[gunbo13]

It will certainly make the combat more active. As it was, energy was having very little effect on the spell casting and with potions there it basically didn't matter at all.

Glyph of lesser energy + aegis... :(

Energy management was such a huge part of the GW1 strategy. A shit-ton of the fun had to do with the constant battle of maintaining cool-downs and your mana. I'm now worried we are getting into the territory of utter chaotic battles only salvageable through high level organization.

I reserve judgment but this is a big change.

[Complistic]

I hope there is an option to double-tap for dodging, seems more intuitive (and easier to pull off) for me than a dedicated button for it.

Double tapping still works. One of the a.net guys clarified on Guru.

[Fishious]

I never played GW1, is the new weapon skill learning method similar to what was in that game? If so, can anyone expand on how it worked? I am assuming that weapon skills will also be tied to my level and not just 'spam flares 1 million times to unlock the 5th skill' etc...

No, in GW1 skills were not linked to weapons (though most skills could only be used with certain weapons). According to the update the second 5 skills will use a system similar to GW1 (where you used a special skill to capture skills from enemies or bought them from a trainer). Note that it says similar to. It probably won't be exactly like GW1, but will still focus on collection rather than buying them all from a trainer (as seen in the older GW2 demos).

As for how the weapon skills work, your guess is as good as mine. Maybe they'll detail it in another update otherwise we have to wait for Gamescom.

[Complistic]

It probably won't be exactly like GW1, but will still focus on collection rather than buying them all from a trainer (as seen in the older GW2 demos).

Getting them as quest rewards seem incredibly likely.

[r4z4]

Thanks for the clarifications. Really hyped for the Gamescom demo now.

Glyph of lesser energy + aegis... :( Energy management was such a huge part of the GW1 strategy. A shit-ton of the fun had to do with the constant battle of maintaining cool-downs and your mana. I'm now worried we are getting into the territory of utter chaotic battles only salvageable through high level organization. I reserve judgment but this is a big change.

Not having played GW1 I can't comment on energy management in that game, but in other MMOs energy had always annoyed me, I always get the feeling that I'm having to manage resources for the sake of balance rather than strategy. GW2 sounds like the strategy will be built into battle via skill and profession combos, positioning, dodging etc, so at first glance I wont miss energy.

[etiolate]

The worrying about energy removal is a question of loss in gameplay depth the same as my worries about locked to weapon/attunement skillbars are a limit of depth and also a problem with the sense of growth. The changes to weapon skills seem to be in response to questions of a lack of sense of character growth, but I don't understand just how the new weapon skill system works.

[Justin Timberlake]

I will say as a long-time high-level GW1 PvP player, I don't like most of the changes proposed thus far, especially the revisions to energy, the skill bar (limiting diversity for the sake of easier game balance), and control (the removal of point-to-click). I like the FPS-style matchmaking reformat of Random Arenas, and the removal of a dedicated healing classes (I really hope that doesn't make every character too self-reliant though, and thus limit the necessity of team coordination). I'm undecided on the change to 5v5; it will make finding a team more manageable, but it drastically lowers the requisite level of efficient team communication required for victory.

I'll reserve judgment until Gamescon, but I think Anet is underestimating how brilliant GW1 PvP really was. There were many problems with the implementation of GW1's design, but I don't know why they are scrapping the core gameplay mechanics.

We'll see. I'm skeptical.

[Morkins]

Glyph of lesser energy + aegis... :( Energy management was such a huge part of the GW1 strategy. A shit-ton of the fun had to do with the constant battle of maintaining cool-downs and your mana. I'm now worried we are getting into the territory of utter chaotic battles only salvageable through high level organization. I reserve judgment but this is a big change.

GW2 isn't the same as GW1, and honestly, with the combat structure that GW2 has, Energy isn't adding anything and it is just making the game more frustrating because it is hindering tactics and strategy. With the mobility that players have and the sheer number of ground targeted spells and positional effects, placing a cap on that type of combat is not helping the game. It just makes scenarios come up where a skilled player who is using their skills effectively could run out of energy and just be forced to sit there while it regens(or be forced to use a potion). Spamming skills isn't helpful in GW2 because honestly a player casting 1/10th the number of spells but doing so effectively is going to do better than a player just spamming things without considering anything else. And the emphasis on player skill dictates that a player who is able to manage positioning, timing, and movement effectively should be rewarded rather than hindered, and Energy is a hindrance.

The way combat works in GW2 doesn't benefit by using energy. The new system replaces the frustration of running out of energy for being good at the game with the strategy and long-term resource management of using energy to dodge, which is extremely important and is a far better use of a long-term resource than the spells which place an emphasis on placement/timing, not frequency....

[Justin Timberlake]

GW2 isn't the same as GW1, and honestly, with the combat structure that GW2 has, Energy isn't adding anything and it is just making the game more frustrating because it is hindering tactics and strategy. With the mobility that players have and the sheer number of ground targeted spells and positional effects, placing a cap on that type of combat is not helping the game. It just makes scenarios come up where a skilled player who is using their skills effectively could run out of energy and just be forced to sit there while it regens(or be forced to use a potion). Spamming skills isn't helpful in GW2 because honestly a player casting 1/10th the number of spells but doing so effectively is going to do better than a player just spamming things without considering anything else. And the emphasis on player skill dictates that a player who is able to manage positioning, timing, and movement effectively should be rewarded rather than hindered, and Energy is a hindrance. The way combat works in GW2 doesn't benefit by using energy. The new system replaces the frustration of running out of energy for being good at the game with the strategy and long-term resource management of using energy to dodge, which is extremely important and is a far better use of a long-term resource than the spells which place an emphasis on placement/timing, not frequency....

