I post from a phone so please excuse any references to ducks or any other auto corrections.
ANET Plz. Why is the current leaderboard and the one before this based on games played? Sure the current one is more based on games won over played, but the ppl who play the most are obviously gunna win the most late night pugging farming solo Qrs lol so it again comes down to whoever plays the most. (Especially when losses don’t even hurt you, they just don’t help you much) It should be quality of wins not quantity like it use to be, but fix the old decay so you cant decay 50 spots after a month of not playing and jump back to top 10 after 1 game win or lose. That was more cosmetic decay than actual decay. Your rank could show 600 but would actually be 6. That was lame but at least that LB was based on quality of wins. Winning 5 matches in a row vs no names barely moved you compared to beating ppl in the top 25. Plz stop making the LBs a grindfest.
Should be Quality, not Quantity. Do we really need to prove who is “best” based on how many wins, or can we simply show who is best by having them beat those who sit at the top?
(edited by Quilja.9425)
Hi folks. As you know, the leaderboards reset on Friday, and a new algorithm was implemented that reflected: “a much stronger focus on wins, with less weight given to the sheer number of games played over a period of time.”
Immediately that sounded like great news to me. I thought the 2 or so individuals equipped with in-chair toiletry and an overhead feed dispenser tube would be finally be overcame as the holders of the Arenanet given titles, “leaders of PvP.”
So now it’s Sunday morning, and there’s been 2 sleeps since the leaderboard reset, I check it out to see how things are progressing.
So, the #1 guy on NA has logged 104 games at the time of this post. If you factor in the two, 8hr sleeps we’ve had, that means for every waking hour, they’ve completed 5 games that hour. Impressive. The guy has 61 points. 55 wins and 49 losses, and 52.88% win rate.
I look at the very close #2 guy on NA, and he has 59 points. 56 wins, and 26 losses, for a 68.29% win rate.
There is not a darn thing that the #1 guy has over the #2 guy, besides twice the amount of losses, of course.
How is this explainable by the language used to describe the new Algorithm? There is a disconnect between reality and expectations here. This is not a focus on win ratio (maximizing wins, minimizing losses) at all. This is still just a focus on farming wins.
After a little research, what was changed was the ability to gain points from losses was nerfed.
What needed to happen to give any credibility to these leaderboards are for losses to affect you negatively.
Having more points than you have wins? How does going 50 wins and 50 losses in a low MMR bracket result in 60 points? Shouldn’t it be slightly closer to um, 0 points than 60 points? (Not saying it should be zero gain, but just a very very very slow gain.) Am I the only one taking crazy pills here?
Since losing games still doesn’t matter at low MMR levels, it’s still simply a matter about how many wins can be farmed, and losses are disregarded. Look at the #1 and #2 players on NA leaderboards to see this is true.
At low MMR, any amount of defeats are never going to negatively affect accumulated points. If you repeatedly lose, sure, you’re not getting wins, but fast queue times allow you to do 4-5 per hour intead of 2.5-3 at high MMR. On a model that’s still 100% based on how many wins you can grind, now instead of how many wins and losses you can grind, it’s really not changed anything.
That brings me to touch on the experiences of a high MMR players.
- As a high MMR solo, or duo in Ranked queue, you’re a beacon that pulls all middle to high tier teams against you, magnifying the imbalances that matchmaking can’t account for, teamspeak/coordination, high performance comp. High MMR solo queue has a severely handicapped win rate. Personally, I find it unplayable due to the extreme pressure/frustration to shepherd players with widely fluctuating experience and effectiveness, against a coordinated foe.
- As a high MMR four queue, the 5th player is often going to be the equilivant of an assassin’s amulet 6/6/0/0/1 Staff Elementalist who’s taking their first baby steps of the game, creating frustration for this one player, and essentially a 4v5 scenario. It’s a handicap that is quite annoying, and will always be a clear decision for the group to simply picking up a competent 5th.
- This leads to the realization that medium to high MMR players can only attempt to achieve quality matches, with a competitive win rate representative of their skill, without severe handicaps, when they queue as a full group. This further limits group playtime to a couple hours a day, where a group of 5 competent players can be organized and continuously play. This creates a further disadvantage in win farming compared to low MMR solo queuers.
- High MMR gameplay in any size incurs a 6-10 Minute queue time. This drastically reduces leaderboard point generation. We’re talking like, low MMR players can fit 4-5 in a leaderboard update, and high MMR players can fit 2-3. It’s cut by around 33-40%. I can’t stress enough that this is an entirely unfair and imbalanced mechanic that nearly ruins the balance of who can farm more wins, which the current rankings are now based on.
