No grind philosophy
Yeah but when you have done it a second time your overall chance it would have dropped is 0,0019999% and on your 3th run you overall chance is 0,000299970001% and so on. But indeed, every run by itself stays the same.
You’re contradicting yourself. The odds for the occurrence of a random event do not improve across multiple tries.
This is just simple math and the problem here is the explanation. Every time you have the same chance, that is true. But the chance you have something in 5 tries (with all the same chances) is bigger.
Your wiki page does say the following “The gambler’s fallacy is the false belief that a random process becomes less random, and more predictable, as it is repeated”.
That is true when looking at it from a single try. My next try is as big as my following, and the number of tries does not influence that.
However, if you have done it a lot of times, chances are bigger that one of those tries had a positive outcome.
That in fact does mean a higher number makes something less random. The whole since is based around this. If you would do a scientific paper where you use peoples feedback as part of your ‘investigation’ you will need enough people for your information to be reliable. Meaning ‘less random’ and there is software that helps you determine if your group is reliable enough. If you would only interview 2 people it would never be considered reliable. This is related to this the same chance math.
Just for the record, the wiki page does not even deny what I am saying here. It says that people believe that if they gamble on number 1 out of 10 and lose, the next try they should gamble on 1 again because now the chance is bigger that 1 will ‘drop’. That is indeed false. It does not matter on what of the 10 number they gamle, there is no difference. They can gamble on whatever they want and the chance it will be the correct number still is the same. However, having gambled 10 times increased there change of having had it right at least once (no matter what number it was) over having only gambled once. That last part is what I talked about.
So far for the lesson on math, guess it’s sort of relevant for the subject, now back tot he topic.
Your lesson is a fail. maybe you should learn a bit more about RNG
they are kind of right, they just still believe in the fallacy.
your chances are higher BEFORE you attempt with multiple attempts
not after
after you tried 20 times you are not more likely to have suceeded, the past is not probability, it is fact.
there is no probability of events in the past. probability is only in reference to future events.
basically you have a higher chance of success if you intend to try multiple times, but every time you fail, those attempts are no longer part of the possible events.
the guy who failed 1000 times has no probability associated with him the guy who succeeded has no probability associated with him.
Your lesson is a fail. maybe you should learn a bit more about RNG
they are kind of right, they just still believe in the fallacy.
your chances are higher BEFORE you attempt with multiple attempts
not after
after you tried 20 times you are not more likely to have suceeded, the past is not probability, it is fact.
there is no probability of events in the past. probability is only in reference to future events.basically you have a higher chance of success if you intend to try multiple times, but every time you fail, those attempts are no longer part of the possible events.
the guy who failed 1000 times has no probability associated with him the guy who succeeded has no probability associated with him.
RNG is chance and for that we have probability (math) what is hard to grasp for some people.
Going back to what it started with is that I said depending on the drop-rate the average number of runs could be exactly the same as the required number of runs that you would need when using a currency system.
In fact, that is exactly what a drop-rate is. A drop-rate of 1-250 mean on average is will drop once every 250 runs.
You could be a little bid ‘lucky’ and it could drop sooner, or ‘unlucky’ and it would drop later but in the end there is no such real thing as ‘bad luck’, it’s just math.
Having done it 1000 times does not increase you chance when doing it the 1001’t time vs somebodies first try. However somebody who tries it once has a smaller chance it would drop for him then the once who will try it 1000 who in turn has a smaller chance then the one who tried it 1001 times.
Bringing this back to the grind topic. The thing is that some act as if RNG is truly incomprehensible while the currency system is the complete opposite and while it’s true that the currency is more predictable (100%) in the end the difference on that part is not as kittenome seem to think.
Really the difference between the two is that with a 1 / 250 drop-rate means on average you need to do 250 runs. With the currency model that requires 250 tokens of what you get 1 per run you need 250 runs.
So in the end, the difference in game-play (what we talk about here) is that with one you have a number going you slowly see increasing and you know that at your 250th run you will have the item. While the RNG option there is still this fictive number counting up to 250 (or higher) but there is always the rush of ‘will it drop this time’ what at least to me makes every run more interesting and feel less like a grind.
In the end however the difference between the two does not change the actual grind (while some seem to think that the currency results in less grind, what is false).
Going one step further however.. When you make your item (or currency) drop in many places it means that more people will get it (when having the same drop-rate), meaning to keep the same rarity as you would have when it dropped from one place you will need to higher the drop-rate what means those going for that item in fact do end up in a higher grind.
Funny enough, in the previous topic Colin said for the ‘no-grind-philosophy’ they make items available from more places or with a currency to decrease the grind because you could play what you wanted. However in reality this means you increase the grind (or lose rarity, but they obviously try to prevent that seeing many of the drop-rates).
INB4 the argument that Ascended is required and non-optional, as it is considered BiS. And that ascended itself is a grind because of the amount of materials it requires, specifially silk. Thus because it requires so much silk, that by definition is a grind. And silk is so expensive due to inflation, and because of RNG, that one is forced to run dungeons all day, and grind silverwastes to get silk drops.
This is followed by the argument that you can obtain silk doing almost everything in the game, thus you can do whatever you want and still obtain all the items that you need to craft ascended.
Countered by, by due to RNG it will literally take years to do that unless you specifically grind for it.
Also INB4: Anet said in their manifesto that there would be no grind, but clearly there is grind, so therefore they lied. As you cannot obtain ascended gear without getting a super ultra rare drop, or grinding the same thing over and over again.
Did I miss anything?
/thread. Thanks!
I believe you missed that you are incorrect on at least half your “facts”, but obviously nobody is going to make you believe otherwise, so “your welcome?”.
- Your BiS is NOT required (sans high level Fractals).
- GRINDING only gets you to the goal (Ascended (light) armor) quicker….it can be obtained without “grinding”.
We go out in the world and take our chances
Fate is just the weight of circumstances
That’s the way that lady luck dances
Fate is just the weight of circumstances
That’s the way that lady luck dances
The no grind philosophy presented in things like the manifesto went out the window with the introduction of ascended gear. Even Colin himself confirmed as much in the last thread that shared the same name as this.
Ugh please, have any of those people complaining actually played an actual f2p MMORPG game?
I remember when I first started MMOing with Maple Story almost a decade ago. Forget skins and money, it took me and my friends MONTHS to grind a single character to 4th job, not even to cap level. We didn’t even had time to worry about skins or stats or whatnot. We had to GRIND on mobs just to to able to ACCESS content. Hundreds of hours of pressing a button, killing mobs, taking advantage of every double exp events, doing the same thing over and over again just to gain access to higher level content. In the end, the grind was too much and we all quit the game.