Did you play GW1 PvP?

Cause this post honestly reads like you did not.

[Morkins]

Did you play GW1 PvP? Cause this post honestly reads like you did not.

I wasn't talking about GW1 PvP. I understand precisely how GW1 PvP worked. I was in at least 15 different guilds that were top 50 in the world.

GW2 isn't the same as GW1. Energy isn't adding anything to GW2 because GW2 functions differently.

It isn't a scenario where everything I say about GW2 means that I think the opposite is true for GW1, which is clearly what you took from my post.... But that isn't what I am saying. I am saying that because of how the mechanics of GW2 work, the gameplay flow and gameplay design don't dictate a need for energy the same way that GW1 did...

[etiolate]

I will say as a long-time high-level GW1 PvP player, I don't like most of the changes proposed thus far, especially the revisions to energy, the skill bar (limiting diversity for the sake of easier game balance), and control (the removal of point-to-click). I like the FPS-style matchmaking reformat of Random Arenas, and the removal of a dedicated healing classes (I really hope that doesn't make every character too self-reliant though, and thus limit the necessity of team coordination). I'm undecided on the change to 5v5; it will make finding a team more manageable, but it drastically lowers the requisite level of efficient team communication required for victory. I'll reserve judgment until Gamescon, but I think Anet is underestimating how brilliant GW1 PvP really was. There were many problems with the implementation of GW1's design, but I don't know why they are scrapping the core gameplay mechanics. We'll see. I'm skeptical.

I think ANet is going for a bigger piece of the MMO market pie and thats why you see these changes. Focusing on PVP is great for retaining a community,but not as good for gaining a more casual, larger userbase. Though that may be my cynicism talking.

I think it is fair to say GW2 is more PVE focused while GW was PVP focused at the core.

I would be happy if the expanded it back to 8v8 or 6v6. The larger you allow groups, the more room you allow for specialized roles and counters.

[Justin Timberlake]

I wasn't talking about GW1 PvP. I understand precisely how GW1 PvP worked. I was in at least 15 different guilds that were top 50 in the world.

Oh really? I love meeting GWers on GAF. What was your GW name? What guilds?

GW2 isn't the same as GW1. Energy isn't adding anything to GW2 because GW2 functions differently. It isn't a scenario where everything I say about GW2 means that I think the opposite is true for GW1, which is clearly what you took from my post.... But that isn't what I am saying. I am saying that because of how the mechanics of GW2 work, the gameplay flow and gameplay design don't dictate a need for energy the same way that GW1 did...

Can you elaborate on that though? What changes from GW1 to GW2 make energy a hindrance? Ground targeted spells and positional effects? How does that relate to energy? How is managing resources so you can defend against their ground targeted spells any different than managing your resources so you can defend against their player targeted skills? Why would one break the energy system and not the other?

[Morkins]

I think ANet is going for a bigger piece of the MMO market pie and thats why you see these changes. Focusing on PVP is great for retaining a community,but not as good for gaining a more casual, larger userbase. Though that may be my cynicism talking. I think it is fair to say GW2 is more PVE focused while GW was PVP focused at the core. I would be happy if the expanded it back to 8v8 or 6v6. The larger you allow groups, the more room you allow for specialized roles and counters.

With as much visual flair as the game has, anything more than 5v5 would be a nightmare for competitive play.

And that isn't a knock on the visual flair that the game has, because I feel like it makes the game easier to follow, easier to enjoy as a spectator, and easier to play. The fact that skills are represented visually means that the on-screen effects tell you exactly what is happening in a battle. However, if you were to have 16 people casting spells constantly, with as "busy" as most of the spells are visually, it would be impossible to decipher what is going on. There is a balance there, between making a game use visual effects to demonstrate what spells are doing and making the game impossible to follow... And 5v5 is the limit. In this case, the LoL/HoN/DOTA comparison is fair because those games are hard enough to follow during 5v5 battles, imagine if you threw 2-6 additional people into the mix...

5v5 is the right size for the Structured PvP.

[Morkins]

Oh really? I love meeting GWers on GAF. What was your GW name? What guilds?

Monk Morkins. Haven't played at that level in ages, and I don't even remember the names of the guilds because honestly pretty much all of them fell apart as soon as they peaked(and half of them were shitty guilds even if the level of play was good), but one that I can specifically say is Grawls Gone Wild... That was the one that lasted the longest, and that was the one I enjoyed being in the most... Every other guild I was in played well for a while and then fell apart because most of us were arrogant assholes who didn't play well with others. Most of the time I knew it was just a matter of time before we fell apart, and I didn't even try to remember the names... And the ones I may have remembered have faded because I haven't played at that level since like 2006-2007... I still GvG occasionally, but nothing big and most of the time with low key casual guilds because I honestly burned out on the hardcore ones(takes luck to find one that isn't filled with ego)...

Can you elaborate on that though? What changes from GW1 to GW2 make energy a hindrance? Ground targeted spells and positional effects? How does that relate to energy? How is managing resources so you can defend against their ground targeted spells any different than managing your resources so you can defend against their player targeted skills? Why would one break the energy system and not the other?

My feeling with the skill system is that if you don't use a spell properly then it isn't going to be useful. Having messed around with it a bit at SDCC, I would stand by the assessment. And in that regard, Energy Management doesn't add anything to the game. The game is all about movement and positioning, and adding Energy Management to the fold is just a distracting element that prevents high level play. If you are good at the game, the mechanics allow you to do a LOT. But when you are worrying about energy, even if you have a good tactical opportunity, sometimes you don't take it because it would put you in a dangerous position with energy.... It is detrimental to the gameplay when that happens. Spamming skills is practically useless. You can do things that way, but you aren't going to be able to keep up with a player who is using the skill properly...