If I could make anything clear from this wall of text on my matchmaking / leaderboard thoughts, it is that:
It’s wrong that rapid fire, low MMR, low quality, imbalanced matches, are the optimal way to progress towards mastering the leaderboards. It’s so completely backwards and nonsensical. High MMR players are punished in almost every way, unless they form a premade which is the other extreme, totally circumventing all balance handicaps, often facing non-premades with only a few good players, who have to carry ridiculously hard to win. Leaderboard progress at no point ever, will reflect the progress in mastering the game, or becoming stronger.
Forum Lord Chaith
Twitch.tv/chaithh
New Twitter: @chaithhh
Twitch.tv/chaithh
New Twitter: @chaithhh
(edited by Chaith.8256)
To understand the mechanics of the Illusions and Phantasms, you need to look at what it is that a Mesmer is doing while fighting others. They use deception and tricks on the mind, to make their target(s) think there is an illusion there, when in “reality”, there is not. A Phantasm is something that is seen, but not really there, it’s a phantom, they in turn, an Illusion. So you are targeting the weak minds of individual targets, making them see things that are not there. If your target is defeated, your mind control over this person is no longer there, thus, the illusion breaks. Likewise, if your target has a strong willpower, they will break your illusion(s) on their own.
Now one could question how these things can do AoE damage, when you are tormenting the mind of a single individual, but that can simply be because you spread the fear and deception to nearby enemies, through your manifestation of something that is not real, in the mind of one individual screaming out at non-existing terrors in the night. Who’s to say that through the thick smoke of illusions, the crazed individual you are controlling, are not only hurting him-/herself, but also nearby allies, as they flail about with their weapons, swinging at phantoms and ghosts.
This is also how you can think about what is going on when you shatter their illusions, wrecking their minds, confusing them at what has just occured, making them cry out in frustration, as a diversion to their ability to think straight temporarily, or through distorting their sight, making them miss their attacks on you.
And remember, we are are nowhere near as powerful as the Mesmers from the Mesmer Collective. Those guys can unveil incredibly tall towers, hidden in the middle of a lake (by other powerful, evil Mesmers), create Portals to their own desired location. Blink across gaps which you could not normally run to reach, make everyone think they are wearing clothes, even though they are practically naked, and so on forth. We are weak in comparison. Those guys can probably create illusions that manifest themselves far more dominantly in the world. We, the weaker Mesmers, can not.
Vella Absconditus | Human Mesmer
Seafarer’s Rest
Seafarer’s Rest
(edited by Absconditus.6804)
The problem is: as long as you don’t rep you can’t communicate with the guild.
If you can’t communicate you will most likely miss when members do something together, so you end up never doing something together with the other members.
A player that neither communicates, nor plays together with others of the guild is just as good for the guild as someone who isn’t in the guild at all. Since that player is (as seen from the guild) no more than a corpse you might as well kick him before he starts to rot.
Things are different of course if you still communicate via a 3rd-party program like Ts while not representing. As long as there’s communication, there’s also participation and companionship.
A guild imo is a place where you gather, meet with people you enjoy playing with, chat about the game, ANet, other games or even rl. If you ask for help and someone decides to help that’s fine, however don’t expect someone to help you just because you’re the new member and everyone wants you to stay. Also don’t ask for help on trivial tasks that shouldn’t require help (ie Map exploration).
I could go on with this for a long time, so let me just say this: trust can only be built by interacting with someone on a regular basis for a long time. Therefore the only guilds that don’t require representation (because they don’t require trust among the members) are bank-guilds and listing-guilds.
Decided to quickly make this guide as I found this is necessary with all the returning and new players!
Enjoy PvP’ers!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUQ6QYvAxQI
Denied | 5.9k PvP Games | PvP Rank: 236 | 8.6k hours | 9 Legendaries | Still Bad.
(edited by Terrorsquad.2349)
I’m calling out the Anet staff on what I’m about to write here. Any mod who wishes to dismiss it will simply have to keep on dismissing it because I am exercising my right as a dissatisfied customer, and voicing my opinion. I did pay $60 USD for it, I do reside in the state of California, and employees at ArenaNet/NCSoft fall under Federal jurisdiction by working in WA, therefore this post is protected by the 14th Amendment, Section 1. No censorship prz. I have scanned most of https://www.guildwars2.com/en/legal/ and found nothing preventing me from posting this.
People like you make me ashamed to be an American. You have no actual understanding of you own Bill of Rights.
As to the rest of your post, you do almost nothing other then compare this game to Aion and other games. Some of your comparison are that of what is generally considered some of the worst parts of those games.
Another thing I had to say about was communication across the map. Why is there no on-screen chat?
Shakes head.
