Guild Wars 2

Same as above; choose character and then Network Error 1083:5:7:595:101

Michael Henninger.7451:

980355 Known issue, support can’t help. =/

Sorry to follow up, but does that mean my account can never get the Achievement, Meta-Achievement, Achievement Points, and Rewards?

Hello,

Wondering if you could help me. It concerns Support Ticket #980355 (Submitted 26/10/14):

Unfortunately, although I have completed all paths in the Twilight Arbor Dungeon (Story, the 2 paths for TA, and the Aetherblade Path) my Achievements Panel hasn’t updated properly and only shows 3/4 paths completed. To make sure that I have done all the paths my guild took me through all of them again and the Achievement continued to fail to update. Obviously this creates problems as it has blocked access to the relevent AP rewards, and additional award tied to that specific Achievement, and, of course, it is now impossible for me to gain the Dungeon Master meta-Achievement (with the associated AP, etc.)

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks

????

The more I think about Alliances, the more I can’t really see it addressing the core issues, and, even more concerning, the problems it will create are probably insurmountable.

As far as I can tell the Alliance system seems to be based around evening out numbers, so a heavily populated Server could (warning, all numbers have been plucked from thin air) find itself facing one side consisting of two lower population servers and another side of four or five very low population servers. That could work during primetime, no problem, but what about at off-peak hours? The high population server will almost certainly have good off-peak coverage, the medium population servers might, between them, or just on the one server, have one half-decent off-peak coverage, and the low population servers probably don’t have any off-peak coverage at all. In other words, once off-peak hours hit all the problems that should have been solved are back: stale gaming, same old maps, one server dominating everything, very few players from the non-dominating servers on the maps to provide any kind of competition. If you are a player who wants to see the serious WvW issues sorted out, and you come along after the update and you see that outside of primetime, nothing’s changed, are your feelings going to be, “Ah well, that’s a shame, I’ll carry on playing for another 2 years,” or are they going to be, “I see the deckchairs have been re-arranged, but there’s still icy water lapping around my feet, so I’m heading for the lifeboats.”?

And then there’s the small matter of the non-English speaking servers. How would forcing servers into Alliances where individual players can find it difficult or impossible to talk to or communicate with a server based around a different language actually work? Is the idea that language specific servers should be scrapped (“sorry, I’ve no doubt Spanish is a wonderful language, but everyone must speak English”), or is it the plan that players who don’t have a second language, or do have a second language but don’t have the particular language needed for this month, are going to be relegated to second-class players?

Leaa.2943:

munkiman.3068:

Sakura No Seirei.6120:

There is a way to stop blob manipulation, and that’s to introduce cooldown timers for re-entering WvW after a deliberate exit from a WvW map to a non-WvW map (which quite handily gets rid toon hotswapping). A detection and flag system could be put in place to detect and record when a player sends a taskkill (or equivalent) signal to the GW2.exe process (through the normal game exit window, or via the OS) or presses the ‘Leave the Mists’ button. If they do that then their account gets flagged for 10 minutes and during that time they can’t re-enter WvW. On the other hand, if the game detects that the internet connection is lost between the client and server, or the game crashes and the error report box comes up, or the game forces an exit due to incoming patch, then the account isn’t flagged and the player can re-enter WvW as soon as their game comes back up.

The Megaserver has taken care of some of the problems of rent-a-mob tactics in LA, but further improvements could be made. The game can be made to detect whether any of the previous 3 or 5 maps that the player was on was a WvW map and whether the current map is a PvE/PvP map and place those players on map instances with the lowest number of people from their server on it. That way, any blob that exits WvW would be scattered across instances, making it very difficult for them to co-ordinate back in, especially if they have to wait 10 minutes to get back into WvW anyway.

This is pointlessly intrusive. And how is it a problem to hit LA and ask for WvW help? Or limited hot-swapping toons? This address nothing about population balance either. Blobbing as a tactic isn’t broken. If they balanced the reward for defense with offense, folks wouldn’t be so quick to jump on the blob wagon anyway.

I agree this is a pointless solution and consider how many times people get dc each night without willingly doing so but the game throws them out in a lagspike then why should they be punished? If anything it would make people rage and leave.