Fast forward a few years, and me and my friends played Dragon Nest, and again, still grinding. Running the same dungeon DOZENS of times to get a single level, with no variety. You HAVE to run this dungeon to get to the next level, as other dungeons either took too long, or barely gives any exp. People used ‘boost’ others, helping them clear dungeons quickly with a high level character in their party for a price.
That’s not mentioning the pay-wall you have to pass to get to the final content, as without good gear, you won’t get a place in a party to clear raids. Without doing raids, there is no reliable way to make money, which means you don’t get good gear.
Only way to get pass the pay wall? Spend hundreds of hours farming gold to have a chance to get mediocre gear to be ‘barely’ accepted into a party, or open your wallet and buy things foo the cash shop to sell/ buy equips from players using cash.THAT is GRINDING. If you don’t DO THIS, you will not get to do ALL THE OTHER THINGS AFTER THIS.
What you guys complain about is FARMING, which is OPTIONAL.
Can you enjoy the game withoutAscended Gear/ Legendary Gear?
Yes.Do you NEED to repeatedly run dungeons to enjoy all the content?
No.Do you NEED to get that awesome looking Legendary/Skin to play the game?
No.Those “grindy” items, such as Legendaries and Ascended Armor are more like a status symbol, a sign that you have invested time and money into the game. They are hard to get for a reason.
And, if there are no ‘grindy’ things in GW2, then what is the point? There will be nothing to work towards. It might as well be a single player game with a multiplayer function.
And btw, I have yet to see an F2P game with more customizing option then Gw2, especially for free.
Arguably Maple Story had larger variety of outfits and skins, but 99% of them are DURATIONAL and is only purchasable by using REAL MONEY. No ‘convert in-game currency to cash shop currency’.
And the skins of Dragon Nest costs more than 30-40 USD for a single ‘low grade’ set, and to get the best skins, you have to pray to RNGesus and spend MORE money to combine two lower grade skins (with the obligatory extra fee of the combination device of course) for a chance to get a better skin. None of that BS in GW2.I’m still amazed that GW2 has no subscription fee, and it is ridiculously cheap (I got it during a sale some time ago), which is definitely a steal.
So for those who compare gw2 to those F2P mmos I’ve grown to detest so much (especially after playing gw2), I dare you to actually try to get into a real F2P mmo, filled with Pay-to-Win ideologies, before QQing about GW2 just because you are too lazy or too cheap to invest time and/or money into the game.
I’m just going to leave this here. It’s from the other thread, but it is exactly what this game is, and how “grind” really works. Thanks!
“You know what the chain of command is?
It’s the chain I beat you with until you
recognize my command!”
It’s the chain I beat you with until you
recognize my command!”
There simply is no denying there is a lot of grinding going on in this game.
There’s a ton of grind in this game, it’s an absolute bore, RNG at its worst. I think what some people are denying is that the grind is necessary though – it simply, well, isn’t. I still find it to be a huge problem, though, because the more “optional” grind there is, the less of no-grinding there is. It’s very easy to get exotic gear, beat dungeons, play through the story and explore the world…these are things that don’t require any grind whatsoever.
ANet, sadly, doesn’t seem to focus much on that and works to make you spend as much real money or gold as possible on obtaining the newest kitten in the gem store. Very little is introduced in the game with the same principles that existed in vanilla, save everything that the bandit crest collectors offer.
However, if you have done it a lot of times, chances are bigger that one of those tries had a positive outcome.
This often comes up when people are discussing Gambler’s Fallacy and odds in general. Odds stay the same across the board but you’re absolutely right, the more total chances you acquire, the higher the probability that one of those chances yield positive. It’s like the fact that flipping a coin is 1:1 odds, yet still if you do it enough you’ll likely see a direct 50/50 ratio in your statistical collective. But with RNG as low as GW2 RNG, it’s not even…well, it’s not even kind of sort of the same. To acquire such a collective you’ll have to acquire millions of statistics.
(edited by Cuddy.6247)
The no grind philosophy presented in things like the manifesto went out the window with the introduction of ascended gear. Even Colin himself confirmed as much in the last thread that shared the same name as this.
Hey players wanted gear grind, ANet gave them gear grind and players never asked for more ever again.
“They either jump off the cliff and take their chances or they smarten up and learn how to avoid it.” what might in reality mean they stop playing the game ….
I hope so because no one should be so stupid they play a game they don’t enjoy. Cliffs aren’t their for people to jump off. I get your angle here: If I try to make them scared the game will fail because of this, they HAVE to change it. That’s not a realistic look at what’s happening with the game. The current ways aren’t going away. At best, there might be some things that move away from it, but it will remain the core, for many varied and complex reasons that have been explained to you many times already. At this point, it’s pretty much a joke to see you bang the pot on your street corner about this.
You can join the guy that wants Sprocket mining pick removed from the game and make ‘The END is NEAR’ signs.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
“They either jump off the cliff and take their chances or they smarten up and learn how to avoid it.” what might in reality mean they stop playing the game ….
I hope so because no one should be so stupid they play a game they don’t enjoy. Cliffs aren’t their for people to jump off. I get your angle here: If I try to make them scared the game will fail because of this, they HAVE to change it. That’s not a realistic look at what’s happening with the game. The current ways aren’t going away. At best, there might be some things that move away from it, but it will remain the core, for many varied and complex reasons that have been explained to you many times already. At this point, it’s pretty much a joke to see you bang the pot on your street corner about this.
You can join the guy that wants Sprocket mining pick removed from the game and make ‘The END is NEAR’ signs.
It’s not so much about ‘the end is near’. I mean what is ‘the end’? What I have said for a long time is that this approach would be bad for the game in the long run. Long being 2 / 3 years and when they released an expansion at the 3 year anniversary you might add half a year to that.
(and when comparing it in percentages with GW1 that has already been proved to be correct)
That does not mean I think servers will shut down and thats it. I think this game had the potential to be a true alternative for a game like WoW and could be between the top MMO’s. However when holding this grind I think population will get low (in fact, it is already pretty low, and income has dropped to an all-time low as well) meaning eventually Anet will need to lose some people and the game becomes one of those MMO’s that could have been this great MMO but is not really interesting for new people looking for an MMO at the time. It’s not one of the alternatives.
The people I talked about that would go away did for the most part go away already, but will come back for HoT. Then you can have a game that is able to hold them and you will have a MMO that is ‘up there’ or you can lose them within half a year again and it will be ‘one of those MMO’s’.
Yeah, I do believe that. So is that ‘the end is near’. I don’t know, but I do think changing it to have less grind or / and smaller junks of farms (making hunting down cosmetics fun) could make this difference between the two MMO’s this game can be.
