Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Syrus.2174

Members
  • Posts

    156
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Syrus.2174's Achievements

  1. I would have been fine with that. The servers weren't down for too long, the bonfire for everyone would have been enough, the issue comes from giving people who logged in something, while those who were careful and stayed patient got something so inequal.From all the previous times where only part of a community was able to get something or got something (like region-locked give aways), Anet should have learned that this only leads to trouble.
  2. Yes, because no amount of posts in the past have ever changed Anet's mind about anything. All the cases when it happened were due to other sites/mmozines posting about the issue. So, yeah, they will ignore this thread and keep trying to pretend nothing bad has happened. And in time it will seem like everyone has forgotten about it. No, because every time they cause a PR disaster on such a scale (and this wasn't either the first time, nor the last - there will be more of those, i'm certain about it), there are consequences that just don;t go away. People get more and more disillusioned, and keep expecting less and less from the game. For some people that added push may be what will make a difference between choosing to stay, or leaving. Or, for getting interested in this game or staying away from it. That in itself is already bad for a game that is in a situation where it could really, really use some good PR in order to safely last those ~2 years we probably we'll need to wait for the expansion. In addition to that, they also just had to teach players that messing things up next time the game servers will have a problem is likely to get them rewarded, but restrained and responsible behaviour will get them nothing, which is something that has the potential of biting the game in the behind somewhere in the future. This case, and many similar ones are one of the reasons why this game's community changed from one that would have strongly defended devs from any form of critique, to one that is for the most part jaded and doesn't expect devs to do a good job anymore. While in every single case it may seem like they've "got away with it again", the longterm price they pay for all of this is both very real, and very, very costly. It really feels like they are deliberately sabotaging their own game. The game itself is still fun, but there are so many bad decisions and some parts, like WvW, make it feel like they are merely doing maintainance work on the game at best, while at other times it feels like they are just trying to suck the last bit of money they can get from it - at least that's what it felt like ever since mount skins were introduced into the shop, more and more content in the shop, less achievable through the game. And so on...But then you get this. It's hurts the game, the fun and the community. All the bad stuff just accumulates. For me, as someone who isn't really interested in the Living World stuff that much, the game has not changed much in a long time. And the promised changes were either discarded or were only worked on very little. It may just be a mount skin, but it's these kind of bad decisions that make it not fun anymore.It's just sad and disappointing.
  3. So, did Anet get away with it again? No response, no comment, nothing.18 pages for nothing but words in a forum that won't ever be read by the people making these horrendous decisions.Are we fine with this, fine with just letting the issue be ignored? Then again, in all honesty, I was not expecting any different...
  4. I have made that decision quite some time ago already, mainly though because all the items that I would have bought are locked behind the Black Lion Chest gamble, which I will not get into. But this whole fumble surely didn't make me more happy about spending money on the game. It's quite sad, I like the game, but there are so many bad decisions being made, it's like they want me to hate them. Some of us just don't accept unfairness and stupid decisions sitting down silently. Some of us still care about the game and what impact the dev's actions have.I wouldn't call it "mad" though, that's such an overused word these days, people are disappointed.But I feel like you don't really care. You logged in to see what was going on ingame. You didn't lose anything in the rollback, but that doesn't matter, you still got your mount skin, right?
  5. Compared to the unfairness, I find it almost more disgusting that some people want the thing to be more exclusive because they were "lucky" to get it while others didn't.You would expect everyone to stick together and see how this is badly handled. It is quite unfunny how the handling of the compensation - rightfully so - caused more upstir than the down time and final rollback of that day itself, which again, the bonfire for all would probably have been enough to most, considering how quickly the issue was fixed in the end, even if the server really should have been taken offline sooner to stop people from progressing and losing more. Yes, some people have lost progress, maybe even substantial progress, due to not knowing that there was an issue. But how many of those who did log were that? Many were probably just curious to see what happened. It should always be the first thing you do, if there's server trouble like this: wait for the dev response before you potentially cause more harm. The contrary should not be encouraged, in my opinion...
