Showing Posts For Inspired.6730:
1 2
With fractured what was really removed was content. The fractal levels over 30 that had existed over 30 were removed from the game. And while this is definitely something to complain about, it is not first time its been an issue with GW2.
The levels werent removed from the game. They are still there. And levels aren’t content. Its a number. You can still progress in levels. But, for example, level 42 was not removed from the game…its there.
The levels that had existed were removed. Yes they added new higher level ones, but they are not the same as the ones they removed. They just reused the level numbers and thus the required reset. The old level 42 and the new level 42 are not the same. And levels over 50 were removed and not even replaced with anything new.
The way I always saw each fractal level was more as the name of that particular dungeon, so fractal level 42 was a specific dungeon. I guess not everyone saw it that way.
With fractured what was really removed was content. The fractal levels over 30 that had existed over 30 were removed from the game. And while this is definitely something to complain about, it is not first time its been an issue with GW2.
Content removal is not the same as progress removal which this is presented as by those who were most affected. Fractal level was always presented as simply a measure of the highest level fractal that a given player had access to. When the higher fractals were removed their levels were reset to the highest newly existing fractal they had done.
Nothing was lost because their access level changed to 30. However, they lost what was a lot to many because content they previously liked doing was removed from the game. Big difference, but that doesn’t mean it matters to those affected.
Your choice really, you can advance your toon and bank any mats you save, or you can craft slowly at the same time and level both your toon and your crafting, as long as you don’t use crafting to artificially level your toon you can control both and advance as you feel the desire. Keep in mind though that you can only have two crafting disciplines active at the same time on any given character and there are 8 crafting disciplines.
You’ll really have to hold yourself back leveling if you play very much, you get xp for just about everything except logging on and logging off and the levels come rather fast in normal game play.
I have noticed that. Wish there was a way to turn off experience.
No real reason to in this game since you don’t out level content. With the down leveling you’ll still be doing content at level not matter where, so the only thing leveling does is gives you more options on what you can do.
So that’s how it goes? 1 response in 5 days?
I’m the only person that was upset about this?
FA is now holding it’s own against Gold League servers and YB is beating SBI and Mag (who actually would’ve made silver league interesting) this week. But that’s irrelevant because FA was put into Silver League.
I seriously hope that someone, anyone from Anet is watching this and realizes how stupid the league was.
Not going to argue with you because I don’t really care one way or the other. But, I did want to point out that regardless of how pointless you think the league was, it gave WvW the most meaning it’s ever had. Even if that isn’t saying much.
Let me assure you, as an accountant, that if a tax is being charged, it is not the company that implemented it upon themselves. Different jurisdictions have different tax laws. The state, province, territory or country imposes the taxes, not the company. The company is merely collecting on behalf of the jurisdiction. Don’t blame ANet. This will be why some of you will pay tax for gems and some will not.
You’re kidding right. I’m sure you know quite well that not all companies administer tax laws correctly. Also, it would seem quite unlikely that all these different tax jurisdictions implemented changes in there tax laws effective at the end of the first week of December 2013. So either they weren’t collecting tax they should have been previously, or they are collecting tax they shouldn’t be now, or maybe even more likely a combination of both depending on location.
I work in a store that sells a variety of those game cards, for gw2, wow, facebook, Xbox, Nintendo, ps, and many others. Those cards are never taxed.
So I have this compulsion to try to figure out stuff that doesn’t make sense to me, and my digging around lead me to these tidbits…
Store Gift Cards and Gift Certificates
No sales tax is due on the sale of a gift card. The actual sale of gift cards is not subject to Texas sales, use or mixed beverage taxes since the card represents an intangible – the “right” to a future purchase. Instead, tax is calculated when a card is redeemed.But then there are these definitions in the tax code
Sec. 151.009. “TANGIBLE PERSONAL PROPERTY” “Tangible personal property” means personal property that can be seen, weighed, measured, felt, or touched or that is perceptible to the senses in any other manner, and, for the purposes of this chapter, the term includes a computer program and a telephone prepaid calling card.
Sec. 151.010. TAXABLE ITEM. “Taxable item” means tangible personal property and taxable services. Except as otherwise provided by this chapter, the sale or use of a taxable item in electronic form instead of on physical media does not alter the item’s tax status.
It looks to me like the law carved out a special tax exempt status for gift cards (other than pre-paid phone cards) that doesn’t apply when buying gems directly. Of course I’m not a lawyer, I just like to play one on the Internet :P
Any politician that promises me that there will be fewer laws when they leave office than when they entered will have my vote, no matter what other crazy ideas they might have.
It’s not the gift card, it’s the “tangible” personal property part that determines taxability in many states. While software is widely considered tangible and thus would be taxed, subscriptions for example are not and thus aren’t taxed unless covered by another tax law. I don’t see why they’re classifying gems as tangible.
And, almost more importantly, I can’t imagine that Anet wants gems classified as tangible personal property due to all the other laws and regulations that affect that classification as opposed to services and/or intangibles.
this is gw2 and not gw1. if you like the changes made or being made to gw1 go play that game.
If you do not see the obvious connection between the two games, and if you do not accept some constructive criticism made here, you’d better not respond at all if everything that you want to add is “if you don’t like it, go away.” Thanks.
It seems pretty clear to me that the connection between the two is the shared lore. But, other than that there isn’t nor need be anything. And saying that something was in the first try at a long-term successful game thus it should be in the second is bad logic.
More time or not doesn’t have anything to do with content release schedule. If they need more time for anything (testing for example) then they need to add that into their schedule. Reducing the amount of content releases to be done would do nothing to affect how much time they schedule for each release.
The result of them deciding to do fewer releases would be them reducing the number of staff required. The result of them deciding that more time was needed for a release is them starting to develop each sooner or them adding more people to work on each one.
Hi Whyme,
Here is the data you requested:
PvE Request for Topics Results
1 Living World
2 Ascended Gear/Ascended Items
3 Class BalanceWvW Request for Topics Results
1 Population (Imbalance)
2 Skill Lag
3 Commander (functionality, system, tag)PvP Request for Topics Results
1 Game Modes
2 Rewards (progression)
3 Build DiversityChris
As already mentioned, Skill Lag doesn’t seem like it’ll lead to meaningful collaborative development. It would also seem that Ascended Gear/Ascended Items would be a poor topic choice, although for a different reason.