I know the reasons behind it, and I know those reasons (what mainly is the cash-shop focus) also means it’s the part they are likely least willing to change. But all I can do it give my input here. Lets hope HoT will be the big surprise we all hope for.
I hope they don’t change course on many things, including this because whatever they are doing, it’s working quite well for them. I think it’s nonsense to make simple statements indicating if it’s bad for the game, it needs to be changed. It’s not bad for the game at all. It’s only bad for the people that can’t pull themselves away from it. The game actually thrives because of its concept appealing to its core players. Indicating it’s anything but is showing a lack of understanding what this game means from a business perspective.
I think it’s funny you mention HoT … we already know what big surprise we are going to get and it’s not rare drops from raids or anything close to it, In fact, precursors are craftable. That means more of the same of what we have now.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I hope they don’t change course on many things, including this because whatever they are doing, it’s working quite well for them. I think it’s nonsense to make simple statements indicating if it’s bad for the game, it needs to be changed. It’s not bad for the game at all. It’s only bad for the people that can’t pull themselves away from it. The game actually thrives because of its concept appealing to its core players. Indicating it’s anything but is showing a lack of understanding what this game means from a business perspective.
I think it’s funny you mention HoT … we already know what big surprise we are going to get and it’s not rare drops from raids or anything close to it, In fact, precursors are craftable. That means more of the same of what we have now.
The changes would not have to alienate the people who like the current system. So I can’t see how it would be bad for them.
“The game actually thrives because of its concept appealing to its core players.” Yeah obviously it’s working for the ‘core players’ as they are the ones still player. All other players got filtered out making what is left the ‘core players’. That does not mean more people are potentiality core players if only some thing would improve.
Didn’t they want to make precursors more of a hunt, so more in line with I ask for and less in line with what we have?
We know what HoT brings for a big part yes, but when it gets released it can still go in two directions, a positive direction and a negative direction. Something that sounds good on paper might not turn out so good in practice while things not even put on paper might work out very possitive. We have seen both happen in GW2 already.
Thats why I say, lets hope it will be the big surprise as in, it will work out (even) better then it does on paper.
I hope they don’t change course on many things, including this because whatever they are doing, it’s working quite well for them. I think it’s nonsense to make simple statements indicating if it’s bad for the game, it needs to be changed. It’s not bad for the game at all. It’s only bad for the people that can’t pull themselves away from it. The game actually thrives because of its concept appealing to its core players. Indicating it’s anything but is showing a lack of understanding what this game means from a business perspective.
I think it’s funny you mention HoT … we already know what big surprise we are going to get and it’s not rare drops from raids or anything close to it, In fact, precursors are craftable. That means more of the same of what we have now.
The changes would not have to alienate the people who like the current system. So I can’t see how it would be bad for them.
Of course you can’t, because you demonstrate time and again how you don’t understand the business impact these changes you want would have.
I hope they don’t change course on many things, including this because whatever they are doing, it’s working quite well for them. I think it’s nonsense to make simple statements indicating if it’s bad for the game, it needs to be changed. It’s not bad for the game at all. It’s only bad for the people that can’t pull themselves away from it. The game actually thrives because of its concept appealing to its core players. Indicating it’s anything but is showing a lack of understanding what this game means from a business perspective.
I think it’s funny you mention HoT … we already know what big surprise we are going to get and it’s not rare drops from raids or anything close to it, In fact, precursors are craftable. That means more of the same of what we have now.
The changes would not have to alienate the people who like the current system. So I can’t see how it would be bad for them.
Of course you can’t, because you demonstrate time and again how you don’t understand the business impact these changes you want would have.
And you can demonstrate the business impact that the current objective holds? Unless you have their quarterly report and historical metrics on hand and are ready to dissect with care, I wouldn’t put stock in buzzwords as flimsy as “business impact.”
I hope they don’t change course on many things, including this because whatever they are doing, it’s working quite well for them. I think it’s nonsense to make simple statements indicating if it’s bad for the game, it needs to be changed. It’s not bad for the game at all. It’s only bad for the people that can’t pull themselves away from it. The game actually thrives because of its concept appealing to its core players. Indicating it’s anything but is showing a lack of understanding what this game means from a business perspective.
I think it’s funny you mention HoT … we already know what big surprise we are going to get and it’s not rare drops from raids or anything close to it, In fact, precursors are craftable. That means more of the same of what we have now.
The changes would not have to alienate the people who like the current system. So I can’t see how it would be bad for them.
Of course you can’t, because you demonstrate time and again how you don’t understand the business impact these changes you want would have.
And you can demonstrate the business impact that the current objective holds?
Absolutely … the game exists and continues to be developed. Games that don’t do this don’t last more than 1 year or plan expansions, etc… A quarterly report would be nice, but it’s not necessary to know that the game isn’t failing and if it was, it’s because of ‘grind’. That’s rather silly.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I hope they don’t change course on many things, including this because whatever they are doing, it’s working quite well for them. I think it’s nonsense to make simple statements indicating if it’s bad for the game, it needs to be changed. It’s not bad for the game at all. It’s only bad for the people that can’t pull themselves away from it. The game actually thrives because of its concept appealing to its core players. Indicating it’s anything but is showing a lack of understanding what this game means from a business perspective.
I think it’s funny you mention HoT … we already know what big surprise we are going to get and it’s not rare drops from raids or anything close to it, In fact, precursors are craftable. That means more of the same of what we have now.
The changes would not have to alienate the people who like the current system. So I can’t see how it would be bad for them.
Of course you can’t, because you demonstrate time and again how you don’t understand the business impact these changes you want would have.
And you can demonstrate the business impact that the current objective holds?
Absolutely … the game exists and continues to be developed. Games that don’t do this don’t last more than 1 year or plan expansions, etc… A quarterly report would be nice, but it’s not necessary to know that the game isn’t failing and if it was, it’s because of ‘grind’. That’s rather silly.
Continued development != Success, or even more success
If you aren’t going to read into the metrics (which can be found somewhere, I’m sure) in a correlation with grind, progress and player retention, then your conclusion has as much value as your research – that is, none.
Fair enough … then I’m going to apply the same standards to the guy QQing about too much grind and claiming it’s going to improve the game if it’s removed. He’s not reading any metrics and making correlations either, except those he has invented in his head to convince him it will make the game better. The difference is that I’m not claiming it would be better, it’s status quo and status quo ain’t bad in this case.
If that’s the logic you want to argue with, then it’s better the devil you know than the one you don’t, especially if Anet’s shareholders don’t seem to have a problem with it.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I hope they don’t change course on many things, including this because whatever they are doing, it’s working quite well for them. I think it’s nonsense to make simple statements indicating if it’s bad for the game, it needs to be changed. It’s not bad for the game at all. It’s only bad for the people that can’t pull themselves away from it. The game actually thrives because of its concept appealing to its core players. Indicating it’s anything but is showing a lack of understanding what this game means from a business perspective.