Have you tried looking in the actual chat window?
Anyways, I’m sick of the imbalanced matchups. And I’m sick of mindless sheep zergs. I’m sure others were too when last year [Os] decided to purposefully tank our ranks so we wouldn’t have to match with a server we would have clearly lost to. It’s sad to me when the playerbase, as a consensus, can tell what is right for their server and the devs cannot. Instead of these “Adopt a dev” events, how about you play the game more often instead of where, when you actually play the game, it gets turned into an event.
That’s the spirit. I always admire a quitter. I mean, seriously. Why strive to beat a server in a tough match up.
If you actually think zergs are mindless, you know less about the game then you do your own rights and laws. In my experience, most of them are in TS, communicating together, with a command structure. Seeing as you made some irrational complaints about communication already, I would think you would be aware of this.
If you fast-forward to now, we have had RIDICULOUS matchups based on this “new” system.
Exactly what new system would that be?
And if anything of what I know about the matchups are true, its that they are purely based only on server population.
Apparently you knowledge is indeed limited in this area. It is based on your score compared to the score of other servers in your match up. As well as how you have done previously against those servers. The only thing population has to do with it, is the size of your army in the field to work for those points.
This is not only volatile, to me its pure laziness. Instead of incorporating a set of equations based purely on a player’s viability to contribute to 24/7 war on their home server, we get matched based on POPULATION.
I am not sure “laziness” means what you seem to think it does. This last part you have here doesn’t make any sense.
(edited by dancingmonkey.4902)
My personal laundry list of what overall game changes I’d like to see:
- Current sPvP size axed. Smallest format should be 8v8, I would prefer 15v15 on larger maps with multiple self-timed objectives so players need to handle various things going on simultaneously, though.
- WvW EotM axed. Sorry.
- WvW adds something like Darkness Falls in DAoC. A superior open PvE zone with 3 entrances, instances once per server-matchup. The realm currently holding SM can go in (entrances are near LA and right outside SM – not inside!). However, players don’t get kicked out once another realm gains access. This zone is intentionally a superior farm, leading the leading realm automatically losing players to the PvE zone, allowing the other realms to catch up.
- Less balance around smallscale numbers, more balance around concepts. Rather keep a class incomplete and reliant on allies than nerf good abilities into the ground to balance raw output. Examples: Portal, Haste as a whole, Ele Stances.
- More boss-events, and less reliable calendar schedule. Long event chains which can lead to a boss-fight, but the raw event chains alone need hours of pushing around the zone doing things. Branching paths too, losing some events sometimes leads to a wholly different boss.
- A few more organization-required bosses, including some in Darkness Falls, exposing a zerg to backstabbing by another realm taking over SM.
- More event changes. I feel every patch every 2 weeks should exchange a handful of events, allowing some to resolve permanently while adding others.
- Skill additions. Every 2 weeks, every patch, add 1-2 skills or traits. No, not one for each class, 1-2 total so it’s a realistic goal. I know, players will whine, but they’ll do that either way.
- More craftable armour designs, hugely pricey so they’re a long-term goal.
The strength of heart to face oneself has been made manifest. The persona Carighan has appeared.
I agree wholeheartedly with the aforementioned complaints, as they’re definitely not trivial in the slightest manner. I myself refuse to watch sporting events due to being able to see referees. When they show some restraint, as well as dignity, and enshroud themselves from my view I will be content. Being able to gaze upon them only negatively impacts the players involved. You don’t believe me? You’re wrong.
Their presence demonstrating a sense of vigilance and promoting order/fair play? I assume next you’ll tell me water is a liquid, or gravity increases as you approach the Earth’s core? Exactly, point proven.
I posted this on Reddit a few days ago when a person was asking about what you’d like to see in the next feature patch, but I think it works here too.
- Fixes to exploits and counters to siege trolling.
- Changes to the ppt system to address some things like encouraging smart play and lowering the issues with population differences during some timezones.
- Something to change the weekly matches that adds some degree of randomness to the mechanics of WvW and more variety beyond potentially getting matched up with a lower/higher rank server.
- Changes to WvW reward structure to make WvW more rewarding, give more ways for WvWers to actually show off their accomplishments and rank, and give more benefits to scouting or doing the other menial tasks.
- New WvW maps, or at least reskins for the maps and npcs to at least break the visual monotony.
- Reworks to EotM to make it less of a constant ktrain and actually encourage some competition.
- Reworks to EotM’s map so the sides are a little more even in terms of destructible walls/gates, bridge locations that can actually kill, point control benefits, and so on.
- New uses for WvW ability points, including a line that could be nearly infinite so you can actually do something with all the excess ability points in between new abilities being released.
