Showing Posts For Dredlore.1672:
Faux,
*Applause!!! Standing Ovation!
I have wanted WvW to drop this silly attachment to servers since mega-server came into existence. “Silly” because the resources available to guilds no longer match the WvW criteria used for participation…namely that everyone be from the same server.Once mega-server launched, our guild was essentially excluded from participating in WvW… and we WANT TO, but our members are from literally every server out there.
I personally played WvW since before season 1, and through the last WvW Season. I commanded some, and gained a lot of WvW experience in the process. I picked up a dead WvW guild and became a GL. That was around 3 years ago and we are still going strong as a guild, but all of us have to WvW for our home servers only…which means we could actually end up fighting our guildies in certain matchups.
Additionally this problem takes away from the overall activities that we can offer to members, and has a contrary effect on the problems that mega-server was intended to address because it forces us to disregard mega-server in guild recruiting IF we want to play WvW. In other words we have to think “pre” mega-server, yet we exist in a mega-server world.
This is a mega-problem.
In my humble opinion this is one of the major reasons that WvW has stumbled recently and the only way to fix it is to allow ALL guilds the opportunity to WvW with all of its members regardless of server.
If we were only a WvW guild? Then the negative effect is lessened. But we also pvp.
…and consider this.
The current system pushes all guilds out except WvW guilds who are willing to only recruit in WvW and pretty much only play WvW.
We dont consider ourselves a PVX guild, but we also aren’t “WvW Only”…and speaking from experience (because Ive talked to hundreds of members about this…) nobody thinks that the current system is ideal. Every single member I have ever spoken with wants to WvW with their guild of choice.
Im sure there are ways to fix this problem, and I hope that Anet decides that this is a necessary priority that will put wvw back on track for everyone.
Thanks
SayaYou’re telling me all your PvE players don’t have a 100 gold a piece to pay for a transfer?
lol and here is one result of the server problem.
I can tell the players who came along after mega server, because having never seen WvW before, they dont understand what a “smooth” wvw system is like.
They only understand how they have adjusted to the problems that the current WvW system created.
Why SHOULD our guild members have to pay an extra 100 gold fee that “same server” members do not have to pay…. just because they want to be in our guild?
Especially since the mega-server system lends itself (systematically encourages) to recruiting from all servers.
Those same members can do anything else with the guild… so why is it 100 gold for them to WvW with their guild of choice?
That makes absolutely no sense at all and the way that most (non WvW only) guilds have dealt with that issue is to stay out of WvW.
…and no we arent one of those toxic “PVE guilds”. lol but if we were, the same set of principles would apply.
Right now we are PVP only and have been for a while…because WvW has been so broken …and the server problem…. so we don’t even want to bother. We will just pvp until something logical replaces the current wvw system.
waiting…. TY
Saya
Just to address the issues raised by Torqued…
You see these issues the way you do because mega-server created most of the problems you note here.
Server hopping guilds? We have been on the same server since the guild started over 3 years ago and we aren’t going anywhere.
As I said, “WvW ONLY” guilds are the only survivors in WvW….because of the system we have in place. Change the system and the effect of server swapping WvW guild is far less because other guilds step in who aren’t of that mentality.
I can name at least 3 guilds (4 including ours) off the top of my head who have been around for years and never swapped servers…yet have been pushed out of WvW due to the current system.
So basically, the “loyal” guilds are excluded and the mercenary wvw (only) guilds are encouraged by this broken system.
Thanks
Saya
Faux,
*Applause!!! Standing Ovation!
I have wanted WvW to drop this silly attachment to servers since mega-server came into existence. “Silly” because the resources available to guilds no longer match the WvW criteria used for participation…namely that everyone be from the same server.
Once mega-server launched, our guild was essentially excluded from participating in WvW… and we WANT TO, but our members are from literally every server out there.
I personally played WvW since before season 1, and through the last WvW Season. I commanded some, and gained a lot of WvW experience in the process. I picked up a dead WvW guild and became a GL. That was around 3 years ago and we are still going strong as a guild, but all of us have to WvW for our home servers only…which means we could actually end up fighting our guildies in certain matchups.