While there may have been a lot of relevant player input months ago, at the current point of ascended gear development/implementation what would be the point? It’s already all in game except ascended armor, and that is clearly already designed if not completely done being developed. So unless there’s some future gear tier being considered that would benefit from the process, it would seem a waste.
My conclusion is that while player input into topics is good, you should use a heavier hand in picking topics that have a better chance of being beneficial to actual future development of the game.
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/livingworld/fractured/Agony-changes/3228298
“New Infused Ascended Rings and Back Items will have an empty slot.”
Take it at your own pace though, a +5 AR infusion seems to be relatively cheap to craft.
Thanks.
What I’m thinking is this combined with fractals level becoming account level may mean that a lot of characters I never played fractals with may be worth looking at getting some gear made for. +5 AR infusion times several may suddenly be a little more meaningful.
It sounds like if you create an infused backpiece or ring now you’ll get an infused one (one with the new agony resist infusion slot) and a +5 agony resist infusion slotted in it with the update. But if you wait it is less clear.
It sounds like you’d have to do the same thing to create an infused one, but would it be created with the +5 agony resist infusion slotted in it? I’m guessing no. but would like clarification.
I was referring to the Clockwork Chaos invasions where the meta designs split groups up in order to complete the objective efficiently. Sorry for any confusion.
So… that would be the event chain where the actual meta that evolved was to stack up as tightly as possible (gather on commanders) to force the individual sub-events to spawn as many champions as possible where they could then be briskly annihilated by that same poorly scaled over-mass of players because the rewards for doing so were a literal order of magnitude greater than playing out the event as you envisioned it (60 champ bags for systematic farming, 6 for event completion…).
I honestly don’t know how I could showcase more clearly that our perception of the game you created is wildly different from yours, and that you are not successfully designing towards the actual player experience.
As I said, I’m less concerned about the two week cadence than by the unusable junk or complete voids each episode leaves behind. If you fix that, then yes, the 2 weeks cycle has some possible virtue.
Well in all fairness all they can really do is give you the content. If players utilize it in a way that wasn’t intended and that some don’t like then I don’t see how that’s their fault. Personally, I liked the way that event played and liked the rewards. I still think players zerg because they enjoy zerging. Of course, a lot also like complaining about it while they’re doing it.
I’m really happy to hear they intend to try and keep up the 2 week cadence. Absolutely annoying to hear players complaining about too much content being added, especially when most releases only take several hours to complete.
Except this an example of why an outmanned server should lose. Not enough of your players are willing to join the battle.
While one can feel bad for servers that have lower population and we can wonder if anything be done to change that, when a world’s population chooses not to fight the options are and should be significantly limited. You were able to compete and then chose not to. This is a group activity and in this regard it cannot successfully be regarded or considered at the individual level.
This is one of the good reasons to switch servers. If WvW is a priority for you, then you should go to a server where there are a significant number of WvW players. Perhaps some servers should just not have a WvW presence. Or maybe the bottom couple servers get combined into one WvW force. It could even be based on number of players who’ve participated in WvW over the prior period.
I think you misread what I said or you do not understanding which issue we are talking about here. I was not making the case that my server should be exempt from losing because we have fewer players. I was using my server’s current situation as an example of how population advantage can have a drastic impact on the score.
Your point that “You were able to compete and chose not to” is a false choice if the competition is unfair and unbalanced. Unfair and unbalanced competition due to population advantages is the point of this discussion.
Lastly, any argument that includes telling people to switch servers makes no sense. The idea that “some servers should just not have a WvW presence” is something I am sure ArenaNet would instantly reject thus I don’t see how it has any bearing on this conversation.
You said your server was doing good and then the update hit and less players on your world chose to help the fight. That’s a world choice and should be punished. What’s unfair or makes it an unbalanced competition if your world’s players chooses not join the fight? I guess I just take World vs World more literally than you. And clearly you’re not alone, because there are others who want some random teams formed from available players. However, I think anything like that would destroy the strategy of WvW.
Except this an example of why an outmanned server should lose. Not enough of your players are willing to join the battle…
This is one of the good reasons to switch servers…
While this mentality is justified and logical, the end result is extremely problematic. Everyone ends up transferring. The desolate servers stop participating. The server at the bottom gets tired of having no one to play with (or losing every week to the same guy) and they transfer. That creates another desolate server as it self destructs and the process slowly climbs the ladder until the remnants are left sitting in one giant group with no one to play against.
Or they start being competitive. If a world just isn’t competitive, and there’s nothing they can do about it by learning to coordinate better or getting more players to the fight, they’re just not going to be competitive. Manipulating the score isn’t going to make them more competitive. Cheating for them by giving them a bonus if they’re losing isn’t going to make them more competitive. It almost seems like some think that of the score were close because they got bonus points for having half as many players this would make it fun for them. I don’t see how.
To the extend the score is a problem, get rid of it. But to the extent that servers don’t have enough WvW players, messing with score won’t change that. Unfortunately, it seems obvious to me that if there’s a minimum number of WvW players on a server required for it to be fun for you and if a server doesn’t have that number then they just won’t have fun in WvW there. And combining servers is the same as transferring for WvW.
There are X number of players who WvW. Right now X / [the number of servers] is less than the population limit on WvW. Either there needs to be more players doing WvW, there needs to fewer WvW servers (doesn’t need to affect PvE), or the population limit on WvW needs to be lowered. Those are the options to make it numerically competitive.
…
While one can feel bad for servers that have lower population and we can wonder if anything be done to change that, when a world’s population chooses not to fight the options are and should be significantly limited. You were able to compete and then chose not to. This is a group activity and in this regard it cannot successfully be regarded or considered at the individual level.
This is one of the good reasons to switch servers. If WvW is a priority for you, then you should go to a server where there are a significant number of WvW players. Perhaps some servers should just not have a WvW presence. Or maybe the bottom couple servers get combined into one WvW force. It could even be based on number of players who’ve participated in WvW over the prior period.
You say it’s a group activity and not to be considered at an individual level. But there are individual level rewards. Throwing more incentives or rewards into WvW is likely going to be biased towards certain populations or servers unless it’s a more even playing field. Is that fair / right?
In your mind we should just pay to transfer.
