Guild Wars 2

Shufflepants.9785:

@Astral Projections.7320
More arbitrary line drawing. Just because it’s pvp, why does that mean you shouldn’t have to do it for your gold star? If it’s just a “well, at least I know I did it” what does it matter if your achievement doesn’t say 100% completion. If you just want to do the PvE areas to 100%, then go do the PvE areas to 100%, no one can stop you. Would it make you happy if ANet split the achievement into two? Have a 100% PvE and a 100%PvP but still only gave the gold star if you had both achievements? Or are you really that desperate to be be handed a little gold star that only other people see?

Ok, what if you are on a server that is low ranking, barely controls its own borderlands and is locked to one color? How do you explore the whole of WvW then? I can solo all of the PvE maps one way or another but to get into all of WvW requires a strong server and that’s my objection to it. If I could get everything in WvW either solo or a small party, if all it took was some planning, patience and skill then it would be fine. What it actually requires is a lot of other people, following a zerg around to get what you need. It’s fine for me personally because I am in a strong server. But not everyone is.

WvW exploration for a non PvP person. Wait till you see a zerg going where you want to go, join it and hope it manages to get the fort or whatever open. Grab points. Go back to central wait spot. Wait for the next chance while tying up a slot for someone who actually wants to do WvW. Yeah, that was meaningful. :/

Edit: as to the question you specifically asked. Yes, split the titles. One title for PvE only with either a silver star or no star. Then make the Been There Done That title with the gold star for doing both. That would be fine. I would get the title for exploring Tyria and not be tying up a slot in WvW, leaching off the zergs. If I ever decided to try for the gold star and its title, then it would be because I wanted to do WvW and would be contributing.

Vayne.8563:

I’m a self-professed Anet fan boy. I have world completion on one character (and almost on another. I’m only missing one point of interest in all four areas for my second character). I have no trouble being in WvW, or even killing other players. Indeed, sometimes I do it just for fun.

Yet I still say Anet made a mistake by making WvW required for World completion. Put it this way.

A person who just PVes has a map and he completes the map of the area of the game he’s playing. He really gets nothing for that. There is no PVe world achievement…and there should be.

There should be a different achievement for getting all of it, including WvW.

This is a game. People should be able to play the areas of the game they’re interested in. They should be rewarded for playing that area of the game.

By all means, legendaries should require both PVe and WvW to be completed…but there is no reason at all that Anet couldn’t have put an achievement for PVe world completion in the game.

It hurts no one. There is no reason not to. And it would allow people to play the way they want.

I agree with pretty much everything you’ve said here, even that a legendary should require both PvE and PvP. I’m not sure if you mean it should require mapping both PvE and PvP though, and I think it shouldn’t require mapping both.
A legendary takes a bit from each aspect of the game, like giving you a sample of each, PvE map completion, the gifts from a dungeon or two, and badges of honor from PvP.
It doesn’t make much sense to me to then also require mapping of PvP on top of the 500 badges one has to acquire. Similar to how we don’t need the gift from every single dungeon for each legendary I don’t think every aspect of PvP should be required.
I think the 500 badges are quite sufficient as a sampling of WvW.

Maybe if they separated the mapping they could have a gift of wvw you get from mapping there that you can replace the 500 badges with or something, though that doesn’t seem like a 1:1 trade though.

Shufflepants.9785:

ScribeTheMad.7614:

Wow, nasty much? >.<

You don’t seem to realize that where the lines are drawn right now was a completely arbitrary decision on Anets part, they were simply drawn up in an illogical manor.
In fact, they made a lot of arbitrary decisions when setting the world up, and they adjust some of those arbitrary lines every time they make a change or adjustment, like nerfing a skill when they decide its initial arbitrary stats are OP and lower them to another arbitrary level.
Just because these things are arbitrary doesn’t mean we shouldn’t fix something that is badly illogical or terribly thought out.

I don’t care about the star, would rather not have it actually, its just visual clutter.
I don’t support changing this for my benefit. I know that’s hard to understand, that someone would support a change merely because they feel the change would be right, but it’s true; I simply support changing a set of arbitrary requirements to a more logical set of arbitrary requirements. Because that’s where logic says they should be set.

Oh yes, this is the best, ANet’s choices are arbitrary but you try to use special pleading to say that your choice is not arbitrary but dictated by LOGIC?! Your choice is just as arbitrary and has nothing to do with logic. It might be more intuitive to put them where you describe, but not more logical. If it is logic, then lets see your proof.

Nowhere in my post did I say that where I thought the requirements should end wasn’t arbitrary. Quite the opposite, I specifically said it was.

Because no matter where those requirements end that decision is an arbitrary one.
However, logic can be applied to deciding where the boundaries are placed.

As for applying logic to deciding where to draw those lines, I’ve already explained it in very simple terms.
An achievement for completely exploring a world map should not also include a requirement that. is. not. on. the. map.
That is logical, just because you don’t agree doesn’t change that.

That’s like writing a math test and including philosophy questions on it.
Doing so wouldn’t make any logical sense.

An even simpler example: take the Harpy Slayer achievement, it wouldn’t make any sense for that achievement to require you to kill 995 Harpies and 5 Drakes.
Logically a Harpy Slayer achievement would (and does) only require you to kill Harpies. Killing Drakes is a separate achievement.
They could of course make the (arbitrary) decision to make the Harpy Slayer achievement require killing 5 drakes as well, but again, it just wouldn’t make any sense.

