Guild Wars 2

Subdue.5479:

Can we all just agree to put a cap of 1,000,000 AP from dailies and be done with it?

Sounds good to me.

Awe.1096:

fellyn.5083:

Here’s one that fits. Say you eat at McDonalds every day of your life and it leads to you having a heart attack. You then ask McDonalds to cut their menu down to salads only because you can’t control yourself and are afraid of another heart attack because you’ve decided that you can’t stop eating at McDonalds.

McDonalds is a poor analogy. And here is why. Sure, eating there every day will lead to problems (well, not quite, you can eat something at McD each day and remain slim and healthy but that would require a very specific choice of meals – definitely it would not be an experience for which people are eating at McD). There is however one quite popular solution to the McD “problem” and in fact it is being advocated for by health experts and some “progressive” people. Namely – avoid McDonald’s like a plague. Dont eat there. Ever. It will be the best solution. And in fact it is. For best health benefit you should just stop eating at McD. And stop giving them your money. Simple. So using your analogy, the best solution for the GW2 AP problem is… stop playing GW2 and never touch it again. Ironically that is exactly what I decided to do although I am not sure about the “never touch it again” part, it depends from potential changes they may do in the future. However, continuing with your analogy, basically what I am trying to do now is to suggest McDonalds what they can do so that their burgers will suddenly become as healthy as fresh veggie salad while still retaining all former taste benefits. Sounds like magic and in fact it would have to be. But in case of GW2 solution is much simplier and therefore I shall keep supporting it at least as long as someone from ArenaNet will more or less openly tell me to shut it and get the kitten out.

Or, you know. Self control.

And I’m done with thread because your arguments keep getting more ridiculous with each new post.

Subdue.5479:

Can we all just agree to put a cap of 1,000,000 AP from dailies and be done with it?

Sounds fair.

fellyn.5083:

And I’m done with thread because your arguments keep getting more ridiculous with each new post.

Ridiculousness is in the eye of the beholder. I find some other things in this thread quite ridiculous, let those things remain undisclosed for the time being. GG.

Subdue.5479:

Can we all just agree to put a cap of 1,000,000 AP from dailies and be done with it?

With very sketchy estimate this would take around 181 years to complete assuming doing all dailies for the entire period. Since I am right now 31 years old but I already have 1 year of dailies done, that would mean that I would hit the cap some time around my 210th birthday. While I appreciate your faith in my longevity, I am affraid I can’t consider that as a reachable goal. Current state of life extension science is not giving much hope for major breakthroughs in the near future. Which effectively changes the proposed 1,000,000 AP cap into the same infinite paradigm. Which means we still have a problem. Sadly, I am affraid sarcasm alone will not alleviate it.

Yamiga.7863:

Awe.1096:

3554091

Simple. Almost everyone in this game does dailies. Only a minority (and an extremely small minority) was salvaging 10 mil items or running 9001 CoF. One is not like the other.

I want to see how many players in GW2 will actually reach the treshold of 25,000 AP from dailies alone. Almost everyone?

Very few, even if the game stays for very long. I’d really like the daily APs to be limited in some manner, and the better solution (imho) I came up to is the following:

Progressive cap

Principle: Past X total points from dailies, dailies does not award anymore APs. Every month, the cap X is increased by 500 (numbers are purely indicative. Its meant to be a bit smaller than the maximum one can earn in a month, which is currently around 600)

Players affected: Dailies farmers only. As long as the numbers are correctly set (first cap and monthly increase), only the players that heavily farmed dailies since release will reach the threshold

• To reach the threshold, one has to have a large amount of APs from dailies AND consistently do more dailies than the monthly increase
• Even if a player reaches the cap, he will still be able to increase his AP score the following month
• The system is rather simple, yet effective and does not punish hardcore players, even on the long term
• It is also more flexible than a hard cap

Please tell me me if you see any flaw in this system. The more I think about it, the more it seems to do only what its meant to: slow down the grind for AP farmers without affecting other players.

A new take on it. Refreshing to see a new idea, I wouldn’t mind a system similar to this. The AP in question would be more comfortable ~200 or 250, but I would be on board on this.

Ewon.5903:

I miss you guys <3

aww, my thread was archived

I miss you too sir. It was bittersweet to meet and pass you in AP. I hope someday you can return.

bwillb.2165:

Awe.1096:

bwillb.2165:

But with a cap, that places me permanently under people who have not missed any events.

How? They will reach their cap first and stop getting more AP from dailies while you will still get those AP and you will start to catch up.

Also. The problem of temporary living story achievements is another separate issue but we dont talk about it here (at least so far).

But those temporary points do exist, and have been gained already. And a lot of people are doing these events primarily for those points, so I can’t see them being capped or it would kill chances of success especially on servers that are already struggling to get the numbers.

And that raises another concern… What would be the incentive to keep doing dailies and events once you’ve been capped? And for the love of god don’t say higher tiers of gear to grind for.

Omg dude there’s something you’re just immensely confused about. The other haters are at least understanding and arguing their points but you’re not getting it.
A cap on AP earned from dailies would mean in essence that any missed points from daily achievements could be made up, and once other players hit the cap, any points you earn are purely gaining you ground. It would help leaderboard competitiveness, it would help grind, it wouldn’t hinder AP rewards, especially considering they haven’t even figured out what they’re doing for 25k+ yet…

Hellmasker.1649:

Ewon.5903:

I miss you guys <3

aww, my thread was archived

I miss you too sir. It was bittersweet to meet and pass you in AP. I hope someday you can return.

I thought this wasn’t about leader boards???

Hellmasker.1649:

Omg dude there’s something you’re just immensely confused about. The other haters are at least understanding and arguing their points but you’re not getting it.
A cap on AP earned from dailies would mean in essence that any missed points from daily achievements could be made up, and once other players hit the cap, any points you earn are purely gaining you ground. It would help leaderboard competitiveness, it would help grind, it wouldn’t hinder AP rewards, especially considering they haven’t even figured out what they’re doing for 25k+ yet…

I’d appreciate if you’d stop making this argument, because it is blatantly untrue. A cap on AP from dailies does not make the leaderboard more competitive. It makes the leaderboard less competitive. Any rational thinker trying to move up (not stay put on) the leaderboard wants lots of temporary content. Here’s why:

Regardless of how much temporary AP is available if any, a climber can maintain about the same rate of AP gain over time as someone who’s already at the top. When temporary AP is uncapped, the people at the top must continue the same level of play in order to maintain their spot. When they slack off, the climber is able to permanently gain some ground.