In a guild with upgrades? Tough. You’ve got to grind them again.If your chosen server gets vast amount of queues so you can’t play as you like?
Tough. Pay for gems. Transfer.If your chosen server sees an exodus / grows indifferent to WvW.
Tough. Pay for gems. Transfer.As a member of a server in WvW, for the most part, you are at the mercy of the general WvW population of the server (aka bandwagon) and may have to keep paying Arenanet money transfer to find yourself in fun / reasonably fair WvW matches. I can see why Arenanet is more than happy with this as the status quo, but why are you?
It is precisely this stance which is alienating people. Perhaps whatever your server you play on hasn’t suffered from transfers. As a proud Denravian since BEW2, I’ve suffered from both sides of the imbalance problem. Neither is particularly fun.
Individual rewards are fine and even beneficial, but they should be (and I believe mostly are) separated from server rewards and score. No doubt WvW should be made more popular and a significant part of that would be better individual rewards.
They’re dealing with the queues as they need to, but eliminating queues will if anything make the WvW population imbalance greater.
I just fail to see a fair option to force population balance. Everyone needs to pick a server based on their preferences. And WvW impacts this while PvE doesn’t nearly as much because you can guest wherever you want. So you keep guesting on Denravian if that world’s WvW is unacceptable to you while fighting for a different world in WvW. But asking for special allowances for Denravian because they can’t or won’t field a competitive force in WvW doesn’t seem right or beneficial to me.
Also, a lot of WvW players don’t jump to the top servers. If they did, everyone who WvW’s would be there and this discussion would be moot.
(edited by Inspired.6730)
1. Nope. You can always guest for PvE with other Eu/Aussie/SEA players, you can not guest in WvW. A shocking hint: you can organize for PvE just like WvW.
2. When you steamroll an empty or nearly empty maps you are putting in a small fraction of effort, tactics, strategies required, you should not be getting rewarded for that in any way shape or form, directly or indirectly. Reward system needs to reflect player effort which is not possible while taking an empty map.
Not sure what the “nope” refers to. Since you can guest for PvE, the only thing that server choice matters for is WvW. So players should choose their servers based on WvW. Also, not every server needs to have a WvW force if there aren’t enough players for it.
We may just disagree on the other. I don’t see WvW as being about player effort. It’s a group event and should be based on world effort and a part of that is fielding a sufficient fighting force. It should never be an option for a world to say, we don’t have enough players to win so everyone leave so they get less rewards.
I believe that all these posts suggesting score adjustments based upon population differences totally miss the point … which is that it is not fun to play when you are significantly outnumbered. In my opinion, the ONLY way to fix WvW is to come up with some way to roughly balance populations in a match. Otherwise we will get the situation where, in an extreme example, an undermanned server can keep the score close by mostly capturing camps or killing yaks. That’s not a full spectrum of the WvW experience.
I suppose that the suggestion to automatically form an alliance between B and C if A has a dominant population presence might help, but that’s pretty much just a way to balance a 2-way battle …. it no longer is the 3-way conflict originally intended. In my opinion, a better method would be to keep the 3-way format and implement a forced mercenary system like Rift did with their warfronts … although I’ll admit not everyone would like that.
In any case, score balance does NOT equate to game play balance. If instanced matches with equal player caps for each faction (notice I didn’t say server) are the only way to achieve game play balance, I say do it.
I don’t think they completely miss it because many times it is the score imbalance that causes the lower playing population. Unfortunately there are many reasons why populations are and become imbalanced just as there different reasons why score imbalances exist.
Clearly if you’re winning the score while being significantly outnumbered you would not want to change that. Anyway, being balanced was stated as not being a goal of WvW and I don’t have a problem with that. It should be possible to have good fun battles and matches without perfectly balanced sides.
Devon,
The reason is that when one server has a population advantage of even 20 people those 20 people can form a zerg and quickly capture towers & keeps that are undefended. The ease to which an offensive zerg can be formed compared with what it takes to assemble a defense is what creates the scoring imbalance.
Case in point look at this week’s match in the bronze league between Darkhaven, Gate of Madness, and Ferguson’s Crossing (http://mos.millenium.org/na/matchups/map/1093). That match was one of the closest ever until the new patch hit and all of GoM’s PvE players vanished from WvW. If you look at the second graph you can see GoM has not been able to get it’s PPT above 250 for some time now (http://mos.millenium.org/servers/view/43). The reason for this is not that GoM suddenly started sucking, but because we cannot match the numbers of the other servers. The other servers have enough people to push us on multiple fronts and our defenders are too few to stop them. A fully upgraded keep means nothing when a 30 man zerg pulls up with 5 Alphas and only a handful of people are defending.
In terms of how WvW could be designed differently I already made suggestions in this thread, but the gist of my opinion is that capturing objectives needs to be made harder and defending an objective needs to be more feasible for small groups. (https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Collaborative-Development-World-Population/page/5#post3111942)
Also, I agree with you that momentum is part of what affects scoring bursts, but I think that is only an after effect of the core problem. Given that most WvW players play for short periods it’s easy to swing momentum as new groups of players sign on. The actual problem is that when one server out populates another repeatedly the disadvantaged server starts to feel disenfranchised to the point where every battle feels lost before it begins.
Regards.
Except this an example of why an outmanned server should lose. Not enough of your players are willing to join the battle.
While one can feel bad for servers that have lower population and we can wonder if anything be done to change that, when a world’s population chooses not to fight the options are and should be significantly limited. You were able to compete and then chose not to. This is a group activity and in this regard it cannot successfully be regarded or considered at the individual level.
This is one of the good reasons to switch servers. If WvW is a priority for you, then you should go to a server where there are a significant number of WvW players. Perhaps some servers should just not have a WvW presence. Or maybe the bottom couple servers get combined into one WvW force. It could even be based on number of players who’ve participated in WvW over the prior period.
Although I still see benefits of just getting rid of score, if score is kept then there are limits to what should be done, but there are options.
If a score is higher because of greater population, whether time factored or not, that’s the way it should be. No server should be punished because they bring more players to the fight.
Conversely, if population imbalance occurs because one team has gained a scoring advantage and thus players stop entering the fight, that can probably be addressed. I can think of couple possibilities, but I bet there are a lot more and better ones.