Understand? My opinion of it is basically that what I played amounted to a game where Energy was trivial most of the time then an awful hindrance when you actually started to run out of it... It made tactical play difficult by adding a level of complexity that is honestly unnecessary. For GW1, it made sense because the battles had a back and forth and it was about who managed things better. But for GW2, I don't think that the game needs that.... It inherently has those elements and the mechanics flow in a way that doesn't require that long-term pressure from a "resource management" mechanic. Turning it on it's head and making dodging and movement related to energy is a better option IMO. It evolves tactical play and places pressure on your team to be able to adapt to changing circumstances(which is a key element of the gameplay). Rather than just making characters useless when they run out of energy, the change has instead forced players to change their playstyle. If you can't dodge or move as well when you are out of energy, then you have to change the way you approach combat. As I said, movement is key and by tying movement to energy, you place an emphasis on player mobility. And that works better with the mechanics of the game...

I will amend my earlier statement though. Energy for spell casting isn't useless... It would add something to the game. However, the thing that it would add to the game doesn't make the game better. If anything, it makes the game worse.

It may take seeing it in action to understand that, but believe me, Energy isn't something that is needed for GW2 to work properly.

[Justin Timberlake]

Monk Morkins. Haven't played at that level in ages, and I don't even remember the names of the guilds because honestly pretty much all of them fell apart as soon as they peaked(and half of them were shitty guilds even if the level of play was good), but one that I can specifically say is Grawls Gone Wild... That was the one that lasted the longest, and that was the one I enjoyed being in the most... Every other guild I was in played well for a while and then fell apart because most of us were arrogant assholes who didn't play well with others. Most of the time I knew it was just a matter of time before we fell apart, and I didn't even try to remember the names... And the ones I may have remembered have faded because I haven't played at that level since like 2006-2007... I still GvG occasionally, but nothing big and most of the time with low key casual guilds because I honestly burned out on the hardcore ones(takes luck to find one that isn't filled with ego)...

Oh yeah grwl. Pew pew baby pew pew.

Yeah, drama is a bitch. I know the feeling.

My feeling with the skill system is that if you don't use a spell properly then it isn't going to be useful. Having messed around with it a bit at SDCC, I would stand by the assessment. And in that regard, Energy Management doesn't add anything to the game. The game is all about movement and positioning, and adding Energy Management to the fold is just a distracting element that prevents high level play. If you are good at the game, the mechanics allow you to do a LOT. But when you are worrying about energy, even if you have a good tactical opportunity, sometimes you don't take it because it would put you in a dangerous position with energy.... It is detrimental to the gameplay when that happens. Spamming skills is practically useless. You can do things that way, but you aren't going to be able to keep up with a player who is using the skill properly... Understand? My opinion of it is basically that what I played amounted to a game where Energy was trivial most of the time then an awful hindrance when you actually started to run out of it... It made tactical play difficult by adding a level of complexity that is honestly unnecessary. For GW1, it made sense because the battles had a back and forth and it was about who managed things better. But for GW2, I don't think that the game needs that.... It inherently has those elements and the mechanics flow in a way that doesn't require that long-term pressure from an "resource management". I will amend my earlier statement though. Energy isn't useless... It would add something to the game. However, the thing that it would add to the game doesn't make the game better. If anything, it makes the game worse. It may take seeing it in action to understand that, but believe me, Energy isn't something that is needed for GW2 to work properly.

But I mean...there are plenty of times in GW1 where using a skill when it would be a good tactical opportunity would have been nice but energy limited it. Thats why you had to manage your energy and never let it get to a point where you can't do the things you want.

What long-term pressure does GW2 have to replace energy management? What elements and mechanics does GW2 have that replace that?

At this point I think its just a part of the dev team de-emphasizing shutdown mechanics. I don't know why they are doing this, because skills that hindered opponents (bulls strike, dshot, freezing gust, gale, shame, bflash, diversion, etc) were always the skills that were the coolest/required the most time to master. Sure, interrupts got out of hand with bots, and a metagame shouldnt revolve around them per se, but I think they definitely add a layer of skill.

I mean, the "red bars go down" skills were highly inconsequential for the most part (i.e. weapon skills, damage spells, etc) in determining how well you play as long as you use them on the right target. It didn't really matter if eviscerate or dismember were the flavor of the month; they perform the same function. So I don't understand why those skills rather than the more impactful skills are being emphasized...

With as much visual flair as the game has, anything more than 5v5 would be a nightmare for competitive play. And that isn't a knock on the visual flair that the game has, because I feel like it makes the game easier to follow, easier to enjoy as a spectator, and easier to play. The fact that skills are represented visually means that the on-screen effects tell you exactly what is happening in a battle. However, if you were to have 16 people casting spells constantly, with as "busy" as most of the spells are visually, it would be impossible to decipher what is going on. There is a balance there, between making a game use visual effects to demonstrate what spells are doing and making the game impossible to follow... And 5v5 is the limit. In this case, the LoL/HoN/DOTA comparison is fair because those games are hard enough to follow during 5v5 battles, imagine if you threw 2-6 additional people into the mix... 5v5 is the right size for the Structured PvP.

GW1 had very distinctive animations and people kept track of everything just fine in 8v8...