I think it’s funny you mention HoT … we already know what big surprise we are going to get and it’s not rare drops from raids or anything close to it, In fact, precursors are craftable. That means more of the same of what we have now.
The changes would not have to alienate the people who like the current system. So I can’t see how it would be bad for them.
Of course you can’t, because you demonstrate time and again how you don’t understand the business impact these changes you want would have.
I did show how it would work out (in the previous topics) with numbers, calculations and comparing it with GW1’s numbers. And it showed that it was likely that yearly expansion would have earned Anet more money by now. A change I suggested because of the business impact these suggestions to prevent grind would have, as the cash-shop will always be a huge reason for grind and so there would be no or less place for it anymore.
You never know for sure what the (alternative) impact of anything would be as we don’t live in the parallel universe where this would be true, so we only have the numbers to go on. So at least from that perspective you are right. I have some numbers, some facts and some calculations but certainty nobody has, including Anet them self. But because of that same reason it’s also not a good defense in trying to dismiss anything.
That you did not like those numbers or did not get them, does not make them incorrect. I will not go into those calculations again as Anet seems to close threads if too many hard facts and numbers run over the screen. Everything can be read back in those threads.
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Grind-is-still-grind/
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/No-grind-philosophy/
But yeah I clearly did understand the business impact of these changes what is also the reason I almost always link the two topics (cash-shop focus / grind) with each other. Much to some peoples dislike.
(edited by Devata.6589)
All of this “armchair quarterbacking” is pointless…..Anet is going in the direction they think is both entertaining and profitable. Obviously not all players will agree with the “entertaining” choices and they have every right to discontinue use of the product.
I think Anet DOES listen to players about things that could be changed that would not greatly effect their overall economic strategy, but requests that would greatly effect the general end-game for every player are not even going to be commented on (and I can’t blame them for not poking at those embers).
Do what you want, there are plenty of MMOs out there and if this one isn’t something you enjoy any longer, move on.
We go out in the world and take our chances
Fate is just the weight of circumstances
That’s the way that lady luck dances
Fate is just the weight of circumstances
That’s the way that lady luck dances
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/why-does-gw2-feel-like-a-grindy-f2p/page/2#post5025712
Just because something is worse doesn’t mean the thing its worse than is good.
No but MMOs require a constant stream of income. And it’s either through subscription or cash shops. GW was an anomaly and while it sold a far number of boxes, it was the fact that GW2 was being developed that kept the servers up when it’s income was less than $15 million in the two years before GW2 came out. Not $15 million a year, $15 million in two years
Therefore various techniques are common place to keep players playing and one is requiring a lot of time gathering and processing materials to craft the top rung items or to accumulate enough currency to buy some high end item.
Another is slow travel and running back to quest givers to finish it. GW2 eliminated these which makes the overall game faster but now makes the previous farming that’s found in all MMOs really stick out like a sore thumb.
I didnt have a clue about the numbers
I want more redheads and octupus ingame , but i must consider first that they are human beeing that they must be treated happily and without hate (otherwise i will burn the hate::P) and have limited resourses .
And that is before i dream for a better genre + the happininess of the ppl + vendeatta :P
(edited by Killthehealersffs.8940)
Fair enough … then I’m going to apply the same standards to the guy QQing about too much grind and claiming it’s going to improve the game if it’s removed. He’s not reading any metrics and making correlations either, except those he has invented in his head to convince him it will make the game better. The difference is that I’m not claiming it would be better, it’s status quo and status quo ain’t bad in this case.
If that’s the logic you want to argue with, then it’s better the devil you know than the one you don’t, especially if Anet’s shareholders don’t seem to have a problem with it.
I did point out to different financial models and how they allowed for less (cosmetic) grind and could be more successful including all the possible numbers available, I could point to the fact that if it purely comes to alienating people there are changes that should not do that (as long as items are not account-bound the grind gold option is still there for those who like it), I could use the logical sense that if you make the hunt for items a more amusing game-play it would attract more people, I could point to the fact that many people complain about the grind and so clearly dislike it, I could point towards WoW that has a more amusing game-play as it comes to cosmetic hunt and is the (one of the) most popular MMO’s out there and in fact at some point in this or the previous threads I did all that.
But your right, I can never proof it would work the way I suggest. Then again, you can say that to everybody who makes any suggestion on the forum.
That shareholders are fine with it does not say anything. Shareholders where fine with Wildstar’s approach until it didn’t make them enough money (anymore), shareholders where fine with Tabula Rasa until it did not make the money they wanted, they where fine with AA initial approach and that of Final Fantasy XIV and that of TCoS and so on. It does say me anything that they are happy now.
Thing is, you accept many people grind and accept the game might help to push them in that direction. You even accept they might walk away because of that. Then why are you so against trying to do something about that?
All of this “armchair quarterbacking” is pointless…..Anet is going in the direction they think is both entertaining and profitable. Obviously not all players will agree with the “entertaining” choices and they have every right to discontinue use of the product.
I think Anet DOES listen to players about things that could be changed that would not greatly effect their overall economic strategy, but requests that would greatly effect the general end-game for every player are not even going to be commented on (and I can’t blame them for not poking at those embers).
Do what you want, there are plenty of MMOs out there and if this one isn’t something you enjoy any longer, move on.
As long as you keep items not being account-bound the option to brainlessly grind gold will stay there. So for there current player-base who make like that not much would have to change.
And yes, if it comes to cosmetic hunts I do go to other mmo’s and GW2 simply is not enjoyable for that, but that does not mean I could be and it should not be suggested. I do think the never-ending grind is what sucks much of the life out of this game and so changing it would improve the game a lot so I will suggest it.
Anet does not have to listen, I still may suggest.
Also Anet does seem to listen and I can’t imagine the developers want to make a game people play / grind while watching a movie on the other screen. So I think there is the possibility they will do something about it, in fact they have made some steps in the correct direction already. If I had completely no believe they could change it I would not be posting about it anymore. But I do completely understand why this is something they won’t change easily as it touches there complete business model.
(They basically sell a way out of the grind, so if there is no grind they need to start selling something else).
(edited by Devata.6589)
Fair enough … then I’m going to apply the same standards to the guy QQing about too much grind and claiming it’s going to improve the game if it’s removed. He’s not reading any metrics and making correlations either, except those he has invented in his head to convince him it will make the game better. The difference is that I’m not claiming it would be better, it’s status quo and status quo ain’t bad in this case.
If that’s the logic you want to argue with, then it’s better the devil you know than the one you don’t, especially if Anet’s shareholders don’t seem to have a problem with it.