- There could be sub scores, like a daily score so that a server which was losing the overall score could still work to take the day.
- There could be greater individual rewards given to players who are on a server losing by a significant amount to encourage them to play. For example: darn were losing, well at least I can get bonus wxp and karma for playing.
- There could be some form of momentum changer. Unfortunately I can’t think of any good ones, and need to be careful with this because getting momentum should be a desirable thing. I suppose this is where it be better to limit momentum.
The only thing I think of right away to limit momentum that doesn’t like it would kill fun, would be having more fixed property on a map, so that it couldn’t be completely wiped.
Still probably better to allow a comeback, but not a good idea to have it be based at all on getting rewarded for have done poorly earlier. For example, the team who wins the last day or two of a match could get a huge bonus to their score.
There are probably a lot of events in the game where the scaling is largely unknown/untested. When the living story takes 50 players into their areas we’ll probably see some other champ hotspots too.
This, there’s a whole world of events out there just like that…working as intended. The trick is getting 50 players there to do them when they spawn.
Big deal.
1st off all, thanks for doing this. I really really appreciate it.
Second though is to not only look at the discussion here. Many people who like what you are doing are not writing on the the forum and are only dissapointed when you steer away from what they enjoy. I worked for customer service for a phone company. 99.9% off the people taking the time to contact the company where dissattisfied with something. Still only 2% off the customers ever contacted the company.So before drawing any conclusions my first advise would be to have an ingame survey.
Discussions both in mapchat and in my guild indicate a totally different view regarding Scarlet then you get out here. an ingame survey would lead to a good view off what ALL of the community wants and not only those that complain.Personally I like most things bout the living story and yes I like Scarlet and dont udnerstand why people hate her. She wasnt dropped on us. her existance was hinted a long time ago, but too many people dont even read mails they are getting (Eir after flame and frost, indicated that someone was behind this alliance) or listen to in game conversations (First time the name Scarlet was dropped was during the first Aetherblade dungeon by Mai Trin). The first part off the queens jubilee clearly indicated we where going to meet this scarlet and then 2 weeks later she was there. So it was very cleverly done.
My tips for the living story are:
1: No more backpacks or make all current ones skins in the achievement pane. I have actually been picking the PvP-skins off the last two backpacks for the simple reason that I wanted to preserve the skin as proof off my participation, but I dont have any characters that had room for a backpack.2: More special themed maps like Bazaar, Queens pavillion and labyrinth. Those maps where all very much fun and very active. If you re-use them please make them different. I could imagine that e.g. the bazaar would turn into a battle between aetherblades and merchants and we have to help out the merchants.
3: More clear communication. Many people where disappointing when the TA-overall achievement dissapeared. This is not the first time. I would suggest a timer in the achievement like the daily/monthly timer, indicating how much time you have left.
So far for my 2 cents.
Agree with this.
I start reading this thread and I have to stop because nearly every thread I want to reply with a no, not really or meh. Can the Living Story be better…what can’t? That doesn’t mean it’s not good as it’s been.
In this respect, its like a TV show. You don’t need a survey to see if its popular, you just need to see if players are playing it. If they are that’s all that matters. Sure some will play and say they don’t like it, so what if they keep consuming it. Again, just like a TV show, the biggest complainers (omg, they killed such and such) are often the most dedicated watchers; that means it shouldn’t be changed, not that it should.
Put another way, I’m hoping the developers know they don’t need to substantially change something that people care enough to have strong feelings about. Just hope they keep playing it and complaining, because the alternative is most likely they get what they want and stop playing it.
Finally, things like calling for it all to be permanent and the pacing. A big part of me thinks, hard to argue that it would all still be there. But, if everything ever put in game, needs to stay, then it’s hardly a living changing world and I find that really appealing. Surely, a mix is best. Some temporary and some permanent, which is also what seems to be happening. The only question that raises is related to the pacing question.
On this it seems like some players are suffering a disconnect. They want more of the additions to be permanent, but then they want there to be fewer of them. Heck, I’d be happier with weekly releases. However, I understand biweekly which also actually ties into they same frequency as most TV shows when one considers you can’t do reruns.
Anyway, that’s my thoughts. Please remember that the majority don’t usually post, and while that often doesn’t tell you all that much. In the case of content you shouldn’t need much because you can just check out how popular it is in game.
Keep of the good work and keep changing Tyria.
…You desperately need to think of the players that do not, or are unable to, buy gems. Whether you like it or not, they are part of your playerbase. They are a part of the community just as much as the people that buy gems every single day are. …..
That may all be true, but what they aren’t is currently paying customers. You were a customer in the past when you bought the game. Now you’re just a former customer who gets to keep playing the game because there’s no subscription.
You got what you paid for and now you want to change the deal by demanding more without paying more.
Stop being cheap. If you want more, pay for it.
Hi everyone,
Well it looks like my release notes weren’t added to explain this, so I’ll try to allay the confusion. Yes, some of the cultural armor has gone through some major updates. Folks have been vehemently requesting that the cultural armors glow, and they have been confused at the old glows that were there. This confusion was because a lot of the dye-to-skin blends on stems would glow the skin color, but not their chosen glow color.
In updating the armors, this comes with particular considerations. The armor glows are not on the same system as the body glow, so they will only glow the color of the area dyed. Armor glow also does not play well with alpha, so I have to avoid any alpha edges. The problem with this is most of those areas that look good glowing are also some of the areas that blend to skin. Armor glow also negates specularity.
So. What this means for you is, to add your glow, I reworked the dye channels to give you the largest choice and control possible over the glow. The areas that glow are now selectable for you. Some of the textures are also better balanced to give you more consistent results… you won’t have to guess what color you need to find to make the red feel red, for example. It will just work.
This currently affects Medium Tier 2 (legs will be re-addressed for better glow and dye alignment, sorry about that, it got past me) and Tier 3, Light Tier 1 (female only), and Light Tier 3. The other weights and tiers will be assessed for a similar pass to give glow or upgrade glow results when possible.
I’ve been hearing your cries to get more glow on the sylvari and am doing my best to give you more control over your character customization.
Okay, this doesn’t affect me; however, I find it necessary to comment.
Other than obvious bug fixes, existing armors and even weapons should never be changed. Spend your time designing new things and leave the existing alone. People who like them use them and people who don’t, don’t.