- New types of siege and upgrades.
- A banker in each of the starting areas of WvW.
- More commander mechanics like tags that can be seen by the guild only and map interaction between commander and squad or vice versa.
- Making supply map specific to help with blobs just porting to unpressured bls for supply to come back and full repair or do a sudden mass golem rush.
- Changing the rally mechanic so a zerg doesn’t just get up from tagging a random Moa or low level ungeared player that is following just to troll.
- Changes to the Skritt and Centaur areas in the bls to make them something more than just part of map completion.
- More uses for badges of honor, like possibly the ability to buy a WvW only commander tag to help encourage more people to try their luck with commanding.
- Changes to camp, tower, and keep claiming so up to 4 different guilds can claim one structure to use their guild buffs on and claims can be overwritten if a guild has more buffs active for longer than the guild that currently has it claimed.
- The ability to display your actual character name to enemies if you want it shown.
Ultimately though, I think the problem with sustaining WvW populations comes down to three big things. One, lack of variety and wildcard elements each week to entertain people and make communities think about how they are going to fight that week. Two, inadequate loot that forces people to leave WvW so they can get the stuff they need to be more effective in it or to just keep themselves from going in the red in terms of Gold. And three, lack of getting that sense of prestige with titles that are mostly INSANELY time consuming to get or ranks that you can only really be showcase to enemy servers when you are in WvW against them.
Okay everybody, I think this discussion has run its course. I appreciate all the feedback, and as I said earlier, this isn’t something we’re looking to implement anymore. I think the thing everybody should take away from this is that you can’t unilaterally judge the validity of a person’s opinion on factors external to the content of their comments.
Well, there are alot o rhetoric games going on in this forum. “I quit long ago” is only one of those. Another one is “blabla only a minority is posting on the forum” aka your opinion doesn’t matter everyone else is happy. Many of those sentences add nothing usefull to a discussion but it’s simply impossible to get rid off all those.
We drink to nostalgia, to the days come and gone
For the greatest Aggression that they have just done
We’ll drive out this Tricksters from this game that we love
With our blood and not our wallets we will take back our Home
Down with the GemStore! The killer of games!
On the day of your death we will drink and we’ll sing
We’re the children of Tyria, and we fight all our lives
And when the Underworld beckons everyone of us dies
But this land is ours and we’ll see it wiped clean
Of the scourge that has sullied our hopes and our dreams
Down with the GemStore! The killer of games!
On the day you revealed your true intention
We raised with pitchforks, and torches of our own
The Bashing yore missed, has just begun
It’s no dragon this time, but it is something far worse
A scourge that has sullied the last of our hopes
We drink to nostalgia, for lost merrier times
When the coming of Mad King meant fun and not This
When the player was happier
When we trusted your Team
When you cared about us
When you loved it too.
:(
Ok, guys. Some of you are unhappy about this change, I can see that. BUT… quite honestly, most of you are sort of (I hate to use the word) ranting (sorry!) instead of offering suggestions.
I assure you, the team leader told me not 15 minutes ago, they will listen to suggestions.
- Does that mean you get everything you want? Probably not.
- Does that mean you should suggest something? Yes, of course! Because they’re expecting player input.
So you want lower increments? Think it through and present a suggestion! You want XYZ in the interface? Post that idea. You would rather see something else? Post what you think about that other thing.
Thanks for your cool head, Gaile. I’ll admit I came in here ready to rant. The change is offensive because it pigeonholes us into buying large amounts of gems even if we don’t need or want – or can’t afford – that many.
I am truly trying to be constructive here, so I want to make clear, hopefully without ranting, that reducing the customer’s flexibility and functionality, pigeonholing their choices, is a poor way to streamline. In this case, it makes more clicks (such as the nine clicks for 375 gold example given earlier), and also reduces our ability to get what we want (such as buying odd or small numbers of gems to make a nice rounded number to buy a particular item without having leftover gems that we can’t use).
Putting 400 gems as the smallest possible amount to purchase was the most egregious error in judgement.
- Keeping the same interface, simply make the increments smaller at the beginning and wider apart: (1?), 10, 100, (250?) 400, 2000, would solve the majority of the problem.
- Someone suggested being able to put in how many we want to BUY instead of how much we want to SPEND [on a sliding basis, I mean, not just with buttons as seen currently]. That, to me, is the best idea of all. It clarifies the relative costs of things better than the current system, and allows us to choose how many we want.
Also important in this discussion:
- Paying attention to the synergy between item prices and purchasable items. It’s really aggravating when things don’t come out to be multiples of each other. Why can’t the 35-gem items be 25 gems, 118 gem items (?!!!) go to 100 or 125? If some items are 1000 gems, why not offer a 1000 gem option in the cash part of the store? Why make outfits cost 700 gems but only sell gems in 800 gem chunks?
