Guild Wars 2

Put me down as liking the new PvE/WvW dailies (I don’t PvP so no comment there). I have always wanted dailies to be specific optional tasks. The previous system was boring and I often had to go out of my way to complete it anyway.

phys.7689:

they basically forced a lot of people to buy a ton more gems than they usually would to get the same items, which skews the gem exchange.

the algorithm of the gem exchange has to react to large influx of gold, with predictive values, so they wont take losses on the gold/gem exchange most likely, therefore you will see a large spike in value.
the only thing that can balance this is a large spike on the other side,

but since selling gems gives you better options to sell as much as you want, whereas buying gems is in huge increments, its unlikely that the system will track the real demand that well anymore

That alone can’t explain this spike. The immediate spike caused by the insanely popular Belinda’s Greatsword was about 12.6%. This spike was around 32.2%. Plus you need to factor in the loss of gem conversions from players who don’t have 75 or 150 gold to spend on gems. I can certainly understand some effect from the larger conversion quantities but this is simply unbelievable.

KDXX.9520:

I am so very, very tired of yelling at ANet this week. So. I’ll keep this simple.

/Signed

And also regarding the sudden and dramatic change in the exchange RATE of gold to gems being generated solely by the new build…prove it. Wait, you can’t because you got rid of the trend history.

Putting that aside, we know it’s a lie. We know it was a price fixing. I’ve seen patch shifts in the market before, heck I count on them to make ANY sort of real amounts of gold since you started nerfing loot. A regular patch will move the exchange by maybe half a gold in a DAY of play. A big patch usually moves 1-1.3 gold in a day.

Your new exchange moved it anywhere between 3-4.5 Gold in less than 5 hours.

The math doesn’t add up. It. Does. Not. Add. Up.

I totally agree. Something had to have changed in the conversion formula. This price jump happened immediately when the patch went live. I’ve never seen anything like this.

Here is a chart from my personal exchange tracker.

The achievement in question says: “Defeat each of the great jungle wurm’s 3 heads in Bloodtide Coast. x/3 Great Wurm Heads Defeated”

If credit for this achievement is only awarded when all three are dead then it would be a 1/1 achievement not a 3/3 achievement.

Do players present at the bugged attempt now have 2/3 on this achievement and can you provide a screenshot as proof? If the achievement still says 0/3 then it indicates the heads were not actually ‘defeated’ but just ‘decapitated.’

If you check the achievements for the GJW, you’ll notice a distinction between decapitating the wurms (which TTS did) and killing the wurm heads (which TTS did not get a chance to do). TTS got screwed over but can’t really claim world first without doing the second phase of the event.

I like the current acquisition of ascended gear, but it doesn’t allow for build switching. I would like to see a method for changing the stats on ascended gear; such as a mystic forge recipe that takes a piece of ascended gear, a skill point item, and 2 other items acting as a gold/item sink and returns a piece of ascended gear with one-time selectable stats.

Props to A-Net for the quick response.

Can confirm: multiple successful offshoot events and no achievement credit.

I supported many of A-Net’s decisions but this one is inexcusable. Can’t even start to imagine how they thought this was a good idea. No more support from me.

Lionguard Justice is bugged for me. I’ve protected all 5 lionguards twice now and no achievement.

Same problem here.

Manuhell.2759:

Because it still accounted for the balancing of the item when they created the celestial prefix, back in november.

Do you have a source that backs this up? All gear except celestial uses a common balance formula while celestial has an entirely unique balance formula. Without another stat set using the same formula as celestial for comparison, it is impossible to say definitively that MF is part of the balance. Has A-Net confirmed this somewhere?

Short of a confirmation, we can only speculate. And since A-Net is not planning to adjust celestial stats, the most rational conclusion is that MF was not considered when the celestial stat was originally balanced.

Edge.4180:

During these clockwork invasions I find myself surrounded by visible (yay!) players, but invisible (boo!) hostile mobs. A crowd of Aetherblade nameplates floating in the air isn’t really doing it for me, and for this event I have my player model quality at minimum and the range at maximum.

Why is it still taking 10-20+ seconds for these NPCs to show up? Most of them are dying and becoming corpses before they even render.

It isn’t culling if you see mob nameplates. When a mob is culled your client doesn’t even know it’s there. You can’t target or hit a culled mob even if you see players around you attacking it.

It sounds like you have a rendering issue, not a culling one.

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

The problem is, by voting for Gnashblade you are sending a clear message to ANet, RNG is good!

Nah, this has zero influence on how A-Net implements RNG. If Kiel had a connection to less RNG then you might have an argument, but she has no ties to RNG issues at all.