It’s quite scary if we need to pay attention to every suggestion or request made by anyone because some designer might listen to and use that as an excuse to change something we like.
Again, this needs repeating, if we’re using something it is because we like the way it looks so please leave it alone. And, if you see a demand for a changed version, then make a new one that’s a variation of it.
[snip]
If WvW is to be a sporting-event, then…
If WvW is instead supposed to be a wargame, then there needs to be an elimination of the “gamey” aspects of points-per-turn and weekly resets, and installation of hard and fast strategic reasons for holding the keeps and towers on each map. The problem would then be engineering it such that the eventual victor has great difficulty holding their gains and the system naturally falls back to a more balanced state. A mercenary system would probably go a long way to help in such a vision as well.
[snip]
I like your analogies. I don’t see how it can be gotten to work as sporting-event scenario. And besides, sPvP exists for this already, except on a smaller scale which is also a large part of the reason for that.
I think that a lot of what was included with season 1 recently works well with bringing in meaning to the wargame. Individual rewards for team/world accomplishments.
I didn’t follow, but I know there was an argument prior to season 1 that led to more tiers of matchups. Was this related to score and worlds not wanting to have a blown up score, or was it more a worry about not being able to accomplish anything against a much higher scoring opponent?
Why would anyone think the score should be adjusted for population? It seems obvious to me that it shouldn’t. Population being put into the battle matters. What doesn’t matter is the score. I’m not even sure what the point of showing a score really is.
I get that there’s a lot of behind the scenes stuff rewarded based on the score and matchups also factor it in, but overall it would seem better off gone. It’s not as though a world couldn’t generally tell if they were winning or losing without it. And if a couple teams thought they were winning when one actually wasn’t, so what?
The question would be, would not having a score help or hurt world population and WvW participation. My initial thought is that it actually help participation on the lower scoring servers and lower it on the higher servers. While this would not be a bad thing, what would it do to overall WvW participation?
I’m tired of it,
since last patch I’m having far too frequent disconnects and since I mainly do WvW that means that if there’s a queue, everytime I DC I have to requeue and if there is no queue (rarely these days) I can play for 10-15mins (even less, sometimes I barely make it into LA or wherever my character is) before getting disconnected again…BUT as if this wasn’t annoying enough
the most annoying thing is that it is not a game crash, it is the game dropping my laptop’s internet connection, and that is unacceptable, your game at the moment is a kitten VIRUS, you can’t code yuor game in a way that it can disrupt one’s internet connection. (And it’s not the whole connection dropping, just the one on the computer running Gw2.exe, my other laptop and my smartphone are still online).
What happens is: in WvW I start seeing people going in a straight line, I can’t use any skill and soon I get the infamous “the game client lost connection to the server”. After 3-4 seconds my Team Speak client loses its connection too and I am stuck without internet until I kill Gw2.exe from task manager. Within 20 seconds since killing Gw2.exe process my connection starts working again.
I want to add that I am not experiencing any similar connection issue when I am not playing Gw2.
The bolded part is correct. They can’t, and obviously didn’t, code their game to kill your internet connection. The game is likely triggering an underlying hardware or computer network configuration problem. No matter what, you should file a support ticket so they help you.
I prefer reading things like that on the website; that’s something that web browsers are properly designed for. The game is better designed for playing the game, not reading background stories that are not required to play the game. That said, I don’t have RP or other reasons for them not to be in game also. I just don’t want reading them to be a requirement to do anything or for them to be unavoidable. So, for example, a UI tab with stories would be fine.
Cause reading a bleh looking white blogged website verse sitting in a library is much nicer. Also the glaring white back ground doesn’t help.
Simply put this is my opinion. I don’t mean to sound rude you are running in circles with your arguements. I could say that why are Asura wasting time making fun little 8 bit mushroom clouds for war vs making real weapons or how a wooden anything would never ever pierce any dragon scale ever etc etc unless it maybe magical or was enchanted with dragon slaying etc. The arguments don’t go anywhere. The game does not have a realistic enough atmosphere to make such arguments. If this was LotR then maybe we can make such ones.
And yes fictional games ALL have realism to some extent because they are based off of reality in the first place.
Without trying to be condescending, it would appear that an easy fix is available for a part of your complaint. Most, if not all, web browsers can be easily user customized to use whatever colors you want for text and background.
Conclusion after reading through thread: farmers will never understand how non-farmers think. To a farmer everything is the gold value and their time is worth what they can get the most gold per minute doing. For the rest, not so much; just is it fun or not.
It’s not a matter of farmers vs. non-farmers. The issue here is that some people draw a strange magic line between money and commodities, saying that only one side has value.
What is the cost of acquiring gold?
Of course commodities have value. That’s why someone says it was free, I used mats I had (the value I had). Pointless argument over nothing, if some people think that free equals no value; that’s not what people mean. They just mean free, not no value.
If the mats had no value, people wouldn’t be gathering and saving them, regardless of whether they went out of their way to do so or not. [bold]If something has value and something has to be expended to obtain it, then it isn’t free. [/bold] Saying it is free is saying your time and effort have no value. Some may believe that. While they’re free to think whatever they like, I don’t believe their time and effort have no value.
This is just wrong. Value doesn’t equal not free, nor does free equal no value. Anyway, do you really even believe this? So every gift you’ve ever received consequently had no value to you. Or, maybe you just considered that it wasn’t free because you had to invest valuable time being nice to the person that gave it to you?
Conclusion after reading through thread: farmers will never understand how non-farmers think. To a farmer everything is the gold value and their time is worth what they can get the most gold per minute doing. For the rest, not so much; just is it fun or not.
I hear this often from people in and out of game. I can’t understand how they can think that crafting something was free since they gathered the mats.
Once you have the mats, you have 2 options:
1. Craft them into something.
2. Sell them.In both cases, you are without the mats in the end, but gain:
1. The value of the item you crafted.
2. The gold gained from selling mats.So when crafting, the cost was either #2 (gold you would have gotten selling the mats), or the cost of buying the mats, both of which are pretty similar.
And the time it takes to gather should also be taken into account. Time saved can be used to make gold somewhere else.
Why you’re trying to change the way people define free is beyond me, but I don’t believe you’re going to succeed. People consider free to mean no outlay of currency, not some measure of opportunity cost.