I know that from a financial standpoint, of course that’s going to be profitable for YOU, but at the consumer end, it’s not profitable for me…. and that makes the consumer unhappy. It’s aggravating to have to plan out my purchases so that I can end up without weird numbers of unspent gems for months between gem store purchases, or without having to convert some of the gems to gold at a loss, or what have you.
I guarantee, if you made $10 buy 1000 gems and adjusted your item prices to be easy multiples, you’d have people so much more willing to spend money. Outfits for 500 gems. Or if you must, 1000 gems for the first month and 500 gems thereafter (with a big red notice on the buy page, “1000 gems for this new release item; price goes down in XX days”)
- Paying attention to the synergy between the needs and desires of noobs and vets. And I use the term “noobs” advisedly, because the level of simplicity required to cater to them is mindboggling. Clarity and simplicity in design are nice (the new design of the exchange is attractive, btw), but so many times lately you guys have been trading away convenience and reward (in the sense of getting what we want or need) in order to gain that clarity and simplicity.
Economically, being required to buy at least 400 gems at a time is not good for the customer, especially when considering that synergy I just mentioned previously. We know it’s good for you and it’s not good for us. We’re not ignorant of math. And that makes this situation frustrating.
Thanks for listening.
(edited by Adelas.6598)
Great start guys! There are a lot of good ideas already.
Here is a high level summary (not a proposal) of what is currently being discussed:
- Some sort of point scaling based on population or prime time hours
- Break the day into scoring periods. The match is decided on the scoring periods not PPT.
- Consider score for taking objectives either in conjunction with or in place of PPT
- Add score for kills
- Boost the outnumbered buff (in a number of ways)
- Consider adjusting score based on placement
- Adjust score of objectives based on upgrade level
- Create special objectives/achievements that occur when you are behind that give you a special reward for completing them
Someone had a question on this one from Phys that I wanted to answer:
- Break the day into scoring periods. The match is decided on the scoring periods not PPT.
Doing this would greatly buffer runaway score. If it is off hours and one world can cap most everything because of greater coverage they still just win the scoring period rather than rack up triple score all night. It means off hours play time still has value without creating blow outs. In conjunction with some of the other suggestions it has potential. I thought that was a pretty interesting suggestion from Phys.
Lots of great ideas guys, thanks for getting this rolling!
John
Mimic copies 12 boons. How is that possible when there are only 9 boons in the game?
“Kentigem”-chief. Born cycle of Dusk. Wyld Hunt:
Learn as much mending and medical info as possible so that it can be added to the Dream.
Become the first Chief of Mending and guide the newly awaken as well as those who want to learn.
Learn as much mending and medical info as possible so that it can be added to the Dream.
Become the first Chief of Mending and guide the newly awaken as well as those who want to learn.
Thanks for the continued discussion. At this point, I’d like to shelve the exhaustion idea. I completely agree with many of you that it has hit a point of being overly complicated especially for the size of the problem. Also I feel it will only address a few tactics that trolls employ. We did get a lot of great discussion and spin off ideas out of it though.
Zui had an interesting thought that the system could detect a pattern of behavior rather than specific instances of bad behavior but others brought up real fears that no system should be given to players on any scale that that has the potential of being abused or produce false positives.
Pandaman had some interesting ideas about siege slowly returning to their original orientations. I think maybe it could return to the orientation that the owner last set it at. Also some good thoughts about interact precedence.
A couple of ideas that seem to have consensus are some sort of labeling or filtering of siege interacts and reducing the footprint of build sites.
Dismantling siege seemed to have a lot of support but there didn’t seem to be good agreement on who can dismantle whose siege and a lot of defensive players brought up concerns about the defenses they build on objectives and fears that it might get dismantled by others who didn’t see the defensive potential of it.
I’m going to ponder what we discussed here and chat with the team about it. Thanks again for a great discussion!
John
I’m not usually one to complain on forum but this is too much.
I can accept being chain killed by campers a few times but this has been going on for literally weeks now.
I’m doing ok on 1v1 but they always zerg me, chaining interrupts as soon as I respawn leaving me no chance of survival whatsoever. My playtime came down to only a couple of seconds every 2 minutes or so.
Please ANET do something to stop the abuse.
Offenders can easily be identified to the 500+ trunks of cypress they are carrying.
Sincerely,
Veteran Risen Subjugator
Pagga’s Waypoint
I just revisted parts of Metrica province; the starter area for the Asura. In my opinion, this was the best zone in all the game for silly humor, great character voicing, and zone cohesiveness as far as lore goes.
