Guild Wars 2

It’s action time.

To get things rolling, I suggest that we scrap the idea of rule meeting.

• Slow responsibility to issues
• Lots of effort required
• Limited effect (not enough time, lots of people already have their own opinion)

Instead, we should be agile and have “weekly” polls.

• Each record-oriented guild leader is given one vote (login info).
• When an issue arises, it’s put on a stack (aka my mind).
• If there is no poll running, I choose a good amount of issues from the stack and start a new poll.
• Poll is started by creating a discussion topic on forums and adding each issue to gw2dungeons poll page (http://gw2dungeons.net/dev/voting, work in progress)
• Each poll runs for a week. Leaders can vote what they want (or even share the login details with trusted members).
• After one week, results have immediate effect and new issues are chosen from the stack (if any).

How does this sound for you guys (especially guild leaders)? Does 1 week sound too fast? Does constant voting sound too cumbersome? Or do you just prefer rule meetings?

Current vote holders:

• Daemoniic [HeX]
• Enko [LOD]
• Deathly [qT]
• Skywalker [TDN]
• Der/p/y Moa [iV]

As I already said to others before, I personally don’t think we have enough “issues” for another meeting.
Maybe after HoT, which I doubt.
So for now this sounds like a good idea and 1 week is resonable.

Since the poll on the gwscr-page is not ready yet, I just post my question here (maybe this is already answered or there is a clear statement): Is it allowed in the volcanic fractal to jump down the cliff after the first boss and go straight over the lava to the last boss?

i dont think so its goating aswell its not game intented to do that

Snowblind shortcut wouldn’t be either aye?

Jerus.4350:

Snowblind shortcut wouldn’t be either aye?

Lolwutm8 ?! That’s atrocious.

Why offtopic?

Wethospu.6437:

Why offtopic?

You have the matter at hands. Would skipping some flight of stairs by jumping down directly be considered legit skip? :>

Issues can be posted so there’s open discussion on the forums and then give the guilds a week to vote on it.

For the guilds that will be voting, are you just leaving it to guilds who have done any kind of records or to any guild that wants to sign up? Previous meetings were invite only so the majority of people didn’t even know they were going on.

Who can vote and how much their vote counts can be tricky. Ideally everyone who is seriously interested in record running should have a vote. In practice that’s impossible to pull off because of troll guilds like GGGG.

I would rather not to give any exact requirements since then I would have to hold them (or get called corrupt). But you definitely need to hold several records over a week at some point or have some other significance.

Then another question is should more important guilds have bigger votes. That sounds pretty hard to tune so I would rather not go that way. But it’s not exactly fair that a random guild with 2 records has the same effect as a guild with 20 records.

Why not allow individuals to vote then?
You solve the issue of how to weight a guilds vote.

It also allows you to get a better idea of what the populace wants/thinks, rather than just a select few.

A voting system which allows 10,000 votes is no more difficult to put together than a voting system that allows 10 votes.

Also by excluding people who have not set records also makes new-comers seem unwelcome. Unless that is the idea?

Artemis Thuras.8795:

Why not allow individuals to vote then?
You solve the issue of how to weight a guilds vote.

It also allows you to get a better idea of what the populace wants/thinks, rather than just a select few.

A voting system which allows 10,000 votes is no more difficult to put together than a voting system that allows 10 votes.

Also by excluding people who have not set records also makes new-comers seem unwelcome. Unless that is the idea?

C’mon man…

I don’t feel unwelcome because in the end I don’t vote. I think it makes sense. Those that take the time and energy to join the community by setting a record get their place to vote. And, if you’re not trying to set a record, why does it matter?

Artemis Thuras.8795:

Why not allow individuals to vote then?
You solve the issue of how to weight a guilds vote.

It also allows you to get a better idea of what the populace wants/thinks, rather than just a select few.

A voting system which allows 10,000 votes is no more difficult to put together than a voting system that allows 10 votes.

Also by excluding people who have not set records also makes new-comers seem unwelcome. Unless that is the idea?

Less experience you have with the system, less likely you can contribute positively. Opening it to masses means most of the voters have no idea what they are doing.

Anyways, assuming we go with this voting thing, I would like to every guild leader contact me in game, forums or email stating their preferred login name, guild they are representing and reason why they should have a vote (for example “My guild was in last rule meeting” or “My guild has XYZ records”).

Also you can optionally give me your email so I can email you whenever a new poll is created.

Additionally now is a good time to mention if you don’t like the idea at all. I’m planning to do the first poll at end of this week.

I’m down for guild leaders voting.

I’m also ok with restricting the access to this poll to guilds that have shown interest in the past or recently in record runs, and that do maintain the truly competitive mindset. What I call truly competitive mindset is people that will try to design new tatics and will strive to beat the current records. If it’s posting just to have a record time, we might as well just drop it all. Records should have meaning : either they beat the previous one, or due to a major rollback, they set a particularly good record, albeit not being all-time.

This way, troll entries like GGGG can’t vote, while guilds that went kiiiiiiinda retirement mode like rT have votes to cast

The problem with that, fracture, is that we might just get a bunch of people trolling the votes and I think we’d like to keep that to a minimum.

We’ve seen what people think of our community enough on nemekitten’s videos/the general discussion/every “destroy the zerk meta ANet kthxbye” topic. Also team GGGG made fun of the community in a livestreamed, widely advertised tournament.