Real life example, someone paints a picture and hangs it on their wall. A friend admires it and asks how much it cost. Most people would say it was free because they painted it themselves. Some would calculate the cost of paint and canvas and say that amount and point out they painted it themselves. You would have them respond based on some opportunity cost of how much they could make at another job, or how much they could sell it for, or something else they could have done with the time; whichever is greater.
Many of us players never sell mats we collect. We store them or use them. Thus, for us they have no gold value associated with them. The opportunity cost involved is that once used they will no longer be stored to be able to be used for something else in the future; and since this is not quantifiable, it is considered free.
In keeping with the theme of this thread. This is similar to why I stopped giving Xmas gifts…self-entitled brats.
Anyway, if the gods see fit to grant me an ascended weapon drop, I’ll be grateful regardless of type or stats. Thanks in advance.
If you think about it, dailies hurt all players. They hurt hardcore gamers who invest 5h+ a day because, well, they’re capped in how much they can progress. They hurt casuals, because if they are missing out on a daily, the progress is gone, forever. Actually it hurts casuals even more. Think about it. There are A LOT of players out there that cannot play for several days, but might have some additional time to spend on another day. And on that day they’re capped and can only do one daily.
At the end of the day this system only serves the developers, not the players. It’s an incentive to log in on a daily basis, to get that reward you have been conditioned to want. The entire game has turned it a big machine that gives you rewards. But only once per day, because it wants you to return. It’s calling the shots, not you. Unless you’re strong willed and say “screw you machine, not with me!”.
If you think about, I think you’ll realize you’re wrong, unless the only reason anyone actually plays is to do the dailies. And if that’s the case, they’re probably about done with this game anyway.
Or, think about it this way, you say hardcore players are hurt when they can’t do another daily and casuals are hurt when they can’t do another daily. So what you’re really saying is that we need more dailies so that no matter how long someone plays there’s always another daily they can do.
Fortunately for you, the game is slowly moving there. We now have daily achievements, daily boss chests, daily gatherings and daily craftings. For a lot of players there’s already another daily they can still do when they log out.
What i mean is that IF they want german people only it would be easier to have a filter like “Germans only” (no hate towards germans! But like we have in servers. We have german specific servers, so i think it should be in the LFG tool aswell.)
And the germans have to remember: They are not the only one using the LFG tool… Seeing more german posts than english makes me sad tbh. Why do they post in german and not english? They could just write “Germans only please”
because if they made a posting saying in English- German players only- you would have some sod who TLDR and join the group and then complain because they spoke in German.
Making the post in German sends a message that it is a German party.
It is not that hard to understand really.
If you don’t speak the language it was not meant for you.
I see all sorts of guilds recruiting in their native language on my server- it is meant for those communities.Well yes, but when i go to the LFG tool i like to see what people are doing. Like Path 2, story etc. but all i can see now is “Weg 2” etc. And some other stuff i can’t read.
I don’t understand why its so hard to type in English so everyone understands
2 means the same in german as it means in english.
Also, with the simple web based translators available it’s hardly an issue anymore to understand anything that is simply written as phrases. Of course, if you want to be understood by a larger number that’s on you.
The whole premise of the OP is based on redefining casuals as those who have almost no time to play. Leaving casuals defined as they usually are as someone who plays casually as opposed to being hardcore, time isn’t an issue. Casuals don’t really care all that much about having best in class gear and thus the OP is solving a problem that doesn’t exist for casuals.
Hardcore players who can’t play for periods of time or don’t want to play everyday would appreciate his suggestion however. Of course, getting those hardcore players to login everyday is also the reason dailies exist in the first place.
These threads always end up with people trying to define what a casual player is. So far since my time here these are some of the things I have seen stated about casual players:
- Don’t care about the game.
- Don’t have game goals.
- Don’t try.
- Don’t want to get better at the game.
- Are not good players because they play casually.
- Want everything handed to them.
- Don’t play enough to be good at the game.
- Are wasting their time.
- Don’t care about having good gear/stats.
- Feel obligated to do dailies every time they play.
- Don’t care about doing dailies.
- Spend their limited time just to do dailies.
- Don’t want difficult content.
- And my favorite, “carebears”.
Those are just the ones I can remember out of many more. Looking at that list a casual player must not play at all or when they do they must just stand in LA asking other players for handouts. Then when they get the handouts they sell them on the TP because they don’t care about the gear anyway.
Me, I don’t play that much and I don’t lose sleep if I don’t get my daily. That doesn’t mean I’m not invested in the game when I play. It doesn’t mean I don’t care about my gear. I’m certainly not going to pound my head against my monitor every second of my free time but hey I want that stuff too and will work toward getting it as I see fit. I can’t speak for all casual players though.
I know this is a bit off topic but I always find these, “A casual is…. and does….” threads interesting. There are probably about as many types and play styles of casual players as there are hardcore players and everything in between.
That’s all fine, and almost always if one is to have a meaningful discussion on anything it starts with a discussion over the terms and definitions you’re going to use. And to be fair to the OP, he did define how he was using the term casual.
But, as I was trying to pointing out, he was then left trying to solve a problem for a very specific and limited group…those who have a very limited amount of time to play, but need to have the best in class gear to play. Or put another way, they don’t have the time to do the dailies, but need to have the best gear to do it.
And, these threads turn into a discussion of the definition of casuals, because the OP’s make them that. Otherwise the Op would have titled it: “Dailies hurt players who don’t want to log in every day” and not: “Dailies hurt casuals, not help.”
7
My engineer, who happens to be Charr, was my first character played is the only profession who isn’t to level 80 yet. I think I made it to level 14 before I stopped playing him and moved on to other characters and he’s level 27 now. He’ll get there eventually.
And, being Charr is the problem.
I also have a female Asuran started on the way to one of each race/sex combo, but that’ll leave me needing a Charr female which is nothing but name at this point.
But anyway 10 80’s is my plan.
The whole premise of the OP is based on redefining casuals as those who have almost no time to play. Leaving casuals defined as they usually are as someone who plays casually as opposed to being hardcore, time isn’t an issue. Casuals don’t really care all that much about having best in class gear and thus the OP is solving a problem that doesn’t exist for casuals.