ArenaNet is a private incorporation. And, as I stated, there’s no correlation between status quo and success. While you’re certainly free to argue ideologies, unless someone here is going to start dissecting these metrics – it’s all an asspull whether or not it’s a business decision.
That you did not like those numbers or did not get them, does not make them incorrect. I will not go into those calculations again as Anet seems to close threads if too many hard facts and numbers run over the screen.
Care to point in a direction where those numbers might actually be and the sources for your numbers? It’s quite daunting to sift through so many pages just to find your logic.
That you did not like those numbers or did not get them, does not make them incorrect. I will not go into those calculations again as Anet seems to close threads if too many hard facts and numbers run over the screen.
Care to point in a direction where those numbers might actually be and the sources for your numbers? It’s quite daunting to sift through so many pages just to find your logic.
He’s referring to their earnings report except he missed something very important that invalidates his argument.
I did show how it would work out (in the previous topics) with numbers, calculations and comparing it with GW1’s numbers.
Yes, all made up from your own imagination of how it would work based on a completely different game. GG!
Fair enough … then I’m going to apply the same standards to the guy QQing about too much grind and claiming it’s going to improve the game if it’s removed. He’s not reading any metrics and making correlations either, except those he has invented in his head to convince him it will make the game better. The difference is that I’m not claiming it would be better, it’s status quo and status quo ain’t bad in this case.
If that’s the logic you want to argue with, then it’s better the devil you know than the one you don’t, especially if Anet’s shareholders don’t seem to have a problem with it.
ArenaNet is a private incorporation. And, as I stated, there’s no correlation between status quo and success. While you’re certainly free to argue ideologies, unless someone here is going to start dissecting these metrics – it’s all an asspull whether or not it’s a business decision.
Is it? I would love to see that because I couldn’t actually locate their corporate information. AFIAK, they are wholly owned by NCSoft.
If that’s actually the case, little changes except who the company answers to. It’s still there to make money and not gamble with their investments on chance nonsense.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
I did show how it would work out (in the previous topics) with numbers, calculations and comparing it with GW1’s numbers.
Yes, all made up from your own imagination of how it would work based on a completely different game. GG!
He’s likely referring to this:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Grind-is-still-grind/page/13#post4913581
Oh I know what he’s referring to. It’s awfully easy to make up stories about points on a graph. All the same thing over and over again. If such a change was so good for the game, Anet would have done it by now. The only thing we see is Anet reinforcing their position on this with craftable precursors in HoT … obviously they don’t agree with the OP or his cheerleading squad.
Just popping in to say I don’t mind the grind really. So long as it’s for marginal stat increase (ascended gear) or cosmetics, yeah ’s fine by me.
What I don’t like is excessive RNG. I would rather grind for something I know will, for example take me 20 hours to complete, rather than something random that’ll take an average of 15 hours, but might also take 50 hours if you’re unlucky. When effort does not match reward, things be unfair.
Looking at you precursors.
Going back to what it started with is that I said depending on the drop-rate the average number of runs could be exactly the same as the required number of runs that you would need when using a currency system.
In fact, that is exactly what a drop-rate is. A drop-rate of 1-250 mean on average is will drop once every 250 runs.
You could be a little bid ‘lucky’ and it could drop sooner, or ‘unlucky’ and it would drop later but in the end there is no such real thing as ‘bad luck’, it’s just math.
Arguing the random average is fine if the distribution isn’t all over the place. With incredibly low drop chances you can be kitten sure it’s going to be all over the place. Guess how unreasonably low the droprate for the really the valuable stuff is.
When someone’s been playing the game for years and has never found a precursor, while someone playing for a week at lv 80 finds one, you can’t make the argument oh sometimes you’re a little lucky and sometimes you’re a little unlucky. The system is bogus and far too unfair.
Going back to what it started with is that I said depending on the drop-rate the average number of runs could be exactly the same as the required number of runs that you would need when using a currency system.
In fact, that is exactly what a drop-rate is. A drop-rate of 1-250 mean on average is will drop once every 250 runs.
You could be a little bid ‘lucky’ and it could drop sooner, or ‘unlucky’ and it would drop later but in the end there is no such real thing as ‘bad luck’, it’s just math.
Arguing the random average is fine if the distribution isn’t all over the place. With incredibly low drop chances you can be kitten sure it’s going to be all over the place. Guess how unreasonably low the droprate for the really the valuable stuff is.
When someone’s been playing the game for years and has never found a precursor, while someone playing for a week at lv 80 finds one, you can’t make the argument oh sometimes you’re a little lucky and sometimes you’re a little unlucky. The system is bogus and far too unfair.
Be very careful as what you’re saying is pretty much the gambler’s fallacy. Someone who has played the lottery for 50 years has the same probability of winning the next one as someone who has just started. You also need to consider the aggregate results across the entire population rather than specific data points (e.g. Between two players).
This is based off your second paragraph which gave me this impression.
Fair enough … then I’m going to apply the same standards to the guy QQing about too much grind and claiming it’s going to improve the game if it’s removed. He’s not reading any metrics and making correlations either, except those he has invented in his head to convince him it will make the game better. The difference is that I’m not claiming it would be better, it’s status quo and status quo ain’t bad in this case.
If that’s the logic you want to argue with, then it’s better the devil you know than the one you don’t, especially if Anet’s shareholders don’t seem to have a problem with it.
ArenaNet is a private incorporation. And, as I stated, there’s no correlation between status quo and success. While you’re certainly free to argue ideologies, unless someone here is going to start dissecting these metrics – it’s all an asspull whether or not it’s a business decision.
Is it? I would love to see that because I couldn’t actually locate their corporate information. AFIAK, they are wholly owned by NCSoft.
If that’s actually the case, little changes except who the company answers to. It’s still there to make money and not gamble with their investments on chance nonsense.
ArenaNet is a subsidiary to NCSoft. Being a subsidiary of NCSoft differs quite radically from being a division of NCSoft. ArenaNet is entirely independent though and, based on the company’s history, I’d dare say NCSoft gives them a long leash in experimental try-outs.
Grind may be annoying but absent grind what would you do in an MMO?
Every activity one describes in an MMO, could be re-described as grind if looked at from an ‘un-fun’ perspective.
http://kichwas.wordpress.com/ – GW2 Blog Presenting the Opposing View
JAH Bless – Equal Rights and Justice for all.
Justice And Honor – Tarnished Coast.
JAH Bless – Equal Rights and Justice for all.
Justice And Honor – Tarnished Coast.
Fair enough … then I’m going to apply the same standards to the guy QQing about too much grind and claiming it’s going to improve the game if it’s removed. He’s not reading any metrics and making correlations either, except those he has invented in his head to convince him it will make the game better. The difference is that I’m not claiming it would be better, it’s status quo and status quo ain’t bad in this case.
