Guild wars 2 Dungeons

[Blznsmri]

Ah, yea well... I have no clue about that! The last time I PVP'd in Warcraft was in Burning Crusade. Haha!

Yeah, I tried arena a few times in Cata, being ret was harrddd.

[Underskilled]

all i can say is /sigh

Care to elaborate? Or is your complete disregard for mine and fiif's post without justification more than enough for you?

I didn't say "You NEED to have X, Y, and Z profession or you will fail", I said, keep in mind this is just a guess, that a dungeon will run the smoothest with one player supporting with buffs and debuffs, two players controlling the enemies while dishing out the damage they can, and two players do nothing but deal the most damage they can.

Again, I'm not pointing out specific professions, any professing can mainly support, mainly control, or mainly deal damage, it simply depends on what abilities and traits you choose.

[Blznsmri]

Care to elaborate? Or is your complete disregard for mine and fiif's post without justification more than enough for you?

I didn't say "You NEED to have X, Y, and Z profession or you will fail", I said, keep in mind this is just a guess, that a dungeon will run the smoothest with one player supporting with buffs and debuffs, two players controlling the enemies while dishing out the damage they can, and two players do nothing but deal the most damage they can.

Again, I'm not pointing out specific professions, any professing can mainly support, mainly control, or mainly deal damage, it simply depends on what abilities and traits you choose.

Its that you assigned a "role" to the players in the instance.

Instead of "support will buff the group," say "Player A will buff the group."
Instead of "controller will slow adds," say "Player B will slow the adds.
If Player B goes down, Player A will buff the group, and visa versa.

[Durzlla]

Care to elaborate? Or is your complete disregard for mine and fiif's post without justification more than enough for you?

I didn't say "You NEED to have X, Y, and Z profession or you will fail", I said, keep in mind this is just a guess, that a dungeon will run the smoothest with one player supporting with buffs and debuffs, two players controlling the enemies while dishing out the damage they can, and two players do nothing but deal the most damage they can.

Again, I'm not pointing out specific professions, any professing can mainly support, mainly control, or mainly deal damage, it simply depends on what abilities and traits you choose.

Why wouldn't everyone just take a bit of everything? I think that'd make them run smoother cause in your scenario should your support guy get flattened by something, you're out support... And the guys who are specializing entirely in damage are going to be slaughtered by a light breeze...

[Fencers]

I don't think he is saying you have to run a dungeon with anyone specializing in a particular role. Sounds more like he is saying it would be helpful if someone was supporting, controlling, damage dealing, etc. Rather than all 5 purely DPSing with no support or control and no DPS.

Course, I could be misreading the guy. Just doesn't seem like he's saying "need" in this case.

[Underskilled]

Its that you assigned a "role" to the players in the instance.

Instead of "support will buff the group," say "Player A will buff the group."
Instead of "controller will slow adds," say "Player B will slow the adds.
If Player B goes down, Player A will buff the group, and visa versa.

I suppose, but that's really just sugarcoating it. We know Player A is doing a specific job, as well as Player B and Player C.

Why wouldn't everyone just take a bit of everything? I think that'd make them run smoother cause in your scenario should your support guy get flattened by something, you're out support... And the guys who are specializing entirely in damage are going to be slaughtered by a light breeze...

I haven't had too much testing, but I'd assume if you tried to choose your skills and traits around preforming every role, it would only cause you to be sub-par at everything. I could be wrong though, I suppose we won't know until GW2 is actually out.

---------- Post added 2011-12-13 at 03:33 AM ----------

I don't think he is saying you have to run a dungeon with anyone specializing in a particular role. Sounds more like he is saying it would be helpful if someone was supporting, controlling, damage dealing, etc. Rather than all 5 purely DPSing with no support or control and no DPS.

Course, I could be misreading the guy. Just doesn't seem like he's saying "need" in this case.