This vote has very little impact long-term besides the fractal choice and a small variation on how characters are used in the Living Story.

Trying to connect the vote to RNG is nothing but a lame attempt by Kiel supporters to swing more votes her way.

So vote for Kiel and pray the devs throw in a bunch of references?

Esplen.3940:

GoddessHrist.8472:

Alleluia.1320:

GoddessHrist.8472:

Esplen.3940:

They were created by the Asura PC, but they’re in the Shiverpeaks because of Thaumanova.

What’s the source on this? The wiki doesn’t list any connections between the two and I’d like to verify this info.

Regarding Steam Creatures & Asura Personal Story Spoilers

hide spoiler

Its conjecture, but apparently the infinity ball storyline for the asura personal story involves meeting an alternate version of yourself who took over his/her Tyria by inventing and using those steam machine golem creatures. So we’re assuming that the ones pulled here were pulled from that reality. Thus, they’re created by the Asura PC from an evil alternate reality. *cough*SeaOfSorrows*cough*.

(To my friends in SoS, I kid, I kid.)

Yes, I’ve played that personal story (one of my favorite), but I was questioning the link between the Shiverpeak steam creatures and Thaumanova (maybe the italics aren’t that noticeable). If I remember correctly, the Shiverpeak steam creatures spawn from Steam Portals, not chaos energy. If there is a link, I’d like to know where to find it.

The only future that we know of (slash alternate reality) where there are Steam Creatures is the one that occurs from that personal storyline. The Thaumanova Reactor creates rips in the space and time fabric (slash continuum). Unless the Steam Creatures are coming from multitudes of futures where they took over and are getting sent back to take over our reality (through some crazy insane inventions), then the most reasonable link would be the Thaumanova Reactor. Also, the Thaumanova reactor didn’t affect just Metrica Province. (See: Jumping Puzzle in Ascalon).

So it is fully speculation. Thanks, that is what I wanted to know.

Alleluia.1320:

GoddessHrist.8472:

Esplen.3940:

They were created by the Asura PC, but they’re in the Shiverpeaks because of Thaumanova.

What’s the source on this? The wiki doesn’t list any connections between the two and I’d like to verify this info.

Regarding Steam Creatures & Asura Personal Story Spoilers

hide spoiler

Its conjecture, but apparently the infinity ball storyline for the asura personal story involves meeting an alternate version of yourself who took over his/her Tyria by inventing and using those steam machine golem creatures. So we’re assuming that the ones pulled here were pulled from that reality. Thus, they’re created by the Asura PC from an evil alternate reality. *cough*SeaOfSorrows*cough*.

(To my friends in SoS, I kid, I kid.)

Yes, I’ve played that personal story (one of my favorite), but I was questioning the link between the Shiverpeak steam creatures and Thaumanova (maybe the italics aren’t that noticeable). If I remember correctly, the Shiverpeak steam creatures spawn from Steam Portals, not chaos energy. If there is a link, I’d like to know where to find it.

Esplen.3940:

They were created by the Asura PC, but they’re in the Shiverpeaks because of Thaumanova.

What’s the source on this? The wiki doesn’t list any connections between the two and I’d like to verify this info.

xCrusadentx.2784:

Southsun Survival is a minigame against NPCs. I see no unbalance there.

From the release page:

Scheme, kill, and scavenge your way to the top in this new competitive activity! Armed with only a bow and whatever supplies you can find, you’ll face off against other players in a battle to be the last one standing.

Southsun Survival will likely be a reworked version of the Hunger Royale beta event and would be terribly unbalanced if organized groups were allowed to compete against solo players.

The rewards allegedly extend beyond 10,000 points.

It’s amazing how the GW2 community finds a way to complain about getting better rewards.

Did you ‘Deposit All Collectibles’?

SynfulChaot.3169:

So … you’re saying you want all the good rewards, but don’t want to consider trying anything new to get them? That’s like saying you want the WvW armor set but don’t want to do WvW.

That’s a poor analogy. WvW armor is tied to WvW in general and there are many ways to earn Badges of Honor within WvW. Your method of requiring core achievements would be like requiring X number of towers capped, X number of dolyaks killed, and X number of players killed in order to buy the armor. If I want to only solo supply camps, I can still eventually earn enough Badges to buy the armor. I have player choice.

If you go re-read the post on Achievement Point Rewards, you’ll see statements like “Every point that you’ve earned while adventuring across Tyria will count towards exciting rewards.” This is a system for rewarding achievement points in general, not specific subsets of achievements like the system you are trying to create.

