Guild Wars 2

I just played a match and this bug is still there. How long until it gets fixed? Should I be reporting it via the ingame report tool?

Lawton Campbell.8517:

Gilj.6304:

Is there any news about having external access to game chat?

It’s still something I really want to do, but haven’t yet been able to commit time to.

The main crux is just budgeting out a solid month for a feature when there’s a bunch of lower-hanging features and bugs. When I get around to implementing it, pretty much everything else is gonna come to a standstill for awhile, so I want to find a good place for a long pause.

I would love seeing this implemented, and I hope you find time for it soon! There are so many things I could use it for..

Edit Kraggy, Cereal: Remember that you’ll still only see your own data, not other people’s data. That means that

1. it’s an opt-in (player chooses if he want to say the result or not), and
2. can’t be verified by others (nothing stopping one from giving false numbers).

So the toxic impact should be pretty minor

Bump. Issue still present

After a while, all attempts to access the forum will redirect to login page instead, effectively block access to the forum unless you log in or restart the browser.

Since the forum should be accessible without logging in, this is a deviation from expected behavior, and should be changed to fully invalidate the session instead.

The symptoms are connected to the cookie “fangamer_core3”

I wrote a small GW2 api wrapper in python some months ago, might be of interest to you.

It can be found here

I’m completely new to Oauth, so bear with me here.. I’ve read https://aaronparecki.com/articles/2012/07/29/1/oauth2-simplified as a simple introduction, and from what I can see it – at least for this app – requires a web server to get the callback, right?

Is there a way for a native app, like a command line script, to get a token for an account?

First of all, I want to say that as far as I understand things, Nasedo got it spot on

Secondly, I kinda wish Anet would just turn the image 180 degrees, and declare it fixed with the help of the community

I have no experience with native programming, I’m afraid, but keeping an eye on this.

In principle it seems easy, make a DLL with the same exported functions as in the documentation, expecting the same arguments, then export it somewhere else (first pass, probably send the raw data to a file, just to see what data it gets). I just don’t know any language that will allow me to create such a DLL.

“LogitechGamingLCDSDK.pdf” page 9 list about 10 functions. Would be interesting to know which (if any) gw2 uses.

http://support.logitech.com/en_us/article/21508?product=a0qi00000069vCHAAY might be of some help.

In anticipation of the new api’s I dusted off some old python code and ideas and put it together in a reasonable coherent package. Supports web api and mumble api.

• Project name : gw2lib
• Implementation Language: Python
• Admin: Terrasque.8735
• GitHub: https://github.com/TheTerrasque/gw2lib

Archomeda.6472:

I’ll throw in my suggestion as well. As I’ve posted on Reddit, I made a design in HTML, CSS and a bit of Javascript and hosted it on GitHub. This way, if people want to make improvements on my rough starting design, they can do that through GitHub issues and pull requests.

You can find the design here. If you have suggestions or anything, please post them on GitHub so it does not get lost in the thread.

That’s pretty nice, actually. You lose the grid, but I think it’s a win still. Add an “All” tab at the top, perhaps.

Rising Dusk.2408:

Currencies that have no value beyond being used as currencies should never be items that take up inventory space. That means the following should absolutely appear in the wallet:

• WvW Claim Tickets
• Geodes
• Bandit Crests
• Black Lion Ticket Scraps
• Bauble
• Bauble Bubble
• Queen’s Gauntlet Entrance Ticket

So forth. Obviously, it make sense to split up the Wallet possibly into multiple tabs or something to distinguish between temporary or location-dependent currencies, dungeon currencies, and so forth. I would imagine the division as follows:

• Basic
  • Coin
  • Gems
  • Karma
  • Transmutation Charges
  • Laurels
• Specialty
  • Guild Commendations
  • Badges of Honor
  • WvW Claim Ticket
  • Black Lion Ticket Scrap
• Dungeon
  • Ascalonian Tears
  • Seals of Beetletun
  • Deadly Blooms
  • Manifestos of the Moletariate
  • Flame Legion Charr Carvings
  • Symbols of Koda
  • Knowledge Crystals
  • Shards of Zhaitan
  • Fractal Relics
• Tyria
  • Geodes
  • Bandit Crests
• Temporary
  • Bauble
  • Bauble Bubble
  • Queen’s Gauntlet Entrance Tickets

I think this would make the most sense.

This. Very similar to what I was thinking. Add tab buttons at the top or bottom, something similar to Skyrim’s SkyUI mod.

For the tab names.. I’d rename “Tyria” to “Living Story” and “Temporary” to “Festivals” or similar.

lordkrall.7241:

Yes, the change itself doesn’t take long. But a developer can’t just decide to do it just like that. There are decisions that needs to be made and so on. So the total time for the actual change would be much higher than just the coding part.

