We don’t care about legendaries… We want to have a decent WvW experience. They can remove all loot from WvW for all I care, if they find a way to make matchups more competitive and fun…
Why should they close the game mode when this acctually does not affect anyone in any way? What difference does it make if you win or you lose in WvW? And what about the players that only play WvW? Should they be denied of their game mode just because of server issues? Then better off shutting the whole game as people on PvE are suffering the same issues (in fact I lost my T4 Solid Ocean party 4 times because of the disconects).
If you run you are bad. If you are good you stay and fight and win, even vs a class or build that counters yours. Baddies gonna be bad.
Lets see, there are two options: Stay or Run
If I run, I’m bad – End
If I stay there are two options: Win or Lose
If I win I’m good – End
If I lose, I’m bad – End
But there is a problem: People say that you beating bad people don’t make you good, because you need to beat good people to be good. But if people that lose are bad, it means you’re only beating bad people, thus you’re not good. And if you’re not good, you’re bad.
Make the Northern towers strategically meaningful. You can treb Garri from the northern towers in Alpine making them a good asset to control offensively and defensively.
Honestly, this is what I like on DBL. You cannot just sit inside a tower and treb it from safety. You have to actually go to the objective or treb from open field if you wanna do some progress. I’m pretty sure the people who yell “NO MORE SIEGE WARS” never took that fact in consideration when they cried for ABL back.
Either way, idc. We have ABL to do Treb wars and DBL to fight in the open. DBL don’t need any more changes after the ones made in april (Except maybe for the stupid air keep which can be simplified a little).
If I see 1 enemy, I’ll click on him and if I see the 40% condi duration food buff, I’ll simply turn my back and run away because I have no desire of fighting this bullkitten.
If you can’t kill a single player in the circle, you don’t deserve that capture… It would be worse if we still had warriors with banner ress the lord (thank you Anet for removing that broken feature) which would buy much more time than simply trying to survive inside the circle.
They already said they intent to add the mistforged weapons and the triumphant hero armor as a rewards. They are just trying to figure how they are going to attach it.
No we don’t… You don’t know what every person that play GW2 think. You don’t know how every single person will react to the change. You don’t know if people will actually like it or really hate it as everyone is saying.
In the interests of transparency how was this value decided?
And seeing as how you are forced to resort to this will the upcoming scoring changes feature a change to the way glicko works to provide more volatility in matchmaking?
Honestly, I think they just threw a dice and said “oh, I think that’s close enough”.
Now about the glicko stuff, I think they said somewhere in that CD thread that they intent to make a pool about reseting glicko ratings.
I don’t mean just a reset, anet’s variation of glicko does not work.
With a glicko reset at every pairing change, I’m pretty sure we’ll have a lot of varierity and the matches won’t get stale until close to end the pairings. It’s a good change imo.
Please remove Gift of Battle from the WVW reward track. The PVE folks are not liking it their as they just don’t want to do WVW events or PVP. Please find a way so that it can be universal across all the boards. In this manner PVP, WVW and PVE can all achieve this award to create legendaries, etc.
If they give WvW players a way to get Gift of Exploration through WvW-only sure, why not?
Server Links happen at the last friday of each even month (The only exception so far was December’s Re-link which were postponed 1 week due holidays). So I’m assuming the next will be at February 24th.
Maybe because these people didn’t wanted to be in the new condi meta? It’s kinda hard to beat a condi bunker in 1v1 these days unless you are traited specifically for that…
Also not everyone is up to be ganked by a thief or mesmer (the kings of 1vX). But I think the first is the most acurate response.
The reason so many people prefer ABL’s over DBL’s is because you can play solo/havoc/roam/scout on the ABL’s. The map doesn’t force you into a single play style (Zerg Train).
Honestly, DBL had much more solo objectives than ABL. After the removal of the barricades among other changes made in april, I’d say DBL became more solo-friendly than ABL.
Player vs Siege is not fun, there is no valid reason to add more siege. We have plenty of it to do what it’s intended to do. You can sit here and say people shouldn’t complain before its in game and the likes but their track record speaks volumes to anyone who doesn’t want to put their head in the sand. We didn’t need to see Golem week to know it was going to be a disaster, and that’s exactly what it was, a complete disastrous failure.
Imo there is no valid reason to add another piece of siege, even if we ignore that player vs siege is not fun and just think in terms of large scale sieging, there simply is no reason for it.
Well I had quite a bit of fun driving my alpha golem around faster than a Kenyan, but that’s not the point here… You can sit here and say people hate player versus siege, but in a pool that arena net is asking if they want to add more siege you have over 50% of the votes going in favor of adding more siege. The opinions of the loudmouths on this forum does not represent the opinions of the majority.
Do I like to fight under siege fire? Honestly, no. But I hate to see large blobs going unpunished because defensive siege is nigh useless since everything breaks in seconds to the multiple meteor showers that cover entire walltops. Will deployable cannons solve this? Problably not, but it’s another piece of siege that I can try to use against orange popping zergs while I have the outnumbered buff in my bar on all 4 maps.
That’s the idea of SMC friend. Its a super hard to hold structure that give you a unfair advantage over all the surrounding towers… Your team had that advantage too while you held SMC, why you didn’t used it? Just because the enemy team used it better than you, doesn’t mean the desing is bad.
a lot of people don’t like to be forced to use siege, as siege vs siege is really boring. braindead boring. zombie braindead boring.
there ya go I just explained the point of the thread to ya.
Do you realise that without siege, WvW would just be a huge K-train of zergs punching gates/walls while defenders aren’t able to do anything unless they match the enemy numbers numbers? (Somenthing that is quite rare these days)
Honestly, siege isn’t even THAT powerful as you people claim. Most siege is pretty useless since Meteor Shower can hit 90% of the siege placements, while the other 10% can be avoided. The only times siege is powerful is when the enemy already have the numbers to push you, which is just sillyness from their part since they could have jumped out and fought already. However, that’s not to blame on siege but on the players themselves.