Hardcore players who can’t play for periods of time or don’t want to play everyday would appreciate his suggestion however. Of course, getting those hardcore players to login everyday is also the reason dailies exist in the first place.
Most misguided post I’ve seen in a while.
There’s absolutely no reason they should limit the amount of content they add to the lowest common denominator – the player who plays the least. If there’s too much content for someone to get through everything, then don’t do it all. It’s not like any of it has been required to continue moving forward through the game.
The complaint seems to be the same as someone going to an amusement park and complaining that there are too many rides that they can’t possibly get to them all. Instead of complaining they should be happy that they can prioritize and do those which are their favorites without having to duplicate or do those they don’t prefer.
It also makes no sense to complain about temporary content and too much content at the same time. By definition temporary content doesn’t need to be done unless the developers make a huge mistake they’ll have to reverse. There’s no way they would make content temporary that was required to be done or the player would be left behind. So if the content is temporary you don’t need to do it.
Finally, if there’s so much in the game that you really like doing that it’s more than you have time to do being grateful is the proper response, not complaining that they have provided too much.
You aren’t seeing the bigger picture. They nerfed karma rewards across the game. They introduced expensive karma recipes for ascended crafting. They added in karma only mats for crafting.
They are starting to move towards karma being a useful needed mat again. They need to drain the current supply of karma from players using these recipes and one off purchases. Once that is done they will almost certainly start introducing more karma based rewards and further reducing karma gains throughout the game.
In a few months time karma may be an important reward from events.
I wouldn’t laugh so hard… What Zudet says is exacly what’s happening. Don’t go spending all of your karma just yet.
I’ll try very hard not to spend my 2.5 million karma that I have……….
That’s all? just 2.5? When you start buying SOME of those Ascended recipes at 25,000K a pop you will wish you had more.
and you will be buying so kitten many for what reason exactly? Most people will craft 1 or two ascended weapons for their fav character and that no more than 50k karma…
Don’t forget armor coming later.
OMFG 3 000 000 – 25 000! Not only that but by the time they add dat armor you’ll have enough time to grow a 3 meters beard.
I’m not really interested in getting into a discussion of how many ascended weapon and armor item recipes the average player will buy because we won’t solve that. But what were you upset about again?
You aren’t seeing the bigger picture. They nerfed karma rewards across the game. They introduced expensive karma recipes for ascended crafting. They added in karma only mats for crafting.
They are starting to move towards karma being a useful needed mat again. They need to drain the current supply of karma from players using these recipes and one off purchases. Once that is done they will almost certainly start introducing more karma based rewards and further reducing karma gains throughout the game.
In a few months time karma may be an important reward from events.
I wouldn’t laugh so hard… What Zudet says is exacly what’s happening. Don’t go spending all of your karma just yet.
I’ll try very hard not to spend my 2.5 million karma that I have……….
That’s all? just 2.5? When you start buying SOME of those Ascended recipes at 25,000K a pop you will wish you had more.
and you will be buying so kitten many for what reason exactly? Most people will craft 1 or two ascended weapons for their fav character and that no more than 50k karma…
Don’t forget armor coming later.
What really gets me is that a friend of mine has this and can just allocate any stats he wants to it.. but for anyone who didn’t get it before this update (Which was NEVER mentioned that it’d be removed) we’re just out of luck?
I find it nearly impossible to believe that you thought they’d keep selling an item that had one of it’s stats removed?
Or did you think they’d just allow everyone to buy that item from then on and pick their own stats? They may as well have just kept those couple items then and removed all the other ones.
Has anyone heard what happens to existing MF items held in a guild bank?
I believe somewhere around here is a developer post stating that if you have one of the old tickets you get a different screen than if you don’t.
Try looking at it with ticket in inventory. If it doesn’t allow purchase, please post.
Actually, no there isn’t.
It’s a PVE open world. Not a dungeon or PVP match of some sort. Anyone can go there for any reason they want and do whatever they want.
Whether they get rewards for anything that happens in that zone is entirely between them and Anet.
Hm…considering they wouldn’t otherwise be there except there is an event that they want the goodies from, but they can’t be bothered to participate in said event. This is as bad as [afk]ing pvp just to get your ‘play x matches’ daily crap.
Freeloading is freeloading, plain and simple.
Edit: Freaking filter
I don’t think it should matter. If you start operating based on the premise that how someone plays in open world PVE creates obligations to other players you have fundamentally changed the nature of MMO’s.
Even in real life it’s almost never the case that you get punished for doing nothing while life occurs around you. Changing that is a big deal.
But, if it helps, you can call it leeching that there is nothing wrong with doing. It’s open world and so when you go there to do anything it is based on you knowing that it will be with other players who go there to do anything and everything they want to do also. And it may not coincide with your goals, but that is okay because it’s open world.
I’ve leeched part of events. Simply because sometimes natured called. Or my neighbour suddenly showed up and asked me something. Or my cat brought in something I personally don’t care for in the house. Or a million other reasons.
Those things take 45 minutes. Anything can happen in those 45 minutes. And would you log off because your neighbour shows up after spending 20 minutes already?
I’ve done several invasions yesterday, where I actively played about 30 minutes out of those 45. And I’ve done several invasions where I took 20 minutes to unlock WP’s… (and not clear portals of any kind).
Oh, and what about those that already were in the map when the invasion happened? They should either leave the map or be forced to participate?
There’s a big difference between these things and the people that just show up to hang out though.
It’s one thing to have to open waypoints so you can help, or having to get up to deal with the mouse your cat just brought in as a trophy vs showing up, and just standing there chatting doing nothing for the duration.
We probably all ‘leech’ to some extent; however its people the latter category that should be penalized.
Actually, no there isn’t.
It’s a PVE open world. Not a dungeon or PVP match of some sort. Anyone can go there for any reason they want and do whatever they want.
Whether they get rewards for anything that happens in that zone is entirely between them and Anet.
(snip)
(snip)
Interestingly, I almost like the sounds of your living world scenario better. But, either way you’ve created two possible scenarios that seem more biased than necessary.
Of course, I read what you posted and see new starting area and think…oh god, I hope not. I would much rather see level 81+ areas than new starting areas. Fortunately, they’ve already said there won’t be either new races or professions added (I forget which), and now we just need to hope it’s both. Five races and eight professions are enough.