They made a decision to keep the current 400, 800, 1200, 2000 values. They were faced with enormous backlash, and decided to keep the existing values, and spend weeks doing something new that may or may not be done before the Halloween sales ends.

They’re not seeing this as bug.. Correction, they are not seeing it as a fault. They see it as a feature, and now they’re making a new feature to please the players. They don’t see the problem with it, they see it as a good thing, and now they see themselves making a better thing.

If they did see it as a problem, it would have been fixed – one way or another – a day or two after. Just like a game crashing bug would have been fixed.

Keep it as it is, but I’d love to see the option of buying “maps” for an area, that would unlock the waypoints for that area (and only the waypoints). Preferably buyable with karma.

I wish they would at least put in a temporary workaround and change the choices we got to more reasonable values.

Exactly, Haishao

It would be easy for them to change the offered gem choices to something more reasonable, but they’re dragging their feet.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

They should hire you if you can make code changes so easily.

I’d do it for free if they let me. I wouldn’t even need to change any code, just the data the code uses.

But that won’t happen, for many obvious reasons. So a pointless jab.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

I’m not so sure you understand what you’re talking about. Unless you’re saying that you’re part of the Anet QA team testing the new code, so you have first hand knowledge of the in-house dev tools being used?

It uses https://exchange-fra-live.ncplatform.net/ page, the source has a section that says this:

GW2.config = {"embedOrigins":[".fatfoogoo.com",".ncplatform.net","buy.guildwars2.com"],"offers":{"gems2gold":[2500000,1000000,500000,100000,10000],"gold2gems":[2000,1200,800,400]},"blockNewAccountHours":72,"features":{"siteEnabled":true,"allowStub":false,"gold2gems":true,"gems2gold":true}}

The part that says "gold2gems":[2000,1200,800,400] actually decides what the UI shows. I altered that list, and the UI behaved perfectly with the new values.

I did actually have a look at that code earlier, I did change it, and I did verify that it worked with different values. As a proof of concept, I bought 10 gems for gold.

The UI showed properly, the exchange rates were correct, the preview was right, the lists and message boxes were showing correctly, and even the cute little “counting up your new gems” animation worked perfectly.

So yes, it’s indeed a one line change.

The dev team is keenly aware that there are Halloween items available only during a specific period (through November 4) and therefore they intend to do their darnedest to offer the new options in the next few days but certainly in advance of November 4th if humanly possible.

In the mean time, please change the list of gem choices to something more reasonable

Dear GW2 developers.

First of all, I know you are working on a new exchange UI to replace the current, but you have given no hard date, and there are items going out of the gem store soon, that people want to buy.

In the meantime, could you please change the current gem for gold list to 2000, 500, 100, 25 instead of the current 2000, 1200, 800, 400? It’s a very simple one-line change, and it would severely help the current problem people are facing.

This change is not only bad, but the excuses used for the change does in no way give a reason for not also adding field for arbitrary conversions at the bottom of the list.

I currently have 104 gems. I was toying with the idea of getting it up to 125 gems for a lion key or 150 for transmute charges. But with this change.. Why the hell would I even consider it?

Around here they don’t expect you to buy a full meal when you’re looking for a bottle of soda in the normal store, where is this “shopping experience” Anet are referring to?

Please reconsider this change, and PLEASE stop using reasoning that doesn’t even explain why. It makes you look dishonest and / or stupid.

When that’s said, I would also recommend that all Anet posts from now on consists of 4, 8 or 16 sentences, to make the responses more newbie friendly and to give a better newspaper experience. For us veterans that have been around the block a few times it’s no problem, but newer players will benefit from it.

Edit: I really want those devil horns… But with this new system, forget it.

Nike Porphyrogenita.8137:

I said nothing about not wanting better AI or better encounters. I am against nerfing a gearset for incredibly poor reasons that seem to boil down to cheapness or RP considerations.

Ok, then. First of all, you seem to think that everyone against the zerk meta want to nerf the gearset. There are a lot of people here who don’t want the zerker meta and don’t necessarily want to nerf the gearset (From my read-throughs, it actually seems to be the majority of the opponents of today’s meta).

Personally I’m against the zerg meta, because I find it boring and uninteresting, and would appreciate some variety – both in valid playstyles, and in the content itself. I wonder; in which category you would put me in?

Edit: I’d personally like to see mobs doing more consistent damage, instead of the usual X second telegraphed spikes and very little in between. I want mobs to not fall for the simple stacking tricks used now (ranged should try to keep ranged, mobs should avoid damage pits more actively, do more aoe damage themselves perhaps), I want to see more interesting boss mechanics you have to play around, I want to see more synergy in the mob groups..