SynfulChaot.3169:

GoddessHrist.8472:

No, one is choice (daily vs core achievements) and the other isn’t. Please explain what choice I have if I’ve done all the core achievements I’m interested in but need more points.

If the system implemented does not count daily/monthly points, then it will not require points that are not there. You won’t need those points.

So let’s imagine a hypothetical solo player who doesn’t like endless grind. Dungeon achievements are no good for a solo player, Slayer and Weapon Master take forever to max, Fashion requires a ton of gold. Is this guy screwed over or will the points required be extremely low? Will he be forced to complete a bunch of achievements that don’t interest him?

Including daily points expands player choice.

Xenlai.8694:

And that’s exactly why the daily AP need to be capped. Players feel forced to do their daily as its the fastest and ONLY viable way of gaining AP.
Casuals will not be affected as they will never be able to reach the cap. I really don’t see the problem of implementing this.

No, one is choice (daily vs core achievements) and the other isn’t. Please explain what choice I have if I’ve done all the core achievements I’m interested in but need more points.

SynfulChaot.3169:

Players, if daily/monthly points count, will never need to touch any other achievement category and will be able to unlock all rewards simply from dailies and monthlies. If the point is to get people to play more of the game then that point will fail. Per time spent dailies and monthlies award the most amount of points and already award the player with laurels.

Now if you want all rewards to be based entirely on dailies and monthlies, then yes, they should count. If you want rewards to be based on how much of the game that a player has actually experienced, then they should not.

Living Story achievements award more points per unit of time played.

If greater motivation is needed for the core achievements, then award titles or increase the number of points given. But don’t reduce the available options for earning points or make one point better than another. Points are points.

Why do you want to force players to play content they don’t want to? If someone wants to wait for years to earn enough points from dailies, why is that a problem?

I want more player choice, not less…

SynfulChaot.3169:

I just think it would be better to have unique awards for achievements that don’t already have intrinsic rewards to them as the dailies already have in the form of laurels.

So what is the reward for doing all the dailies instead of just the 5 easiest? If not tied to achievement points, then what?

If daily achievement points become relatively worthless, there will be no reason to earn them all. Why eliminate another way for ambitious players to distinguish themselves?

SynfulChaot.3169:

GoddessHrist.8472:

Laurels do not reward going above and beyond the required 5 dailies / 4 monthlies. I could have earned the same number of laurels in 25% the time if I only did the easiest achievements instead of completing them all. The daily system was designed from the start to award points for extra effort.

True. It does. But dailies and monthlies are still rewarded by laurels. True that not all the extra categories count, but there is already a reward mechanism for them.

GoddessHrist.8472:

And dailies are a part of the game. Living Story achievement points will catch and surpass daily points as the primary point source at the current rate of introduction. So do we cap Living Story points, too? Why force players to focus on specific content in order to earn a reward for dedication to the game in general?

Because dailies/monthlies are already rewarded. Nothing else (aside from Living Story meta-achievs) are rewarded. Should we reward people who do dailies and monthlies more than everyone else by rewarding them twice? I, personally, don’t believe so.

Why shouldn’t it reward twice? Completing an event gives gold, karma, and experience. That’s a triple reward! Dailies give laurels, gold, karma, experience, mystic coins, and bonus items. That’s… you get the point. So what if there’s another reward for dailies? The alternative is no reward for doing the extra achievements.

Jumping puzzles have chests. Dungeons have gold, karma, and tokens. Let’s remove the achievements for those so we don’t have any double rewards. I could go on…

SynfulChaot.3169:

The problem with having dailies and monthlies add in for the rewards is that then there is no additional push to do anything but dailies and monthlies to get your reward. You can just do you dailies and get them eventually. So where would the impetus to try out other things come from?

On what basis do you suggest this reward system is intended to push players into trying other things?

SynfulChaot.3169:

GoddessHrist.8472:

Daily achievement points should remain included:

1. Removing daily points would be unfair to players who have invested time in earning them. Personally, I have spent hundreds of hours completing dailies since launch. If daily points are removed or capped, this all becomes wasted time.

That isn’t wasted time. You already received your reward for them. Laurels. Now if they removed your laurels, then it would be wasted time.

GoddessHrist.8472:

2. Daily achievement points are different than the salvage and dungeon tracks that were capped. Those two points sources were unlimited and could be acquired as rapidly as resources (time, money) allowed. Daily points are awarded at a more regulated pace that requires a time investment in playing the game.

That would still be rewarding us twice for the same work completed. We already earned our laurels. We don’t need to receive further reward from the same.