[Orayn]

But I mean...there are plenty of times in GW1 where using a skill when it would be a good tactical opportunity would have been nice but energy limited it. Thats why you had to manage your energy and never let it get to a point where you can't do the things you want. What long-term pressure does GW2 have to replace energy management? What elements and mechanics does GW2 have that replace that? At this point I think its just a part of the dev team de-emphasizing shutdown mechanics. I don't know why they are doing this, because skills that hindered opponents (bulls strike, dshot, freezing gust, gale, shame, bflash, diversion, etc) were always the skills that were the coolest/required the most time to master. Sure, interrupts got out of hand with bots, and a metagame shouldnt revolve around them per se, but I think they definitely add a layer of skill. I mean, the "red bars go down" skills were highly inconsequential for the most part (i.e. weapon skills, damage spells, etc) in determining how well you play as long as you use them on the right target. It didn't really matter if eviscerate or dismember were the flavor of the month; they perform the same function. So I don't understand why those skills rather than the more impactful skills are being emphasized...

I think ANet is aiming to get rid of the distinction between "red bars go down" skills and impactful ones. I mean, your five pre-set attacks are going to be the bread and butter of any combat encounter, so it makes sense for them to make them more interactive, customizable, and mechanically interesting than they were before, just so that no particular spot on your skill bar is utterly replaceable.

[Morkins]

GW1 had very distinctive animations and people kept track of everything just fine in 8v8...

Yes, but the particle effects were less expansive... It is a LOT more to follow with GW2.

[Jira]

Yes, but the particle effects were less expansive... It is a LOT more to follow with GW2.

Just look at this for example:

White = Will have no effect
Red = Harmful to the player
Blue = Positive effect on the player

Now look at all of these attack types for AoEs:

Cone: Skills that hit all targets in a specific angle and direction in front of the caster, such as the spell Drake's Breath[2].

Ground target: Skills that require a selected point in the game world, like the spell Phoenix[3].

Point blank: Skills that cause an effect around the caster, like Cyclone Axe.

Target point blank: Skills that cause an effect on those within a specific area around an enemy, like the elite Destruction, which causes all attacks to turn into target point blank area of effect.

Trail: Skills that cause an effect on the path the caster or projectile moves along after activation, such as the spell Burning Retreat.

Vertical: Skills that create a vertically-aligned effect to affect those above and below its position, such as the underwater skill Pillar of Light.[4]

That's a TON of variations in possible spell effects going around at once, it's a ton to keep track of and is probably a lot more intensive to render too.

[Morkins]

I think I went about approaching this debate the wrong way... I have sort of gotten railroaded into something I didn't intend to be discussing simply because I worded things poorly initially...

Here is a post I made on GW2Guru

The way I see it, this particular change is good. In previous builds, energy management was a detriment to playing with movement and position(which are what I would consider to by the KEY gameplay elements). It added an additional layer of management and forced players to think about their overall energy situation, but it didn't help the game mechanically. It just seemed like an obvious long-term mechanic because that is how every game does it(including GW1)... But, honestly, in the long run, it wasn't helping emphasize player movement and it wasn't helping to emphasize the dynamic structure of the gameplay. If you ran out of energy, you just became a useless player. You couldn't really fulfill any role and you just kind of need to wait until you had energy. That isn't an inherently bad thing because it does put a long-term resource and pressure into the gameplay, but it doesn't mesh with the rest of the gameplay mechanics. Between weapon swapping, attunement, toolkits, death shroud, and steal, the game emphasizes adaptive, dynamic play. That is its core mechanic. That is the basis for the design and that is the primary goal of the entire skill system... In my opinion, the goal with this "Energy" change is to make "Energy" relevant to that core mechanic. If you run out of energy now, your ability to move and fight is severely hindered. You are not as effective if you can't dodge. Period. Thus, when you run out of energy, you have to change your playstyle. You have to adapt. You have to assume a role that is more defensive and control oriented to make up for your lack of mobility. That doesn't suddenly mean that you become useless like running out of energy when every spell cost energy, it just means that you have to adapt. Thus, this change in the way that Energy works, has shifted Energy from a long-term resource that determines a player's ability to be effective, into a long-term resource that determines a player's playstyle. It forces players to react adaptively because that is simply the way that they can be most effective. Rather than adding an additional mechanical layer on top of the combat, this change integrates "Energy" into the core mechanic of the gameplay. Hopefully that is a good explanation of how I see this change, and hopefully it can help some people think about it in a different way...

Previous iterations of Energy didn't fit the mechanical structure of GW2 as well as you might thing. It is a mechanic that has a purpose and does achieve something within the gameplay, but it doesn't necessarily add to the game. I'd much rather the game remain focused on its core mechanics and take advantage of those as much as possible instead of adding additional layers of complexity on top of the gameplay... Energy is still a long-term resource, it just has different implications now.

Also, it isn't like previous versions of the game really had that much of a worry with Energy Management anyway either... It was a long-term resource and was practically impossible to use up just standard spell casting anyway. Spamming dodge was the only way to use up your energy to be quite honest... So, they have a system that now acknowledges that things were working that way, but doesn't make a player useless in the case that they do run out of energy...

As for why there was a general lack of energy management on spell casting in the first place.... Honestly, it is just because the gameplay is more dynamic and active. The game doesn't need energy management. This may be a foreign concept to some people coming from GW1 PvP where energy management was half the game practically, but GW2 is genuinely doing different things and they aren't "worse" or "dumbed down," they are just different. As I said, Energy is still a long-term resource, it just is a different type of long-term resource. Rather than being something that places a cap on your ability to be effective as a player, it is something that just forces you to change the way you play if you run out of energy... It works better for the dynamic, adaptive gameplay style.

