Guild Wars 2

Bald headed is unisex, go with it. It even fits elonian lore.

Do you really want nothing over something? :/

You will not get in trouble for reporting someone for botting, even if they weren’t really botting. Don’t spread misinformation.

Anet is aware that they will get false positives in their reporting system. That’s why they investigate these reports (if they actually do). If it turns out that the person wasn’t really botting, they move on. They will not punish you for providing a value service to them.

As long as you are not abusing the reporting system, you will be fine. Teleporting bots and people who camp nodes look enough like that reporting them is understandable.

In fact, I frequently get ready to report any character that I see that didn’t walk up to a node and vanishes after farming it. Unless it’s a well known farming spot (like Malachor’s) or a known permanent position for a rich ore node.

So go ahead and report the bots. Anet will be able to tell whether they are valid or not, but they need your help to find them.

Without putting too fine a point on it, A.Net is not a well managed company. Their coordination and control structure is a mess and they waste an enormous amount of work. Private equity would be thinking leveraged buyout.

At the same time, building a game like Guild Wars is not like managing a P&L at a factory or retailer. A.Net really is building a work of art – and it shows in game. Sure, it could be better managed, and look more like, say, EA, but the game would likely follow suit. A.Net has a culture that runs on collaboration between a big jumbled mess of passionate creative types, and while I’m sure you could fire management and bring in professionals that would improve productivity and efficiency by leaps and bounds, I’m not confident at all that you could do that while maintaining the energy and soul that brought us SAB and all the other countless small touches that make the game what it is.

I think you need to look at it with a healthy dose of perspective. A.Net is not a publicly traded company tasked with maximizing return on equity to shareholders. It’s a private company owned by millionaire veterans of the game industry that want to run a company that they like working at – and if that resembles a kindergarten classroom of passionate artists and designers doing what they love, then so be it.

You’re approaching Taimi as if the Commander personally had a choice in the matter. You didn’t. In fact the Commander and the part did in fact tell her to ‘scram, kid’

She didn’t. And thus, because the Commander and by extension his party are just, decent, heroic people, the eye-rolled and took care of the stubborn kid. They found out she’s actually valuable.

She decided not to because, as in reality, being in command of the situation does not equate to being in control of the situation.

Of course she shouldn’t be on the front lines. However, Taimi, as a person, feels an intense need to do so. Would the plot be better served if you could just leave her on the side of the road somewhere? I mean, she’s a liability, it would make tactical sense. However, it wouldn’t be very heroic.

What’s a more interesting character, the able-bodied tank gunner that just goes and sits in the tank, or the crippled tank gunner that SHOULD let someone else sit in the tank, but refuses to because it’s his tank, that he designed, and he feels personally responsible for the war the tank is being used in?

You’re attempting to apply logic without accounting for the internal absence of logic in heroic storytelling. All heroes are heroic only because of a schism in logical storytelling. It’s never logical for the underdog to take on the giant monster. The logical thing to do would be to retreat, get a giant army, and come back.

In fact that’s what you did in the original living story.

In HoT, the story begins with that army being completely dissassembled, your close friends being captured, and you and your closest allies taking the shortest possible route to victory because there’s not time to take the most logical option.

Of course she shouldn’t be on the front lines. The fact that she is anyway is what makes her an interesting character. I really don’t want a plotline filled with nothing but Rytlocks. Boring Soldiery types with no apperant physical or psychological flaws. Flaws are what define interesting characters. Overcoming flaws is what defines heroic characters.

By default, The Commander is a legit kitten. Both because it’s the player character, and because ascribing detailed personality traits to what’s supposed to be a character of the player’s design and creation is a bad idea. Any good war story only has room for a very small number of legit kittenes. What makes those stories interesting are the people that aren’t ideal, aren’t sure of themselves, and fight anyway.

Nobody’s debating that Taimi is inappropriate for the role that she’s in. The fact that she’s inappropriate for it and is able to do it anyway is what makes her interesting. The idea you could look all over Rata Sum and not find one other Asuran Child (or adult) capable of that. That makes her the exception which creates a heroic narrative.

There was a recent article that showed every time someone starts another thread about SAB being permanent Anet is thinking about removing it permanently. Here is the link to the article.

http://bit.ly/IqT6zt

Yeah it’s like Anet(Courage) making HoT(Mac and Cheese) for customers(Li’l Muriel).

Too much macaroni!

“More challenge!” “Too much challenge!” “More heals!” “Heals too strong!” “More expansion less LW!” “Yay expansion!” splat “We hate expansions… When’s LW?”

Let’s put this into context:

Irenio – not only have you created a desirable role in a limited amount of time, but you’ve done so while creating an awesome new mechanic, attractive gameplay, useful (and incredibly cool) pets, arguably the best new traitline of all elite specs, detracted minimal value from other professions, created new build opportunities for non-staff/non-support Druids, single handedly (aside the raid designers of course) created a medium used to bypass the zerker cancer meta, and finally and most importantly listened and recognised base Ranger concerns.

Regardless of whether a healer/support role was what you were looking for, you can’t deny the positives that have come from this. Fantastic news for Rangers and Druids alike. We are the most deserving profession of a change like this. Huge pat on the back to this guy.

More facial hair of all varieties would very much be appreciated.

dom.2748:

I don’t really care what people wear, but the facts need to be straight.
Zerker don’t die any more often than anybody else.

… I understand the zeal for defending this philosophy of playing, but let’s be honest here … we do not know this for certain so throwing it in everyone’s face as a fact is just stirring the pot. Besides, if you want to defend the zerker’s approach to playing, you have MUCH better and factual ways to do this.