But oh my goodness, if this current zone had been the one I visited two years ago when I bought the game, I’m not sure I would have fallen in love with GW2 they way I did.
Old Metrica, there was a heart where you got to wear a golem suit, and do golem suit things. Now, the golem follows you around, you press F, and then tell the suit it’s a good boy. WTF?
The underwater inquest buildings are free of inquest, leaving empty buildings moldering down there like an artifact of fun.
Golem chess is gone.
I just don’t understand why on earth you would remove content that was fun, was lore specific, and fit so beautifully with the Asura story.
I said after the patch, I was going to level a new character, with all the trait handicaps, and level gate handicaps inherent in the new system, so that I could accurately critique the experience that new players would have. And I’ve done so, slowly but surely, heart by heart, POI by POI, vista by vista.
And while I despise not being able to actually play around with my character because she has no real access to traits despite being lvl 34, and still hasn’t unlocked the 9 and 10 skills, I think the thing I’m the most disappointed about is the removal of all the silly and fun content at the starter zones.
I just fail to understand why you would do that, but I’m beginning to find the whole process of leveling to be mechanical and disappointing, and I’m not sure I’ll last long enough to actually get an elite skill or traits.
Come on guys, there was no reason to take the fun out of the game.
Cruella LaDucki: Have corpses, will travel
Torwynd Trueheart: Here I come to save the day!
NSP – Quak Resident Duchess L’Orange
Torwynd Trueheart: Here I come to save the day!
NSP – Quak Resident Duchess L’Orange
Just a thought.
Siege has a timer on it. Of which in some cases has been frustrating of defenders that have the thankless job of spending their play time sitting in a keep “ticking” siege. Those of you that do that, thank you!
what if.
At the time that Siege is despawned say.. 50 to 75 percent (or 100?? ) of the supply used to create said siege returns to the nearest supply drop. Such as if you created it in a Keep. it despawns because you missed the tick, the supply returns to the keep stockpile. If for whatever reason you lost the fort. and the opposing faction didn’t break the stuff it returns to the nearest camp you control.
What does that accomplish?
pointless siege will only be pointless for a short time. before the supply is returned to usable.
does it actually resolve a siege troll issue? I don’t think so. but it will at least offer some respite for the lost supply?
(( just a though might be worth discussing. i am short on time so i apologise if it does not make any sense? ))
Well, I was’nt aware there were siege troll…
Since the problem come from, if I understand well, alone player spamming siege ; give power and priority to the squad :
- Disable area siege cap for non finished siege (I was’nt aware there was one actually)
- A player joining a squad loose his ability to deploy siege (why he would do that, if he join a commander)
- A player in a squad build as a priority a siege from his commander.
That’s mean a commander will lead thanks to the mechanics of the game and not only on the goodwill of other player, and thus avoid the troll more efficiently. In addition a commander should be able to force player in his squad to build ONLY his siege by checking a box or something.
But what if a second commander come in and refuse to un-tag even if he don’t have a squad ?
-First, as i said earlier, only his squad is able to build as a priority the siege of his commander, but you can add a requirement by saying that only a squad of 10+ people can do that. So even if player join the wrong squad, he have a chance to build the good siege.
OR
-When two contesting commander are close of each other, they should be able to spawn a box where nearby player vote for the one they want to follow. Like in democracy, if 50%+ of player choose commander one, every voting player join the squad of the winner while he gain a buff like “commander adrenaline” or something, preventing any other constestant to be a commander near him for a span of, let’s say, 30 minutes.
“Commander Adrenaline : you have been chosen to be the leader of your army, any commander tag in a range of 2500 around you disappear on the map for squadless player, you can disable this buff by cliking here”
You can also add build area, for example : only ram can be built in less than 500 unit of doors…
With all these new mechanics, a player can always troll others by spamming siege everywhere but player in squad will basically ignore it. And since roamers don’t follow commander nor build siege to troll everyone, and players following a commander are in his squad, problem solved. I guess…
Wait, I’m confused. What part of the game is this post about: PvE, PvP or WvWvW?
Players can’t kill other player in PvE, so that’s out.
In PvP there’s a spawn where the enemies can’t enter -> killing at spawn is impossible.
In WvWvW you can’t enter the enemie spawn either because of legendary defenders. Also the spawn has multiple exits, so camping them all requires quite the manpower.And isn’t zerging single players or smaller groups a legitimate tactic? Why would A-Net do anything against that? And what does this have to do with camping corpses? Is there some secret way of standing up again after being defeatet that I don’t know about? Except of Revival-Orbs, which are way too expensive for repeated use.
The light fades.