  6. I wonder, how do people justify saying that people who logged in, even for a mere second, deserve a mount, while those who patiently waited after informing themselves on the forums didn't? The right thing to do in such a breakdown case is to be patient and wait for a dev response, instead of panicking and potentially causing even more problems. To me, not logging in after reading about the rollback on the forums was the only right decision, you never know how much doing otherwise might have screwed around with your character or account. Of course that should not happen, but you never know. Yes, it sucks for those who didn't know, for those who actually lost the progress they achieved during the rollback. Everyone who wanted to play lost that day.But unless Anet goes and looks at how much everyone actually did on that day, there's no way to fairly compensate those who did play normally. Compensating those who just popped into the game, no matter how long, so much greater than those who didn't, ... Anet should have realized this would cause an outrage though. And again, I didn't get anything, despite being active daily. I wasn't even expecting anything in all honesty, having the game back up in a short time was fine with me. A small compensatory token would have been nice and more than enough. But some people getting a whole freaking mount for doing what can be regarded as the "wrong move" in regards to the issues that were at hand or for even trying to abuse or abusing the situation (like loging in to duplicate items) sends the wrong message in my opinion. Next time there are server issues, you can now expect people to try to log in even harder, probably magnifying the damage caused, instead of patiently waiting for the team to respond and fix the problem. And, to be blunt, it feels really shitty to be screwed over for doing what is actually the right thing, for patiently waiting and letting the team fix the issue.There is no argument against that, no matter how hard you try to justify this, fairness looks different.
  7. As someone who plays online games for more than 15 years now, I decided that it would be best not to log in. Having had many experiences where logging in during a rollback / server problem would cause even more trouble and all, that was the only right decision for me. And it was clear that any progress made during this time was surely going to be lost anyway, because a rollback of such duration was very unlikely to stay this way, it was clear there must have been some more up-to-date backups, even if the last backup was corrupted. At least so I hoped - and luckily I was right. So ... because I'm active on the forums, checking it regularly and because I had (bad) experience with such things, I decided to stay off the game and give the people working on the issue less problems, I am now ... well, calling it "punished" is probably wrong, but at least treated unfairly? Others lost the progress they made on that day, sure, and if they had checked the forums they would have known something was wrong, but those who did check the forum and did pick the sane option of not logging in in fear of causing even greater issues still lost a day. Overall I'm happy to see some "compensation", it wasn't necessary for it to be a mount. But this is just straight up insanely unfair treatment of people who tried to help by letting the crew work on the issue without making it worse. All of us active players lost something. Yet those who are careful lose out on the greater compensation...Not to mention the people who actively abused the problem to duplicate items also get the mount "as compensation". I can only shake my head to this, not a good decision. I was happy with how quickly the issue was resolved and thankful to the team for their good work, despite how long it took for them to take the servers offline, but this now leaves a really bad feeling for it all. Besides, I log in every day - and I mean, literally, every day - for the dailies, yet I have not gotten either the mount or the bonfire...Personally I think everyone who logged in in the last week should be eligble for the mount, reward those who are active, not those who abuse server issues.
  8. And ... you say, remove the boon, well, with which of my many skills should I do that? To reiterate it, not every class can do that. It is actually quite limited. A zerg being attacked by a few players should have no problem dealing with the few players by fighting back. They are outnumbering them after all. But if the attacker plays better than the zerg, what's the problem with them being able to take on the zerg successfully? To me that sounds like a "well played" case. Skill beating mass sounds fine to me.If ranged meta is too powerful by itself, then that's a different issue altogether, though curently I feel like it isn't really.And that's not because of retaliation eating some classes alive. As I said, luckily fewer zergs have perma-retaliation around, despite that, it's still an issue. Like I stated at the beggining, get yourself a healer friend. Lets put the example in this way.You and your friends (15) fight a zerg (30). You try to burst them and they pop retaliation. It is easy to understand that the max number of targets you would be getting retaliation damage from is determined by you max target capabilities from your skills. So, the ammount of damage you will be taking from retaliation should be quite similar no matter if you hit 30 or 50 players. This means that no matter if you fight in equal numbers or outnumbered, the potential damage to be taken from retaliation might be quite similar.Now since WvW is all about teamwork, you might be bringing the DPS (lets say you are an staff DPS elementalist) but probably another members of your team (warriors, necromancers, mesmers) should be bringing the boon removal. If those teammates do their job correctly, retaliation would have a high chance of being removed before you strike. In addition, we assume as well that you guys are focusing your actions into the same subgroup of enemies since no matter if you fight outnumbered, one of the first lessons of WvW combat is to focus the actions of all your team players into the same bunch of players on the edge of the enemy zerg (instead of throwing everything in the middle and allowing them to mitigate easier since they have more players) I can't argue with fights where you do have boon removal not being affected much by retaliation, but the moment that you don't have it around, you will always be at a severe disadvantage. From the many boons that improve things for the enemies, but also from retaliation causing you significant amounts of damage. Of course in a group you can heal against it, you will still be at a disadvantage though.Damage-wise at some point numbers don't increase the amount of retaliation damage taken that much anymore, that is true as well. But more people usually means the likelyhood of hits increases. It always depends on the enemy zerg's stack-ability. Take a skill like meteor shower or wall of reflection though, both will mean more people results in a lot more damage taken ... they are exceptions though. @Mizhas.8536 said:To be honest I find quite amusing that elementalists or DHs for example complain about retaliations when they have the potential to bring groups of players from 100% to 0% Hp with one skill/rotation. I mean, what should be the counter for that if retaliation gets nerfed? Would aegis be the next boon to be asked for nerf?In WvW you often see elementalist running marauder or berserker gear hitting meteor showers of +5k to minstrel guardians or +10k to necros. All this from 1200 feet + teleport. Is that balanced when average Hp is 20k? The time of those hits has passed. Most I usually see is between 2k and 6k, with maybe some 7+k on the really squishy boonless targets, depending on who is hit.And 20k health? Wishful thinking for Ele or DH. 16k is what I have, with absolutely full Marauder I guess you would hit 18k maybe. My DH has 18k with survival focus, but also got toughness - which does not help against retaliation.Yes, you can take out people (certainly not larger groups though) with a full bomb, but you have to work for that. Get yourself in range without being noticed, getting targeted or killed, and stay close enough long enough to pop off your skills - hoping the enemy stays in them. Any decent zerg won't fall for that though or will just counter heal before obliterating you if you stay where you are.And that's the main thing... The enemy can take you out far faster than you can bomb them, if only they react. No need for retaliation.As I said before, retaliation only strengthens those who already are more powerful due to numbers, there is no need to have a way for passively killing attackers, the people in a zerg aren't incapable of fighting all of a sudden and can and should have to defend themselves actively. Anything else is just lazy and wrong. @Mizhas.8536 said:So, from my point of view, ALL is related with teamwork. The whole purpose of retaliation is to discourage mindless AoE dps spamming. WvW is based on group fights therefore, you should be thinking about group sinergy necessary to overcome problems other than just asking for nerfs.So we have mindless boon spam and healing against damage while the enemy kills themselves, instead of having to fight back?Where does that involve teamwork by the way? Isn't it more teamwork to coordinate with your zerg to drop a sneaky bomb on the enemy zerg's rear or such? But you can't do that if you will just kill yourself by doing so... The team work argument can go both ways here, so I don't see it make much sense in regard to this topic.Besides, group fights is one thing, but retaliation is just one factor in encouraging massive blobs, in my opinion, as the bigger your blob is, the more likely you will have the "correct" classes. Small groups on the other hand have to make due with what they got. Don't see encouraging bigger and bigger groups as really helpful for WvW.If there are problems with too much AE damage, then there needs to be a change to that. Not a boon that is nothing but a cheap way for the enemy to defend themselves, without actually defending themselves. People always talk about the skill involved, getting good at the game. There's no such thing for retaliation, simple as that.Personally I think the AE damage has gotten less impactful compared to before the patch, saw some melee zergs cutting right through their enemies. I don't see much point in constantly repeating myself though...Not to mention ... you didn't elaborate on how to learn to stop attacking once the AEs are down by the way. EDIT:Fixed two sentences of the first paragraph.Cleared up sentence in third paragraph.
  9. And ... you say, remove the boon, well, with which of my many skills should I do that? To reiterate it, not every class can do that. It is actually quite limited. A zerg being attacked by a few players should have no problem dealing with the few players by fighting back. They are outnumbering them after all. But if the attacker plays better than the zerg, what's the problem with them being able to take on the zerg successfully? To me that sounds like a "well played" case. Skill beating mass sounds fine to me.If ranged meta is too powerful by itself, then that's a different issue altogether, though curently I feel like it isn't really.And that's not because of retaliation eating some classes alive. As I said, luckily fewer zergs have perma-retaliation around, despite that, it's still an issue.