Additionally this problem takes away from the overall activities that we can offer to members, and has a contrary effect on the problems that mega-server was intended to address because it forces us to disregard mega-server in guild recruiting IF we want to play WvW. In other words we have to think “pre” mega-server, yet we exist in a mega-server world.
This is a mega-problem.
In my humble opinion this is one of the major reasons that WvW has stumbled recently and the only way to fix it is to allow ALL guilds the opportunity to WvW with all of its members regardless of server.
If we were only a WvW guild? Then the negative effect is lessened. But we also pvp.
…and consider this.
The current system pushes all guilds out except WvW guilds who are willing to only recruit in WvW and pretty much only play WvW.
We dont consider ourselves a PVX guild, but we also aren’t “WvW Only”…and speaking from experience (because Ive talked to hundreds of members about this…) nobody thinks that the current system is ideal. Every single member I have ever spoken with wants to WvW with their guild of choice.
Im sure there are ways to fix this problem, and I hope that Anet decides that this is a necessary priority that will put wvw back on track for everyone.
Thanks
Saya
Just wanted to weigh in on the latest changes to Ranger and start by saying that I have never seen a Ranger/Hunter profession/class nerfed out of using a bow in any game ever.
Yet, here we are, and it seems that we (in Gw2) are the 1st to accomplish the amazing feat of fielding the ranger who’s best option is to toss away their beloved and classic weapons… their bows. Is their an industry award for this?
The latest math analysis of the ranger profession describes the rangers ideal DPS build as follows:
Weapon 1: Greatsword
Weapon 2: Sword/Axe
Of course we have created a scenario where the ranger has now essentially become a melee class. Oh, the wonders never cease! … as this would be another industry 1st! Maybe another award is in order?
Oh wait… Rangers are melee, without heavy armor. *confused)
Do you know who should receive an award?
The company who ceased to use misleading terms like “balancing” (which implies equilibrium) and instead used more accurate terms such as “realignment” or even “unbalancing”.
Honesty should be rewarded, and that approach would truly be an honorable step.
At minimum, that would provide us with an accurate representation of what was potentially coming our way… rather than the candy-coated, best face forward previews that we were given prior to the patch… which made no mention of our planned demise on the dev cutting block. That… breeds resentment.
Sadly, the ranger is seemingly being flogged (an analogy) for crimes unknown. If a nerf of this proportion has ever been unleashed on any profession in GW2, I am unaware of it.
Forget “fairness”..and think in terms of reasonable.. in relation to decision making and the ultimate results of those decisions.
This is truly the windows 8 of nerfs in the modern gaming era, and I sincerely hope that Anet understands the urgent need to remedy this as quickly as possible.
That pretty much sums it up.
Thanks for listening.
“Remorseless” in grand master ranger traits is not proccing like it should.
We are not regaining “Opening Strike” until we are out of combat, therefor we are losing the benefit of “Precise Strike” and other trait synergies that are critical to ranger builds.
“Fury” does seem to be proccing as it should.
I don’t have any questions.
After seeing some of the feedback, I will say that for as long as gaming has been around you would think that we would all understand what “Beta” means and it’s underlying implications. Seems that’s not the case. :>
Overall, it was a great experience and I was happy to do it. I’m a GL and it was nice to be able to share my impressions with the members.
I did have to play windowed because my game broke on the 15th with that update, but I still managed to get a decent impression of what’s coming even with the far slower performance.
So I’ll start with the obvious.
The Revenant is a great new profession. I don’t feel it needed the blindness tie-in to the story, but whatever. It works.
The character functioned flawlessly using all the weapons that were available.
I am partial to axes in fighting games and the one that was provided was the best weapon Ive ever seen in GW2. Loved it.
Skills-wise, its tough for me to comment with any detail after only a few hours on the profession and multi-weapons.
All I can say at this point is that the skills are consistent with other professions that Ive played in GW2 (I have 5×80′s).. meaning that they feel like GW2 skills and that’s a positive. Players will feel at home using them.
The environment was also well conceived. No big departure from the usual GW2 Living world format. I enjoy Living World, so I liked it.
I think that the activities could have been expanded some because I finished everything and had a lot of time remaining… but I just stuck around and fought husks and took screens for the guildies, so it wasn’t fail.