Seeing these acts, I think it’s wise to keep the voting power to a minimum, though advertising our changes, and the fact that the rules are clear and adverse to exploits would be a nice touch added to the public image of the speedrunning community

i think guilds of all time records should have a vote tbh not current meta because there are current meta records far away from all time. But i think every guild should have the same amount of votes because if not big guilds can just over vote small ones. Also going back to records i think those records should be holded for more than a week more like 2 weeks atleast. Another point is that guilds which are known in PvE should have a general vote aswell since there are guilds which were known in the past but aren’t that interested in records anymore.

Might be better to give big guilds like 2 votes but not sure with that.

Some of the bigger guilds havent taken part in records for quite some time. Now for some that might be due to the rules. But even so i dont think its fair to give double votes to certain guilds.

The agile idea is good. Keeps things moving and cuts the red tape. +1

Unrelated but important. I think its about time we get a sticky for all things gw2dungeons.net. Explaining what the site has available (guides) along with a bit of info about records. Could also be useful for people to link their record submission threads as reminders to the admins. Or give admins a place to check to make sure they havent forgotten anything.

spoj.9672:

Some of the bigger guilds havent taken part in records for quite some time. Now for some that might be due to the rules. But even so i dont think its fair to give double votes to certain guilds.

In this case, size refers to amount of records. For example all guilds had a default weight of 10 and each record increased it by one.

Even so im not sure thats a good idea either way. Unless it accounts for all previous records a guild has submitted. But then there are a lot of old records that arent on our database because they were eventually beaten.

For example DnT and rT have loads of records. But most werent eligible for the all time leaderboard when the switch happened. So they arent in the database. But they were top records in various previous metas.

Eh one vote per guild. Otherwise, the guilds with more votes will just make the rules more favorable to whatever they want. Ideally, the rules would be to a point where its just flat statements that aren’t just opinions.

Basically, beat the previous time and you’re good. No pay to win ie gem store items. No third party hacks. This stuff is pretty hard to argue about vs some of the rules we have in place.

Out of bounds I thought would have been pretty hard to argue about but apparently not.

BlackDragon.3752:

i think guilds of all time records should have a vote tbh not current meta because there are current meta records far away from all time. But i think every guild should have the same amount of votes because if not big guilds can just over vote small ones. Also going back to records i think those records should be holded for more than a week more like 2 weeks atleast. Another point is that guilds which are known in PvE should have a general vote aswell since there are guilds which were known in the past but aren’t that interested in records anymore.

Might be better to give big guilds like 2 votes but not sure with that.

Isn’t the idea of “all time” only there because we do resets with the idea that big enough game changes have happened that the old records should no longer be obtainable? I mean we know this to not be true with the FGS vs IB change obviously, but that’s the idea behind the resets isn’kitten So wouldn’t requiring All Time basically mean that new people would have to do the impossible to join?

I think someone making a serious attempt should be embraced. If i toss up a 5 min SE1 just to fill a spot I wouldn’t think I deserve a vote, but if I form a guild and get it down to 3:10 I think I’d have shown my devotion to the play style and deserve to have my voice count.

Of course it’s not likely that I do this, just using that as an example.

Some of the record resets like when the might nerf happened were kind of dubious. Granted the community agreed to ban dodge icebow at that time too but nothing in game happened that really warranted a reset at that time.

The might nerf was enough to warrant a reset. Yes many of those records could still be beaten. But it didnt really seem fair. It was such a big change to damage and balance that it really didnt make sense not to reset it.

It really wasn’t though. It didn’t change how people were playing by that much and maybe made some fights 1 or 2 seconds longer. While it was a change to damage, I wouldn’t say it was a big change.

If im not mistaken there was a lot of other changes at the same time. It was a big balance patch. It was done because people agreed that it was enough. And it makes sense for consistency sake.

no i think all time records show more of the community how it was and as i said i would let old guilds like rT and DnT still vote since they were big in the community for new ones if they get close to all time then sure but tbh 50 seconds slower might nerf did never change so much ;P

BlackDragon.3752:

no i think all time records show more of the community how it was and as i said i would let old guilds like rT and DnT still vote since they were big in the community for new ones if they get close to all time then sure but tbh 50 seconds slower might nerf did never change so much ;P

I was under the impression was the idea that once you’ve set a record you’re on the list for good. So of course less active guys like rT and DnT would be on it.

but tbh if a new guild set a good record should they get equal votes because they are new and got one record now i think it would be needed to discuss about such things.

BlackDragon.3752:

but tbh if a new guild set a good record should they get equal votes because they are new and got one record now i think it would be needed to discuss about such things.

WTB punctuation.

On an actual on topic note I believe giving votes to guilds that are relevant in the speedclearing community is the best solution. If a guild feels left out they can just contact Wethospu and discuss their right for a vote. This way there won’t be any trolls or people that are completely outdated on the game. After all, the rules we have now are basically just to satisfy the current chunk of players that bother to do records and I think it should stay that way.

dboylolz.3916:

BlackDragon.3752:

but tbh if a new guild set a good record should they get equal votes because they are new and got one record now i think it would be needed to discuss about such things.

WTB punctuation.

Yui always writes like that, he even replied to applications in that way before we gave him kitten for it

PS: Yui <3

</3 you weren’t allowed to tell anyone!