Guild Wars 2

Hi All,

Its so upsetting to think there is so much that is missing compared to GW1.

Guild Halls and GvG
Where the hell are these? Someone mentioned there coming but this isn’t even Guild Wars without them. Talk about a huge muck up not putting these in. Any admin/dev wish to comment?

Dungeons
More more more, and there not something that needs to be taken lightly. This game recieved such great press until a month or so after release and people then all started mentioning the lack of End Game. While PvP is a great end-game, I am a avid PvPer myself – its not even all there. GvG, HoH, All the things at worked in GW1 need to be in GW2, just bigger better and improved. WvW is lovely, but what about the RP’ers?

While I appreciate its a big task to make more and more dungeons, they are a effective way of improving end game dramatically.

• Skills, Armor and Everything around it*
  More needed of all. Lacking hugely.

Town based missions
These were brilliant in GW1. Thats all were missing quest wise now.
We have Dynamic Events – Brilliant
We have the Hearts – Brilliant
We have the Vistas – Brilliant
We have exploration – Brilliant
We have skill points – Brilliant
We have the personal story – Brilliant
NOW – one more thing will complete it.

Advantages of making town based missions like GW1?
1- It could be in the same map just instances A.K.A – no more map building
2- Easily add a LFG section for each towns instance
3- More storyline, more effect on world, more to play for
4- Expansion on huge content

I understand the games still new and early, but its taking a while for things to get in place with no major updates set in place. I hate to compare but Blizzard, and even ArenaNet in GW1 managed to update at huge regularity, and while I understand GW1 wasnt as big or dynamic or even new. It grew faster and faster daily.

AND THE BEST SUGGESTION?
Constant heads up on what developers are working on.
We can know what to expect, a idea of whats coming, all the time, every time.

Last log-in feature is needed even before guild housing and, imo, an in-game lfg.

Guilds need to know which members are active and members need to have consequences for not being active.

Vorch.2985:

Guilds need to know which members are active and members need to have consequences for not being active.

Now, I think this is the reason there isn’t last login feature, people would use it with the same hostility as demonstrated here.

Fred Fargone.3127:

Vorch.2985:

Guilds need to know which members are active and members need to have consequences for not being active.

Now, I think this is the reason there isn’t last login feature, people would use it with the same hostility as demonstrated here.

Hostility??? What did I say that was hostile?

If someone wants to go on vacation, they usually let their guild leader or officer know.

If a person decides to go away for months and months, they are no longer in the guild and are taking up space that potential members could have.

Let the guild officers what they decide is an active member (log-in every 3 days, week, two weeks, etc.) But give them that tool. It was in GW1, it’s in MOST MMOs, and it’s really not that controversial to know who is still playing in your guild.

Vorch.2985:

Fred Fargone.3127:

Vorch.2985:

Guilds need to know which members are active and members need to have consequences for not being active.

Now, I think this is the reason there isn’t last login feature, people would use it with the same hostility as demonstrated here.

Hostility??? What did I say that was hostile?

If someone wants to go on vacation, they usually let their guild leader or officer know.

If a person decides to go away for months and months, they are no longer in the guild and are taking up space that potential members could have.

Let the guild officers what they decide is an active member (log-in every 3 days, week, two weeks, etc.) But give them that tool. It was in GW1, it’s in MOST MMOs, and it’s really not that controversial to know who is still playing in your guild.

The way I see it ANet wants guilds to be places to have fun. But unfortunately there are people who want to run guilds as corporations. “You’re not contributing enough so get out” and such. (Or the way you said it “members need to have consequences for not being active” which is quite hostile way of putting it.) Adding timecards is really just a corporation thing. It would work if people didn’t try to hoard as many members as possible, in which case it wouldn’t even be needed.

Guild stops being fun if you need to worry about logging in every 3 days (or getting the boot)

Fred Fargone.3127:

The way I see it ANet wants guilds to be places to have fun. But unfortunately there are people who want to run guilds as corporations. “You’re not contributing enough so get out” and such. (Or the way you said it “members need to have consequences for not being active” which is quite hostile way of putting it.) Adding timecards is really just a corporation thing. It would work if people didn’t try to hoard as many members as possible, in which case it wouldn’t even be needed.

Guild stops being fun if you need to worry about logging in every 3 days (or getting the boot)

This feature’s isn’t just useful for hostile reasons. If somebody hasn’t logged on in quite a while, it could be an indicator that something is wrong. Example: as an officer or leader you see that a member hasn’t logged in for a month. You can ask in guild chat if anybody’s heard from them or know where they are. Another member might be able to answer—perhaps they’re a friend in real life—and say that they are on vacation with family or something.