Wow, people really don’t read posts before replying, do they? If the client detects that the internet connection is lost, or if the GW2.exe process is terminated in an unexpected way then the account would not be flagged. If the account isn’t flagged and the player can get straight back into the game, how are they being punished?

munkiman.3068:

Sakura No Seirei.6120:

There is a way to stop blob manipulation, and that’s to introduce cooldown timers for re-entering WvW after a deliberate exit from a WvW map to a non-WvW map (which quite handily gets rid toon hotswapping). A detection and flag system could be put in place to detect and record when a player sends a taskkill (or equivalent) signal to the GW2.exe process (through the normal game exit window, or via the OS) or presses the ‘Leave the Mists’ button. If they do that then their account gets flagged for 10 minutes and during that time they can’t re-enter WvW. On the other hand, if the game detects that the internet connection is lost between the client and server, or the game crashes and the error report box comes up, or the game forces an exit due to incoming patch, then the account isn’t flagged and the player can re-enter WvW as soon as their game comes back up.

The Megaserver has taken care of some of the problems of rent-a-mob tactics in LA, but further improvements could be made. The game can be made to detect whether any of the previous 3 or 5 maps that the player was on was a WvW map and whether the current map is a PvE/PvP map and place those players on map instances with the lowest number of people from their server on it. That way, any blob that exits WvW would be scattered across instances, making it very difficult for them to co-ordinate back in, especially if they have to wait 10 minutes to get back into WvW anyway.

This is pointlessly intrusive. And how is it a problem to hit LA and ask for WvW help? Or limited hot-swapping toons? This address nothing about population balance either. Blobbing as a tactic isn’t broken. If they balanced the reward for defense with offense, folks wouldn’t be so quick to jump on the blob wagon anyway.

This solution was being offered to address points raised about manipulation of the system previously mentioned in the quote (manipulation of player numbers at PPT scoring, where scoring is calculated based on Score At Tick/Numbers of Players of that Server on WvW Maps). The person I was replying to was pointing out how that system could be manipulated, I was pointing out how to provide solutions to that problem. Without having read about the previous solution offered (which is in the quote), the solutions aren’t going to make a lot of sense.

Herbal.6291:

Funny all the systems you’ve just said won’t work worked just fine in one of the best mmos to have ever done wvw/rvr Dark age of Camelot.

Also are you seriously suggesting people won’t want to fight each other once you remove the main reason people take empty undefended keeps karma/wxp? It wouldn’t kill wvw it would promote it, it would however kill pvd which it seems you really want kept in the game for some strange reason.

No, that’s no what I’ve suggested at all. I suggest you reread my post to see what I actually said,

Dayra.7405:

Sakura No Seirei.6120:

There is a way to stop blob manipulation, and that’s to introduce cooldown timers for re-entering WvW after a deliberate exit from a WvW map to a non-WvW map (which quite handily gets rid toon hotswapping).

If my client crashed or if I send him a kill-signal is not distinguishable and
if my internet DCs on purpose (switched WLAN off) or not (critical packets got lost/delayed somewhere) is also not distinguishable.

And I would be really kittened if a (currently quite frequent) client-crash/DC is additionally punished by a cool down timer.

Actually, the client already distinguishes between crashes and kill signals, that’s why the Crash Error Report box pops up on crashes, but not on taskkill processes sent via cmd or the Task Manager. (Next time you get a Crash Error Report box on anything have a good look at it, somewhere it will normally say that something has happened to cause the process to terminate in an unexpected way). If the process gets terminated in an expected way, the account gets flagged, if the process gets terminated in an unexpected way the account doesn’t. That way somebody who experiences frequent crashes wouldn’t be penalised.

You are right in that the client can’t tell whether a connection has been deliberately terminated, or if the disconnect has happened further down the line, but it doesn’t need to. In either case the game wouldn’t flag the account, but for deliberate connection lost you are still looking at 15secs~60secs for the game to confirm that the internet connection is lost, the time needed to reload the game, log back in, choose your character, load your PvE map, and then load your WvW map. Add in the time for your computer to fully reconnect itself back to the internet as well (that would depend on how you killed your connection, if you rebooted your router for instance, you could be looking at 5 minutes before that is ready and you can do anything else) and you are looking at a good 5+ mins before you could get back in to WvW.

Herbal.6291:

The answer isn’t hard to work out

1) Decouple wvwvw from pve so during population checks only people in wvw are counted towards population cap on server transfers (not an issue for pve due to mega servers) remove gem costs from transfers for a 1 month period.

Example your an sea guild looking to move to t1 for wvw population checks shows JQ full during these hours discouraging sea moving to there while BG shows as nearly full TC medium/full etc. How ever during NA BG will show as full TC and JQ nearly full etc can’t be to hard to set the metrics up on this.

Doesn’t really work over the long term, meaning that this process would need to be repeated every x months.

2) Remove all wxp/karma rewards from keeps/towers/camps to stop people pvd dooring for karma/wxp. At same time buff wxp and add karma on players by a decent amount so its a similar speed of advancement through the levels, also add a 5-10 min timer on killing the same player to prevent abuse.