[Justin Timberlake]

I think ANet is aiming to get rid of the distinction between "red bars go down" skills and impactful ones. I mean, your five pre-set attacks are going to be the bread and butter of any combat encounter, so it makes sense for them to make them more interactive, customizable, and mechanically interesting than they were before, just so that no particular spot on your skill bar is utterly replaceable.

Well the ones theyve shown just look like the "red bars go down" skills of old

[Orayn]

Well the ones theyve shown just look like the "red bars go down" skills of old

I don't think we can say anything definitively until we've seen them in action some more, but this could be where the cryptic "evolving skills" references come in. Well, that and the trait system which can fundamentally change how your main skills work.

[Morkins]

Just look at this for example: White = Will have no effect Red = Harmful to the player Blue = Positive effect on the player Now look at all of these attack types for AoEs: Cone: Skills that hit all targets in a specific angle and direction in front of the caster, such as the spell Drake's Breath[2]. Ground target: Skills that require a selected point in the game world, like the spell Phoenix[3]. Point blank: Skills that cause an effect around the caster, like Cyclone Axe. Target point blank: Skills that cause an effect on those within a specific area around an enemy, like the elite Destruction, which causes all attacks to turn into target point blank area of effect. Trail: Skills that cause an effect on the path the caster or projectile moves along after activation, such as the spell Burning Retreat. Vertical: Skills that create a vertically-aligned effect to affect those above and below its position, such as the underwater skill Pillar of Light.[4] That's a TON of variations in possible spell effects going around at once, it's a ton to keep track of and is probably a lot more intensive to render too.

Rendering it wouldn't be too much of a problem(they are licensing some pretty high end culling tech to deal with this), but it would be difficult to follow during the particularly hectic battles.

[BrettWeir]

Ugh. I wonder if/how this change to the energy and skill system will push the game back even longer. Seems like quite a drastic change at this point in development.

[Jira]

Ugh. I wonder if/how this change to the energy and skill system will push the game back even longer. Seems like quite a drastic change at this point in development.

It does to us, but what if they've been in the process of doing this for many months now and finally got everything in place and then showing us at Gamescom?

[Keasar]

Getting them as quest rewards seem incredibly likely.

Wasnt that the thought at the beginning? Pretty sure they talked about how you say as a warrior would go out and meet an old retired general and he would teach you a skill after completing a task for him or something.

[BrettWeir]

It does to us, but what if they've been in the process of doing this for many months now and finally got everything in place and then showing us at Gamescom?

Very true. They may have had the new system in place for months and are just now able to discuss it.

Looking forward to videos out of Gamescom!

[Dexa]

this whole energy-gone thing makes me angry.
i dont want a vindictus style game - give back my guild wars anet! :-|

[JonCha]

Where are the WvWvW leaks? Read through the OP and couldn't find them. Put a page number in the header or something.

[Vigilant Walrus]

Where are the WvWvW leaks? Read through the OP and couldn't find them. Put a page number in the header or something.

I think it might be a reference to the "leaked"(?) picture of the WvWvW map. It's around on a bunch of sites. Haven't seen any actual videos or screens thus far.

[Jira]

Where are the WvWvW leaks? Read through the OP and couldn't find them. Put a page number in the header or something.

I would if I could edit the topic title.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost...&postcount=293

There's the WvWvW stuff.

[Havik]

In the demo new abilities are unlocked by using the abilities associated with that weapon.

[Minsc]

I would if I could edit the topic title. http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost...&postcount=293 There's the WvWvW stuff.

Just throw a link to it at the top of the OP while the info's relevant (or permanently), it's easier to locate and doesn't have to get lost in any future title updates.

[Jira]

Just throw a link to it at the top of the OP while the info's relevant (or permanently), it's easier to locate and doesn't have to get lost in any future title updates.

Will do.

[Grivenger]

Do some of you people know how energy used to work in earlier stages of GW2? It was there as a long-term resource and to give an idea to the player about the difficulty of an area.

It wasn't part of the tactics. It was almost insignificant as a resource. The energy potions were free and infinite, only with a cooldown between them. Mesmerish energy denial was confirmed to not exist.

Energy was only needed for dodging, so those changes make sense. It's bac to be a short-term resource again, it has regeneration again, and is there for dodging. Seems far funnier than their initial idea.

It was their intention all along to have recharges as the only cost of the skills. That's because GW2's tactics will now be much more visual: mobility and terrain are going to be more important factores than in the original, spells are going to have flashier effects to reflect this, and players are going to need to look more at the battlefield now and less at the skill bar.

Two skills costs instead of one would only make such experience clunky and frustating. It worked on GW1 because the emphasis on the battlefield was much less, which allowed the player to focus more on the skill bar, and thus have more complexity and things to be careful about there.

Recharge is going to be essential as a resource, because timing will be essential too.

Regarding the spellcasters and melee, they'll all have their first weapon skill to be a weak, spammable skill, and everything else to have a recharge cost. Except the thief, which will trade recharge of their weapon skills for initiative.

[gunbo13]

The way combat works in GW2 doesn't benefit by using energy. The new system replaces the frustration of running out of energy for being good at the game with the strategy and long-term resource management of using energy to dodge, which is extremely important and is a far better use of a long-term resource than the spells which place an emphasis on placement/timing, not frequency....

That sounds mind-numbingly boring. Who says running out of energy was frustrating? It was a game mechanic and one that I enjoyed battling. GW2 seems right up your ally, a game that is starting to share no common ground with GW1 PvP. Also, your "being good at the game" line is nonsense. It sounds like you regarded certain GW1 PvP styles as more skillful then others or that the game lacked thereof.