I’ve heard many reason why people have quit, but it being “hard” has never been among them to very much extent.
The people for whom “this game wasn’t for them” ..they complained about the lack of trinity (or at least meaningful non-dps roles) in combat. They complained about the lack of linear questing so they “didn’t know what to do”. If they stuck around to max level, they complained about “no endgame”.
The leveling experience has never been perfect. The #1 reason for that is it was (and still is) it’s too easy to end up under-leveled for content because nothing gives enough exp. The Personal Story would have been fine if it alone gave enough exp to keep up with itself. If players could progress to each step of the story without levels being an issue, that already had plenty of “direction”. Then the hearts, events, etc were just bonus.
But instead when you feel you’re ready to check out the next area or story instance (and you don’t know to “cheat” by going to a different starter zone) ..you find yourself still too weak and have to grind more, not for fun, but for power needed just to proceed. It never was, and still isn’t, a consistent leveling experience. Level-gating and forcing us to grind does NOT fix this. Giving more exp would though. Or even better, just do away with levels all together. But I guess Anet is too afraid to depart much from"tradition" (unless it’s their own).
That has nothing to do with players being unable to grasp the concept of downed, dodge, skill points, more than 2 skills, etc. With this update, they have NOT addressed what has always been the issue with leveling, and instead “fixed” other things that weren’t really broken.
And while they thought they were fixing things, that was resources and dev time that COULD HAVE been going to content and features people actually wanted. Anet already has shamelessly pandered much more than they should have to the wow-crowd. But they weren’t ready to turn GW2 into a 100% wow clone, so those players left. Some before max level, some after. But you know what? Look at all the other wow clones. People still leave. They always leave because if wow is what they really want, they already have it. Anet made several huge mistakes trying to acquire that playerbase rather than playing to their strengths ..the philosophies they made their name on in the first place (very low level / gear cap, massive amounts of actual permanent content / story, more guild features, etc).
This game had incredible potential to be so much better, but they’ve spent the past 2yrs squandering that. It does still have a ton going for it. It really does have a lot of great features and it amazes me when new games come out that still do things the “old way”. I believe Anet should get credit where credit is due.
BUT they’ve made multiple decisions contrary to that also. Rather than forging ahead and continuing to be trend-setters, they have bent over backwards trying to appease a certain type of player who simply isn’t going to be won-over, at least not long term. In addition to that, they’ve put out embarrassingly little content in all this time. The world and the things we can do in it has barely been expanded at all since release. And because of all this, they have harmed their standing with a lot of players who actually did want to stay with them long term.
Guild: Everlasting Sacred Path [ESP]
Server: Tarnished Coast
Server: Tarnished Coast
I don’t at all hate the new season of the LW, and I actually like some of the game system changes that have taken place lately, but the pace of content releases is still egregiously slow and that is certainly one of the biggest reasons this game has hemorrhaged players.
In 2 years there has been 0 new weapon types, 0 new classes, 0 new races, 0 new game modes (unless you count SAB), very few new skills, 1.5ish zone maps, 1 large dungeon, a bunch of paid cosmetics, and some temp content.
I know there’s been a lot of miscellaneous stuff, mostly minor and bundled with the LW, but still – that’s pathetic. That’s significantly less new content than most totally free MMOs that are less successful than GW2 see in the same time period.
What is going on here, exactly? The #1 way you attract and retain players is by generating hype. The #1 way to generate hype is to talk about your plans in advance, and to release major content updates frequently. Most people don’t care as much about story as they do about having new stuff to play around with. This game desperately needs an expansion or to have much bigger content patches than it has been getting, pronto. The 2nd most desperate thing it needs is more consistent interaction between designers and players.
(edited by Einlanzer.1627)
Removing content is the new adding content, yo.
Language is a virus from outer space.
William S. Burroughs
William S. Burroughs
Let me first quickly take the opportunity to say that I think most of this update is marvelous. The Trading Post is so much more well-oiled now and I found it genuinely enjoyable to use.
The addition of miniatures to the wardrobe was, at least in theory, great. I often got annoyed with myself for never remembering to lay mine out. I haven’t seen to what extent the latest patch has fixed the mini-hiding issue (considering megaservers).
The update to the crafting UI has made such a difference. Just last night I tackled the last 80-odd levels of Chef to hit 400, and I was surprised by how much of a difference nesting recipes made. Kudos!
The Personal Story is rather a shambles, though, and the NPE is at best unrefined. I can respect the intentions of the NPE, but I think it’s gone a little too far – admittedly I can’t look from the perspective of a new player, I never really had that viewpoint even when I was new. Still, I’ve thought calmly and rationally about it, and I believe it can fit with some adjustments.