However, when temporary AP is capped, the people who are at the top become entrenched. True, they won’t have access to quick AP from dailies anymore, but that doesn’t matter since given the cap, they know exactly how close the climber can get by doing those dailies. In the mean time, it’s wrong to assume that the people sitting at the top will just wait idly by while the climber climb. No, they’ll be doing the permanent achievements. So even when the climber finally reaches the cap on dailies, they’re still going to be way behind on permanent achievements!

At best, a cap will constrict the range of AP between climbers and people sitting at the top. In no way, however, will it help climbers actually pass those at the top, and in fact, makes it that much more difficult to do so, as there is little pressure on those sitting at the top to continue performing. That makes the leaderboard less competitive.

^—- Subdue is absolutely correct.

A cap makes no sense. The only argument for a cap on AP is to equalise the achievement points between places, which makes no sense. If someone has invested more and time and effort into the game then why shouldn’t they have more achievement points? They’ve worked for them.

You lose and gain absolutely nothing by having less achievement points. As you earn more you will unlock the same chests that other people have unlocked, and you have forever to do so. You can’t restrict other peoples playing experience just because you want to be on the same level as them.

Subdue.5479:

Hellmasker.1649:

Omg dude there’s something you’re just immensely confused about. The other haters are at least understanding and arguing their points but you’re not getting it.
A cap on AP earned from dailies would mean in essence that any missed points from daily achievements could be made up, and once other players hit the cap, any points you earn are purely gaining you ground. It would help leaderboard competitiveness, it would help grind, it wouldn’t hinder AP rewards, especially considering they haven’t even figured out what they’re doing for 25k+ yet…

I’d appreciate if you’d stop making this argument, because it is blatantly untrue. A cap on AP from dailies does not make the leaderboard more competitive. It makes the leaderboard less competitive. Any rational thinker trying to move up (not stay put on) the leaderboard wants lots of temporary content. Here’s why:

Regardless of how much temporary AP is available if any, a climber can maintain about the same rate of AP gain over time as someone who’s already at the top. When temporary AP is uncapped, the people at the top must continue the same level of play in order to maintain their spot. When they slack off, the climber is able to permanently gain some ground.

However, when temporary AP is capped, the people who are at the top become entrenched. True, they won’t have access to quick AP from dailies anymore, but that doesn’t matter since given the cap, they know exactly how close the climber can get by doing those dailies. In the mean time, it’s wrong to assume that the people sitting at the top will just wait idly by while the climber climb. No, they’ll be doing the permanent achievements. So even when the climber finally reaches the cap on dailies, they’re still going to be way behind on permanent achievements!

At best, a cap will constrict the range of AP between climbers and people sitting at the top. In no way, however, will it help climbers actually pass those at the top, and in fact, makes it that much more difficult to do so, as there is little pressure on those sitting at the top to continue performing. That makes the leaderboard less competitive.

I’ve understood your point all along, and maybe what’s needed is the leaderboard overhaul like you’re suggesting, but if you can find a player who’s willing to do all 8 pvps and all 12-15 pves, AND find time to finish all the LS achieves, then yeah, you guys are right, they do deserve a spot. Maybe they can someday make up the 260pts from SAB Trib mode or the 215pts from the Queen’s Gauntlet, or the 235pts from the Secret of Southsun. They’ll only be “catching up” to me 2 pts at a time as it is(solo queues). So 2pts per day, assuming I stop even trying the solo queue wins(which I do sometimes attempt and complete), it’ll take just under a year for them to catch up.
So to those who feel so empowered, go ahead and spend 4-8 hours every day doing boring grindy achieves and I’ll see you on the front page in ~355 days.

And there you have it. Some people are willing to spend a lot of time doing Dailies in order to move up the Leaderboard. No one should be denied that, because others do not wish to put in the time, anymore.

Hellmasker.1649:

Yamiga.7863:

Awe.1096:

3554091

Simple. Almost everyone in this game does dailies. Only a minority (and an extremely small minority) was salvaging 10 mil items or running 9001 CoF. One is not like the other.

I want to see how many players in GW2 will actually reach the treshold of 25,000 AP from dailies alone. Almost everyone?

Very few, even if the game stays for very long. I’d really like the daily APs to be limited in some manner, and the better solution (imho) I came up to is the following:

Progressive cap

Principle: Past X total points from dailies, dailies does not award anymore APs. Every month, the cap X is increased by 500 (numbers are purely indicative. Its meant to be a bit smaller than the maximum one can earn in a month, which is currently around 600)

Players affected: Dailies farmers only. As long as the numbers are correctly set (first cap and monthly increase), only the players that heavily farmed dailies since release will reach the threshold

• To reach the threshold, one has to have a large amount of APs from dailies AND consistently do more dailies than the monthly increase
• Even if a player reaches the cap, he will still be able to increase his AP score the following month
• The system is rather simple, yet effective and does not punish hardcore players, even on the long term
• It is also more flexible than a hard cap

Please tell me me if you see any flaw in this system. The more I think about it, the more it seems to do only what its meant to: slow down the grind for AP farmers without affecting other players.

A new take on it. Refreshing to see a new idea, I wouldn’t mind a system similar to this. The AP in question would be more comfortable ~200 or 250, but I would be on board on this.

My idea was to limit the top farmers to ~80% of the “normal” maximum income to avoid a threshold effect, but as long as the system works I’m fine with any numbers
The smaller the monthly increase is the easier it is to reach the cap, which means that players that already reached it have an easy time keeping with the increase, but also that players that didn’t reach the cap yet will catch up faster.

Another advantage of this system compared to a simple hard cap (since some people really think the leaderboard does/should have a meaning…) is that everyone can actually catch up with “top” AP players, because they’re slowed down, and even pass them if they slack off because the cap keeps increasing.

Yamiga.7863:

Hellmasker.1649:

Yamiga.7863:

Awe.1096:

3554091

Simple. Almost everyone in this game does dailies. Only a minority (and an extremely small minority) was salvaging 10 mil items or running 9001 CoF. One is not like the other.

I want to see how many players in GW2 will actually reach the treshold of 25,000 AP from dailies alone. Almost everyone?

Very few, even if the game stays for very long. I’d really like the daily APs to be limited in some manner, and the better solution (imho) I came up to is the following:

Progressive cap

Principle: Past X total points from dailies, dailies does not award anymore APs. Every month, the cap X is increased by 500 (numbers are purely indicative. Its meant to be a bit smaller than the maximum one can earn in a month, which is currently around 600)

Players affected: Dailies farmers only. As long as the numbers are correctly set (first cap and monthly increase), only the players that heavily farmed dailies since release will reach the threshold

• To reach the threshold, one has to have a large amount of APs from dailies AND consistently do more dailies than the monthly increase
• Even if a player reaches the cap, he will still be able to increase his AP score the following month
• The system is rather simple, yet effective and does not punish hardcore players, even on the long term
• It is also more flexible than a hard cap

Please tell me me if you see any flaw in this system. The more I think about it, the more it seems to do only what its meant to: slow down the grind for AP farmers without affecting other players.