Basically, I want more strategy and challenges in the game, and I want pure zerker to only be something viable if you’re extremely good, or have solid backup from your team.

Harper.4173:

People want roles because in an everyone does everything for himself they can’t handle all the different things they need to take care of and become worse players for it.
So they want their little role to learn and maybe they’ll do better.

Funny, that’s like me saying die hard meta-DPS defenders are unable to contemplate or handle more advanced concepts than “hit stuff, dodge obvious” and are now panicking ^^

Which isn’t constructive at all. So let’s focus on the discussion and not silly stuff like that, okay?

Harper.4173:

Fun fact : there will ALWAYS be a meta. Pro players ( the elite ) will ALWAYS run the optimal meta.
No matter how much you try to shove " build diversity " down our throats you will never be " Elite" if you don’t run the meta. That will NEVER change.

As someone who ran a very effective non-meta tank build in WoW.. In my experience, “elites” can sometimes be idiots who don’t know half of what they think they know.

I agree that it’s not the gear in itself that’s the main problem (although those 3 stats does combo extremely well together), but the PvE content.

While I raided in WoW we had a term for the straight-up fights with no advanced mechanics – “Tank’n’spank”. The problem in GW2 is IMHO a combination of these things:

1. The majority of PvE fights are straight-up fights (or reduced to it with enough dps)
2. Tanks/healers are removed, leaving only the spanking part
3. Players are expected to use active defenses to avoid lethal damage

None of these are necessarily bad alone, but in combination it leaves a very one-sided meta where the only thing that matters is how much DPS your group can do.

And the way active defenses work (extremely strong, but limited resource) very much leads itself into a DPS race, where your best offense and defense is killing stuff before your active defenses runs out.

It’s to the point where you’re reducing risk instead of increasing it when going full zerk, and you get rewarded for it. In some places you’re even reducing the skill needed because the fights are so short that the advanced parts of a fight never happens.

This is my opinion of the current meta. If I’m wrong, please enlighten me. But, from my current point of view, the zerker meta does look very unbalanced, limiting, and frankly, quite boring. I do not think that’s how GW2 was supposed to be.

Berner.7289:

Terrasque.8735:

You seem to be stating for a fact that the zerk meta fix will lower the needed skillcap, while most suggestions I’ve seen are based around increasing the skill needed to play zerker well.

Let me do a simple mechanic example. What if some bosses had a reflection shield, that would reflect a certain percent of the damage done back to whoever did the attack, and the shield would be down for a period if the boss was successfully interrupted.

You’d either have to take pauses to avoid lethal damage, gear/spec for handling more incoming damage, have support to keep you alive, or use CC properly. Now my question is, in that example, how would it make things easier than it is now?

All this would do is slow down the amount of time it takes a skillful group of DPS-geared players to complete the content. Consequently, what you’re really doing is nerfing the rewards of skillful play, because the only reward for skillful play in GW2 is the ability to complete content quickly and efficiently.

I like how you insist that having damage-only gear is skillful play in itself, and any change to that is a nerf to being a skillful player.

And also, you seem say that having mechanics to react to and play around is not skill, while just doing damage all the time is skill – and everything that tries to prevent you from just doing damage without interruption and react to it is reducing skill. I hope you understand that such logic might seem a bit strange to some?

You’re also assuming that a mob with that mechanic would have the same too-large health pool as today’s mobs. I really doubt that would be the case.

NoTrigger.8396:

the only reason why you want to nerf berserker is because you are either too bad to play it or you simply dont like it.

I feel a strange sense of deja vu here..

Berner.7289:

A well-reasoned analysis, but I disagree that player skill has no part of this discussion. Objectively, the “zerker” playstyle has a higher skillcap because the active defenses must be deployed correctly (type, timing, placement) to gain the benefits of front-loaded DPS. Failure to correctly use the active defense in a highly skillful manner typically results in the defeat of the player and/or team (and corresponding loss of money and time).

By contrast, more defensive playstyles have a lower skill requirement because there is greater room for error in the execution of the available active defenses. This is not an elitist statement, or an insult to lower skilled players. It is an objective fact, and frankly a positive testament to the game’s design that all content can be completed by players of varying skill levels.

But it is a basic tenant of game design that higher skill should be rewarded. Lowering the skillcap — or raising the skill floor — eliminates the fun of getting better at the game.

This is why I disagree with your premise that there is a problem with the Berserker meta. Nerfing Berserker gear or raising the effectiveness of defensive playstyles lowers the skillcap, making the game less rewarding for skillful play. Currently there is positive correlation between higher skilled play and player reward (measured in any number of metrics, including gold/hr and time to complete content). To reduce or eliminate that correlation by lowering the skillcap would be a significant mistake, in my opinion.