This is based on having leveled a new character to 10 in the new system, and on reading forum posts (but taking everything with a grain of salt – way too much rumour and hyperbole going around…).
This is just my opinion, one of many, but the changes that I believe need to happen, roughly in order of importance, are:
- Undo the changes to the end of the Personal Story’s narrative. I considered the story to be the strong point of the Guild Wars series, but cutting parts out and switching others around in my opinions shows rather a disregard for that, and leaves the end of the Personal Story, well, a tangled mess. So, most important adjustment right there!
- Spread out the Personal Story a little so that we can access it a bit earlier, perhaps around level 5, and give back the option of accessing it early. Player choice and diversity of activities is what makes the game great. More on this below.
- Make profession mechanics available sooner. Seriously, some (if not all!) of those are kitten important!
- Put the bundle items and underwater combat back into the early game. I just don’t see the sense in removing them when they were delivered in an intuitive way which was just fine for teaching new players about them, and they made renown hearts much more interesting.
- Find some system which leaves the first three weapon skills accessible during the tutorial. They’re important to give new players a sense of agency.
As I say, I’ve been thinking long and hard about it, and I think the Personal Story issue (second bullet) is at the heart of why so many players consider the new leveling experience boring. It still takes about an hour to reach level 10, and until then you only have one real option to play.
I also believe that the Personal Story is a large part of what hooks new players, so it would help player retention to have it available to them quickly. Gating it for about 5 levels would be fine, in my opinion – that’s roughly equivalent to how you used to have to do a renown heart first. It gives the player a chance to understand that the Personal Story isn’t the only mechanic of the game. I just think that level 10 is too late.
As for making it accessible when the player is under-leveled, I don’t think this would impact the experience much for new players as long as the content guide didn’t point them to it. A lot of older players, myself included, like to try to get through the story early as a challenge, and it can be especially useful to offset the advantage of having a large group of friends. Like I said above, player choice is a very big part of this game, which is why I think this option needs to return.
I hope you will take this into consideration, ArenaNet. I fear my words carry little weight, as I have no real game design experience, but after giving it a lot of thought this seems to me the best way to adapt the current system.
The vote is kinda bias imho, should just be “Do you like this new changes? Yes/No/Not apply”. Breaking down the not-like into so many categories while like in just one is an attempt to divert the Nah votes.
Btw. I voted “not apply” option, since the trait update already kill my desire to make new alts, this update really just reinforce it.
Yes the vote is pretty well worded to divert people from the dislike vote. Pretty sneaky.
Nothing sneaky about it. It’s simply that so many people seem to HATE this change and others might not feel as strongly.
The truth is if peoiple are voting it would be okay with some changes, they’re probably closer to liking it than not, because I gave them that option.
I could have put I like it but it would be better. I didn’t, to make it fairer.
The bottom line is it’s not as dire as some are painting it, period.
Than word it,
Like
Dislike
N/A
Not sure yetthe way it’s worded now is so vague. I could put do you think congress is ran well? yes/no/it could with changes, well duh dislike and changes are nearly the samething. That’s why people dislike it.
well, here is the 2 vote option. I think people generally dislike it, but dont’ make it too much a deal with it.
And quite honestly, there are mainly only 2 complaint about it. Utility getting lock, and personal story getting lock. The other are more minor complaint about other things getting lock.
So any slight adjustment people’ll be happy.
(4) The dumbing down of low-level content is sad. I liked carrying things, pouring buckets of water on crops and fires, whipping cattle, and cleaning up scraps and tools. Active participation in the happenings of the world is more fulfilling and immersive than what the changes offer.
(6) The compass is ridiculous. Not only does it sometimes give you bad guidance, but a big selling point for GW2, offered (I guarantee) by many of the players who now support this compass nonsense, is that the game lacked aspects of linear hand-holding of other games. It’s a visual distraction that I don’t need anyway, so at least let me turn it off.
Yes to #4 and #6 you can turn it off under options. I think someone mentioned it on the first page but that was one of the first things I did upon re-rolling another new toon today.
I thought removing all the pickup items was silly but going back to Metrica hit harder then Queensdale. It is faster I will agree with that now. As long as you ignore all mobs that aren’t attached to a heart or event you will level like crazy. But seeing all the rc golems and tool chests turned off made me sad. Killing sparks charges you now instead of picking up orbs and that was kind of fun. But I miss the underwater heart it’s just an abandoned area now. That one was more then a bit of fun and I always hit it up then waited for the shark to spawn. I know the heart is still there and just moved to the toad village but still it doesn’t have the same charm.
There’s good and bad for now I think I will reserve any further judgement for next weeks patch.