  10. It's still horrible. While I at times even liked playing on Desert BL, at some point I always run into things that just don't work out well in WvW.A map with less clutter and especially fewer height differences and more standard sized objective, not to mention less annoying NPCs, especially lords, would be very much appreciated. Having to take detours everywhere because there's a massive drop isn't fun and means much time spend moving between objectives. I feel like I'm always struggling to find ways to get to where the action is without killing myself through fall damage on the way there, despite usually knowing the way. It's just not fun, nor intuitive.And objectives that are almost 10% the size of the map are quite annoying to scout, especially when their design is this unrealistic, a keep that is underground but not really doesn't make much sense as it is. Not to mention all the places mesmers or thieves can hide in these massive objectives. Even towers are large enough that you can easily be missed by the enemy and retake them once they are gone. Few people bother checking everywhere because it takes so long, causing objectives to flip much faster and easier than on the normal maps.Fire and Air keep are just ridiculously easy to attack from afar and Garri can almost be opened by the time you found where the enemy is, even if you got a defending zerg near it. Though despite it all, Fire is probably my favorite keep on the map... There's a reason fortifications in real life were usually put on elevated places, they are easier to defend and overlook the area.Fire practically being underground adds another layer to it as well, which increases the map's size significantly, even if there's usually nothing going on up there.I do like that towers can be entered from not just one way though. With how big they are that at least saves some time of running all the way to the entrance.Not to mention, Lords should be sturdy, not annoyingly jump around. The players are there to defend an objective. There are just so many flaws with this map, it's pointless to list them all, and it would probably make more sense to design a new map instead.The Alpine Borderland surely isn't perfect, but it plays much smoother and offers much better chances for decent fights. Objectives are actually defendable. I'm all for a new map, but if they ever release one, I most certainly hope for them to not clutter it too much, to keep the height differences small - there should not be a need for teleports to move around properly! -, to keep objectives properly sized and easier to overlook, to keep running distances between objectives low, but spacing things out decently at the same tim... and so on. Personally I prefer EBG-style maps, with all parties having somewhat equal starting positions and a more middle-focussed fight, instead of the one-side-defends kind of maps. But it is as it is. Overall I would really prefer to have another Alpine Borderland for Red ... or let the players (who completed Silver chest this week?) choose which map they get next week... then again, that'd always end up as Alpine anyway...
  11. What I do know is that retaliation is not a game mechanic that requires "skill" and further strengthens those, who don't need it, against those, who can't counter it. A perfect zerg has no problem with retal, as they are (almost) required to have boon removal. But a group of randoms without the proper classes suffer significant additional harm, despite already being at the disadvantage of having to fight a boon'ed up enemy zerg. There's no skill in just having the right classes, in my opinion, there's only skill in playing your class right. Suffering significant, unavoidable damage because you have no counter against it, you cannot remove the boon, cannot dodge it, outrun it or "out of line of sight" it, almost dying because the very action of you attacking an enemy will drain your health to great degree is not skilled by the enemy, nor is it unskilled by the attacker.It is also not similar to things like reflects, which can also kill you - those need to be well placed, or well timed. They often have long cooldowns, they can't be kept up permanently and only affect projectiles, so you can stop attacking easily and wait for them to end. Not to mention you get visual cues. Retaliation is nigh invisible in a big blob, you will never be able to "scan" through all players and by the time your AEs are down the situation might have changed considerably. Not even the good old term of "just dodge" can be said for it. "Just heal", "Just go invulnerable" - and then watch as the fight unfolds, while you wait out those cooldowns before you can attack again? It is a clear loss by that point. I don't see why people see a need in defending such a bad mechanic. It adds nothing to the game but laziness. ...again, I'm repeating myself. Luckily not too many zergs run with retaliation, it's definitely been a reason for me to stop playing GW2 for the evening a few times already.
  12. Really wonder how that'd play out these days. Besides how you'd instantly die to retaliation. Overall with a very small area a zerg would just spread a little bit more. I would imagine there are other ways of encouraging less stacking, like somehow making smaller groups a bit more viable...
  13. I would guess that EU returning to 5 Tiers again is mainly due to more players playing again with the quarantines all over the place.Overall I'd really wish for a monthly relink instead of bi-monthly and a return to 4 Tiers once the player numbers drop again, when the crisis passes and the weather gets better.