Basically. I'm talking about the ideal, the perfect setup. I'm not saying you NEED s support, two people controlling, and two people do nothing but damage, but in my opinion, that will prove to be the most successful setup.

I personally can say, I most likely will never run that setup anyway, I'm not spending time looking for the "perfect group" when I want to run something

[Fencers]

I haven't had too much testing, but I'd assume if you tried to choose your skills and traits around preforming every role, it would only cause you to be sub-par at everything. I could be wrong though, I suppose we won't know until GW2 is actually out

I don't think GW2 will work as such. Speculation of course. But It seems as though many of the control, heal, support, etc skills are merely a part of a given profession's tools. I.E. A Elementalist doesn't seem to be worse for wear if he swaps to water attunement for a some support and then goes earth for some mitigation or fire for DPS. Looks fluid and on the fly. The engineer is another example of that same fluidity.

Just based on what we seen/heard.

[Blznsmri]

The point is Underskilled, no one's going to be stuck in those roles. Yeah, 2 control, 2 damage and a support would probably be ideal, but the encounters are designed to have those roles be fluid, meaning you'll essentially have 5 controllers, 5 damagers and 5 supporters.

[Fencers]

<snip>the encounters are designed to have those roles be fluid, meaning you'll essentially have 5 controllers, 5 damagers and 5 supporters.

As needed! I remember when they had the fan day at Anet a lot of folks came back with reports that group "roles" were something everyone was quickly swapping/switching to & from on-the-fly and in reaction to others.

Think it was Rubi from Guildcast who remarked that her dungeon group went into a fight with certain "ideas" but in the course of the encounter, they quickly realized they needed to switch it up as they were fighting. Need some extra heals! Need some extra mitigation! Need some more AOE! More DOTS!

Seems like kind of a big deal that your GW2 warrior might be a [for lack of better terms] a prot, fury, arms or shaman moment to moment.

[Underskilled]

I don't think GW2 will work as such. Speculation of course. But It seems as though many of the control, heal, support, etc skills are merely a part of a given profession's tools. I.E. A Elementalist doesn't seem to be worse for wear if he swaps to water attunement for a some support and then goes earth for some mitigation or fire for DPS. Looks fluid and on the fly. The engineer is another example of that same fluidity.

Just based on what we seen/heard.

I guess what I'm saying, is for example, you have 6 strong support skills, 6 strong control skills, and 6 strong damage skills. If you try to balance out and take 3-4 of each, you may miss out on important skills of one kind, and thus only make it harder for yourself to effectively control a group of enemies, or damage them.

Of course this all speculation as well.

The point is Underskilled, no one's going to be stuck in those roles. Yeah, 2 control, 2 damage and a support would probably be ideal, but the encounters are designed to have those roles be fluid, meaning you'll essentially have 5 controllers, 5 damagers and 5 supporters.

I understand, and agree with you as well! I'm simply brainstorming the best, or perfect setup, which could differ between dungeons. I doubt I'll even be using this setup as well, since there's no way the friends I'm playing will want to change their playstyle for the sake of efficiency.

[Odeezee]

@Underskilled: dude, what don't you get? the reason i said /sigh is because if you stopped to think and actually look at the skills you CANNOT build a toon to be mainly support, damage, or control. MOST skills are a combination of 2 or 3 of those aspects of gameplay, so...yeah. and just in case that is not clear enough, the most ideal group is a cohesive one, regardless of whatever "pigeonholing" you try to ascribe to them; skill trumps all.

[Borzo]

I guess what I'm saying, is for example, you have 6 strong support skills, 6 strong control skills, and 6 strong damage skills. If you try to balance out and take 3-4 of each, you may miss out on important skills of one kind, and thus only make it harder for yourself to effectively control a group of enemies, or damage them.

You can have all of them. You choose if you want damage, control, or support - at any particular time - by swapping weapons/attunements. Your action bar will then change appropriately.