Someone explains to me please why do we have the score update from T7? >.>
Anyway, here is the score at the moment.
Because SF is important to many of us… If you dig deep in the forums, you’ll see all the trash talking that T7 said about ALL T8 servers being hopeless… Now here we are… GoM is the underdog on T8 and SF is rolling the T7…
Well, there is no effort in running EotM karma train (which award much more wxp than regular wvw mind you), so I don’t mind that there isn’t some big guaranteed thing to come out of these wvw ranks. I’m 1407 and I assure you the only useful item I got from wvw rank up was a rabid ascended ring. All the rest was either salvaged (Rares that worth less than 50s and exotics that worth less than 3g) or sold.
Havok, 20v30 and 60man blob in the same phrase. Sounds lika a True T1 player.
And honestly, I find very hard to belive YB is winning anything with less people when my server always have outnumbered buff when YB have a group in the map. Maybe it’s SF who is losing when they actually have people, but surely it isn’t DH simply because DH no longer have people.
Also, backcapping is boring af. You think people like being able to only PvE on wvw? They just go do actual PvE instead which is much more profitable.
To remove someone using hacks (teleports, speed, etc) we have to witness the act in game so you must use the in-game reporting tool. The only exception is if you can point us to chat where the player cheating has said they are using a 3rd party program.
The problem is: The in-game reporting tool doesn’t give an option to actually point the person is hacking. And a lot of people are afraid of reporting for somenthing else because we risk getting our accounts suspended for “false report”.
Can Anet at least add a “Hacking” option on the report list?
I think they added this to incentive people to fight over T3 objectives instead of paper ones… Most of the time you see zergs only going for paper stuff to K-train while avoiding upgraded defended objectives because of how much time/effort consuming they are.
There is a difference between actively defending an objective and trolling the enemies with siege disabler spam
Sorry, I cannot actually defend with my AC because your 50man blob rained down Meteor Showers that cover the entire walltop on it. The only thing I have are disablers.
I finished the meta on Season 1 in the first week of the season.
I finished the meta on season 2 in the first weekend of the season.
Looks like I’ll finish Season 3 achievment in the first 5 minutes?
…I think having one desert BL is the perfect amount. You can play it if you like. I’m sure some people will get annoyed when it’s their turn to have it as their home BL, but they can stick to the other maps for those matches…
Having issues covering daytime/afternoon/evenings/overnight? Figure it out. Where there is a will there is a way!!
4 years in the game and you want us to care about what’s happening in a timezone we don’t play?
Yes you should. As the overall score is what should matter most.
Overall score will matter when winning start to matter. Right now there is no point in winning as you gain nothing for it. At least with rewards for skirmishes we can focus in winning during the time we play instead of stressing over what happening while we are not playing.
Skirmishes can be much more competitive oposed to Matchups that are pretty much over by monday.
1613 posts had to be written to have some feedback.
Well it’s something!
Well, most of the “1613 posts” are just whinning without arguments… If there are 100 posts that really point somenthing it’s too much.
For myself… I don’t see a problem. I’ve never used rams on towers/keeps that are defended by ACs (even tho I know I could naked-dance under it) because that was simply plain stupid and now there is a major reason to not do so.
I got 2 precursor drops so far , I don’t care if it was a precursor drop. I jut complaining about the game dynamics which is not designed properly.
Well, the mechanic is to get loot from wherever you are… You choose to stay dead and let the loot stay there instead of respawning and receiving the loot anywhere where you could pick up. The system isn’t flawed, you’re the one who don’t know how to use it properly.
What if I said that an Anet guild claim could actually harm the server of the guild claim? Lets say a guild plans on claiming a keep and is going to tactivate it and remove public tactic activation so that they can properly regulate the usage of the tactivators. Now lets say an Anet dev nabs it first and guild claims and has public tactic activation by default and then disappears. Now a different guild tactivates it. Next, someone starts trolling all of the tactivators and no one can do anything about it because of the public tactic activation. Now we have arrived to a situation where it actually would have been better if a different guild had guild claimed. Is this still favoritism by Anet?
What if I said that an Random guild claim could actually harm the server of the guild claim? Lets say a guild plans on claiming a keep and is going to tactivate it and remove public tactic activation so that they can properly regulate the usage of the tactivators. Now lets say an Random Guild Member nabs it first and guild claims and has public tactic activation by default and then disappears. Now a different guild tactivates it. Next, someone starts trolling all of the tactivators and no one can do anything about it because of the public tactic activation. Now we have arrived to a situation where it actually would have been better if a different guild had guild claimed.
12k Decapitate? 10k Backstab? 15k Coalescence of Ruin?
#Balance.
All of which can be dodged, most condi application cannot be dodged because A- it’s AOE, B- Has no cast tell, C- Condi application skills can be spammed, D- Hitting the enemy gives you condi’s.
A – You can dodge AoE just as you can dodge any skill in the game.
B – Please name 3 skills without cast time that can deal as much damage as the 3 I mentioned.
C – And all stacks of a single condition can be cleared with a single cleanse.
D – Only a few runes do that with the only bad one being perplexity as far as I know.
Honestly, the only thing you need to know is how to keep pugs entertained. As long you’re not leading them to their certain deaths and is actually making some progress (be through fights or ppt) you are likely to keep a healthy pug zerg.
The rest is all about the use of game mechanics and field experience… These are learned by playing, not by reading.
, I don’t care if it was a precursor drop. I jut complaining about the game dynamics which is not designed properly.