  14. This. Every retal QQ thread can be summed up as "I didn't coordinate with the zerg bomb and died to Retal procs plz nerf cus I'm too bad to learn how to play better" to which the reply is "wait for the boon strips..." to which the QQers accuse others as being bad players defending the boon that is doing its job right. Either strip the boon yourself or wait for it to be stripped. Bubbles are big hints on where to put the nukes, or hop into voice chat and hold your nukes for when the tag calls for them. That is easily said for people playing classes that can strip boon and for people having good server groups where people actually have boon removal. Overall the other boons already make for a powerful enemy to fight, I don't see why there needs to be yet one more strength factor added on top of it with a boon that actually takes away the part of having to defend yourself. Boons and boon removal already are a massive factor for zerg fights, it doesn't need to be even more significant.If you already have a coordinated zerg you shouldn't even be needing this clutch at all, you will already be powerful enough. But, even if people don't seem to realize it, retaliation really does hurt the groups of randoms who aren't lucky enough to have the right and perfect class combinations in their zerg.You are thereby furthering the meta-game even more, making some classes - those who can boon strip - even more "valuable" to a "proper" zerg.Now, I'm all for a well run guild zerg being more powerful than a random pug-fest, but let's be reasonable: that power should come through skill, not through some lazy boon. The impact of that one boon is simply too great, with the major nerf patch, even more so now than before, as it was not adjusted. Besides, insulting people with concerns about a broken game mechanic as "QQers" and "bad" players is not furthering the discussion in a meaningful way.Please keep it civil. Telling people to run less glassy builds is also a funny thing when the boon ignores toughness.Thereby it has two factors about itself which cause it to hit classes very unequally:One, those classes or builds that rely much more on many single hits instead of few big ones suffer A LOT more, probably the reason why, back in the days of hammer rev, I never felt anywhere as squishy with that compared to my ele. And two, those classes with lower base HP also suffer more due to the health damage being the same all around.Usually, positioning would be key here, as with a more glassy build, you try to not get hit. Avoid dying by avoiding damage. With retaliation that all becomes null and void. You take damage no matter how well you play, the only defining factor is whether you have the heal or boon strip to counter it. Sure, it means you require a healer and "that's teamplay", but I just cannot see how this is a good mechanic.Again, and again, I can tell you: there is no skill involved in applying a boon and watching the enemy kill themselves on you. Personally I don't like the suggestion of limiting retaliation to melee range. Melee already suffers enough. And limiting retaliation to "once per second at most", or nerfing it in any way that would "fix" the problem, would just be equal to removing any reason for it to exist at all - in that case, to lessen server load even, maybe, the boon could be removed all together.
  15. There are no counters to Retaliation and it can have nearly a 100% up time over nearly 100% of the group. This is the problem . It's a far to powerful boon to be shared so easily . Either drop it from the game entirely or fix the boon share . And yet, somehow I'm still countering it? If you're going to backline, learn how to manage retal. You can heal through it, you can go into your stack to get healed, you can pull off when there's too much incoming damage, you can even save CDs and go down- so long as you're sure you generated enough downs that you'll rally. Each class has different ways of dealing with it, learn how to use them.As much as I appreciate this video to showcase how many times retal still ends up being a significant damage source in most battles, from what I saw there was not a single enemy zerg among them that had any real retaliation upkeep. Luckily they are quite rare, it really depends on which server you fight against and I don't know how common they are in NA, but retaliation on the whole zerg hits much worse than what you encountered.Of course, you also seem to have some proper boon removable in your group, which helps, but even without it, when you bomb the enemy zerg before your zerg engages, it is quite clear they didn't have much retaliation to begin with, because in such cases I usually had to immediatly heal up due to eating several thousand points of damage in a few seconds. And even with all this, STILL often retal ends up as the highest percentage of damage taken for you.I mean, look at the fight in the tower at ~4 min, the enemy seems to barely have any retaliation on them (watch how rarely it ticks considering how many hits you land) and still you end up with almost 15k damage taken from it for a grand total of 33% of all damage taken despite getting hit a few times and running through AEs.I'm just questioning how that is justifiable for a passive boon? Luckily you also have capable healers around, as well as teammates who don't soak up all damage so your healers are busy trying to keep them alive.But that just as a side node.
×
×
  • Create New...