The Pale Reavers (alt-Sylvari?).. really interesting and also well done. Loved the BF guns :>
The one comment I have that could be considered a negative (because it is..).
The whole hang-gliding experience was fail for me.
If IRL hang gliding worked that poorly, absolutely nobody would ever do it. It was so bad that I didn’t even want to do it in-game.
Wings suddenly popping up out of my back? Hmmm. I feel like something more tangible and less mystical and vague would be a much better concept.
You have the glider or you don’t. It works or it doesn’t. Jumping off high places isn’t the time to be guessing.
Even though the falling was kinda fun, I did that more than flying. I would have preferred the flying.
That’s all Ive got. Thanks Anet for giving me the invite! Please, please, please solve that login/windowed issue soon? 9 days…
OK Thanks!
Just wanted to keep this topic alive…
I lost my week 1 rewards, and a guildie lost his week 4 rewards.
The system used in season 3 unduly increased the chance that rewards would be lost since it included the caveat that they must be picked up within a few days or they were forfeit.
In week 1, I was not even aware that a new system was being used… so I assumed that the email I got contained my week 1 rewards as Anet had done in previous seasons.
I had no reason to think otherwise. After all it was week 1.
Just wondering how many others lost a week of their WvW rewards as a result of this very questionable system? ..and I cant help but wonder what prompted the change?
..and the very fact that support flat out refused to help me with this matter, while not surprising… was aggravated by their encouragement to “submit my feedback and ideas to the devs”. I had to LOL that.
Why… in a billion years… would I… go and give my support… to a company… who refused… to support… me? ..or even answer my questions?
As I said in my support conversations… company who relies 100% on the goodwill of its customers (for gem purchases and positive word of mouth)) should be finding ways to retain the player base, rather than pushing it out the door. But gaming companies seem to not understand that simple premise.
So, I thanked “Blizzard” very much for all their help! lol
Pipe in if you or someone you know was whamboozled by this reward system!
Lets identify the correct problem before we attempt a fix? On Darkhaven for instance population has not been an issue. Rather the issue has been percnt% of the server population that plays WvW.
When the PVE folks decided to show up for the achievements… Darkhaven was waffle stomping our opponents, but as soon as the achieve requirements were met the PVE players went back to running fractals (or whatever) and Darkhaven was left with a few core WvW players to hold the line. So server population alone is not the entire issue.
I do think that some of the suggestions on this topic have merit. Iike the idea of tiered caps… but what happens when a large number of players from one server LEAVE wvw? Is a proportionate amount of players from the other servers booted to reach a new lower player cap? It would have to work both ways.
I think that Anet should do a few things..
Increase the requirements to gain WvW achievements
*Have *participation requirements to gain world bonuses ( I see no reason that players who do nothing to earn world bonuses should get them)
- Add a small wvw gauge (monitor) icon which is always visible on the main screen which shows how your server is doing…maybe based on score…maybe based on number of players in wvw.. or based on both. Gauge would be green, yellow, or red based on how your server is doing at the time. Green=good, Red=bad
- Implement some kind of cap system as suggested above… but ensure that its friendly to incremental increases an decreases in wvw population.
This makes no sense.
I just lost a weeks WvW rewards (week 1) after putting 60 hours into a loss.
Are we to understand that we simply lose credit for doing something in a computer game?
Key word is “computer”…
Computers are inherently more than capable of retaining data… such as a player reward record.
There is absolutely no good reason for players to “lose” credit for their contribution after only a few days!
This oversight will negatively impact many players as it has me and I plan to open a ticket on this matter ASAP.
I hope that more of you are able to join me in making Anet aware of this problem in hopes that they will fix it.
So please contact an Anet representative as soon as possible and share your feelings on this matter?
Thanks
This makes no sense.
I just lost a weeks WvW rewards (week 1) after putting 60 hours into a loss.
Are we to understand that we simply lose credit for doing something in a computer game?
Key word is “computer”… which are inherently more than capable of retaining data… such as a player reward record.
There is absolutely no good reason for players to “lose” credit for their contribution.
This oversight will negatively impact many players as it has me and I plan to open a ticket on this matter ASAP.