A new take on it. Refreshing to see a new idea, I wouldn’t mind a system similar to this. The AP in question would be more comfortable ~200 or 250, but I would be on board on this.

My idea was to limit the top farmers to ~80% of the “normal” maximum income to avoid a threshold effect, but as long as the system works I’m fine with any numbers
The smaller the monthly increase is the easier it is to reach the cap, which means that players that already reached it have an easy time keeping with the increase, but also that players that didn’t reach the cap yet will catch up faster.

Another advantage of this system compared to a simple hard cap (since some people really think the leaderboard does/should have a meaning…) is that everyone can actually catch up with “top” AP players, because they’re slowed down, and even pass them if they slack off because the cap keeps increasing.

Why again would we want it to be easy to stay at the top?

Subdue.5479:

Why again would we want it to be easy to stay at the top?

Digression. I just stumbled upon your Let’s Fix It thread and it became clear to me that you have your own personal agenda which you also indirectly promote in this thread here. I agree that I also might have my own agenda to pursue but I try to be clear about it and I stated multiple times that I am seeking a form of compromise that would take “best of both worlds” into account. Ultimately, it is up to ArenaNet to monitor feedback and metrics and decide what possible changes are best for the game (and that is the only thing for which I wait atm, ArenaNet’s take on this subject, no matter to which end). Just make no mistake, you are accusing people in this thread of acting selfish and promoting something that only benefits them, but in this case, how is your other thread different from this one? Oh right, your thread represents concept which is yours and this makes it clearly (and I mean clearly) the rightful one while this thread here is just bunch of silly little people with mental illness (thanks for that btw., though I promise I wont infest your thread and call it’s OP mental)

PS. You seem to be caring a lot about the leaderboard as evidenced by your thread. That already makes the whole “discussion” here pointless since as I stated several times already, I see AP leaderboard as a malicious construct and for all I care I would love it to be removed and thrown into a trash bin. Though I am not going to campaign for that since I understand this would mean removing an actual feature, no matter how much I dislike that feaure. Grinding daily achievements every single day for 8h+ is not a feature however. The case remains open.

I find it funny that you go through all that trouble to paint this picture that I’m biased. However, I notice that you neglect to identify who I am biased towards, or against. Do you know why that is? It’s because the suggestion I put forth is neutral, fair, and more importantly, makes the game more competitive, and therefore better for all players. If you are going to bring up my views, that’s fine, but argue against them, not against me having them.

Oh, and I called the compulsion you guys all describe with regards to completing everything as a neurosis because it is. Look it up.

Subdue.5479:

I find it funny that you go through all that trouble to paint this picture that I’m biased. However, I notice that you neglect to identify who I am biased towards, or against. Do you know why that is? It’s because the suggestion I put forth is neutral, fair, and more importantly, makes the game more competitive, and therefore better for all players. If you are going to bring up my views, that’s fine, but argue against them, not against me having them.

You are biased because you assume this thread to be about the leaderboard when it’s not. In each of your posts you assume that the leaderboard is what we AP-hunters are aiming for, and that our playstyle should be “balanced” like a competition which it isn’t. You are biased because you do not know the playstyle (AP-hunt) you’re proposing to rework (destroy actually).

Subdue.5479:

Yamiga.7863:

My idea was to limit the top farmers to ~80% of the “normal” maximum income to avoid a threshold effect, but as long as the system works I’m fine with any numbers
The smaller the monthly increase is the easier it is to reach the cap, which means that players that already reached it have an easy time keeping with the increase, but also that players that didn’t reach the cap yet will catch up faster.

Another advantage of this system compared to a simple hard cap (since some people really think the leaderboard does/should have a meaning…) is that everyone can actually catch up with “top” AP players, because they’re slowed down, and even pass them if they slack off because the cap keeps increasing.

Why again would we want it to be easy to stay at the top?

You don’t seem to understand how the system I proposed works. Currently to “stay at the top”, one just has to farm dailies and other players can’t even catch up. With my system, “top” players can’t prevent other people to catch up with them, making it harder to keep thier top spot.

PS: the more I talk about this leaderboard nonsense to answer your concerns the more I wonder why you (or anyone) care so much about it…

@Yamiga

It has points, it has a leaderboard, and while you may not care about the leaderboard, it is pretty obvious that there are those among the following who want to cap daily AP that do care about it. Furthermore, the suggestions I put forth match more with what one would expect an “AP Hunter” to want. When a hunter goes into a forest to hunt, his goal is to bring back as much as he can or as much as he needs, not to kill every animal in the forest. That’s how it should be for “AP Hunters” well. If there are far more potential points than a player can possibly achieve in any given day, it shifts the focus from “I have to do everything” to “I’ll do as much as I can.”

Just because you can’t see that, just because you don’t want that, doesn’t mean that it’s not better for the community as a whole. As it is, the system is a giant “screw you” to the 95% of the player base that didn’t start collecting achievements right from day one. What could be an excellent tool for A.Net to drive activity into lesser played zones, into lesser completed dungeons, for lesser completed events, instead stands as a flaccid ruler for the kittens of a tiny minority of the population, as evident in the number of your supporters who, prior to it being pointed out, even had their leaderboard ranks in their signatures!

And as for your suggestion, it is just a watered down version of the same deal that the others posted. It has the same pitfalls – making it easier for people at the top to stay ahead. Now, I’ve already explained it once so I’m not retyping all that. Instead I’ll just quote it for you here.

Subdue.5479:

Hellmasker.1649:

Omg dude there’s something you’re just immensely confused about. The other haters are at least understanding and arguing their points but you’re not getting it.
A cap on AP earned from dailies would mean in essence that any missed points from daily achievements could be made up, and once other players hit the cap, any points you earn are purely gaining you ground. It would help leaderboard competitiveness, it would help grind, it wouldn’t hinder AP rewards, especially considering they haven’t even figured out what they’re doing for 25k+ yet…

I’d appreciate if you’d stop making this argument, because it is blatantly untrue. A cap on AP from dailies does not make the leaderboard more competitive. It makes the leaderboard less competitive. Any rational thinker trying to move up (not stay put on) the leaderboard wants lots of temporary content. Here’s why:

Regardless of how much temporary AP is available if any, a climber can maintain about the same rate of AP gain over time as someone who’s already at the top. When temporary AP is uncapped, the people at the top must continue the same level of play in order to maintain their spot. When they slack off, the climber is able to permanently gain some ground.

