Guild Wars 2

And as this happens, Bitcoin’s real supply is less, thus it will be worth more if demand is constant. This is the second type of growth for bitcoin, which is basically like a naturally occurring “interest rate”.

Bitcoins unlike fiat money can never be increased without consensus of the entire community, and not at the whim of one government. If it does increase, it devalues their holdings, so there is no incentive to do so. However because Bitcoin is all software and networks, it can be divided to as many decimal places as needed (current limit is. Unlike printing money where your pie shrinks, with Bitcoin it’s like keeping the same chunk of the pie. More people will agree with increased divisibility than increased supply, because it keeps their wealth the same.

While this may end up with the ridiculous notion at 1 bitcoin will keep the economy alive forever, Bitcoin’s security can and likely will be upgraded over time in the distant future (like, every 50-100 years), due to Moore’s law or new technology breakthroughs. Older coins that don’t move to new, secure addresses will eventually be recovered by gravediggers/treasure hunters. This means it can keep up with new technology, and keep the supply of bitcoins healthy. None of this of course needs to happen now, because the current security is more than enough for the technology we have today.

Because bitcoins can only ever be 21 million, it makes economic sense to hold some money in bitcoins (even $10, or $100) now just in case it does take off and go through the moon. If it doesn’t, who cares, it was yesterday’s Gem money. But you’ll start to see the problem with fiat once you do. Because the value of fiat decreases over time, you need more fiat to buy a bitcoin. In reverse, if you hold your bitcoin long enough, you’ll see it can be traded back for fiat for a higher price not because it is valued by more people but because there is also simply too much fiat.

• C. It’s an efficient system if everyone uses it.

Transactions comply instantly and safely confirm within 1 hour, globally. A bank needs 24 hours to confirm a local transfer, up to 3 days for international transfers. The bottlenecks when you first buy bitcoins start to show where you see fiat is the slower part of the whole process.

• D. Some do it just for fun.

In all seriousness, Bitcoin isn’t going to bring down USD, and governments can’t bring down Bitcoin. It’s just a fresh, fun currency to use. People have even sprung up clones of Bitcoin, collectively “Altcoins”, to try and find the real “sweet spot” with the transaction system (confirming transactions faster or slower, or using different algorithms, or even going with a non-deflationary minting rate). The true beauty of this is if you use a conversion service that accepts them, you can theoretically accept them all at no risk.

• E. It’s energy efficient compared to fiat

Think of all the co2 emissions the money printing machines emit to print out money. The money needed to hire vans and security to ship cash from ATM to bank to ATM (and the co2 emissions these cars emit). And the trees!! I don’t have the statistics, but some article (if you google it) has researched the amount compared between the two systems and Bitcoin is significantly less. Bitcoin lets the global warming group put their money where their mouth is. And they do. I don’t care too much in this space though (hence not knowing the stats).

• F. It’s a Ponzi Scheme. In it to win it!!!!

(It’s a joke btw). A ponzi scheme means there is one perpetrator behind all the entries into the game. Bitcoin is purely market driven, so by definition it isn’t a ponzi scheme. Even if it is a variant of a ponzi scheme, the software has been created regardless and can be used for more than just currency. If someone as brilliant kitten .N. who knows cryptography inside out, and understands Keynesian & Austrian economics inside out, and the banking system, and knows C/C++, and creates a ponzi scheme for the hell of it, then I don’t mind falling for this man’s ponzi scheme. He has my respect. (The software source code isn’t even in his control anymore, btw. That’s the beauty of open source and reinforces the idea it isn’t a ponzi)

Disclaimer:

I’ve been playing GW2 since release and GW1 for 5-6. Definitely not a scrub that just bought GW2 just to comment on this. I know my economics & my tech, and Bitcoin is fascinating in both the finance and IT world. Intelligent people around the world talk about Bitcoin and how it can change the world, and everyone else is debating whether it is a ponzi scheme, a volatile trap or what not. Bitcoin is just what the world needs, but not the one it deserves.

WALL OF TEXT AHEAD

There is a lot of misinformation in this thread, that I prefer not to comment directly on. For now I want to lay out some facts (I will mark my opinions as necessary in parenthesis) to clear up misconceptions about Bitcoin for ANet. “Merchants” refer to ArenaNet, and “Customers” refer to us players:

• Volatility has no impact to merchants due to services like BitPay and Coinbase which convert on-the-fly. (Given these services can pay you in your preferred currency, you can probably declare your revenue in said currency. Your experience may vary depending on local laws.)