Svarty.8019:

Chrispytoast.3698:

1) It is a PvP area
2) There is no way to walk into WvW from other zones. You must use an Asura Gate.
3) All PvE exploration can be completed solo while WvW requires groups to take points.
4) If one team remains first for weeks, other teams will have a hard time taking their points to get the exploration.
5) WvW is separated from PvE just like PvP is but we are not required to get PoI in PvP

This is in no way me crying that it is to hard to get these points. I just think that having WvW required for a PvE achievement seems flawed.

This is like saying you shouldn’t have to do PvE to get components for a Legendary weapon.

Hmm… maybe they should make the legendary weapons per-zone-type, so if you do a long list of things in PvE, PvP or WvW you can make a legendary that can only be used in the relevant zone.

Except 90% of the game is pure PvE. That would be like buying CoD and complaining about having to shoot things. Seems pretty dumb to buy a game only for the 10% of it that appeals to you. That’s what this weak argument amounts to. Please use a better one.

Exploration has nothing to do with the Punch and Judy antics of PvP. It’s about visiting new places and seeing new things. I guarantee there’s nothing new involved with attacking or being attacked in WvW. Nothing. New. At. All. Let’s just stop promoting that fiction, please.

My disappointment with this feature stems from:

In GW1, the explorer titles meant exploring the world map; areas outside the world (Underworld, Fissure of Woe, Domain of Anguish) were not a part of it. The Temple of Balthazar, technically part of the world, was not required. The only PvP areas were two maps in Factions, that could be done on one visit each (although, for a portion of the game’s life, getting Jade Quarry to pop was an exercise in frustration).

Exploring is something to do. At the moment, I’m not bothering to complete the Tyria map because there is no incentive to do so unless I’m willing to also explore in a game mode that I find to be anti-fun. This leaves me with one less thing to do.

Shufflepants.9785:

Oh, okay. I see what you guys are saying. You guys don’t care about legendaries. You just want to know why you have to explore the whole map for map COMPLETION?
Hey guys, I just defeated 90% of a dungeon, can I please have the reward at the end without finishing it please? Hey guys, I’ve got 90% of the mats for my legendary, why doesn’t ANet just give me the rest?

WvW is not part of the world map. It is part of the mists. By your logic in order to get 100% we should have to go through every fractal because they are also in the mists. World exploration is about exploring the world. Not the Mists. We want to get 100% completion for completing 100% of the world map. No one is asking for hand outs, you however seem to lack the ability to comprehend that.

I know the OP stated that this isn’t about Legendary weapons, but unfortunately the issue of awarding map completion involves a part of the Legendary requirement. This solution addresses both issues.

Add a title for WvW map completion and one for PvE completion. The title for “Been There Done That” can remain as a reward for completing both PvE and WvW and the reward for this is the “Gift of Exploration”.

Gator.5729:

Now change the recipe for Legendary’s to require any combination of (2) of these gifts. You can use (1) of each of (2) of the same. At the same time reduce the award for PvE map completion to (1) “Gift of Exploration”.

This will effectively eliminate any PvE’er from being required to do WvW and vice versa.

No one wants this, To get a Legendary you should be required to be a “master” at all parts of the game excluding sPvP and tPvP. Because you need a Gift of Battle from WvW and a Gift of Exploration, Gift of Exploration should be PvE only. That way you need a Gift from PvE Exploration, from WvW Battles, and Gifts from Dungeons.

Chrispytoast.3698:

Gator.5729:

Now change the recipe for Legendary’s to require any combination of (2) of these gifts. You can use (1) of each of (2) of the same. At the same time reduce the award for PvE map completion to (1) “Gift of Exploration”.

This will effectively eliminate any PvE’er from being required to do WvW and vice versa.

No one wants this, To get a Legendary you should be required to be a “master” at all parts of the game excluding sPvP and tPvP. Because you need a Gift of Battle from WvW and a Gift of Exploration, Gift of Exploration should be PvE only. That way you need a Gift from PvE Exploration, from WvW Battles, and Gifts from Dungeons.

Yes, I know. I was editing it as you posted. It was just a thought, that I wanted to see what it looked like on paper. I meant to preview it and posted it by mistake. I’m at work and having computer issues.

Agree with OP. The idea of forcing PvP in an instanced area for “world” completion is silly. The world you complete should be the one you see when you open your map. WvW should not be a part of map completion. But it is.

I disagree with OP in all points, but still think anet should remove WvW from world completion to end those daily tiring, atrocious entitlement whining threads finally. I mean that as sincerly as condescending, yes.

Algreg.3629:

I disagree with OP in all points, but still think anet should remove WvW from world completion to end those daily tiring, atrocious entitlement whining threads finally. I mean that as sincerly as condescending, yes.

Never once in this topic have I said that ANet owes me anything for being a player or is this a whiney rant thread. I expressed my thoughts bout why WvW should not be included in World Complettion and that is all.

Algreg.3629:

I disagree with OP in all points, but still think anet should remove WvW from world completion to end those daily tiring, atrocious entitlement whining threads finally. I mean that as sincerly as condescending, yes.

Thanks, we knew we could count on your support.
I mean that as sincerly as condescending, yes