What IS a fact is that a capable player can run any gear they want and be successful. An incapable player will struggle regardless of what gear they have. Gear is NOT what makes people great at this game.

I don’t think it’s a stretch to understand what people are trying to express to you here. Take a guy who struggles in zerker gear, put him in a tight spot where he goes down. It’s not inconceivable that if you give him a few thousand more HP at the , it might be just enough to prevent that, recover and pull through the fight. If you are interested in a discussion rather than an argument, being less obtuse would be a good start.

Sube Dai.8496:

I’ll say this much, I’m not looking forward to druid if it is a support role.

We are in a burst meta after all…

Except that support is exactly what it would take to get Rangers into the GWEN wvw and pve metas.

Realistically, I think they could get into those meta’s with a change to the spirit system, making them auras that radiate from the ranger (active effects also radiate from us when triggered) instead of immobile totems with 10 hit points and die shortly after being dropped unless placed “in safety” (aka too far away to be useful).

Druid will certainly have both offensive and defensive abilities, and certainly the change to our class mechanic would take into account the type of pet (increase our defensive ability if we have a tough pet, increase our burst if we have an offensive pet). Support does not have to mean bad burst (points to guardian’s “Feel my Wrath”).

There have been a few threads over the past months about AFKers either causing event scaling problems or leeching by collecting rewards from events they didn’t participate in. In Silverwastes the fort NPCs will often revive a downed AFK player even if the other players ignore the AFK person.

As a possible solution I wanted to suggest that when a player’s armor is all broken that they become unrevivable and their only option is to waypoint out (and hopefully visit an armor repair station.)

From the perspective of the AFK player, this should not be too burdensome a problem if you had a legitimate reason to go AFK for a short period of time such as bio-break, check a crying child, grab some food, etc. The chances of you going down and being revived enough times to both damage and then break all your armor during your short AFK are hopefully slim. From the perspective of the intentional “bot” AFK type of player, they would still be able to leech a few times, but after all armor was broken, they’d be stuck at the downed screen with a message something like “All your armor is broken and you are unrevivable” with the option to waypoint out.

From the perspective of the other players, if someone went down with all armor broken, their corpse would not be able to be interacted with, and it would just fade away after a few seconds, similar to how an enemy corpse fades away after a few seconds. An unrevivable (and thus invisible) player would not count toward event scaling.

This suggestion is provided only in the context of PvE.

DarkSyze.8627:

Puck.9612:

DarkSyze.8627:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kc6LZTwamPI

Didn’t you ragequit the game?

When i make a case: I use in-game as evidence, that is all

When you spout gibberish you dig up completely pointless, highly edited videos, and reference 3 year old threads posted by other clueless players, and think that qualifies as some kind of evidence. You can go back to your bridge now troll, that is all.

robertul.3679:

…Make hunter shot stealth even if it doesn’t connect….

…Make pet evade when the ranger evades….

Yeah, I’d love to see LB3 become “Camoflage”, a stealth skill that isn’t an attack, same duration etc but after you do stealth, it flips to Hunter’s Shot (ala thief AA), which would do something else like cripple as well as give you the swiftness, if it connects. It just seems backward to me, for the hunter to shoot, then get stealth.

Yes yes yes, pet evades when the ranger evades, why they haven’t implemented that is beyond me totally as it would near fix the problems with pets being insta-gibbed in PvE.

Serraphin Storm.2369:

…Having pet evade when rangers evade would be a nerf. If pets evade when the player evaded they would be out of position all of the time….

…Smarter pets equal smarter mobs the ai is tied and even if pet could be smarter. Ai shouldn’t do most of the damage….

You wouldn’t actually make the pet dodge, just give it 1.5s of evade when the ranger dodges.

Yeh, we don’t really want a self aware AI that anticipates every move a player or mob make, we just want the pet to be able to hit moving people and path to players/mobs properly instead of running all over the place. The AI is pretty kittened with mobs, you can literally stand in the one place strafing in circles with some in orr and they never hit you, this we want fixed on our pets.

Now they’re going to do it just to spite you.

And craftable tacos.

All the changes look great, nice job ArenaNet! (and here’s the but)… but Projected Profit needs to be somewhere on the UI, and here’s why.

The pictured example is not a good example to use since the TP price is so much higher than the vender list price, so even without the Projected Profit shown no calculator is needed to know that you’ll get more from the TP.

On the other hand what if you wanted to sell a Beryl Orb and wanted to quickly determine if it would be wiser to vender or TP. This is what you would see:

Vender Price: 1s 98c
TP Sell Price: 2s 12c
Listing Fee: 10c
Exchange Fee: 11c

So without using a calculator which is the better deal? And how long did it take you to arrive at that conclusion? I think especially for new players this will cause a lot more confusion & wasted time than just having the Projected Profit listed somewhere in the UI.

Edit: And make sure Kate Welch is given a special thanks since I assume she worked on the UI design but for reasons won’t get a chance to talk about it in the next POI. Awesome job Kate & UI team!

Lendruil.9061:

A single dungeon with the depth and the difficulty of underworld/ fow or doa from GW1 would be enough to keep many players busy for months. But instead of we get some living story that you finish in one hour, and thats it.
The combat-system of GW2 is the best i ever played, and i dont understand why they waste it with their living story instead of giving us a challenging dungeon.

A dungeon along the lines of the Aetherblade path that is not done by people because you can do several other dungeons in the same length of time it takes to run this one path?