• Using such service, while pricing in btc can vary, the price in dollars can be quoted to customers. (Merchants understand bitcoin’s volatility, which is why they rarely price their goods in actual btc. This makes bitcoin “not a currency” but a medium of exchange. Which is fine by the bitcoin community)

• PayPal charges 2.4% + $0.30 per transaction (quote is from Australia, not sure where to find USA/Europe), BitPay charges $30/mth to $300/mth, Coinbase charges 1%.
  e.g. $10 in gems = $9.46 through PayPal, $9.90 through Coinbase, BitPay requires you to achieve $3,000 to $30,000 in sales a month to break even with Coinbase. Enterprise subscription to BitPay might be cheaper/more expensive.

• Accepting pure bitcoins without immediate conversion is risky due to volatility. Therefore adopting a service like the above is better. (Also probably lets them worry about the tax implications of accepting bitcoin. You just worry about your revenue tax as per normal. Again local laws will vary) At the same time, pure bitcoins don’t suffer any transaction fee on the merchant side. As the exchange rate gets more stable in the future, it may make sense to switch (unless local laws are not favourable).

• Bitcoin isn’t anonymous. Transactions are publicly visible, and the moment you exchange a good or service for bitcoins, you usually need to enter your address for your items to ship to. Merchants usually require billing & shipping addresses for online/virtual goods anyway when taking credit cards, or in the case of PayPal where they already have the information in the customer’s accounts. (You can’t fund a terrorist with Gems, ever)

• You can’t do a charge back with Bitcoin. This removes the merchant’s need to disable accounts if a customer commits charge back fraud, because there is no charge back fraud. The risk is entirely on the customer’s side, as opposed to credit cards and PayPal where the risk is on the merchant side.

Given all the risk is on the customer side, why do they use Bitcoin? Well… (this section is ALL opinion, with some facts to back up my thought process.):

• A. People are fed up with the fiat system.

Governments print more money which devalues the currency. You don’t see how much it affects you because the money is spread out everywhere. But once they get piled into one location you’ll see how much money there is that you will feel it is worthless.

The US government is trillions in debt. The Germans in WW1 (or was it WW2?) printed money to bail out, and screwed over their system. There is the slightest risk the US government plans to do the same, but in a controlled, hidden manner. If someone can figure out the scheme or leak it to people like WikiLeaks, USD will plummet, if they can’t, then the US government wins.

The banking system fell over in the GFC, and Bitcoin was created in response to the bailouts. Why are organisations allowed to be bailed out anyway? It speaks ill of the fiat system, that you can always be forgiven if you make a critical, fatal mistake. There is the notion that the debt system has become “too big to fail”.

Most people probably don’t know when fiat money was introduced it was ridiculed, not praised. The fact when it stopped being banked by gold, people thought it stopped being valuable. Today, there is no intrinsic value of a USD. If USD can be backed by a non-tangible concept called “trust”, then so can Bitcoin. I trust bitcoins a lot more than I trust USD, but that might be my bias because I’m from Australia.

• B. People see it as an investment opportunity.

Bitcoin is said to be the first ever deflationary currency to exist because of its fixed supply. There’s two types of events that give rise to bitcoin growth. The first type is adoption. Over time, bitcoins will be spread across millions of people as goods and services are exchanged. It gets harder to get a bigger sum of bitcoins.

Every 4 years, bitcoins get harder to mint. By 40 years time, 95% of the bitcoins will be minted. This means at this point bitcoins will start to see a deflationary effect. Like fiat money, you can lose access to your bitcoins if you die of old age or carelessness, etc. and don’t pass it on.

(TBC)

When the next living or personal story begins, can you implement into the story a way to allow the player character to choose a name that will work with your future lore? Surely, being referred to as the slayer, the hero of Shaemoor, commander, hey you, etc. gets tiring and makes the dialogue less believable. I can only stand it so many times until you run into “who actually killed Zhaitan…? Oh, the Zhaitan slayer!”

What I’m thinking is you run a story instance (solo) that puts you in a tight spot that results in having no option other than to change your name to an alias (something cheesy like protecting loved ones. Actually no please don’t use this one…!) If it’s a story driven approach then I reckon people would be attached to the name (as long as you give us some good ones to choose from)

If audio budget is of no concern you just make a few names (3 or 4, that work with all races) and have each actor pre-record the name a few times for different tones and recycle them.