However, when temporary AP is capped, the people who are at the top become entrenched. True, they won’t have access to quick AP from dailies anymore, but that doesn’t matter since given the cap, they know exactly how close the climber can get by doing those dailies. In the mean time, it’s wrong to assume that the people sitting at the top will just wait idly by while the climber climb. No, they’ll be doing the permanent achievements. So even when the climber finally reaches the cap on dailies, they’re still going to be way behind on permanent achievements!

At best, a cap will constrict the range of AP between climbers and people sitting at the top. In no way, however, will it help climbers actually pass those at the top, and in fact, makes it that much more difficult to do so, as there is little pressure on those sitting at the top to continue performing. That makes the leaderboard less competitive.

Subdue.5479:

@Yamiga

It has points, it has a leaderboard, and while you may not care about the leaderboard, it is pretty obvious that there are those among the following who want to cap daily AP that do care about it. Furthermore, the suggestions I put forth match more with what one would expect an “AP Hunter” to want. When a hunter goes into a forest to hunt, his goal is to bring back as much as he can or as much as he needs, not to kill every animal in the forest. That’s how it should be for “AP Hunters” well. If there are far more potential points than a player can possibly achieve in any given day, it shifts the focus from “I have to do everything” to “I’ll do as much as I can.”

Bolded part. You’re not considering what actual completionists/AP hunter want but what you think they’re expected to want. Unfortunately these expectations are wrong, what completionists want is to be able to do everything and your “doing as much as I can” is the exact opposite mindest.

Just because you can’t see that, just because you don’t want that, doesn’t mean that it’s not better for the community as a whole. As it is, the system is a giant “screw you” to the 95% of the player base that didn’t start collecting achievements right from day one. What could be an excellent tool for A.Net to drive activity into lesser played zones, into lesser completed dungeons, for lesser completed events, instead stands as a flaccid ruler for the kittens of a tiny minority of the population, as evident in the number of your supporters who, prior to it being pointed out, even had their leaderboard ranks in their signatures!

And as for your suggestion, it is just a watered down version of the same deal that the others posted. It has the same pitfalls – making it easier for people at the top to stay ahead. Now, I’ve already explained it once so I’m not retyping all that. Instead I’ll just quote it for you here.

Again, you base your arguments on what you think people want. Most people don’t care about the leaderboards, whether or not they are in it, just read the various threads about achievements that were made last december if you want evidence. And the very few people that may actually care are, at least in my experience, largly outnumbered by the completionists.
What you’re proposing is completely destroying the playstyle of a minority, completionists, to potentially please an even smaller minority. What I propose is a QoL change affecting completionists only

The way I see it Subdue is upset he cant be top of the leaderboard, so he wants noone of the current people to be there, too.

Subdue.5479:

I find it funny that you go through all that trouble to paint this picture that I’m biased. However, I notice that you neglect to identify who I am biased towards, or against. Do you know why that is? It’s because the suggestion I put forth is neutral, fair, and more importantly, makes the game more competitive, and therefore better for all players. If you are going to bring up my views, that’s fine, but argue against them, not against me having them.

Oh, and I called the compulsion you guys all describe with regards to completing everything as a neurosis because it is. Look it up.

I just identified another root of the problem. I dont know if this will be shocking or “ridiculous” for you but here goes. “Competitive, and therefore better for all players” is a fallacy. It really is. You may see more competetive as better and probably it is for you but this is not an universal value. Some players dont want things to be competetive. They do not want to compete becouse they find it stressful and they look at video games as a source of relaxation rather than competition. Now I dont say that things being competetive is bad either. No, there is a large amount of players who likes games to be as much competetive as possible and I perfectly understand that. I have my own suspicions regarding which group is larger (based on experience from various online games over the years) but I am not going to pursue this argument becouse it dangerously treads into the “my needs are more important from yours” territory.

Now you may say that our agenda is to deprive competetive players from their fun but I look at it in different way. There are multiple aspects of an MMO game and certain of those aspects should IMO cater to different goals and playstyles to accommodate as many players as possible. There are several things which are customarily competetive, with PvP (and associated leaderboards) being prime example. As for achievement points, I never looked at them as something competetive. I dont look at them as a list of who can complete the most AP every day or month. I look at them as a form of checklist where I am not competing with anyone but I am merely collecting “trophies”. Hence “completionism” or “collecting”. This is how achievements worked in every game I played so far. And I am speaking about MMO games becouse achievements works in an exact same way in single player games as well but since single player games are an entirely different category, it would be unfair to use them as backup for this argument. If you know any MMO games in which achievements works in a way which you envision in your thread, please, name them for the sake of further argument.

Now it all boils down to what I am looking for since quite a while. To ArenaNet stating their design goal and intetion behind achievements. Do they want achievements to work in a more traditional way but perhaps they lost balance at some point? Or do they really want to turn achievements into a daily marathon and a source of constant competition between players (notice how already introduction of AP leaderboards rose a red flag and alarm signal for me and several other people)? The latter is also a design choice but in such case it will be not something I am willing to play along with and in such case I could seal my departure from GW2 with a clear mind.

Bottom line is. Things being competetive is not “better for all players”. Some people like it, some do not. I look at AP in pretty much every game as an oasis for a non-competetive and collector playstyle. And with such intention I am looking for a possible balance to it. It is same as with gear threadmill progression for example. Some people want it and need it as a necessary carrot to fuel their need for playing. Some people dont want it. Arguments for and against “give us more tiers of gear” are present in GW2 community ever since release day. You cant say that gear threadmill (or lack of it) is better for all players. AP are fuel and carrot for me and many players who share my playstyle. This is how IMO AP works in all MMO games. If ArenaNet wants to redefine this paradigm into a competetive race of daily endurance, so be it. But this will mean there is nothing more for me to do in this game (after seeing all the world content that is). Is there really a need for turning achievements into a rat race when there are so many aspect of an MMO game much more suited and traditionally used for a source of rivalry and competition?

PS. I am not going to further comment on your assertion that people wanting to complete all achievements suffer from mental disorder. Lets just say that such assertion is very… convenient on your end. Perhaps even too much convenient.

Malediktus.9250:

The way I see it Subdue is upset he cant be top of the leaderboard, so he wants noone of the current people to be there, too.

Actually, from the postings from this thread, Malediktus, it’s pretty obvious that you’re the one who’s out for personal gain. Examples:

Malediktus.9250:

I dont want to limit anyone choices, just a hard cap on daily/monthly achievement points (10k/2.5k would be just great. Casual players will likely never reach it in the next coming years, possible not even by the end of GW2s lifetime, only a select few hardcore achievement point farmers like me will reach it anytime soon.