If that’s the logic you want to argue with, then it’s better the devil you know than the one you don’t, especially if Anet’s shareholders don’t seem to have a problem with it.
ArenaNet is a private incorporation. And, as I stated, there’s no correlation between status quo and success. While you’re certainly free to argue ideologies, unless someone here is going to start dissecting these metrics – it’s all an asspull whether or not it’s a business decision.
Is it? I would love to see that because I couldn’t actually locate their corporate information. AFIAK, they are wholly owned by NCSoft.
If that’s actually the case, little changes except who the company answers to. It’s still there to make money and not gamble with their investments on chance nonsense.
ArenaNet is a subsidiary to NCSoft. Being a subsidiary of NCSoft differs quite radically from being a division of NCSoft. ArenaNet is entirely independent though and, based on the company’s history, I’d dare say NCSoft gives them a long leash in experimental try-outs.
OK .. they still aren’t going to gamble their resources to placate people. Worth saying again … craftable precursors.
Oh I know what he’s referring to. It’s awfully easy to make up stories about points on a graph. All the same thing over and over again. If such a change was so good for the game, Anet would have done it by now. The only thing we see is Anet reinforcing their position on this with craftable precursors in HoT … obviously they don’t agree with the OP or his cheerleading squad.
I agree, ANet’s taking a good route. The precursor hunt seems to be more in-line with more grind and less RNG, which exactly what this game needs more of. Accomplishments for your efforts and not dumb luck. As it sits, far too much depends on your luck in achieving any pecuniary significance. Pure, dumb, unadulterated luck.
Fair enough … then I’m going to apply the same standards to the guy QQing about too much grind and claiming it’s going to improve the game if it’s removed. He’s not reading any metrics and making correlations either, except those he has invented in his head to convince him it will make the game better. The difference is that I’m not claiming it would be better, it’s status quo and status quo ain’t bad in this case.
If that’s the logic you want to argue with, then it’s better the devil you know than the one you don’t, especially if Anet’s shareholders don’t seem to have a problem with it.
ArenaNet is a private incorporation. And, as I stated, there’s no correlation between status quo and success. While you’re certainly free to argue ideologies, unless someone here is going to start dissecting these metrics – it’s all an asspull whether or not it’s a business decision.
Is it? I would love to see that because I couldn’t actually locate their corporate information. AFIAK, they are wholly owned by NCSoft.
If that’s actually the case, little changes except who the company answers to. It’s still there to make money and not gamble with their investments on chance nonsense.
ArenaNet is a subsidiary to NCSoft. Being a subsidiary of NCSoft differs quite radically from being a division of NCSoft. ArenaNet is entirely independent though and, based on the company’s history, I’d dare say NCSoft gives them a long leash in experimental try-outs.
OK .. they still aren’t going to gamble their resources to placate people. Worth saying again … craftable precursors.
You’re saying it’s a gamble as if projections can’t be made within reason. If I had a week with ANet’s fiscal reports, history and player metrics, I could offer an annual projection over the course of 2016 if HoT included less “grind.” (Although this game isn’t that grindy, it’s just based on RNG, which in itself becomes a chore because effort != success). I’m not going to do this, I’m just saying anyone with business experience could. Gambling has nothing to do with it.
Just popping in to say I don’t mind the grind really. So long as it’s for marginal stat increase (ascended gear) or cosmetics, yeah ’s fine by me.
What I don’t like is excessive RNG. I would rather grind for something I know will, for example take me 20 hours to complete, rather than something random that’ll take an average of 15 hours, but might also take 50 hours if you’re unlucky. When effort does not match reward, things be unfair.
Looking at you precursors.
Yeah this has always kittened me off, and it’s why I liked Guild Wars more than Guild Wars 2. At least in Guild Wars, you had a really good chance of getting Dhuum’s Scythe if you ran UWSC for 4-6 months. Speedrun dungeons, WvW, PvP or even MF gambling for 4-6 months in this game…gives you no good chance at anything, really. It’s a crying shame that you can’t work for your rewards.
Part of the reason I went casual is I spent over a year speedrunning dungeons just to get Dusk to no avail. Money to buy Dusk was acquired and I still never saw a precursor. I spent a year trying. That just seems at a certain point to be unethical in the way they designed RNG. Hell, I still don’t have Sunrise to go with it because I can’t be bothered to buy Dawn or farm against the treadmill anymore. Much like the precursor hunt, though, if there were some sort of way for me to get a reward for my effort rather than banging my head against the wall praying to RNGesus, I will enjoy this game a lot more.
I’m thankful they’re finally coming to grips with replacing RNG with provisional grind.
(edited by Cuddy.6247)
You’re saying it’s a gamble as if projections can’t be made within reason. If I had a week with ANet’s fiscal reports, history and player metrics, I could offer an annual projection over the course of 2016 if HoT included less “grind.” (Although this game isn’t that grindy, it’s just based on RNG, which in itself becomes a chore because effort != success). I’m not going to do this, I’m just saying anyone with business experience could. Gambling has nothing to do with it.
And assuming Anet has same competent people, they have done the same and come to the conclusion that they aren’t going that direction, yet we see the same cheerleaders for no grind waving their pompoms. It is a gamble to implement something that would be seen as disruptive to your core market and unless you need a miracle, there is no reason to do so.
You’re saying it’s a gamble as if projections can’t be made within reason. If I had a week with ANet’s fiscal reports, history and player metrics, I could offer an annual projection over the course of 2016 if HoT included less “grind.” (Although this game isn’t that grindy, it’s just based on RNG, which in itself becomes a chore because effort != success). I’m not going to do this, I’m just saying anyone with business experience could. Gambling has nothing to do with it.
And assuming Anet has same competent people, they have done the same and come to the conclusion that they aren’t going that direction, yet we see the same cheerleaders for no grind waving their pompoms. It is a gamble to implement something that would be seen as disruptive to your core market and unless you need a miracle, there is no reason to do so.
Projections are rarely done, it’s a waste of time to project annual reports on hypotheticals when there’s no projected loss in dividends. ArenaNet would have to be incompetent to make a projection of the less grind proposals in threads like this. That doesn’t mean any tailoring would be a bad thing, in fact – it could be beneficial, they likely haven’t run the metrics to know. The reason? Because dividends fall within expectations. As it goes: Don’t fix what ain’t broke. There’s no correlation with benefit/harm and the decision making process, though, if the decisions yield expected results.
I did show how it would work out (in the previous topics) with numbers, calculations and comparing it with GW1’s numbers.
Yes, all made up from your own imagination of how it would work based on a completely different game. GG!