---

Fans of the change seem to be amped up for a new redone game. All of these changes are straying from tactics that were central to GW1. It's not even mechanics but events. No more e-denial mesmers, fall-backs when the healers run dry, e-management from secondary prof requiring multi-tasking, focus on casting frequency, maintaining casting order, etc... 5v5 is also not helping things by removing room for versatility to combat a bunch of the subtractions.

We might as well stop dropping GW1 references. We are now bearing very little resemblance to the past. This is a new title that you will be a fan of or not. I'm seeing most of the game-play systems in GW1 PvP being dropped. Replaced with that seems to be a less strategic, melee heavy, chaotic system.

It was their intention all along to have recharges as the only cost of the skills. That's because GW2's tactics will now be much more visual: mobility and terrain are going to be more important factores than in the original, spells are going to have flashier effects to reflect this, and players are going to need to look more at the battlefield now and less at the skill bar.

Sounds like an action game. Whap, whap, whap

[Spehornoob]

Sounds like an action game. Whap, whap, whap

I think that's exactly what they're going for, actually.

[Justin Timberlake]

We might as well stop dropping GW1 references. We are now bearing very little resemblance to the past. This is a new title that you will be a fan of or not. I'm seeing most of the game-play systems in GW1 PvP being dropped. Replaced with that seems to be a less strategic, melee heavy, chaotic system.

Basically. Its an FPS with fireballs, swords, and spears. Its more like Team Fortress than GW1.

Everything is different. Maybe it'll be awesome, maybe it won't. But it won't be a continuation of that innovative GW1 combat system that so many of us fell in love with.

[Dexa]

Everything is different. Maybe it'll be awesome, maybe it won't. But it won't be a continuation of that innovative GW1 combat system that so many of us fell in love with.

i really wanna see 5v5 pvp in action now. hopefully they didnt destroy everything that made it so good.

[Morkins]

That sounds mind-numbingly boring. Who says running out of energy was frustrating? It was a game mechanic and one that I enjoyed battling. GW2 seems right up your ally, a game that is starting to share no common ground with GW1 PvP. Also, your "being good at the game" line is nonsense. It sounds like you regarded certain GW1 PvP styles as more skillful then others or that the game lacked thereof.

.... It worked in GW1. I had no problem with the energy mechanics in GW1 because they added something to the gameplay, and with as much energy management and energy denial as the game had, it was practically built around that... But GW2 plays differently, and in GW2 Energy is more of a frustration than anything else... I literally cannot think of any other way to describe it. It really is something you have to SEE to understand. Also, stop trying to interpret what I am saying because that isn't what I was saying.

Fans of the change seem to be amped up for a new redone game. All of these changes are straying from tactics that were central to GW1. It's not even mechanics but events. No more e-denial mesmers, fall-backs when the healers run dry, e-management from secondary prof requiring multi-tasking, focus on casting frequency, maintaining casting order, etc... 5v5 is also not helping things by removing room for versatility to combat a bunch of the subtractions. We might as well stop dropping GW1 references. We are now bearing very little resemblance to the past. This is a new title that you will be a fan of or not. I'm seeing most of the game-play systems in GW1 PvP being dropped. Replaced with that seems to be a less strategic, melee heavy, chaotic system.

Again, this is the wrong attitude. You don't understand how the game actually functions and you are making what seem to be gut calls based on very little actual engaged thought about what implications the changes to the gameplay will have... Just because it is different from GW1 does NOT mean that the mechanics are "a less strategic, melee heavy, chaotic system." Having played it, that is the exact opposite of what is the reality. GW2 is more strategic and far more dynamic than GW1 ever was.

Simply put, the gameplay flow with the current system is dynamic and constantly evolving. Tactics are immensely varied and working as a team is vitally important because an entire team adapting instead of a single player is vastly more effective. Skills require active thought and planning if they are to be effective, and playing around the effects of particular skills is important.

Stop trying to figure out how GW1 gameplay fits into GW2, because it doesn't. You are correct about that. Take the time to consider the tactical and mechanical implications of the new gameplay structure. For example, look at Weapon Swapping and how that changes the skill bar. Now think about what that means for gameplay. It means, a player can change roles in an instant. Entire teams can reconfigure themselves on the fly to adapt to changing circumstances. One of the teammates goes down? Switch to a more Control/Support oriented skillset so that you can hold the line despite the disadvantage. Kill an enemy? Switch to a more Damage oriented skillset to press your advantage. It makes tactical play and team-wide coordination key elements to success. To play at a high level you need to understand exactly how to react to every circumstance and you need to be able to adapt quickly to the dynamic combat structure. Even if that is just a simple as being able to follow what the other team is trying to do and then adapting to that. If they look like they are going for a more melee heavy composition, then adapt and be prepared for it with some additional control. If they are going for ranged composition, then adapt and be prepared with the plethora of ranged defenses... Rather than reacting after the fact(NOT saying this was all that happened and that proactive play was not present so do not fucking twist this statement, just that that was what the mechanics lent themselves towards), you instead need to act proactively and be able to predict what the other team is doing. That in itself creates a MASSIVE skill barrier that will separate the good players from the bad players...