[Underskilled]

You can have all of them. You choose if you want damage, control, or support - at any particular time - by swapping weapons/attunements. Your action bar will then change appropriately.

I know that. I also know you can only have 10 active skills on your bar, and changing weapons, during combat I believe, has a cooldown.

@Underskilled: dude, what don't you get? the reason i said /sigh is because if you stopped to think and actually look at the skills you CANNOT build a toon to be mainly support, damage, or control. MOST skills are a combination of 2 or 3 of those aspects of gameplay, so...yeah. and just in case that is not clear enough, the most ideal group is a cohesive one, regardless of whatever "pigeonholing" you try to ascribe to them; skill trumps all.

Your challenge, it is accepted.

http://gw2.luna-atra.fr/skills_tool/...itch=2b630ad31

This, warrior skill build, is focused on supporting your allies. 1H axe for some damage and the Throw axe skill, warhorn obviously for buffs. All selectable skills have been chosen to either buff your allies, or weaken the enemies.

Now lets take a look at my personal build.

http://gw2.luna-atra.fr/skills_tool/...itch=2b630ad31

Does it look like I'm supporting anyone? Nope. I chose my selectable specifically to do the most damage possible.

This entire is moot anyway, but you can plainly see there is much more than a simple swap of the weapons between a warrior who wants to support their allies, and one who is focused completely on damage.

[Odeezee]

I know that. I also know you can only have 10 active skills on your bar, and changing weapons, during combat I believe, has a cooldown.

Your challenge, it is accepted.

http://gw2.luna-atra.fr/skills_tool/?lang=en&code=301ba942a6f18c2b630b3;34fb19536c8bec2a6f0096cc0c&switch=2b630ad31

This, warrior skill build, is focused on supporting your allies. 1H axe for some damage and the Throw axe skill, warhorn obviously for buffs. All selectable skills have been chosen to either buff your allies, or weaken the enemies.

Now lets take a look at my personal build.

http://gw2.luna-atra.fr/skills_tool/...itch=2b630ad31

Does it look like I'm supporting anyone? Nope. I chose my selectable specifically to do the most damage possible.

This entire is moot anyway, but you can plainly see there is much more than a simple swap of the weapons between a warrior who wants to support their allies, and one who is focused completely on damage.

your first set: skill 1 is pure damage, skill 2 is pure damage, skill 3 is damage+support, skill 4 is support, skill 5 is support+control, skill 6 is self heal, skill 7 is support, skill 8 is support, skill 9 is control, skill 10 is damage+support. in all those there are only 4 purely supportive skills and like i said you cannot build a purely support/control/damage build NO MATTER what you try to do.

now looking at your second build: skill 1 is damage to damage+support to damage+control, skill 2 is damage+control, skill 3 is damage+control, skill 4 is damage+support, skill 5 is support, skill 6 is self heal with personal support, skill 7 is personal support, skill 8 is personal support, skill 9 is personal support, skill 10 is damage+(possible)support. again there is not one purely damage skill in that whole skill-set. this is the reason why things like damage meters would be useless in GW2 as they do not show who was the most valuable player. you cannot faceroll to victory as there will be many instances where you would have to not use your big attack to take advantage of a vulnerability or boon on your target but use it's control/support component on a different target since many skill, like i said before, are a combination of damage/control/support. adaptation given your chosen skills will be more beneficial that trying to pick the "optimal" damage/control/support build. so my stance still stands; skill >>>> all.