I know I dont have to do all dailies, but then 1) *Would loose my leaderboard position *2) All effort on achievements so far was wasted, because the achievement reward chests are a joke.
Not to mention the whole game is optional, so pointing it I dont have to do all dailies is just silly.

Malediktus.9250:

Your system would reward people who spend most hours per day instead of* veterancy *or skillful play. I dont see any improvement. Yes, you can optimize your time to get more dailies done per day, must most achievement hunters already perfected it.

Malediktus.9250:

Subdue.5479:

If Player A is ranked 100 on the leaderboard and is willing to spend 18 hours a day doing dailies and other achievements to move up, should he not be allowed to because Player B can’t handle the mental pressure of not doing all the dailies, but also is unwilling to devote the same amount of time and effort?

He shouldnt be allowed too.

It’s pretty obvious what your motives are. The changes you want to happen give you a direct advantage on the leaderboard, where as the suggestions I make simply give everyone a fair shot.

@Yamiga:

The number one reason most people don’t care about the leaderboard is because the vast majority of players have no access to it. Plain and simple. My suggestions make it accessible and allow for awards to be attached to it, two things which currently are not possible.

@Awe:

We can argue back and forth about the value of competition forever. At the end of the day, several things are apparent:

1. A.Net implemented a leaderboard for achievements. A leaderboard. The definition of a leaderboard is:

lead·er board
noun
noun: leaderboard
1.
a scoreboard showing the names and current scores of the leading competitors

Whether or not you think it should be a competition, A.Net clearly does, and I am inclined to agree.

2. If my suggestions were implemented, and you decided you did not want to compete, you could simply focus on doing all the permanent that you feel are so valuable, and never look at the leaderboard, since it’s not important to you. You would be completing the permanent achievements.

Finally, I’d like to leave you with this:

neu·ro·sis
n(y)o?o?r?sis/Submit
nounMEDICINE
1.
a relatively mild mental illness that is not caused by organic disease, involving symptoms of stress (depression, anxiety, obsessive behavior, hypochondria) but not a radical loss of touch with reality.

Hellmasker.1649:

JustTrogdor.7892:

Hellmasker.1649:

JustTrogdor.7892:

Why would a completionist spend more in the gem store? There is no reason for them to do so because they are just there for points that you can get without spending a single penny beyond box price.

You clearly don’t understand. We don’t play this game solely for achievement points. We play this game because it has so much potential to be fun, when we’re not grinding dailies.

Way to bold one part of one of my posts so I’ll do the same by sectioning off this part of your post.

Why don’t you just play to have fun then if it isn’t such a big deal? Answer that directly please.

I do, after dailies. Sometimes during dailies, but it depends on the day.

Awe.1096:

Although to be fair I also accept that this may be a flaw on my own character. Perhaps my mild OCD which prevents me from being happy with the game if my daily/monthly tab is not maxed out is the reason. All I know is that I cant enjoy GW2 (for a great game it still is) if I know that I didnt done some random daily which due to lack of cap can never be made up for.

These are just a couple of the quotes that demonstrate my point in this thread alone. There is much much more evidence to back my assertion.

The thing with the leader board is this… I’m not competing with anyone at all for position on the leader board. I neither know nor care what my position is. If someone passes me or I pass someone it’s as noticed as a mouse fart in a hurricane. I just have little personal goals regarding APs that affect me and no one else… getting that next chest. (Almost at 10K! Woo!) Most of my APs come from dailies, which I’m completing (the chest part) every day simply through normal play. The audacity of some people thinking it’s a good idea to restrict my potential access to APs because of some competition they’re not having with me is ludicrous at best. If you’re worried about holding some position in a leader board for some competition that exists in your mind alone then go do what you have to do in game to stay there if that’s how you choose to play. However your style of play, your choices, are not worthy of being imposed on those of us that neither realize you exist nor care.

Subdue.5479:

@Awe:

We can argue back and forth about the value of competition forever. At the end of the day, several things are apparent:

1. A.Net implemented a leaderboard for achievements. A leaderboard. The definition of a leaderboard is:

lead·er board
noun
noun: leaderboard
1.
a scoreboard showing the names and current scores of the leading competitors

Whether or not you think it should be a competition, A.Net clearly does, and I am inclined to agree.

Hence why I am asking ArenNet to give a clear verdict on this (and no, your definition of “clearly” does not cut it). Introduction of leaderboards does not clearly state their entire philosophy behind AP. What is more important even, it does not clearly form their standpoint towards concerns presented in this thread. The moment someone from ArenaNet will post about and make it clear about their policy, I will rest my case even if their standpoint is completly opposite to what I would desire.

Subdue.5479:

2. If my suggestions were implemented, and you decided you did not want to compete, you could simply focus on doing all the permanent that you feel are so valuable, and never look at the leaderboard, since it’s not important to you. You would be completing the permanent achievements.

How about a compromise then? Separate dailies and monthlies from permanent achievements. Leave current AP value for permanents only and intruduce a new track (call it merits or whatever you like) which would count only dailies and monthlies and be tracked on a leaderboard. This leaderboard could reset every month or year, whatever is that you wish. You could then proceed to add dozens and dozens of new dailies which make it impossible to complete all within 24h, if that is what you desire. As it stands now, permanent achievements and dailies are baked into the same pool. This could change. Permanent AP track would track progress of playstyle I represent, and merits system with leaderboards and fierce competition would track progress of yours. Would this work for you or not?

Awe.1096:

Finally, I’d like to leave you with this:

neu·ro·sis
n(y)o?o?r?sis/Submit
nounMEDICINE
1.
a relatively mild mental illness that is not caused by organic disease, involving symptoms of stress (depression, anxiety, obsessive behavior, hypochondria) but not a radical loss of touch with reality.

Hellmasker.1649:

JustTrogdor.7892:

Hellmasker.1649:

JustTrogdor.7892:

Why would a completionist spend more in the gem store? There is no reason for them to do so because they are just there for points that you can get without spending a single penny beyond box price.

You clearly don’t understand. We don’t play this game solely for achievement points. We play this game because it has so much potential to be fun, when we’re not grinding dailies.

Way to bold one part of one of my posts so I’ll do the same by sectioning off this part of your post.

Why don’t you just play to have fun then if it isn’t such a big deal? Answer that directly please.

I do, after dailies. Sometimes during dailies, but it depends on the day.

Awe.1096:

Although to be fair I also accept that this may be a flaw on my own character. Perhaps my mild OCD which prevents me from being happy with the game if my daily/monthly tab is not maxed out is the reason. All I know is that I cant enjoy GW2 (for a great game it still is) if I know that I didnt done some random daily which due to lack of cap can never be made up for.

These are just a couple of the quotes that demonstrate my point in this thread alone. There is much much more evidence to back my assertion.