New levels, new areas, new skills, new enemies, etc. can all be added and introduced through the living story. And, none of that would require that all the content in a new area would have to part of a living “story” even if was introduced in a living story update. So, if it is unfortunately part of the plan, a new starting are could be planned for a new race which could be added as a non-expansion update and introduced as part of a living story event.
They can also sell access to any possible new race, or whatever else, in the gem store instead of selling it in an expansion release. Or maybe, they can come up with an even better way of making money off a new race…Oh, I know, how about an RNG Tengu box with the top prize being you can create one.
I don’t like it.
Actually starting to become less and less of a fan. Other posters that recognize me know I have been supportive of the game and Anets design decisions since beta. My posting history reflects that, with my only real criticisms being the black lion chest/key scam, that live action trailer, and the damage WvW still suffers from caused by months of free guesting.
But this living story stuff…while it was interesting and novel to begin with is just starting to feel pointless. We started the Hero’s Journey cycle with the Dragons. And then that just stopped and left us hanging. Then we are dropped into the middle of another Hero’s Journey cycle that seems extremely disjointed and random.
The worst part is Tyria as a whole is just left to whither because the bulk of players run off to do the living story stuff. Not because they might particularly want to, but because they are afraid they will up being penalized if they don’t.
I have seen the villagers outside of DR in QD sick more in the past few weeks than I ever have. In the living story we are trying to keep someone from murdering Krytans, while out in the world we are letting them get poisoned to death by bandits. This is a perfect allegory for the current state of the game. Living story zones see overflow, while the rest of the world dies.
So it’s extremely sad there will be no traditional expansions (and even sadder that apparently no expansion content seems to be in production since they don’t even have a delivery method settled upon). Traditional expansions have their place in MMOs. For instance, new classes and races will cause people to revisit low/mid level zones on alts and allow them to experience old content in a new way. While new high level areas, dungeons and prestige awards give current players large new chunks of content to experience and explore. Instead we get living story: every player in the same place, doing the same thing, getting the same stuff neglecting an enormous, gorgeous world and rich lore that is lucky to hold on to a crumb from living story’s temporary content plate.
For myself, the draw away from expansions and move towards Living story, temporary content and focus on corralling players to one tiny area have me more inclined to give another game a grab at my allotted MMO play time. A few months ago, I never would have considered it.
You make a lot of seemingly well thought out statements; however, they don’t lead to your conclusion.
Whether you like the living story content or not is irrelevant to whether more extensive content should be released via living story type updates or via an expansion. Otherwise, it would be like arguing that because you didn’t like Factions they should never have released another expansion and should just have released Nightfall though living story type content updates.
The content and method of release are two different things.
Also, you’re kidding yourself if you think that existing zones would be any less dead than you’re finding them while players are off playing new living story content than they would be if players were off playing new expansion content. If the new content is something the players like playing, they will be off playing it. All the dead zones you describe are is evidence that most players like the new content and are thus off playing it.
This is a VERY important point. Something like this should be clarified in the patch notes. In bold.
Actual release note:
All overflow maps created within 10 minutes of the start of the invasion will host a concurrent version of that hour’s event.Except that the player has no way of telling when an overflow was created. They join within the 10 minute time limit, get into an overflow and…..nothing…..“return to your home world”, etc.
So, what do you have to say about that?
Logic:
-joins overflow
-observes there is no metaevent
-concludes that this overflow was created past the 10 minute cutoff
I think what he’s talking about is when the player enters the overflow in the first 10 minutes and there’s no event. It’s possible because the overflow could have already existed at the top of the hour. This is especially possibly on maps with popular mega’s that occurred toward the end of an hour. This, however, would seem a relatively minor problem with an otherwise great event overflow implementation.
In my opinion, players who do not attempt to go to an event as soon it pops on the top of the hour do not have a right to complain when they later go and don’t get in one. This would actually seem like a feature to prevent those who think it’s their right to farm event completions without putting in any of the effort for the event.
Overflow events seemed to be working good for me. If some are having errors with those created in the first 10 minutes having an event they should report it as such. What the OP’s complaining about and suggesting makes no sense.
Of course a pop needs to come up if your home world is available. Not everyone going to a map will be there for the event.
And traveling off an overflow map with an event running because you get the popup is no where near anything common sense would dictate doing.
The only possible “real” non-bug issue that could happen would be if a main instance finished the event before the 10 minute window was up, and I find that hard to believe.
Gaile, I sent you a PM. I don’t think I am supposed to post other people’s display name in forum.
I have looked up the account in question, and the ticket. Apparently, this post was made immediately upon submission of the ticket. I certainly can understand that you’d want a very prompt response, but to submit a ticket and post on the forums immediately afterwards is just not appropriate. Our means of follow up is here: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/account/Tickets-for-Review-3-days-and-older-merged/first#post48339
It has been 24 hours now, and I wish that you had received a response more quickly than this. The team is backed up (we had some issues with the ticketing system, darn it!) but I think your husband will hear soon.
Thank you for understanding the process that we request, and thank you, also, for patience as the team reviews the ticket.
It seems pretty obvious that her reason for posting was to complain that the circumstances presented led to a ban, not that she wanted an extra-normal support review. Thus, no ticket was provided.
What would really seem appropriate for a support liaison to address is how people can continue to claim they were banned for nothing more than transferring gold between themselves and other players. Either call them out for lying if they were doing something else or explain why this apparently happens followed by bans lifted because they were done in error.
Transferring gold between players is supposed to be an allowed activity and would seem like something that should not raise any flags that even require any review before a ban. However, if you wish to review all transfers over a certain size, then one should be able to assume the review would be thorough and the ban done only upon certainty of misdeed.
Assuming guilt and asking your customer to prove their innocence or at least beg for a timely review seems to be a bad practice.
Can’t you just uncheck your back piece so it will not be shown?
Then there would be no more clipping which you seem to find extremely annoying.
And what happens if I want to see my back piece? Kind of why I got it in the first place, you know. Or perhaps you are suggesting I go into the hero panel and check it each time I get into combat? Why should I have to?
Well, I considered suggesting that you not use kits if appearance was that much more important to you over functionality, but I figured that wouldn’t go over well.
(Anyway, I suppose you can just consider my posts as bumps that don’t violate the rules like real bumps do.)
1 2