I can’t think of anything that would kill WvW faster than this suggestion. Essentially this would take WvW maps and turn them into GvG maps. That’s already a problem that’s causing problems with WvW. Instead ANet should look at creating GvG maps where this kind of system is in place so that GvGers can go there, get rewards appropriate to GvG maps, but don’t contribute anything to the WvW score (which a lot of GvG guilds don’t do anyway).

3) Now that players are fighting players to get wxp/karma introduce a system so it splits up wxp per player vs how many people hit them ie 1 on 1 full points, 1 vs 8 you get 1/8th of the points. This actively encourages more even or fair fights breaks up the maptag blobbing and means more roaming fights for everyone. Would also discourage full groups or above from ganking soloers due to the diminished rewards.

That’s not how blobs work. Blobs have a mob mentality, and tend to jump solo players or small groups because they can, not because of any reward from it. If you doubt me, watch what happens everytime a PUG blob runs over an enemy sentry point; at least half the blob ends up glueing itself to the sentry point despite the fact that the commander told them not to, yet the rewards for capturing a sentry point are so minimal as to be non-existant when you are high ranked WvW player.

4) Change the outnumbered buff to a 25% or 50% wxp buff under the same system as above to make it worthwhile…

A 25% or 50% increase of what would be 0 WXP under your system comes out to 0 WXP. The Outnumbered Buff mechanic is seriously out-of-date and broken. It needs to be remodelled from the bottom up. Probably the best change that could happen to it is that all downed players on the outnumbered server get auto-rezzed at their location on a global 30 second tick. That way large blobs would have to be efficient in capturing locations, not just large, because if they aren’t, all the defenders at their location are going to pop back up at either xx:00 or xx:30. If the defenders pop back up with some serious 10 second buffs, so much the better.

Crius.5487:

Sakura No Seirei.6120:

For me, the quickest, easiest, and fairest system to go with to balance out WvW would be based around points scoring. Just run everything as it is now, but with every tick each server’s population in WvW would also be recorded and added to an aggregate. At the end of each week divide the total number of points a server scored by the total number of players logged into WvW for that server during that week and use that figure to determine 1st, 2nd, and 3rd places, and adjustment to server rankings.

e.g. With numbers pulled from thin air, and for a single Tick:

Green = 365pts WvW pop = 320 Adjusted Result for Tick = 1.14
Blue = 170 pts WvW pop = 250 Adjusted Result for Tick = 0.68
Red = 160 pts WvW pop = 100 Adjusted Result for Tick = 1.6

I used a single Tick as an example because it’s easier to see the numbers, but imagine the example using the weekly score and weekly population figures and you see what I am getting at.

The reason I favour this system, it rewards good tactics (gaining points for stomping w/bloodlust, capping sentries, ganking dollies), good strategy (aiming to gain and hold objectives for the tick), and removes built in advantages that very high population servers would otherwise have.

Interesting idea to change the tick based on population but this can easily be manipulated by trolls. I’m going to take your concept and put my own spin on it. For this discussion, which I have said in previous posts, since forces can hop between maps and since scoring is based on all maps anything which has to do with population should be considered based on all maps.

Adjusting the end of the week score based on the total players who logged into WvW is probably a bad idea considering some people play longer than others. Green may have had 200 players who each logged in for an hour a day while Blue had 100 players who logged in for three hours each day. Green may have had more people, but Blue had more man hours played. Blue’s may already be higher and basing by players who logged in would only increase it.

Adjusting each individual tick is probably better than the end of the week score. This would also give you an idea of how your server is doing through out the week.

Scenario 1: Blue has 350 PPT and leaves WvW with scouts in place. Red with 150 PPT now out numbers Blue however Blue is getting increased PPT on top of already having 350. Red is trying to catch up and hits a T3 Blue objective, Blue ports blob in from LA, wipes Red, and ports back to LA before tick trying to manipulate the score.

Counter: End tick is adjusted based on the number of people who earned WXP during the 15 minute tick window.

I’m still a bit partial to this idea but it might work.

Someone mentioned earlier the idea of completing removing damage against gates. This is probably a good idea so it forces you to use siege to get through gates, however with siege disablers sometimes it’s the only way. If one person can solo defend a paper tower against a map blob by throwing a siege disabler and countering the enemy siege while it’s disabled, it kind of ruins the game.