I’m told Mass Effect did this in a similar way and worked out well (haven’t played it yet). I’m sure it will work with GW2. Ultimately you’ll break future canon, OR make canon interesting (A: “XXX killed Zhaitan”, B: “No, according to this tombstone, YYY killed Zhaitan”, C: “Bookahs don’t know history, I killed Zhaitan”)

When you transition from fractal shard to another fractal shard, you now lose all your stacking buffs, e.g. Bloodlust/Perception/Corruption stacks. It also seems to remove anything that you would normally lose through a normal map transition, such as Mesmer Mimic/Echo.

Why? If we are skillful enough to keep it, we should be allowed to keep it. If it’s a problem with Mimic then fix Mimic. Does anyone know if this is a bug or nerf? (does not seem like a bug – you’d have to explicitly add a call to remove it given it’s the same ‘map’)

A disappointment for me this patch because I made dual bloodlust ascended weapons just for fractals before the patch rolled in, only to find out this.

Aberrant.6749:

John Smith.4610:

Hello all, I looked into this because we intended to have a release note for the changes to the champion loot.
We did modify the gold and bloodstone dust coming from champion bags, and a release note will be added shortly.
What I can tell you is that we made a mistake, this one fell through the cracks and I’m truly sorry. I’ve promised before that we won’t make stealthy economic changes without notes and I mean to stick to that promise.
Thank you all for pointing out the error, we will be more vigilant in the future.
Good luck in your adventures.

Is there any way you could revert it for even 24hours? I have 1.3k+ boxes saved up to help save space. Had I known I would have obviously popped them.

If not can I at least get a hug?

Not to be rude… after what they did in the Queen’s Gauntlet (regardless of how ‘exploitive’ it was) if you haven’t learned to open them up before logging off then this is partly you to blame… But I agree they should undo the change and give a rollback & fair warning period similarly to the Karma one (though they only reverted the Karma one because, ahem, it’s a Gem store buff they were nerfing)

For the remaining (cut to 2 posts due to length):

Nerfs:

• Trickery IV – Flanking Strikes. Move to Master tier.
  This one’s a huge nerf, now all the increase-damage traits on Thieves are in 2nd tier. Thieves are more likely to go the Deadly Arts line now (for the extra Power) if they want the increased damage for backstab. A big loss for support (being able to switch between damage & Merciful Ambush), and a win for no one.

Buffs:

• Pistol Whip. Reduced the after cast on the first half of this skill by .25 seconds.
  A nice buff, the awkward animation and rooting was a downer in its original and previous incarnations, hopefully now it’s actually going to be slightly usable somewhat in PvP.

• Critical Strike X – Critical Haste. Increase trigger chance to 25%.
  Still useless, 2 seconds on 30 second cooldown.

• Acrobatics IV – Assassin’s Retreat. Increased swiftness duration to 20s.
  I don’t know how this is used or how it fits in with this balance patch’s ideas, but it’s a welcoming buff.

• Trickery VIII – Trickster. Move to Adept tier.
  Nice welcome for Condition Thieves, but they’re typically 2 tiers into Trickery anyway and would’ve gotten this regardless. I think it’s just pulled down to accomodate the moving of Flanking Strike upwards.

Directionless:

• Deadly Arts VI – Sundering Strikes. Increased the trigger chance from 50%. Remove ICD. Decrease Vulnerability duration to 6s.
  Again don’t know how this fits in with the balance patch ideas, and sundering is useless anyway since it can’t upkeep the stacks, you’ll only ever get 2-3% damage increase at most (2-3 stacks). I’d rather pick Mug.

JonPeters.5630:

Thief:
One of the issues we are working on for thieves this patch is the dependence on the traits which boost initiative. We did this by shaving a significant amount of initiative gain from these traits while simultaneously boosting the generic rate of initiative gain by 33%.
…
The change to Infusion of Shadow is meant to stop players from gaining initiative by applying stealth while already in stealth. This should keep thieves from being able to recharge all of their power while idling in a very long stealth. We felt that using a lot of different abilities to maintain stealth is ok, but re-using the same ability over and over for almost permanent stealth was just bad for the game, especially when gaining large amounts of initiative.