Or how about just looking at the skills themselves? One particular scenario would be the combinations of skills and the implications of them in the context of map position/design... The Guardian has a skill called Line of Warding for example, which sets down a line at the target location that enemy players cannot cross. Traits associated with it can either make it reflect projectiles or knockback enemies that run into it. Now, with this particular skill, you can do a lot of things for a LOT of purposes. You can just use it as a simple Control skill to redirect melee and aid kiting. You can use the skill as a projectile defense if you use that particular trait. You can also do some more complex tactics like funneling the opposing team into worse tactical positions by manufacturing chokepoints. You can even combine it with other skills to increase effectiveness with other skills, like combining it with Barrage, whereby your teammate throws up a Barrage on top of the other team, then you throw down a Line of Warding either in front of or behind the other team to force them to either advance(into your melee forces and other attackers) or retreat(away from the Barrage). You can also use it to split enemy forces by creating a barrier between them that require them to react.... And this is just me describing the sheer number of possible tactics with a SINGLE SKILL. I could do the same thing with a number of other skills, and just about every skill has at least 3-4 tactical uses.

It may not be GW1 but saying that it is "a less strategic, melee heavy, chaotic system" isn't at all correct.

I came from a GW1 PvP background as well, but rather than just trying to figure out how GW2 would play in the context of GW1, I sat down and looked at what was actually there and how those mechanics would function in high level play. It is different, but I genuinely believe that it is a better system. It sounds like more fun to play, and it will definitely be more fun to watch....

Sounds like an action game. Whap, whap, whap

It is more of an action game. They have been saying that for like 3 years now...

[gunbo13]

i really wanna see 5v5 pvp in action now. hopefully they didnt destroy everything that made it so good.

5v5 video/impressions will be the next progression. I can't help but be disappointed that the links to GW1 seem to be dissipating. How else can you respond to your favorite online game ever losing its presence in the sequel?

because you suck at it.

stop being stupid

is just ignorant.

Wow

ITT I'm being called out and insulted for making "gut calls" on a game that isn't even in beta. I'll give you the win I guess since I don't care for these fiery armchair discussions.

[Morkins]

Wow ITT I'm being called out and insulted for making "gut calls" on a game that isn't even in beta. I'll give you the win I guess since I don't care for these fiery armchair discussions.

Sorry, I am just frustrated because I see this practically everywhere. People who either don't want to spend the time to consider mechanics, or are just too caught up on the old ones to give the new ones a chance. I will edit.

Again, sorry, but I feel like I have to repeat this exact post every few weeks...

[Spehornoob]

Gotta agree with Morkins on this one. Guild Wars 2 is not going to be Guild Wars 1. We've known that for a long time. It seems to me that GW2 interprets the design philosophies of GW1 in different ways that the original did.

Anti-Grind philosophy: The original accomplished this with an emphasis on builds and a low level cap. The new one raises the level cap, but is attempting to push meaningful content throughout the whole game, rather than have an extended "tutorial" to the level cap.

Skill-based combat: In keeping with the anti-grind philosophy, both games are attempting to put skill in combat ahead time spent developing your character. Again, the original accomplished this through it's strategic, build oriented combat system and giving lots of skills quickly. The sequel is using an action oriented combat system with a heavy emphasis on tactical skill usage.

There'll be some similarities in that regard, but this is simply not going to play the same way as GW1, and we've known that for a while.

[gunbo13]

Sorry, I am just frustrated because I see this practically everywhere. People who either don't want to spend the time to consider mechanics, or are just too caught up on the old ones to give the new ones a chance. I will edit. Again, sorry, but I feel like I have to repeat this exact post every few weeks...

We are theorizing here. I don't know anything about PvP in GW2 except these little tidbits. We can only react accordingly. I'm not ignoring taking a look at the ramifications but people will have different perspectives on the changes. You also have a matter of preference and loyalty to the prequel.

Every interpretation can be countered with another take. Was "less strategic, melee heavy, chaotic system" out of line? No, it is an exaggeration based on preference. Less strategic has to do with removing strategies I feel are more complex then the replacement ideas. Melee heavy is a theory since all characters have the ability and factoring in the mana pool removal. And a chaotic system is a reference to the absolute reliance on cool-downs which brings worry about short recharges. There are further concerns I have including a big one, the removal of strategy with spikes or the death of. If there is no mana pool then the players can hit a skill directly on recharge causing constant mechanically timed spikes with no weight of consequence. However, like most theories I have, I am withholding them.

I'm not digging the new mechanics as much as the former. Therefore, I won't be singing praises for a game that is removing what I like. And until we have more info or are in beta, I'm going to with-hold most judgement. However, that doesn't mean I am barred from posting reactionary statements in the thread. I like to theorize but we have to keep in within reason when the game is still being created.

There'll be some similarities in that regard, but this is simply not going to play the same way as GW1, and we've known that for a while.

You would have to define that. Not to long ago it was taking GW1 in a new direction. Now, everyone is crazy to treat them like similar games.

[Morkins]

Gotta agree with Morkins on this one. Guild Wars 2 is not going to be Guild Wars 1. We've known that for a long time. It seems to me that GW2 interprets the design philosophies of GW1 in different ways that the original did. Anti-Grind philosophy: The original accomplished this with an emphasis on builds and a low level cap. The new one raises the level cap, but is attempting to push meaningful content throughout the whole game, rather than have an extended "tutorial" to the level cap. Skill-based combat: In keeping with the anti-grind philosophy, both games are attempting to put skill in combat ahead time spent developing your character. Again, the original accomplished this through it's strategic, build oriented combat system and giving lots of skills quickly. The sequel is using an action oriented combat system with a heavy emphasis on tactical skill usage. There'll be some similarities in that regard, but this is simply not going to play the same way as GW1, and we've known that for a while.

Exactly... It is just hard to explain certain mechanical things about the combat to someone who hasn't experienced it firsthand. I suppose there will be certain people who just aren't going to understand it until they play it because describing it in a way that doesn't bring up unwarranted(and inaccurate) associations with certain overly simplified action games, is such a difficult task.