“all made up” vs “based on a completely different game.”. Yeah.. And that completely different game still is the game that pretty much made this game.
Oh I know what he’s referring to. It’s awfully easy to make up stories about points on a graph. All the same thing over and over again. If such a change was so good for the game, Anet would have done it by now.
Yeah almost as easy as to dismiss it by saying “you can’t proof it would work”. And the “if it was good Anet would have done it” fits in the Anet knows everything, they did not do it so it can’t be good. What is of course false. Many companies (including Anet) made mistakes, sometime came back on them, sometimes not.
Arguing the random average is fine if the distribution isn’t all over the place. With incredibly low drop chances you can be kitten sure it’s going to be all over the place. Guess how unreasonably low the droprate for the really the valuable stuff is.
I think you missed the part where I completely agreed with this part. Yeah when RNG is to extreme is also just bad and not better then a currency grind, in fact it would really result in a currency grind as that would then be the only viable option to get the item. That is also exactly how many items in GW2 that are available in the game are added.. with an extreme low-drop rate but usually also dropping from many places or from something that already gets grinded for gold.
It is what I said before about how if you make an item drop from one place you can have a higher drop-rate then when you drop it from many places (or from something that gets grinded anyway) in order to keep the same rarity. Drop 1 items from 1 place with a 1/100 drop-rate. To keep the same rarity when dropping in from 2 places (that have similar popularity) you will need a 1/200 drop-rate for the same rarity.
That is why I say, RNG would not be a problem if it’s doable RNG. Doable as not is so extreme as we indeed see with many of the items that do drop in GW2.
And once again, if you would make the items not account-bound your option to grind is still there.
I did show how it would work out (in the previous topics) with numbers, calculations and comparing it with GW1’s numbers.
Yes, all made up from your own imagination of how it would work based on a completely different game. GG!
“all made up” vs “based on a completely different game.”. Yeah.. And that completely different game still is the game that pretty much made this game.
More correlations that aren’t related. What happens in GW1 has no impact on what happens in GW2.
Oh I know what he’s referring to. It’s awfully easy to make up stories about points on a graph. All the same thing over and over again. If such a change was so good for the game, Anet would have done it by now. The only thing we see is Anet reinforcing their position on this with craftable precursors in HoT … obviously they don’t agree with the OP or his cheerleading squad.
I agree, ANet’s taking a good route. The precursor hunt seems to be more in-line with more grind and less RNG, which exactly what this game needs more of. Accomplishments for your efforts and not dumb luck. As it sits, far too much depends on your luck in achieving any pecuniary significance. Pure, dumb, unadulterated luck.
Now you could explain this. At this moment getting a precursor mainly means, grind gold and buy it. There is no ‘doable’ RNG / more direct way to get a precursor.
With the new system you will need to do task and get collections. In addition they would make it easier to farm mats.
That seems to be less of a grind and more in the direction I ask for (a more direct way of working towards each other) then the current ‘grind gold’ system.
Sure, the precursor will be so extreme it probably still is a grind (and in fact I did say a few grinds for some very rare items would not be a problem, I guess the precursor is supposed to be this very rare thing) but nonetheless a more direct approach and smaller grind / split into smaller junks again more into the direction of what I am suggesting here.
You can split hairs if you like and convince yourself crafted precursors are a move away from gold/mat earning. Anet creating craftable precursors is just supporting their current approach to the game and will be as much about earning gold and mats to get it as anything else. That’s the ‘grind’ that people are QQing about. I don’t see how anything has changed.
(edited by Obtena.7952)
Just popping in to say I don’t mind the grind really. So long as it’s for marginal stat increase (ascended gear) or cosmetics, yeah ’s fine by me.
What I don’t like is excessive RNG. I would rather grind for something I know will, for example take me 20 hours to complete, rather than something random that’ll take an average of 15 hours, but might also take 50 hours if you’re unlucky. When effort does not match reward, things be unfair.
Looking at you precursors.Yeah this has always kittened me off, and it’s why I liked Guild Wars more than Guild Wars 2. At least in Guild Wars, you had a really good chance of getting Dhuum’s Scythe if you ran UWSC for 4-6 months. Speedrun dungeons, WvW, PvP or even MF gambling for 4-6 months in this game…gives you no good chance at anything, really. It’s a crying shame that you can’t work for your rewards.
Part of the reason I went casual is I spent over a year speedrunning dungeons just to get Dusk to no avail. Money to buy Dusk was acquired and I still never saw a precursor. I spent a year trying. That just seems at a certain point to be unethical in the way they designed RNG. Hell, I still don’t have Sunrise to go with it because I can’t be bothered to buy Dawn or farm against the treadmill anymore. Much like the precursor hunt, though, if there were some sort of way for me to get a reward for my effort rather than banging my head against the wall praying to RNGesus, I will enjoy this game a lot more.
I’m thankful they’re finally coming to grips with replacing RNG with provisional grind.
This is a little strange statement. "Part of the reason I went casual is I spent over a year speedrunning dungeons just to get Dusk to no avail. Money to buy Dusk was acquired and I still never saw a precursor. ".
So if you love grind so much, what was then the problem? You grinded the gold? And the fact that it’s not possible to work directly towards the item you want (other then the gold-grind) is what I talk about all the time. These items for example do indeed drop but with such a extreme low drop-rate that you can’t work towards them anymore leaving grind (for gold) as the only real viable option to get them.
So what you say you dislike results in what you say you like. Reasonable drop-rates lets you also work towards an item. Just as putting items behind specific content does like chest, or putting them behind challenging content or in fun crafts. That are the types of things I am asking for. But would decrease the grind.
You say you are happy with more grind because that allows you to work towards something.. yes in the same was as it already does ‘grind gold, grind gold’ but at the same time you say you like the ‘change to grind’ because you dislike the current RNG system… that results in grind.
So what is it? You liked it that you had to grind gold for your legendary and want more of that? Or you dislike the grind and want less of it???
Yeah almost as easy as to dismiss it by saying “you can’t proof it would work”. And the “if it was good Anet would have done it” fits in the Anet knows everything, they did not do it so it can’t be good. What is of course false. Many companies (including Anet) made mistakes, sometime came back on them, sometimes not.
Much as I’ve been telling Obtena: where’s your authority? Have you actually run the metrics of the players (not just a comparison with Guild Wars, which had low showcase compared to Guild Wars 2…the launch sales and retention metrics between GW and GW2 are astronomically different)? If you have, care to share with the class? GW2’s system works, it achieves the desired result and the dividends are what they expect them to be (you can’t rationally assume that every player that bought the game will continue playing. In fact, a 35-45% retention rate is good in the gaming industry).
Genuinely would love to see the math and business administration these ideologies seem to be proposing without evidence.