Whether you believe that guilds should be run with more or less structure or severity is relative. It’s an option for those running the guild to exercise; your option is to choose to be a part of that guild or not.

Neksis Syxx.6983:

Fred Fargone.3127:

The way I see it ANet wants guilds to be places to have fun. But unfortunately there are people who want to run guilds as corporations. “You’re not contributing enough so get out” and such. (Or the way you said it “members need to have consequences for not being active” which is quite hostile way of putting it.) Adding timecards is really just a corporation thing. It would work if people didn’t try to hoard as many members as possible, in which case it wouldn’t even be needed.

Guild stops being fun if you need to worry about logging in every 3 days (or getting the boot)

This feature’s isn’t just useful for hostile reasons. If somebody hasn’t logged on in quite a while, it could be an indicator that something is wrong. Example: as an officer or leader you see that a member hasn’t logged in for a month. You can ask in guild chat if anybody’s heard from them or know where they are. Another member might be able to answer—perhaps they’re a friend in real life—and say that they are on vacation with family or something.

Whether you believe that guilds should be run with more or less structure or severity is relative. It’s an option for those running the guild to exercise; your option is to choose to be a part of that guild or not.

The problem isn’t that you couldn’t also do good with the feature, the problem is that you can also do bad with the feature. And as you stated yourself, people have friends they join guilds with. When they join, they might not know about some 3 day rule (thats pretty strict, but was pointed out by another poster) and you just might be slightly less active than your friends, who also enjoy the guild you’re in.
Nobody wants to leave their friends nor be the guy ruining the party by asking others to go into the night in search of another club to hang around at, just because the music is slightly too loud for them.

Besides, if you just want to prune guys who are inactive for months, put them on some droplist when their info goes away. When they log in and see they’re on the inactivity list, they’ll know what is going on and will probably send you ingame mail or something to fix things. If they don’t, they’re inactive. Then, after they’ve been on the list for a good while, kick them out. Simple as that.
Having easier tools to do this would promote doing it for guilds that aren’t in desperate need for space, (as in, just kicking because of elitism) while there exists methods for guilds that for some reason are at max capacity.

Teirano.5736:

AND THE BEST SUGGESTION?
Constant heads up on what developers are working on.
We can know what to expect, a idea of whats coming, all the time, every time.

I think you forgot to add: “And whine about it?”

I have to agree that a Last time logged in feature is needed. And maybe even a last time represented feature. The being able to join multiple guilds thing is the worst thing I’ve ever seen in a MMO. Especially for casual guilds. My guild was able to get about 50+ members in the first few weeks without really looking, but 90% of them never represented us and so it was like only having 10 people not 60. I proceeded to kick out those that I knew hadn’t represented us since joining and that did knock us down to around 15 people.

Guilds that are at their limit cap, that are especially invested in WvW…need ACTIVE memberships. If you aren’t highly active then yes you need to be booted, join a more casual guild.

I am in a casual guild, no expectations on time. If you want to play at the highest levels though (really that only exists in WvW right now as spvp has no ensuring way of being on the right team…no tournaments don’t count) you need to know who is contributing and who is wasting space that a contributing member could be filling.

Runiir.6425:

Guilds that are at their limit cap, that are especially invested in WvW…need ACTIVE memberships. If you aren’t highly active then yes you need to be booted, join a more casual guild.

I am in a casual guild, no expectations on time. If you want to play at the highest levels though (really that only exists in WvW right now as spvp has no ensuring way of being on the right team…no tournaments don’t count) you need to know who is contributing and who is wasting space that a contributing member could be filling.

You know, I’d actually like to argue that large WvW guilds are bad for WvW. If people were spread out evenly in smaller WvW guilds, well, yeah, the overall strategy might take a small hit at first… Wait, what overall strategy? People just run in zergs anyways. But there would be slightly smaller, more efficient zergs running around, spreading more evenly accross the WvW maps. Well, just my theory, but anyways.
The main problem with large guilds is that when a guild lead decides to migrate to another server, they efficiently steal the servers, which they migrate from, active WvW population. Or how about when the large WvW guilds decide to have a day off… Last time that happened (A couple of weeks ago), that was rather devastating for our servers WvW effort (in T1). And I don’t know about others, but I stopped playing WvW that day. (I’ll return, eventually, WvW is fun and I enjoy it. Alot.) That one, multi guild guild had hoarded a large portition of our servers WvW population, which wouldn’t be so bad if they just didn’t go like. “Hey guys, lets all take a break”. Of course not everyone in that guild did, but we still lost a good amount of active WvWers due to that break, for the duration of that break.
Well, the above is greatly influenced by my personal opinion, as you can see. As in, I’m not claiming it’s all facts that is happening for every server, it’s just something I experienced on mine.