[Morkins]

We are theorizing here. I don't know anything about PvP in GW2 except these little tidbits. We can only react accordingly. I'm not ignoring taking a look at the ramifications but people will have different perspectives on the changes. You also have a matter of preference and loyalty to the prequel. Every interpretation can be countered with another take. Was "less strategic, melee heavy, chaotic system" out of line? No, it is an exaggeration based on preference. Less strategic has to do with removing strategies I feel are more complex then the replacement ideas. Melee heavy is a theory since all characters have the ability and factoring in the mana pool removal. And a chaotic system is a reference to the absolute reliance on cool-downs which brings worry about short recharges. There are further concerns I have including a big one, the removal of strategy with spikes or the death of. If there is no mana pool then the players can hit a skill directly on recharge causing constant mechanically timed spikes with no weight of consequence. However, like most theories I have, I am withholding them. I'm not digging the new mechanics as much as the former. Therefore, I won't be singing praises for a game that is removing what I like. And until we have more info or are in beta, I'm going to with-hold most judgement. However, that doesn't mean I am barred from posting reactionary statements in the thread. I like to theorize but we have to keep in within reason when the game is still being created.

Fine. But having played the game, even if it was just PvE, I don't need to "theorize." The design philosophy is there and it is readily apparent. And extrapolating how certain things will work in PvP based on PvE experience is not a difficult thing at all. But I guess it will take seeing it in action to convince you, which I guess is fair.

[Morkins]

You would have to define that. Not to long ago it was taking GW1 in a new direction. Now, everyone is crazy to treat them like similar games.

You aren't correct about that... It has always been a different game, for precisely the reasons he described. And that has been since the PC Gamer article announcing the game...

[Spehornoob]

Morkin, knowing that you've played the game has given me two reactions.

1. I can trust that you know what you're talking about.

2. I hate you, Morkin. I wanna play it. You monster.

You would have to define that. Not to long ago it was taking GW1 in a new direction. Now, everyone is crazy to treat them like similar games.

I've been following the game for maybe a year and a half or so, so maybe I was outta the loop for a while, but I've never been under the impression that it would play similar to GW1. When we didn't know about the combat, maybe you could assume it was similar, but as soon as the first details and videos about combat came out it was clear that this would play very differently.

[Morkins]

I just hope Boon Control does a good job. They have only had a couple of weeks to practice with the Structured PvP, and I just hope they actually take advantage of the full suite of tactical options available. It isn't something that is necessarily obvious about the game(which is part of the problem I guess), but it is there. Figuring out skill combinations and getting a feel for the flow of combat is going to take time, and I just hope that we see at a least a glimmer of it in the GamesCom PvP demos.

[Justin Timberlake]

I don't think its hard to understand that people who love the original Guild Wars are disappointed to hear that the sequel won't have any similarities to its predecessor.

Its particularly sad to me, because I see an industry thats obsessed with sequelitis, yet the developers of the franchises I enjoy the most (Smash Bros, Guild Wars, etc) seem to think its a great idea to go a completely new direction. It wouldn't hurt so much if there were other games like them to fill the void, but since they are unique its like killing a genre. :/

[gunbo13]

Exactly... It is just hard to explain certain mechanical things about the combat to someone who hasn't experienced it firsthand. I suppose there will be certain people who just aren't going to understand it until they play it because describing it in a way that doesn't bring up unwarranted(and inaccurate) associations with certain overly simplified action games, is such a difficult task.

You still are carrying that tone. Being stealthy with disrespect is not the same as removing it.

Fine. But having played the game, even if it was just PvE, I don't need to "theorize." The design philosophy is there and it is readily apparent. And extrapolating how certain things will work in PvP based on PvE experience is not a difficult thing at all. But I guess it will take seeing it in action to convince you, which I guess is fair.

That's great you played the game and are posting impressions. But, you are going about it the wrong way. Nobody wants you to "teach" the game. We would prefer to hear about your experience with it since most of us don't have the luxury.

It is still theory. Most of your bullet points are just simple inferences based on skills and mechanics. They aren't difficult to understand. What you aren't realizing, is that just because there is logic does not mean there is relevance. The majority of the skills might be thrown out. Tactics might be way different then your ideas. The game-play could devolve into all DPS pressure builds where the base idea is the kill clock. The game could also move more towards a terrain battle with a heavy emphasis on kiting. That would emphasis misdirection and map games over combat.

If you want to prove your theories you'll have to wait until about 1 month after the retail game is out worldwide. That's the nature of this stuff. And even then, the PvP world can flip upside down based on the tiniest variances. Keep posting your impressions but you don't have to talk down to give your points validity.

I've been following the game for maybe a year and a half or so, so maybe I was outta the loop for a while, but I've never been under the impression that it would play similar to GW1. When we didn't know about the combat, maybe you could assume it was similar, but as soon as the first details and videos about combat came out it was clear that this would play very differently.

Interpretation. All the tools have been in place. It was all about new media, articles, and impressions to verify/disclaim. There is no reason whatsoever that this couldn't have been a PvP system with 8v8, energy management, emphasis on DPS, with the addition of enhanced movement and weapon ranging. It could have been extremely similar to GvG in game-mode, the skill bars basically just shuffling/distributing responsibilities, roles still intact based on available skills, and the intact properties of "lines." There were still a number of possibilities not ruled out and that includes just yesterday with the mana pool.

Hindsight is 20-20. All of these definitive claims are out of place considering they are making massive features changes like...right now, cite yesterday, etc...