Oh I know what he’s referring to. It’s awfully easy to make up stories about points on a graph. All the same thing over and over again. If such a change was so good for the game, Anet would have done it by now. The only thing we see is Anet reinforcing their position on this with craftable precursors in HoT … obviously they don’t agree with the OP or his cheerleading squad.
I agree, ANet’s taking a good route. The precursor hunt seems to be more in-line with more grind and less RNG, which exactly what this game needs more of. Accomplishments for your efforts and not dumb luck. As it sits, far too much depends on your luck in achieving any pecuniary significance. Pure, dumb, unadulterated luck.
Now you could explain this. At this moment getting a precursor mainly means, grind gold and buy it. There is no ‘doable’ RNG / more direct way to get a precursor.
With the new system you will need to do task and get collections. In addition they would make it easier to farm mats.
That seems to be less of a grind and more in the direction I ask for (a more direct way of working towards each other) then the current ‘grind gold’ system.
Sure, the precursor will be so extreme it probably still is a grind (and in fact I did say a few grinds for some very rare items would not be a problem, I guess the precursor is supposed to be this very rare thing) but nonetheless a more direct approach and smaller grind / split into smaller junks again more into the direction of what I am suggesting here.
May I ask, then, what your definition of grind is? Because the new precursor system is most definitively a grind. Grind never hurt games, terrible RNG has. The RNG in this game has become a reckless chore that’s more grindy than it needs to be due to a slackjaw manifesto that ArenaNet should revise and poor reward distribution.
You can split hairs if you like and convince yourself crafted precursors are a move away from gold/mat earning. Anet creating craftable precursors is just supporting their current approach to the game and will be as much about earning gold and mats to get it as anything else. That’s the ‘grind’ that people are QQing about. I don’t see how anything has changed.
I am not convincing myself of anything yet. First will need to see it, just going with with they say. Maybe you are convincing yourself of something?
What I say here all the time is, make it possible to work directly towards items, put it behind quest and quest-chains and behind specific content and so on.
What I did hear from the precursor crafting this is basically how it will work only with many quests and so on.
“Anet creating craftable precursors is just supporting their current approach to the game and will be as much about earning gold and mats to get it as anything else.”
There current approach results in the only real viable option to get the a precursor is to grind gold and buy it. There is no real other viable option. The new approach is about doing quest and specific task and collect specific items to get the precursor.
Don’t know what the mats requirement will be (that could still be a grind) but even for that there would come a system that would allow you to better be able to farm for mats in stead of having to grind for gold to buy the mats, as there is no viable option to get many of the mats directly.
So I don’t know how that would be in line with the current gold-grind and not with a more direct approach and specific content and quest (what I ask for). But we will see what it turns out to be.
You can split hairs if you like and convince yourself crafted precursors are a move away from gold/mat earning. Anet creating craftable precursors is just supporting their current approach to the game and will be as much about earning gold and mats to get it as anything else. That’s the ‘grind’ that people are QQing about. I don’t see how anything has changed.
Well, people don’t assume that the precursor collections will be as much of a RNG demon as drops are. I, admittedly, fall within that category and I should probably feel bad for taking a presumptuous stand. Still, being rewarded for one’s efforts, as grindy as it may be, is more rewarding than a RNG grind – which ends up being too pervasive and demoralizing. Hell, I’m sure if people could even guarantee an exotic from completing, say, Orr paths, people would be doing those more often than they do now. Yet, as it stands, there’s no guarantee of anything – there’s nothing you can possibly do other than kill any champion or any foe and get a shot at what you want.
That’s just…not feasible.
Just popping in to say I don’t mind the grind really. So long as it’s for marginal stat increase (ascended gear) or cosmetics, yeah ’s fine by me.
What I don’t like is excessive RNG. I would rather grind for something I know will, for example take me 20 hours to complete, rather than something random that’ll take an average of 15 hours, but might also take 50 hours if you’re unlucky. When effort does not match reward, things be unfair.
Looking at you precursors.Yeah this has always kittened me off, and it’s why I liked Guild Wars more than Guild Wars 2. At least in Guild Wars, you had a really good chance of getting Dhuum’s Scythe if you ran UWSC for 4-6 months. Speedrun dungeons, WvW, PvP or even MF gambling for 4-6 months in this game…gives you no good chance at anything, really. It’s a crying shame that you can’t work for your rewards.
Part of the reason I went casual is I spent over a year speedrunning dungeons just to get Dusk to no avail. Money to buy Dusk was acquired and I still never saw a precursor. I spent a year trying. That just seems at a certain point to be unethical in the way they designed RNG. Hell, I still don’t have Sunrise to go with it because I can’t be bothered to buy Dawn or farm against the treadmill anymore. Much like the precursor hunt, though, if there were some sort of way for me to get a reward for my effort rather than banging my head against the wall praying to RNGesus, I will enjoy this game a lot more.
I’m thankful they’re finally coming to grips with replacing RNG with provisional grind.
This is a little strange statement. "Part of the reason I went casual is I spent over a year speedrunning dungeons just to get Dusk to no avail. Money to buy Dusk was acquired and I still never saw a precursor. ".
So if you love grind so much, what was then the problem? You grinded the gold? And the fact that it’s not possible to work directly towards the item you want (other then the gold-grind) is what I talk about all the time. These items for example do indeed drop but with such a extreme low drop-rate that you can’t work towards them anymore leaving grind (for gold) as the only real viable option to get them.
So what you say you dislike results in what you say you like. Reasonable drop-rates lets you also work towards an item. Just as putting items behind specific content does like chest, or putting them behind challenging content or in fun crafts. That are the types of things I am asking for. But would decrease the grind.
You say you are happy with more grind because that allows you to work towards something.. yes in the same was as it already does ‘grind gold, grind gold’ but at the same time you say you like the ‘change to grind’ because you dislike the current RNG system… that results in grind.
So what is it? You liked it that you had to grind gold for your legendary and want more of that? Or you dislike the grind and want less of it???
I like grind. I dislike the idea of not being rewarded for my grind. Hell, I can’t even reasonably farm in Silverwastes or EotM and achieve much money. I spent maybe 8 hours the other day in EotM on my day off and walked away with a grand total of like 25 gold. That’s absurd. I can get more gold by grabbing a second job.
I’m not an advocate against grind, I really hate the idea of removing grind from this game – it means there is no achievements to earn. I want my effort to be directly correlated in the rewards I earn, and that simply doesn’t exist anymore. Too many things (the Halloween weapon skins, precursors, minipets, black lion tickets, dyes, gathering nodes) are all a wonderful (sarcasm) RNG fest that have no effort to reward ratio. Unlike, e.g., Arah armor or Lumi/Carapace – which you can earn by just putting some effort into the game.