There is a difference between looking at own’s faults in order to facilitate proper discussion (in good discussion both sides makes concessions) and basically saying “you are r******d, your argument is invalid” which is what you are doing albeit not is such direct form. I find it mildly offensive, thats all.

VOLKON.1290:

The thing with the leader board is this… I’m not competing with anyone at all for position on the leader board. I neither know nor care what my position is. If someone passes me or I pass someone it’s as noticed as a mouse fart in a hurricane. I just have little personal goals regarding APs that affect me and no one else… getting that next chest. (Almost at 10K! Woo!) Most of my APs come from dailies, which I’m completing (the chest part) every day simply through normal play. The audacity of some people thinking it’s a good idea to restrict my potential access to APs because of some competition they’re not having with me is ludicrous at best. If you’re worried about holding some position in a leader board for some competition that exists in your mind alone then go do what you have to do in game to stay there if that’s how you choose to play. However your style of play, your choices, are not worthy of being imposed on those of us that neither realize you exist nor care.

This is why the very large global cap on dailies was the preferred proposition becouse it would not restrict you in any way until very far ahead in the future at which point there are not even chest rewards present. After introducing a large cap, nothing would be imposed on you. Nothing would change in what you do and gain every day. Hell, they could even add more dailies at that point to help you reach your chests faster. In my perfect world dailies would not even exist. But I dont dare to make such proposition becouse I can see how it could restrict playstyle of several players. The only thing for which I have the “audacity” is to seek ways to make AP meta-game enjoyable for achievement hunters while not taking away things from people focused on other goals. If you have better ideas for a compromise, I am ready to hear them out. But if all you can do is ridiculing other people preferences, I can’t even respond to it with anything that would not make my forum account suspended.

Awe.1096:

VOLKON.1290:

The thing with the leader board is this… I’m not competing with anyone at all for position on the leader board. I neither know nor care what my position is. If someone passes me or I pass someone it’s as noticed as a mouse fart in a hurricane. I just have little personal goals regarding APs that affect me and no one else… getting that next chest. (Almost at 10K! Woo!) Most of my APs come from dailies, which I’m completing (the chest part) every day simply through normal play. The audacity of some people thinking it’s a good idea to restrict my potential access to APs because of some competition they’re not having with me is ludicrous at best. If you’re worried about holding some position in a leader board for some competition that exists in your mind alone then go do what you have to do in game to stay there if that’s how you choose to play. However your style of play, your choices, are not worthy of being imposed on those of us that neither realize you exist nor care.

This is why the very large global cap on dailies was the preferred proposition becouse it would not restrict you in any way until very far ahead in the future at which point there are not even chest rewards present. After introducing a large cap, nothing would be imposed on you. Nothing would change in what you do and gain every day. Hell, they could even add more dailies at that point to help you reach your chests faster. In my perfect world dailies would not even exist. But I dont dare to make such proposition becouse I can see how it could restrict playstyle of several players. The only thing for which I have the “audacity” is to seek ways to make AP meta-game enjoyable for achievement hunters while not taking away things from people focused on other goals. If you have better ideas for a compromise, I am ready to hear them out. But if all you can do is ridiculing other people preferences, I can’t even respond to it with anything that would not make my forum account suspended.

Compromise? There is no compromise needed. It doesn’t matter what the degree with which you’re willing to restrict other people’s access now or in the future for your own personal gain for whatever reasons, it’s bad policy. There’s no need to compromise from “bad” to “a little less bad” at all when the system is working quite fine as is for the vast majority of players.

VOLKON.1290:

Awe.1096:

VOLKON.1290:

The thing with the leader board is this… I’m not competing with anyone at all for position on the leader board. I neither know nor care what my position is. If someone passes me or I pass someone it’s as noticed as a mouse fart in a hurricane. I just have little personal goals regarding APs that affect me and no one else… getting that next chest. (Almost at 10K! Woo!) Most of my APs come from dailies, which I’m completing (the chest part) every day simply through normal play. The audacity of some people thinking it’s a good idea to restrict my potential access to APs because of some competition they’re not having with me is ludicrous at best. If you’re worried about holding some position in a leader board for some competition that exists in your mind alone then go do what you have to do in game to stay there if that’s how you choose to play. However your style of play, your choices, are not worthy of being imposed on those of us that neither realize you exist nor care.

This is why the very large global cap on dailies was the preferred proposition becouse it would not restrict you in any way until very far ahead in the future at which point there are not even chest rewards present. After introducing a large cap, nothing would be imposed on you. Nothing would change in what you do and gain every day. Hell, they could even add more dailies at that point to help you reach your chests faster. In my perfect world dailies would not even exist. But I dont dare to make such proposition becouse I can see how it could restrict playstyle of several players. The only thing for which I have the “audacity” is to seek ways to make AP meta-game enjoyable for achievement hunters while not taking away things from people focused on other goals. If you have better ideas for a compromise, I am ready to hear them out. But if all you can do is ridiculing other people preferences, I can’t even respond to it with anything that would not make my forum account suspended.

Compromise? There is no compromise needed. It doesn’t matter what the degree with which you’re willing to restrict other people’s access now or in the future for your own personal gain for whatever reasons, it’s bad policy. There’s no need to compromise from “bad” to “a little less bad” at all when the system is working quite fine as is for the vast majority of players.

How do you know this? You just appropriated “vast majority of players” as supporters of your case. A very common fallacy in forum discussions. So is it becouse only a handful of people raise this issue on forums? By same standard I could say that only 3 people are against such change becouse only they post about it here. True? No? This works both ways. How can you be certain that such change would upset more people than make people like the game more? There is also a group of people (and probably that would be the majority) who would not care either way. But should they be the part of this equation? If I dont care if USA is governed by Republicans or Democrats, does this mean I support the Democrats? Let ArenaNet judge on what is working fine and what could be improved. There are several things in GW2 which could be improved, lots of them way more controversial than AP case. But ArenaNet made something that makes the otherwise well crafted game unplayable for certain people. Advocating for a change that would allow those people to enjoy GW2 again is something that I really feel the forums are for and I kind of feel entitled to it. At least as long as there is no official answer (something very brief would be OK, I dont expect an elaborate dissertation) which would close the case in this way or the other.

Awe, even though I don’t agree with all the suggestions made. You do state your case well.
The one I disagree with the most is capping the amount of dailies one can earn in a day. Which is not what you suggested. But that suggestion is without a doubt very self serving.

tomlin.8204:

Many people have things they want to say to the team too, that is what these forums are for. Get in line like everyone else, you’re not special and your ideas are not more important than ours :p

Pretty much offtopic, but i love your signature! meta meta meta current meta……

I support Awe’s proposition. A total cap of 20-25k daily points would not be reached by anyone but the most dedicated completionists (who do the permanent stuff as well), it wouldn’t punish anyone’s playstyle and it would improve the achievement point system, making the leaderboard more competitive (except for the living story achievement problem) + making playing the game like completionists do more relaxed.

