardest for it to injure? 1) it's no less arbitrary than tank attacks generating extra hate and other such hate management systems 2) if you go down that slope of "what would monster do" you end up in the pits of "why don't developers implement better AI in games" which is a real clusterfuck of a discussion culminating in the answer "it's not currently possible"
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 16:44
|
|
|
I should be clear that I'm not saying it isn't dumb; what I'm saying is that nobody has really found a cost-effective solution that won't make the servers catch fire from computational stress
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 16:46
|
|
|
Kessel posted:
It IS possible, it's just a poo poo ton of effort for something people realize they don't actually WANT once they get it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 17:09
|
|
|
Kessel posted:2) if you go down that slope of "what would monster do" you end up in the pits of "why don't developers implement better AI in games" which is a real clusterfuck of a discussion culminating in the answer "it's not currently possible" It's not like this is some Nth dimensional chess decision. This is a first-dimensional, seriously gameplay effecting choice. It effects newbie players and it's directly contrary to the obvious decision. Worse, it's not suggested in any in-game tutorial, text, menu or tooltips. It would be (not great, but) better if the toughness tooltip at least said something like "Makes you take less damage from attacks. Also makes you more likely to be attacked," because then at least it's transparent. Kessel posted:1) it's no less arbitrary than tank attacks generating extra hate and other such hate management systems Oh, it's not arbitrary at all. I know why they did it: it makes a single "tank stat" instead of multiple. The problem is, though, in those other games threat is a known mechanic and has both explained and implied interplay. An attack called "Infuriating Strike" that makes a monster more likely to hit you makes thematic sense as well as mechanical sense. In contrast to a warrior deciding to put on more protective armor to somehow entice the monster to ignore the dainty, nearly nude damage-cannon elementalist in order to whale on him, instead, does not make sense in the slightest. Especially if you consider that the warrior is probably sacrificing actual damage by statting toughness, making him even less dangerous to the monster in question. Blasphemeral fucked around with this message at 17:16 on Oct 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 17:14
|
|
|
Is there actually a source on how gw2 aggro works? Anything I've read says the toughness stuff (and really anything about the aggro system) is speculation/cognitive bias.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
Mobs prefer to attack closer targets, or a nearby Guardian or Elementalist. If either class is in the party, they will exclusively be targetted despite 3 earth elementals constantly occupying the same exact coordinates as the boss, although he might take a swing at one if you chain enough immobilizes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
Mobs target whichever player is speaking the most on mumble at the time, to hopefully embarrass them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
Mobs prefer to attack the nearest bear, which is why Ranger is the true tank class in gw2.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 17:33
|
|
|
Blasphemeral posted:An attack called "Infuriating Strike" that makes a monster more likely to hit you makes thematic sense as well as mechanical sense. it doesn't make any thematic sense why that strike and all other tank strikes would do less damage than the DPS guy beside the tank striking the enemy with the same sword, though
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 17:36
|
|
|
Tanking will never make sense in a flavor sense. Ever. Unless the enemies you are fighting are dumb, there is never a good reason why they shouldn't figure out that it would be better to ignore the guy in armor in favor of smashing the guys in robes to the ground. Mechanically and in a gameplay sense, toughness causing "aggro" makes sense since you want the person able to take a hit to be the one taking hits. Sure, they could add that as a tooltip in game, buts its an MMO. If you're doing content in the game where having enough toughness will make a big enough difference in aggro, you probably should be reading up on game mechanics anyway. New player or not.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 11:44 |
|
|
remove all concept of armour classes because they're discriminatory and have everyone be able to cast devastating spells while in full plate bikinis
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2015 17:46
|
|