• Increased the base rate of initiative gain from .75/second to 1/second.
• Shadow Arts V – Infusion of Shadow – This trait functionality has been changed to “Gain initiative when you enter stealth.” 2 init.
• Critical Strikes VIII – Signet Use. Reduced initiative gain from 2 to 1.
• Trickery 5 – Kleptomaniac. Reduce initiative gain from 3 to 2.
• Acrobatics IX – Quick Recovery. Reduced initiative gain from 2 to 1.

This is a good direction (there definitely is a net increase over the long term fights, except for Infusion of Shadow which was just overused). But as initiative is one of the more restrictive Thief mechanics, I’m not surprised this issue is overlooked, again: it does not help the problem with weapon swapping and skill use (which you originally “addressed” last year by increasing base Init regen), unlike other classes where weapon swapping returns full use of their skills. The change you add now results in a net loss in the short term since we can’t do our Init burst regens anymore (spamming signets/stealth etc). Quick Pockets should be something to look at, either combining with Quick Recovery with active/passive effect (i.e. if you swap to activate Pockets, it goes on 5~10s cooldown and you can’t get the Recovery bonus.) so we can use another trait, or making it more available by lowering its tier. Without, it punishes those who use skills wisely.

JonPeters.5630:

We have also somewhat reduced the effectiveness of high evasion thieves by reducing vigor up time and adding some cast time to the Shadow Return skill on the sword. This prevents these thieves from evading too much and too easily dealing with being disabled (stun, daze, fear, knockdown, etc.).

• Shadow Return on Sword. Renamed to Infiltrator’s return. Added a 1/4s cast time.
• Critical Strikes 15 – Opportunist. Increased trigger chance to 50%. Increase cooldown from 1s to 5s.
• Critical Strikes VI – Practiced Tolerance. Increased conversion from 5% to 7%.
• Acrobatics III – Vigorous Recovery. Reduced Vigor duration to 4s from 8s.
• Trickery VII – Bountiful Theft. Reduced vigor duration to from 15s to 8s.

Thieves were built with high evasion capability (Shadow Return, Roll for Initiative, Withdraw, Feline Grace, Vigorous Recovery) because we lack the Vitality/Toughness to absorb the damage. Can we get something to compensate the loss? The 2% increase from Practiced Tolerance is puny compared to the halved Vigor and insta-cast SR.

JonPeters.5630:

Also we are trying to improve the survivability of thieves in the Acrobatics line through easier access to the Hard to Catch trait and increased effectiveness of the Assassin’s Reward trait. This will reward thieves who are actively engaged in the fight rather than those who are just dodging over and over again.

• Acrobatics XI – Hard to catch. Moved to Master Tier.
• Acrobatics X – Assassins Reward. Increased healing scaling by 35%. Moved to Grandmaster Tier.

Hard to Catch is a weak, RNG-based trait, so it doesn’t increase Thieves’ survivability at all. Making it accessible doesn’t help, because people won’t choose it in the first place. If you want Hard to Catch to work, you either need to grant it Stability, or it needs to move the Thief at least 1200~1500 distance away, not 600, allowing them to choose to re-enter combat or disengage.
Assassin’s Reward Healing scaling isn’t helpful… unless you meant base healing, not the stat?

Hi Jon,

Can you please split the balance posts to the 8 professions forums next time? It’s very difficult to follow all the repsonses for 1 profession, I can’t imagine this being easy for you guys, and us, to read

I think one caveat of the living story is how it is being released, and how it is taken away. One problem fixed and you move on to the next problem. If you attempt to return to a previous story (like how Southsun did, 5-6 months inbetween) to resolve it then the story feels way too slow (progress Scarlet story one release, then progress Consortium story one release next, Ellen Kiel story after, SAB story after that, etc…) Yet if you resolve the story now then you’ll get introductory fatigue with new enemies/problems for the next release. When you take those issues away the chapters feel disjointed. So how can you make the story more interesting?

Concurrent story. Concurrence is the key to the living story; it creates a big mess and therefore creates a more complicated story even if they are disjointed. Imagine if we had the molten alliance still stirring up trouble BECAUSE we destroyed their molten facility, that there are still Consortium efforts to fix up their resort (and slowly progress with each update, since they lost their slave labours that trickled in from F&F) while the molten alliance pushes more refugees to the Black Citadel/Hoelbrak each week (the Consortium can’t hire them all & with their contracts being so shoddy…), while fending off Scarlet’s invasions because Scarlet is evil, and Moto without a care in the world releases SAB world 4.