Laurels do not reward going above and beyond the required 5 dailies / 4 monthlies. I could have earned the same number of laurels in 25% the time if I only did the easiest achievements instead of completing them all. The daily system was designed from the start to award points for extra effort.

SynfulChaot.3169:

GoddessHrist.8472:

3. Achievements points are not intended to signify skill or feats accomplished, but instead the dedication of the player. The achievement article says “show off your dedication to your fellow players,” not “show off your skill” or “show off your feats.”

Dedication to the game. Not dedication to just doing your dailies.

And dailies are a part of the game. Living Story achievement points will catch and surpass daily points as the primary point source at the current rate of introduction. So do we cap Living Story points, too? Why force players to focus on specific content in order to earn a reward for dedication to the game in general?

Awe.1096:

Cap them at significant value. Like a year, two or three worth of dailies. Do it now and nothing gets removed from anybody. Best compromise IMO.

Why the need? The achievement point rewards will have an upper limit regardless. What does it matter if players continue to earn points beyond that? Or if a player wants to spend years earning the rewards from solely doing dailies, why is that a problem?

Daily achievement points should remain included:

1. Removing daily points would be unfair to players who have invested time in earning them. Personally, I have spent hundreds of hours completing dailies since launch. If daily points are removed or capped, this all becomes wasted time.

2. Daily achievement points are different than the salvage and dungeon tracks that were capped. Those two points sources were unlimited and could be acquired as rapidly as resources (time, money) allowed. Daily points are awarded at a more regulated pace that requires a time investment in playing the game.

3. Achievements points are not intended to signify skill or feats accomplished, but instead the dedication of the player. The achievement article says “show off your dedication to your fellow players,” not “show off your skill” or “show off your feats.”

4. Removing or capping daily points will not benefit casual or new players. Hardcore achievement hunters will always be ahead in points earned and Living Story achievements represent a significant number of missable points going forward.

I am totally down with a rework of the core achievement values, but daily points should not be retroactively changed.

Crimsony.2514:

I’ve heard that Moa Racing will be a permanent addition (can anyone confirm or deny?). So I could definitely see myself putting down 50-100 silver every week or so if I was in the mood to work towards a mini.

Yes, Moa Racing is permanent; however, the festival-themed miniature is not. After Dragon Bash ends, the festival moa miniature will be replaced by a regular moa.

Moa Racing is the spiritual successor to Nine Rings from GW1, which was an enormous gold and time sink, so I actually see Moa Racing as rather reasonable. I’m curious whether achievements are tied to MR and how high the tiers go.

bravoart.5308:

Yes, I know a majority of the forum seems to just have gobs of dosh laying around from exploiting game bugs, exploiting other players (bltc) and CoFp1 spamming, but really…

This is ridiculous:

• Mini costs 125 racing tokens.
• You earn a maximum of 7 tokens for winning a moa race. 3 for 2nd, 1 for third.
• You have a 20% chance of winning (un-alterable)
• It costs 50s per bet.
• You only earn money if you turn in your tokens for winner’s bags. Saving your tokens for the mini earns you nothing.

That is an absolute minimum of 9g you would have to spend assuming that you won 1st EVERY round (which you won’t) – and 62.5g assuming worst case scenario in which you still win 3rd place.

Anyone else feel this is a bit excessive for a mini?

It’s not as bad as what you make it out to be. Assuming each moa has a 20% chance of winning, for each race you have:

• 1/5 chance at 7 tokens
• 1/5 chance at 3 tokens
• 1/5 chance at 1 token
• 2/5 chance at 0 tokens

This averages out to 2.2 tokens won per race. The mini will require about 57 races or 28.4g on average. With each race cycle lasting slightly over 3 minutes, it should take approximately 3 hours of betting to acquire 125 tokens. Naturally the RNG element will result in some players requiring more and some less.

For players not saving for the mini, 2.2 tokens won per race will return 44s, resulting in a net loss of 6s per race over the long run.

If it wasn’t missable I wouldn’t mind. I’ve just about given up; gg A-Net. Though maybe missing my first missable achievement will be freeing and I won’t feel compelled to chase achievements that aren’t fun.

Did any of you actually read the patch notes:

Wait for the story to develop further…

marnick.4305:

Except that finding a group of elitists takes far longer than it takes for a group of people to complete the content with less popular builds.

Not to mention the lack of drama by not going with elitists. It’s pretty refreshing.