[Underskilled]

your first set: skill 1 is pure damage, skill 2 is pure damage, skill 3 is damage+support, skill 4 is support, skill 5 is support+control, skill 6 is self heal, skill 7 is support, skill 8 is support, skill 9 is control, skill 10 is damage+support. in all those there are only 4 purely supportive skills and like i said you cannot build a purely support/control/damage build NO MATTER what you try to do.

now looking at your second build: skill 1 is damage to damage+support to damage+control, skill 2 is damage+control, skill 3 is damage+control, skill 4 is damage+support, skill 5 is support, skill 6 is self heal with personal support, skill 7 is personal support, skill 8 is personal support, skill 9 is personal support, skill 10 is damage+(possible)support. again there is not one purely damage skill in that whole skill-set. this is the reason why things like damage meters would be useless in GW2 as they do not show who was the most valuable player. you cannot faceroll to victory as there will be many instances where you would have to not use your big attack to take advantage of a vulnerability or boon on your target but use it's control/support component on a different target since many skill, like i said before, are a combination of damage/control/support. adaptation given your chosen skills will be more beneficial that trying to pick the "optimal" damage/control/support build. so my stance still stands; skill >>>> all.

When I say support, I don't mean "Sit in the back, doing NOTHING but using support skills" as that would be silly. Like you pointed out, the first skill set has 6 support skills, and one control. Will they still be able to fight? Of course. Will they do less damage than the second set? Of course. Will they play a more supportive role, while still dishing out the damage they can? Bingo.

As for the second build, yes, technically most of the skills do involve some sort of control, or buff/debuff. At the same time however, they, in my opinion, will provide the highest source of damage output for the two weapons I chose. I understand axes may be higher than maces, but I like maces more.


I still agree with you on basically all points. Skill of course >>>> all, especially since gear is not a deciding factor in GW2. A damage meter would be pointless, since the deciding factor of a fight is rarely damage output.

I think what we're forgetting, is what my original post was all about, which was speculation on what, in my opinion, what would be perfect setup for a dungeon team. I still believe, two people who mainly set their skills around controlling, one who sets their skills around support, and two who set their skills around providing the maximum output of damage will result in, assuming all players are skilled, the smoothest possible dungeon clear.

Could I be wrong? Of course, it's speculation. Could you clear the same dungeons with other setups? Of course. Will I be forcing this setup upon others, or even using it myself? Doubtfully.

[Blznsmri]

Why are you two still arguing? You're both right. Odeezee just let it go.

[Rahzael]

I think that due to the nature of abilities in this game, we're more likely to see an ideal class setup than we are to see an ideal role setup, as it were. Of course there is going to be a difference between 5 people all going damage output and 5 people all going support, but what I'm referring to is the difference between 2 support and 3, or 2 dps and 3 dps(yes, I'm aware everyone will be dpsing). Optimization is possible in just about every class based game, but in PvE I think it will be much more abstract than what we are used to.

Just for the sake of reference: If you can recall a time in WoW when a special ability that only one or two classes had which made a fight infinitely easier, I would say that we will encounter situations like this, although hopefully to a lesser degree. A guardian shielding everyone from a heavy outburst of AoE damage, for instance, is probably going to top a warrior dropping a HoT banner in a certain situation. A slow ticking, consistent DoT AoE during an encounter will favor the warrior and his banner, on the other hand.

But more to the point: I believe there may be multiple "ideal" setups for certain encounters, and those ideal setups will include different types of roles, hinging on which classes are present. With a guardian helping to wall off a wave of burst damage, why bother having three warriors all drop HoT banners to ward off the damage? With an elementalist present, why bother having 2/3 people AoEing adds down when you could just herd them with tornado or kite instead? There are a lot of factors to consider.

[Underskilled]

Why are you two still arguing? You're both right. Odeezee just let it go.

I personally enjoy my ideas or thoughts to be challenged by another. A hearty well mannered argument is good stimulation for the brain, you know.

[Odeezee]

I personally enjoy my ideas or thoughts to be challenged by another. A hearty well mannered argument is good stimulation for the brain, you know.

well said. the way i see it, don't speak unless you plan on having your ideas being challenged and have the ability to defend them.

[Underskilled]

Since this is still a thread about dungeons in GW2, I can't wait to see how 5 mesmers will do in one.

Imagine an army of illusions attacking a boss