To put it nicely, it’s like how Game of Thrones tackle concurrence. Everything happens together in one timeline, and with only 47 minutes to tell the story you have to show as if they were happening all at once. GoT would not be very interesting if we watched all the Daenerys story in one go, then the Starkk story in one go, and the Lannister story in one go.

This also resolves the temporary content problem (people are complaining 1 month/2 week content is too short). The content isn’t temporary in that it will just disappear soon, but rather it is evolving. There’ll always something to do for the Molten alliance, something to do to help out the consortium slave labour crisis/Canach (well, Canach is resolved) and something to do with Aetherblades, until you resolve the story in 3-4 months time and progress to something new like Ellen Kiel/Kralkatorik/Elona problems.

If you give benefits to individual players for WvW matchup, everyone will stack on the best servers. If you give benefits to the losing team, people will lose on purpose. You just don’t give rewards to people like this and call it a day.

Thinking outside the box, here’s my suggestion. Make the reward a reward to the server. The server gets a progression bar; as the server ‘levels up’, their tower’s looks improve, their mercs get updated looks, areas in the borderland maps get updated with unique looks (e.g. forests, deserts), etc. Just a few things I can think of at the top of my head. People have been asking for this kind of stuff since way back when people got bored of borderlands being the same for all 3 servers.

As for the reward, possible setup:

1st place = 2 progression points
2nd place = 1 progression point
3rd place = 0 points

Since there’s no tangible benefit for winning at the individual player level so we maintain the status quo. But there’ll now be fights between 3rd and 2nd place to get that progression point, it’s no longer “hurdurr 1st place is 2x our points combined we can’t win” that plagues WvW right now for us sitting in the mid-lower tiers. There’ll be a reason to keep playing to win because you can tangibly see your server improve.

Make it possible to have more then one stolen skill (F2 to F4) and add a steal mechanic to 1 or 2 skills. The skills with steal mechanic shouldnt trigger “on steal” traits.

Glad we think alike I made this as one of the suggestions back in BWE3. Tried to find it again but I think the post got deleted when the game opened doors. Here’s a mockup that I made.

http://i.imgur.com/ff4svtM.jpg

Had another screen with 15 initiatives in a 5×3 layout. It’s floating on the internet somewhere.

1) PvP Locker needs to be 12 units across. Full armor sets should appear first, individual armor pieces that do not belong to a set should appear last

2) Fine Crafting Materials storage needs to be 6 units (Tiers) down. For miscellaneous items like the Ancient Karka Shells, either go 7 down or append the rest to the end (like Rare Crafting Materials storage)

3) Gemstones and Jewels storage needs to be 6 units (Tiers) down, variable 6 to 8 across (6 across for Tier 1, 8 across for Tier 5, 7 across for the other Tiers)

4) Tab position for any window needs to be be cached

5) Black Lion Trading Company window needs to stop refreshing on initialize. Caching should be implemented to keep elements there, AJAX calls should be executed on initialize to update prices / timers / other metadata of the cached elements

6) Currencies needs a wallet window (twisty expandable from inventory, perhaps, instead of a separate window). All forms of currencies should be consolidated here and token-based currencies should be withdrawable for Mystic Forge purposes (Fractal Relics). Materials such as Globs of Ectoplasm should be excluded

7) World vs World window needs a Quick-join button when viewing the map stats. Alternatively, the Enter WvW button should be beside each of the maps’ menu buttons, rather than a single consolidated button utilising dropdown selections

8) PvP window needs a Quick-join button when out of combat, instead of going to the Heart of the Mists. Give the option to do either

9) World Map needs to allow waypoints to be clickable when UI-hide feature is turned on

10) World vs World waypoints should be accessible from the Heart of the Mists World Map

11) Heart of the Mists should be accessible from the World vs World World Map

12) Buying items from a vendor needs to have an input to buy items in multiple amounts (similarly to how crafting can specify the number of times to craft)

13) The player’s own party portrait should be displayed somewhere in the game

14) My Story tab in the Hero menu should be consolidated into chapters, rather than entries for each mission segment (you can separate each mission segment in those chapter tabs, but IMO write them as paragraphs which is better for readability)

15) Soulbound items need the name of the character the item was soulbound to

16) Bank tabs needs naming capability to be consistent with Guild Bank tabs

17) Inventory bag slots positions (not the bag themselves) needs naming capability to be consistent with Guild Bank tabs

18) Lastly… Custom UI layout framework, please!