You seem to be stating for a fact that the zerk meta fix will lower the needed skillcap, while most suggestions I’ve seen are based around increasing the skill needed to play zerker well.

Let me do a simple mechanic example. What if some bosses had a reflection shield, that would reflect a certain percent of the damage done back to whoever did the attack, and the shield would be down for a period if the boss was successfully interrupted.

You’d either have to take pauses to avoid lethal damage, gear/spec for handling more incoming damage, have support to keep you alive, or use CC properly. Now my question is, in that example, how would it make things easier than it is now?

Edit: Another thing, if you made the shield only for direct damage / initial attack, conditions becomes more interesting too. Giving you another option, and add another viable role to the mix.

Thanks, man

Glad to see you’re improving things. Good job!

Khisanth.2948:

Are you looking at EU, NA or both?

Both, actually. Seems like it started working 21:19 cest, then stopped working again 21:24 – and is still not updating

Edit: And started again 21:41

It seems like the API have served up the exact same event states since 19:37 CEST – over an hour ago now.

Any known problems?

1. Register user
2. Give user unique key
3. Let user input that in the position program
4. Players with admin right to relevant group(s) can add him via username

Got a bit inspired by this reddit thread and wrapped a simple C# component for reading this data in a configurable HTTP POST’er.

I also quickly (and with bad code I might add) made an example webserver that uses the data (was mostly for being sure that it actually works..)

Link : https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2401158/GW2%20Position%20Updater.zip – just edit the server.ini file to point at your project, read POST “data” form field, json decode, and off you go.

Yeah, I was wondering because I rarely see those in-game.

I tried to find out what triggered them, and it looks like the wiki have all of them flagged as bugged:

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Prove_you_know_a_lot_about_Destiny%27s_Edge
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Stop_the_bandit_thief_from_stealing_the_pumphouse_blueprints
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Drive_the_rogue_bull_back_home,_and_fix_any_mayhem_on_the_way
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Bandits_have_constructed_a_roadblock_to_stop_Shaemoor_traffic

Heyo, interesting. But I’m seeing several events now that are in Preparation for a very long time. Examples from Queensdale:

21:10:14 Queensdale Village of Shaemoor Prove you know a lot about Destiny’s Edge2 Preparation
21:10:14 Queensdale Shaemoor Fields Stop the bandit thief from stealing the pumphouse blueprints3 Preparation
21:10:14 Queensdale Shaemoor Fields Drive the rogue bull back home, and fix any mayhem on the way4 Preparation
21:10:14 Queensdale Shaemoor Fields Bandits have constructed a roadblock to stop Shaemoor traffic2 Preparation

They have been in Preparation since (at least) 21:10, and time is 21:55 locally here. Is this intended behavior?

It seem to go against the "Not all events have preparation states at all, and it’s often short for those that do, so this should not effect most events. " comment you had earlier.

I also doubt the events requests take up much resources either. I’d guess they’re writing data to memcache-like cache on update, then just pull from there.

thumbs up

anything interesting deployed? Also, can you give some info about the API’s request load? Q/s and server load?

Why do you think it’s a bug? Tequatl have no fail state, no followup, and thus won’t need a specific success state either.

Warmup is when a condition is missing for the event to start, in Tequatl’s event it’s time . I guess they set a new time when he dies (3h+random) and sets the event to Warmup.

Thakitten means something else than what you hoped for doesn’t necessarily make it a bug

Interwebs

• http://gw2.thelazy.net/ – using Events API

Killer Rhino.6794:

Terrasque.8735:

Nice list! Love ya!

Using it in my project at http://gw2.thelazy.net/

Really like what you’ve got here! Especially the desktop notifications. Well done, sir.

Thanks, been a bit (aka too) obsessive about it the last two days. Nice to get some feedback

Nice list! Love ya!

Using it in my project at http://gw2.thelazy.net/

Was just thinking..

It would be really nice if the zone list could include level range and possibly region too.

http://gw2.thelazy.net/ – something I made earlier today – looks similar

I just noticed that my “events dot html” link got helpfully converted to “eventkittenml” . impressed

Actually, if properly and cleverly cached, they can probably squirt out answers to several thousand requests per second..

Not all have that, I’m afraid.

“Defeat Franklin Quickblade and his band of rogues” for example.

Hey, I’ve been toying with the Events API a bit today (wip found here ), and there are some things I feel should really be there.

First of all, in the event list, I’d love to see flags for events. Especially group events and skill challenges should be marked. Something like “flags”:“G”, “flags”:“S”, “flags”:“G,S” for example. Other possible flags could maybe be for pre-events and events giving chests?

I’d also (as many other threads mention) like to see a timestamp for last status change

Last (for now), I’d like to see an event_details api, that could list some more information about an event. More text, maybe a general location. And for example for active events, it could list the event progress and goal name(s).