If anet is worried that these completionists would stop logging in daily after reaching this cap, I feel there still is enough incentive to get your chest every day, aka laurels.

Subdue.5479:

@Yamiga:

The number one reason most people don’t care about the leaderboard is because the vast majority of players have no access to it. Plain and simple. My suggestions make it accessible and allow for awards to be attached to it, two things which currently are not possible.

That’s your opinion. Mine is that the number one reason most people don’t care about the leaderboard is because they think that “competing” about who spends the most time farming dailies is silly and absolutely not fun.
I obviously can’t prove I’m right (and neither can you), but it is what can be infered from the various posts of last december’s daily-related threads.

Nausicaa.9563:

I support Awe’s proposition. A total cap of 20-25k daily points would not be reached by anyone but the most dedicated completionists (who do the permanent stuff as well), it wouldn’t punish anyone’s playstyle and it would improve the achievement point system, making the leaderboard more competitive (except for the living story achievement problem) + making playing the game like completionists do more relaxed.

If anet is worried that these completionists would stop logging in daily after reaching this cap, I feel there still is enough incentive to get your chest every day, aka laurels.

Why exactly do you wish to punish the most dedicated completionists again by capping their access to APs? Why is their style of play so ‘not good enough’ that you feel the need to put a cap on it?

Yamiga.7863:

Subdue.5479:

@Yamiga:

The number one reason most people don’t care about the leaderboard is because the vast majority of players have no access to it. Plain and simple. My suggestions make it accessible and allow for awards to be attached to it, two things which currently are not possible.

That’s your opinion. Mine is that the number one reason most people don’t care about the leaderboard is because they think that “competing” about who spends the most time farming dailies is silly and absolutely not fun.
I obviously can’t prove I’m right (and neither can you), but it is what can be infered from the various posts of last december’s daily-related threads.

This. Anyone who thinks achievements are “competitive” in a game based around who plays the most and does the daily every day is kinda silly to me personally. The fact that dailies add AP to begin with kill any kind of competitive sense that would come from AP leaderboards, if there was any competition beyond time played to begin with.

Sorry to burst any bubbles, just my 2c, everyone has their own opinion on this.

VOLKON.1290:

Nausicaa.9563:

I support Awe’s proposition. A total cap of 20-25k daily points would not be reached by anyone but the most dedicated completionists (who do the permanent stuff as well), it wouldn’t punish anyone’s playstyle and it would improve the achievement point system, making the leaderboard more competitive (except for the living story achievement problem) + making playing the game like completionists do more relaxed.

If anet is worried that these completionists would stop logging in daily after reaching this cap, I feel there still is enough incentive to get your chest every day, aka laurels.

Why exactly do you wish to punish the most dedicated completionists again by capping their access to APs? Why is their style of play so ‘not good enough’ that you feel the need to put a cap on it?

You don’t understand that completionists are the ones actually requesting that kind of change, because it will improve our playstyle.

Yamiga.7863:

VOLKON.1290:

Nausicaa.9563:

I support Awe’s proposition. A total cap of 20-25k daily points would not be reached by anyone but the most dedicated completionists (who do the permanent stuff as well), it wouldn’t punish anyone’s playstyle and it would improve the achievement point system, making the leaderboard more competitive (except for the living story achievement problem) + making playing the game like completionists do more relaxed.

If anet is worried that these completionists would stop logging in daily after reaching this cap, I feel there still is enough incentive to get your chest every day, aka laurels.

Why exactly do you wish to punish the most dedicated completionists again by capping their access to APs? Why is their style of play so ‘not good enough’ that you feel the need to put a cap on it?

You don’t understand that completionists are the ones actually requesting that kind of change, because it will improve our playstyle.

Every completionist is asking for this, or only the few that see this as a means to try and cement their positions on the leader board by denying others access to APs?

The goal here is changing dailies in a way it doesn’t impact anyone in a negative way. In my opinion a completionist would surely be glad about there being a cap to ‘complete’.
I’m not sure how many people would get to a hypothetical daily AP cap without being able to complete almost all permanent stuff as well. I can’t imagine it being many.
The proposition would make it easier for people to compete on the leaderboards, not harder, right now the only way to catch up is if someone from the top quits (personally I don’t care as much about leaderboards, but it wouldn’t stifle competition anyways).

VOLKON.1290:

Yamiga.7863:

VOLKON.1290:

Nausicaa.9563:

I support Awe’s proposition. A total cap of 20-25k daily points would not be reached by anyone but the most dedicated completionists (who do the permanent stuff as well), it wouldn’t punish anyone’s playstyle and it would improve the achievement point system, making the leaderboard more competitive (except for the living story achievement problem) + making playing the game like completionists do more relaxed.

If anet is worried that these completionists would stop logging in daily after reaching this cap, I feel there still is enough incentive to get your chest every day, aka laurels.

Why exactly do you wish to punish the most dedicated completionists again by capping their access to APs? Why is their style of play so ‘not good enough’ that you feel the need to put a cap on it?

You don’t understand that completionists are the ones actually requesting that kind of change, because it will improve our playstyle.

Every completionist is asking for this, or only the few that see this as a means to try and cement their positions on the leader board by denying others access to APs?

A hardcap doesnt deny AP to people low on the leaderboards. It will affect the top 1000 much much faster than anyone trying to catch up. And I dont know any top 100 person who enjoys having to do so many dailies.

Malediktus, " having to do so many dailies" this is one of the biggest complaints many of the opposition to the suggested changes have. And no matter how many times it has been said, apparently some just don’t get it. Some believe they simply DO NOT have a CHOICE. And because of that mindset, they wish to change the game for those who realize they DO have a CHOICE. good grief, how many times does it have to be spelled out.

there is a need and there is a want, AP is nothing more then a want and it doesn’t need to chance, you want it to change.
you also don’t need to do dailies, you want to do dailies, your own choice.

however, we need some way to make AP’s less important, i dunno what drives ppl to constantly grind the heck out of this game just for AP’s but all i can think of is some kind of redraw symptom from other MMO’s where they also needed to grind.
don’t quote me on this but that’s how i observe this whole ordeal, it makes me wonder what they would do if AP’s would not be in the game……have fun maybe…..chase a story to immerse them selves in..?

sorudo.9054:

we need some way to make AP’s less important

I’m going to quote you here (even though you said not to :P):

there is a need and there is a want, AP is nothing more then a want and it doesn’t need to chance, you want it to change.