There is a way to stop blob manipulation, and that’s to introduce cooldown timers for re-entering WvW after a deliberate exit from a WvW map to a non-WvW map (which quite handily gets rid toon hotswapping). A detection and flag system could be put in place to detect and record when a player sends a taskkill (or equivalent) signal to the GW2.exe process (through the normal game exit window, or via the OS) or presses the ‘Leave the Mists’ button. If they do that then their account gets flagged for 10 minutes and during that time they can’t re-enter WvW. On the other hand, if the game detects that the internet connection is lost between the client and server, or the game crashes and the error report box comes up, or the game forces an exit due to incoming patch, then the account isn’t flagged and the player can re-enter WvW as soon as their game comes back up.

The Megaserver has taken care of some of the problems of rent-a-mob tactics in LA, but further improvements could be made. The game can be made to detect whether any of the previous 3 or 5 maps that the player was on was a WvW map and whether the current map is a PvE/PvP map and place those players on map instances with the lowest number of people from their server on it. That way, any blob that exits WvW would be scattered across instances, making it very difficult for them to co-ordinate back in, especially if they have to wait 10 minutes to get back into WvW anyway.

For me, the quickest, easiest, and fairest system to go with to balance out WvW would be based around points scoring. Just run everything as it is now, but with every tick each server’s population in WvW would also be recorded and added to an aggregate. At the end of each week divide the total number of points a server scored by the total number of players logged into WvW for that server during that week and use that figure to determine 1st, 2nd, and 3rd places, and adjustment to server rankings.

e.g. With numbers pulled from thin air, and for a single Tick:

Green = 365pts WvW pop = 320 Adjusted Result for Tick = 1.14
Blue = 170 pts WvW pop = 250 Adjusted Result for Tick = 0.68
Red = 160 pts WvW pop = 100 Adjusted Result for Tick = 1.6

I used a single Tick as an example because it’s easier to see the numbers, but imagine the example using the weekly score and weekly population figures and you see what I am getting at.

The reason I favour this system, it rewards good tactics (gaining points for stomping w/bloodlust, capping sentries, ganking dollies), good strategy (aiming to gain and hold objectives for the tick), and removes built in advantages that very high population servers would otherwise have.

What kind of issue are you specifically having that could be related to lag?

- Skill Lag: This can range from Utility Skills and AoEs not firing when activated all the way to the ‘1’ skill on your weapon failing to work. Skill Lag tends to start when any 3-way fight occurs, even if one of the sides is only 1 or 2 players, and the other two sides are about 30 in number each, and reaches the point where no skill activates when 30+ on each side is engaged in a 3-way fight. If the skill lag is only effecting AoE and utility skills then the lag drops off the further you are from the fight, but if the lag reaches the point when no skill, or only the ‘1’ skill activates, then the lag effects the entire map and effects all actions taken, including building, using siege, or taking supply.

- Lag during 3-way starts even when one side hasn’t engaged in combat. Just being close enough will start severe lag happening. The same can happen if a large zerg is close to your zerg. Even though there is no fighting and only two sides are present the lag noticeably increases, enough that sudden skill lag is now used as an indicator that a zerg is incoming.

- Some teleporting across the map/rubber banding, although generally mild. However, the server can lose track of where my character is when I exit any structure with a wall (keep, garri, tower, etc). When that happens the client will insist I’ve left the building and will continue with me running and activating skills as normal, but the server will insist I haven’t left the structure. The only sure way I’ve found to clear the discrepancy is to run an emote, which seems to force the server to decide where I am and relocate me.

- Dropping dead while not taking any valid damage. Damage shown is usually ~1500, followed by ~2500, with the damage occurring as close together as possible. The first damage downs you, the second kills you. There is nothing around to damage you, and you haven’t fallen to take any damage. This is particularly noticeable on the 3rd floor of Stonemist. If killed like this you then almost always become impossible to rez by other players, you have to waypoint.

- RI that doesn’t run out and/or waypoints that don’t open up even if the counter hits 00:00

What server are you on?

- Far Shiverpeaks

Has there ever been a time when you or a friend are experiencing lag, while others in your party are not?

- Yes, but that has only occured when experiencing connection difficulties at my end (noticeable because of dc’s on TS, etc.). By and large the lag is experienced by all players on one server. It is particularly noticeable that the lag can only effect one server during a fight, with the other server(s) you are fighting with being able to use skills normally.

Has there ever been a time where one party in a map is experiencing lag, while other parties in that same map are not?

- Please see above.

Do you experience the lag at very specific times?

- Whenever 3-way fights occur in Stonemist. This produces the worst lag
- Whenever a 3-way fight occurs anywhere on any of the maps. The lag will effect that specific map, worse at the location then, depending on the size of the zergs, can drop away the further from the fight you are.
- Otherwise please see aboce

If so, can you estimate how many players are in each zerg?

- If the total number of players fighting goes above 50 then this can trigger skill lag. If more than 70 players are in close proximity to each other then this can also trigger skill lag.