Mesmers are the real Thieves. Have you not heard about social stealth?

Please know that I’m trying to say that there is no purpose for these servers in PvE, not that there isn’t any purpose to return to the low level maps. Two entirely different issues. I did identify this as a problem in Problem #1 (I didn’t emphasise on it much but I did throw it into the title). I have no doubt ANet will be introducing content soon that will give us incentive to return (Live Story, more Ascended gear, etc). But again this is a short term problem. In the long term this current structure isn’t going to be beneficial for the game.

Putting it another way: there are 576 open world maps in the game across all servers. It should be shortened to 24.

Anyhow, would appreciate if we only discuss about what the purpose of these servers serve for PvE, and not the content itself. And as I have seen, I cannot find any purpose for split PvE servers at all.

I will not make assumptions that GW2 player population is dying, as I don’t have any information to back it up. What I can say is that in my own opinion, the design decision to split players into worlds is a huge problem that doesn’t work well with how GW2 is designed in the first place with the instanced/separated nature of dungeons, pvp, and world vs world.

Problem 1 – Short term density problems: too many servers, too little purpose for the open world
In NA there are a whopping 24 servers. There are 24 open world maps. Based on the assumption that 500 people (an old WvW figure from BWE1-3) can be available on a map that’s 24*24*500 = 288K players. In reality, we see 15-20 people scattered in each open world map, maybe 40-50 if it has a dragon event going on. The open world is really only ever used for leveling and map completion – as people reach the end game, the maps will rarely be revisited. The rest of the player base are all running dungeons, personal instances, WvW or sPvP, none of which matter because they are cross server already.

Problem 2 – Long term density problems
In the long term, no doubt ANet will be releasing new maps – Crystal Desert, Ring of Fire, Isle of Janthir, Woodland Cascades to name a few to be anticipated in the near future. We saw what happened with Southsun Cove though – huge influx of players in the new map, after players have done all the content and the event was over, poof, now empty… The new maps will either replicate this, or make it true for the existing maps (Orr).

Problem #3 – Servers only serve World vs World
The 24 NA servers fulfill two things; the feeling of belongingness (that people don’t care about for PvE, as proven in problem #2), and the separation of players for the purpose of WvW (where people do care about that feeling of belongingness).

Problem 2 – Guesting
Guesting has proved something of a savior to GW2, other than to gate WvW transfers; we are slowly seeing communities picking and joining the “unofficial PvE” server (Tarnished Coast). It raises the question why we need Guesting in the first place, if people all just want to get together in the same map.

I’m sure there are more problems this has caused but those 4 are what I feel the biggest issues. Nevertheless, the split servers have served its purpose, and I think it’s time to merge all the servers. For launch it probably was very important to split the players so as to not cause lag, except that GW2 has the overflow system, so I can only discern that this is a design decision to split the players solely for the purpose of belongingness and WvW.

I don’t think I’ve ever come across a person who has disliked overflows. Better than sitting in a queue. I personally also never felt any different in the “persistence” feeling achieved through my efforts be any greater while in the main server compared to the overflow. It’s just cycled content that will reoccur eventually and I’m not fooled.

The solution is a difficult feat. There’ll be code to sift through to untangle anything that ties World selection with PvE and WvW. But the eventual outcome that the servers merge into one, or two/three is there are capacity issues, will be much better for the PvE community.

I do forsee some minor issues, for example the map capacity will mean if there are 500 (estimated) players trying to fight a world boss, likely that 501th person and above will be kicked into overflows. Not a huge problem if the event reward is account bound for its duration, as then the overflows can synchronise with the main world when the world bosses appear in the overflows. ANet did this with the Karka event (with some minor flaws), so I don’t see it technically impossible.

Thoughts?

tldr;
Problem: too many servers, too many problems, 4 arguments to prove my point
Solution: Merge all the PvE servers back into one world, make use of overflow shards instead. World selection to only matter for WvW
Consequence: Guesting made redundant

<Did not speak for EU, as I assume the problem is slightly different due to language barriers>

I’ve got 3 suggestions at the moment…

- Ability to label bank tab slots (currently there’s no text on the slot, as compared to character bag slots)

- Thief: move the stolen item button to F2 instead of F1. Using Steal again while the item is there overrides the item.

- Play the startup flair that was in the BWE1 launcher, then proceed to display the character selection screen. I miss this so much… We miss this so much!