You’re right that most of us don’t really, really need it, but it would improve the system for us significantly, it’s just like all these QoL changes people suggest all the time. Sometimes, a little QoL change can do a lot for the enjoyment of a game.

VOLKON.1290:

Yamiga.7863:

VOLKON.1290:

Nausicaa.9563:

I support Awe’s proposition. A total cap of 20-25k daily points would not be reached by anyone but the most dedicated completionists (who do the permanent stuff as well), it wouldn’t punish anyone’s playstyle and it would improve the achievement point system, making the leaderboard more competitive (except for the living story achievement problem) + making playing the game like completionists do more relaxed.

If anet is worried that these completionists would stop logging in daily after reaching this cap, I feel there still is enough incentive to get your chest every day, aka laurels.

Why exactly do you wish to punish the most dedicated completionists again by capping their access to APs? Why is their style of play so ‘not good enough’ that you feel the need to put a cap on it?

You don’t understand that completionists are the ones actually requesting that kind of change, because it will improve our playstyle.

Every completionist is asking for this, or only the few that see this as a means to try and cement their positions on the leader board by denying others access to APs?

At least every completionist I know. Some of the most hardcore even said so in this very thread. And I’m still under the impression you don’t understand how a hard cap or the progresive cap I proposed works: it will “deny people access to APs” starting from the top of the leaderboard, slowing down the top players. If one was trying to secure his position he wouldn’t require that kind of change.

yamiga, it has been suggested many times. We want the amount of dailies one can earn a day reduced, we want a cap of 5-8 as the most amount of dailies one can earn in a day. Now its a hard cap of a different kind. Maybe if those wanting the changes didn’t start off with, please make our lives easier by taking away the amount of dailies EVERYONE can earn, there wouldn’t be so many people still hating on the idea of change.
We know what a hard cap is, we also know what a red herring is.

william dj.6953:

Malediktus, " having to do so many dailies" this is one of the biggest complaints many of the opposition to the suggested changes have. And no matter how many times it has been said, apparently some just don’t get it. Some believe they simply DO NOT have a CHOICE. And because of that mindset, they wish to change the game for those who realize they DO have a CHOICE. good grief, how many times does it have to be spelled out.

Just like you DO NOT have to play WvW, but you’ll enjoy that new map they’re putting out. Or like you DO NOT have to play sPvP, but you might enjoy balance changes they implement. You also DO NOT have to do your characters’ personal story, but if there’s a bug I’m sure you’d want it fixed so you can enjoy the game you paid for.
Same principle, different aspect of the game.

The only dailies I have an issue with are the new sPvP tournament wins dailies and the WvW defense restorer daily.

The sPvP ones because they would take about as long as doing all of the other dailies combined, if not longer.

The defense restorer one because it encourages bad/inappropriate use of supply in WvW.

The number of dailies in the list is fine. I do complete all of them most days, but generally skip the ones I mentioned above.

Hellmasker, Your 100% correct, I do not have to do those things. Nor am I QQ about changes to make those things easier. If there is a bug, you bet I would like it fixed. And the bug in the current dailies available is where/what??

Your barking up the wrong tree here sweatheart, everyone knows exactly why some want these changes, even though they lie and lie and lie saying its for a different reason, And that same group of people is just mad because they can’t convince others the sky is not blue.

william dj.6953:

Hellmasker, Your 100% correct, I do not have to do those things. Nor am I QQ about changes to make those things easier. If there is a bug, you bet I would like it fixed. And the bug in the current dailies available is where/what??

Your barking up the wrong tree here sweatheart, everyone knows exactly why some want these changes, even though they lie and lie and lie saying its for a different reason, And that same group of people is just mad because they can’t convince others the sky is not blue.

I’ve said it so many times in this thread it’s not even funny anymore:
If you don’t get it yet, you simply won’t. It’s beyond you.
You’re against the idea, you’ve said your part.
Goodbye.

Oh I get it, I got it from the beginning, I and many others just don’t believe the claims as to why.
Funny thing is, if you all would just be honest. There would be less negativity towards this. You have brought it on yourself, claiming one thing when intentions were completely different. Wanting to dampen the way others play because your tired of the grind to stay at the top. You can deny this till the cows come home, wont change the truth.
bye bye now, I’m done with this silly thread. So you can get back to blaming Anet for your faults. Apparently that is beyond your ability to comprehend.

Nausicaa.9563:

sorudo.9054:

we need some way to make AP’s less important

I’m going to quote you here (even though you said not to :P):

there is a need and there is a want, AP is nothing more then a want and it doesn’t need to chance, you want it to change.

You’re right that most of us don’t really, really need it, but it would improve the system for us significantly, it’s just like all these QoL changes people suggest all the time. Sometimes, a little QoL change can do a lot for the enjoyment of a game.

they need allot of QoL updates, changing how achievements work in general is only the tip of a huge mountain of problems.
zerging is one, no immersion is another.

william dj.6953:

Oh I get it, I got it from the beginning, I and many others just don’t believe the claims as to why.
Funny thing is, if you all would just be honest. There would be less negativity towards this. You have brought it on yourself, claiming one thing when intentions were completely different. Wanting to dampen the way others play because your tired of the grind to stay at the top. You can deny this till the cows come home, wont change the truth.
bye bye now, I’m done with this silly thread. So you can get back to blaming Anet for your faults. Apparently that is beyond your ability to comprehend.

Obviously, you don’t get it. Half of us have repeatedly said “Just do away with the leaderboard, we don’t care. It’s not about that.” So again. You don’t get it, and you never will. As a completionist gamer, I’ve always wanted to finish games 100%, and achievement points have become the norm for that in gaming. From wanting to beat every skirmish map on C&C Generals to beating the Endless Setlist on Rock Band 3, I want to finish it for the sake of finishing it. Leaving no stone unturned and no detail overlooked. If you read through the thread carefully, and actually consider the situation, a cap on overall cumulative AP earned strictly from dailies would hinder NO ONE except those of us asking specifically for this kind of change, and even then I’m ~2k AP from hitting the proposed 10k cap.
So while you may not care to finish things, in games or otherwise, some of us would like a finish line. A goal. An achievement.

sorudo.9054:

they need allot of QoL updates, changing how achievements work in general is only the tip of a huge mountain of problems.
zerging is one, no immersion is another.

Things like ‘zergs’ and ‘immersion’ are too abstract or complex to be set right in one little change. These things require a large restructuring of existing systems or new content that has a focus on improving on them. Whereas a daily cap is (probably) small in terms of programming hours, but a huge change for those that want it.

But it’s nice that you agree the current achievement system is a problem.

Game has many problems, but Anet consists of several teams working on different areas.