Fred, what tier WvW do you play in?
The upper branches have 2-3 “zergs” on every map, typically with members of the larger guilds playing sentry duty to call out siege with smaller groups roaming to take/flip the camps.

The servers running one giant zerg end up losing more than they can take.

Fred Fargone.3127:

that was rather devastating for our servers WvW effort (in T1).

Runiir.6425:

Fred, what tier WvW do you play in?
The upper branches have 2-3 “zergs” on every map, typically with members of the larger guilds playing sentry duty to call out siege with smaller groups roaming to take/flip the camps.

The servers running one giant zerg end up losing more than they can take.

Well, yeah, I know I was a bit ramblish and incoherrent while writing that. (Still am) so I understand if you didn’t pay that much attention. I know I wouldn’t.

And yeah, we aren’t running only one big giant zerg, we are just running mainly one big giant zerg. There are people on sentry duty, there are occasionally people flipping supplycamps… but for the most of the time, I just see one big giant zerg. It’d be better if we had two zergs of 20 people rather than one zerg of 40 people, but that just doesn’t really happen as we only have one big, giant, guild dominating our WvW plans… Which means we got 5 fanboys telling everyone else to shut up when they suggest something as radical as dividing people to cap two towers at the same time. Well, again, just my personal opinion & experience.

Teirano.5736:

Hi All,

AND THE BEST SUGGESTION?
Constant heads up on what developers are working on.
We can know what to expect, a idea of whats coming, all the time, every time.

As I remember they wrote about this, and I understand why do not post about what they are working on! Other big game developing companies was “stealing” the ideas GW2 was pioneer on. By not talking about it publicly Anet can prevent other companies to steal their ideas before they implement and publish it!

Fred Fargone.3127:

Fred Fargone.3127:

that was rather devastating for our servers WvW effort (in T1).

Runiir.6425:

Fred, what tier WvW do you play in?
The upper branches have 2-3 “zergs” on every map, typically with members of the larger guilds playing sentry duty to call out siege with smaller groups roaming to take/flip the camps.

The servers running one giant zerg end up losing more than they can take.

Well, yeah, I know I was a bit ramblish and incoherrent while writing that. (Still am) so I understand if you didn’t pay that much attention. I know I wouldn’t.

And yeah, we aren’t running only one big giant zerg, we are just running mainly one big giant zerg. There are people on sentry duty, there are occasionally people flipping supplycamps… but for the most of the time, I just see one big giant zerg. It’d be better if we had two zergs of 20 people rather than one zerg of 40 people, but that just doesn’t really happen as we only have one big, giant, guild dominating our WvW plans… Which means we got 5 fanboys telling everyone else to shut up when they suggest something as radical as dividing people to cap two towers at the same time. Well, again, just my personal opinion & experience.

That just sounds…blah. I’m on TC, we split our zerg up and attack multiple targets rather than traveling in a single hodge podge.

Geeze…people yelling against splitting up? It makes perfect logical sense. Heck I’ve led a few false attacks that even include siege, grab 10 people to build a catapult and slowly start knocking on a wall, being very obvious and lure the zerg to you, call out when you have their attention and watch as 2 other towers get flipped. Sure…me and those with me are guarenteed to die horribly, but getting 2 for 1 like that is always perfect. Keep a few people there (5 on each) to look for the zerg backlash while my group gets back to a wp to get back wherever we are needed.

Just with our night shift had better coverage…we lose a LOT at the peak asian hours.

That is one thing I forget, how different the servers work. Need to remember that lil tidbit when discussing WvW, thank you for that.

Wait, was this original post about WvW tactics? I forgot.

In reply—and respect—to the Original Poster:

Guild Halls: I remember reading somewhere that ArenaNet plans on implementing guild halls but it’s on a back, back, back burner.

GvG: With a name like Guild Wars, why would they want to do something like that??

Dungeons I agree. More are needed. I wouldn’t worry though, more will almost definitely come.

Town Based Missions These, in a way, have already been implemented via personal story instances (many take place in ones home city). While I am always a proponent of more content, I’m not sure how well these would go; overflow is bad enough already.

Heads up on developer’s projects Check out http://www.guildwars2guru.com/. They often conduct interviews with developers and it’s a good way to ‘sniff the air’ at what’s planned for GW2.