Depends on the number of runs. If it’s your standard 3 runs and done, then the builds don’t really make a difference. But if you’re doing 30+ runs back-to-back, shaving off a few minutes per run is huge.

penatbater.4710:

Because gear ping is voluntary, but /inspect is not. And if such feature were to exist, even if theres an option to allow viewing or not, people would be suspicious if you didnt let them see it, make them think your build isn’t up to par with what they want, and kick you nonetheless, effectively making said option useless.

This feature is also gonna be useless because outside of cof 1, pinging gear is largely unheard of. I have never met anyone asking me to ping my gear in an ac/ta/cm run, nor has my build ever been in question.

No suspicion would be raised if the system was designed properly. For example, default to off and only enabled for a specified duration before switching back off. Despite the limited application, after seeing GW2 players come on the forum and brag how they intentionally lie with gear pings, I see only positives in adding an inspect feature.

Penguin.5197:

morrolan.9608:

penatbater.4710:

it’ll lead to elitism.

Problem is thats already happened.

well into deeper elitism

How so? I’m genuinely curious.

Astraea.6075:

Being asked to ping gear at least lets you know that the group is oriented towards efficiency so you can choose to join or not. An inspect feature takes that control out of your hands and will be misused more than it will be used appropriately.

Not if it can be toggled off. Asking for inspection to be turned on would be no different than asking for a gear ping.

No one has yet made a good argument as to why gear inspection is worse than gear pings. Most of the posts are arguing against gear checks in general, and those have been in the game forever and aren’t going anywhere.

We already have the ability to ping gear. High performance groups already require it. Adding an inspect feature will simply make it impossible for dishonest players to lie.

I regularly speed run CoF and it is easy to tell when a new addition to the group is not running the required gear and a kick at the acolytes follows. Gear inspection would save everyone time.

How would a toggle-able inspect feature promote elitism anymore than gear pings do currently?

More hours, still no achievement. My so-far futile pursuit of this achievement will be my sole memory of the May content…

Yeah A1182080-2599-4ACC-918E-A3275610602B is the bridge event so it stays in the Fail state until the escort reaches the bridge. After a successful completion it goes into Warmup during the delay until it starts again.

The escort phase can be found by checking 6A8374CF-9999-43E9-B1C7-BAB1541F2426 for the active state.

I coded a simple desktop app to use during my CoF farming, and I can verify this is how it works. It ended up being a lot simpler than I expected.

In the case of CoF: Warmup = open, Active = bridge event, Fail = closed.

Kaaboose.3897:

GoddessHrist.8472:

Pixelpumpkin.4608:

Your solution is to grief people?

Not griefing. Suppressing a dominant player is a standard tactic in a battle royal.

It is. However any dominating player is just going to snatch that fishing rod right out of your hands and use it to get the crab

Depends on the motivation. Making someone miserable for no reason is griefing. Focusing a dominant player to force him or her to change their approach or leave the match is not.

Pixelpumpkin.4608:

Your solution is to grief people?

Not griefing. Suppressing a dominant player is a standard tactic in a battle royal.

Two more hours; no luck. Finished all other achievements. Still haven’t seen all non-crab-carriers go down at once.

Players are getting too good at staying alive. Chased this achievement for 3 hours tonight and not once did everyone go down, for me or anyone else.

JustTrogdor.7892:

darkace.8925:

You might buy a weapon or armor skin with the hopes it will make you a special little snowflake, but – and you may find this hard to believe – some people buy skins solely because they like the way they look. Not everyone thinks like you.

Not everyone thinks like you either. I imagine that there are many players that want skins that are different than most others. I know that if I got a drop off an RNG and then it was suddenly in the gem store at cost I would be a bit disappointed.

Exactly. A number of the players that I farm with have mentioned they are no longer interested in legendaries that are common. It works the same way with event skins. I’m not a big fan of RNG but at least the trickle-in rate from boxes keeps them rare. The one improvement I would like to see is for the skins to be tradable.

raptor.1064:

Maximillian Greil.1965:

This needs to be taken out

if it’s too hard for you don’t get it, you don’t need it to unlock anything

Hard = good; requiring dumb luck != good.

The problem with this achievement is that acquiring it has almost nothing to do with the player. Regardless of how good one is at dodging through a karka roll, it still requires all the other players in the instance to be stupid simultaneously.

Terrible achievement. I’m all for challenging achievements but this one is pure dumb luck.

I’m happy with the current design. Staying on top of the leaderboard should be a matter of dedication, not simply logging on for an hour a day. On a related topic, monthly achievements should be much more difficult for the huge number of points they give.

The GW2 Macro Policy directly forbids binding multiple actions (jump & dodge) to a single key or button.