I hope that more of you are able to join me in making Anet aware of this problem in hopes that they will fix it.
Thanks
lol
Im sure this has been brought up before, but Ive been pouring through videos and forums trying to come up with a creative build that my ranger can use…which actually incorporates pet abilities into it to some degree.
Ive read repeatedly that PVE bosses of all types are basically the same “dead-pet” syndrome, but for this post Im speaking in terms of WvW.
What Ive found in GW2 concerning pets is that they are actually helpful in world roaming or in PVP to some extent.
Meaning that in those situations, pets are about as helpful as they “should” be in all situations across the game.
Problem is… they just aren’t.
Bigger problem is that when the devs created the ranger prof they nerfed ranger abilities to account for the abilities of the ranger pet.. and that’s exactly how it should have been done so that the ranger class wasn’t OP.
Great. Fine. Wonderful.
However, there seems to have been no accounting for situations (such as WvW) where the ranger pet is subjected to siege, and zerg AOE damage etc… and the ranger pet is F4’d (swapped) every time the swap CD is up.
This results in 2 things, as follows:
Rangers as a prof are literally operating at a disadvantage (whatever % advantage the devs decided that the pet gave the ranger) when their pet is continuously dead.
So if the devs decided that overall a ranger with an active pet had a 7% advantage over other profs… then they logically nerfed ranger by that same 7% in the name of prof balance.
OK.. but there seems to have been little to no accounting for scenarios where pets are continually dead due to their lack of survivability (in WvW and perhaps boss fights).
Thats a pretty big disadvantage for a ranger to operate under.
The 2nd result is that this disadvantage severely limits the builds (types of builds) available to rangers.
Why? …because rangers (in WvW) simply have to consider their pets useless.
Thats right.
When planning the build a ranger has to disregard the pet with the understanding that when the rubber meets the road and you’re taking a defended tower or pushing against an enemy zerg… when the pet is needed most (not so much against a tower lol), that pet will be dead. Thus useless.
Is this true for every single scenario in WvW? No.
5 man roaming is OK. Solo roaming is OK.
So, my suggestion is that the devs simply add some of the benefits available in WvW rank to pets survivability… such as siege bunker. So that (for example) when a pet is running around in a hail of AC fire they aren’t dead before the ranger can pull them out of it. That would be a great start!
So this post is simply about pet survivability when its in conditions that it would not normally encounter in “the world”.
Not getting into more numbers, stats, and math speculation.
We understand that the wheel is round and that it rolls… without the need to explore geometry. :>
Thanks
Hi,
*Ive tried every version of the AMD driver releases.
*Ive tried every setting in Graphics options.
*Ive tried the recommended settings that I found here (on the forums) for AMD graphics cards
- I always do “clean” installs when I change drivers.
*Ive updated associated Windows apps. (C++ redistributable, .NET Framework)
*My error logs automatically go to A-net.. unless the crash is so bad that it requires a re-boot. This means that A’net prob has a record of 50 crashes from me alone.
- Sometimes the crashes are so bad that I lose all control of Windows and have to shut down the system manually.. (by holding in the power button) which can be extremely harmful to the OS and require a complete re-install and re-configuration of Windows (if Boot sector or other OS critical data becomes corrupted because of the crash)
" I run a guild, and am heavily involved in my servers WvW performance, so this matter affects more than just me (and my PC) as an individual player.
- The graphics card performs perfectly in every other application and game that I use. There are no problems or issues with them whatsoever.
*Occasionally I get an error message which states that the game has encountered an error which will not allow it to continue… occasionally the problem is ID’d as a graphics (driver) problem.
- The crashes are fairly random, but frequent. They usually occur either when I am WPing, or in combat (90% of the time) but they also occur at other random times.
*My last graphics card (an Nvidia) had zero problems in GW2, but was underpowered which is why I replaced it.
I am out of options.
Having tried every driver and fix that I could either find or come up with on my own there is nothing more I can do.
So I am in hopes that someone has a solution that I have not yet tried, because at this point (with multi-crashes per hour being common) the game is virtually unplayable.
Any help I can get in resolving this issue is greatly appreciated.
Thanks