Guild Wars 2

Ben K.6238:

- Aion. Because forts only went vulnerable at specific times of the day, you always had a good contest for them. The actual combat was a hot mess, but I’ve wished GW2 could host GvGs over forts like that for years.

That is not at all how Aion was for me. I played about one year after launch and every other month one side would take turns having burn out and not show up.

Strider Pj.2193:

BG will bleed players off it. They likely will remain locked for some time. And no, they likely shouldn’t have been opened the last time.

BG (and other stacked servers) always keep opening up to re-stack. This isn’t what you want to happen if the idea is to balance existing servers over time. Maybe it makes sense if your endgame is to close some servers, but they aren’t doing that (yet) either. It doesn’t even appear like they have a coherent plan.

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

Sarrs.4831:

Hello, I’m not quite clear on this.

So you need to get
75+ pips on week 1
75+ pips on week 2
75+ pips on week 3

And then so long as you remain on the server, you will get the loyalty bonus?
Or will the streak reset if you miss a week, and you need to do all 3 again?

Needing to earn 100+ pips weeks 1, 2 and 3 is correct. If you miss a week you will need to do all 3 again.

*Edit: It should be 100 pips not 75. So you need to complete all of Wood Tier for 3 weeks.

Chiming in that I also think it’s ridiculous that you lose the loyalty bonus after acquiring it if you miss a week. Punished for going on vacation and not playing GW2, nice! Guess I’m lucky I already took my week off this year.

Sarika.3756:

One up one down will be a mess with only four tiers.

More or less of a mess than what we’ve had though?

XenesisII.1540:

That post is seven months old.. they’re currently working on skirmish rewards.
Was there even a priority poll done?

That was the last poll they did, and skirmish rewards won.

MaLeVoLenT.8129:

The biggest reason WvW feels so bad is because WvW has no meaning, no purpose and no drive to achieve winning what so ever. I don’t know how many times this needs to be said before they get it. When there is no drive to play competitively, all mechanics start to break down.

If they incentivize winning it just encourages stacking, which has been a problem since day 1 with Titan Alliance even though there were no rewards whatsoever back then, not even the paltry bonus chests each week. Or how BG stacked every tournament. Or how Mag is the dominant KDR server to the point where they complain about BG doing nothing but running from them and tank to get out of T1.

When/if skirmish rewards ever materialize and if they scale with performance will there be any reason for me to stick on a server that routinely gets 2nd or 3rd place? If the game essentially tells me and everyone else I’m better off bandwagoning that won’t bode well for the health of the game mode.

I have to admit I actually agree that there is no purpose in WvW. Population balance should be addressed at the same time as rewards, but I don’t see how they can do it. Trying to balance 24 hour(or 7 day) slices, even if accomplished, means nothing with regards to a particular skirmish.

If they ever add this I wouldn’t be shocked to see it tied into the skirmish rewards that they’re supposedly working on.

Atros.9607:

Honestly there is a lot missing here in terms of info. What time did you take this, what day, what is the coverage for your server on that time?

However, Anet made the decision to listen to you and made this:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Glicko-Temporary-Manual-Adjustments/first#post6529467

But there will be salt on both sides about the changes. I for one am really not having the T1 crap. Anet needs to come onto these forums and read suggestions and start thinking about ways to fix the imbalance and linking crap that has caused so much volatility in WvW to allow for “Manual Glicko Adjustments” when they did not need to do that for the first 3 years of GW2’s life.

There have been many servers that took months to settle into their proper tier in GW2’s life after mass exoduses, ditto for mass transfers in. Just because Anet did not adjust Glicko back then doesn’t mean they shouldn’t have. Maybe you don’t remember HoD breaking up right after game launch when WvW matches went to 7 days, but I do.

Liston.9708:

I am sort of interested to see what is done with a T1 server that has fallen all the way to high pop. That pop has to be lower than some guests now….

Since I am in T3 it doesn’t really affect me, I only care to see if someone is paying attention….

#t1forever

havoktwo.2147:

1 up 1 down won’t work.

It works better than sending the #5 server who can’t win t2 into t1 where they then move up server ranks due to draining glicko from BG and Mag despite being blown out. Think of all the problems with locked tiers we’ve had in 4 years that would have been solved by switching to 1U1D where there weren’t months of fighting a dead server or one that belonged in a higher tier because glicko is so bad at managing bandwagons and exoduses.

Unless they changed something in the Wed patch, you need to control all 3 shrines for the jump pads to work, including the jump pads to the outer red keep mortars.

The real joke is how TC keeps getting T1 roll when they can’t even win T2. Glicko so good.

Endelon.1042:

Was more of just a friendly reminder since I think they forgot about these armors :P

The same time that they fix the missing northeast and northwest corners of the desert borderlands garrison wall, which are still missing, but only on Reinforced and Fortified tiers.

Alternate answer: in celebration of the wvw revamp being released

When you are queued for another map, use a waypoint, and if the queue pops while you are on the loading screen, the queue popup does not render, and there is no way to get into the map you were queued for. The invisible queue popup will timeout and you will be force re-queued.

Annoying bug/design flaw.

Jayne.9251:

1. Thieves have very little HP.
2. Multiple stealth traps ensures he not only aggros you, but the npcs as well.

If the npcs aggro the thief then the keep & wp contest and you didn’t stop them…which is the whole point of the thread.

XTR.9604:

Edit: Honestly, I think they should remove waypoints from WvW all together except spawn.

They removed waypoints from the side keeps and that worked out so well…

You guys are hilarious. You expect people to be able to stop someone from hitting a guard one time(do they even need to do this or can they just aggro them?) like that’s viable. How many people do you expect to camp every single group of guards. The mechanic is stupid and I’m pretty sure there are people using bots to contest keeps because I’ve seen the same person doing it for literally hours every day, starting before I logged on, probably still going on after I logged out.

Another year missing out on the seasonal animations(treb snowballs, catapult gifts) when you have wvw ability points in respective siege, anet pls

Scrap Glicko, it never worked because of bandwagon servers and mass exoduses.

Red Garrison, Desert BL
What happened to the corner of the wall, is this intentional?

I think you should be able to repair cannons, mortars, etc, but don’t know how I feel about being able to repair all siege.

Jayne.9251:

Helys Vikonas.9125:

Sarcasm aside, I mostly agree with what has been said in several other posts above. I believe girls are rarer because they are fewer playing, and because of the weirdness and stupid remarks from a few people that are to be expected to happen in command situations. I dunno if a girl would feel glad to go online to have fun and get a break, only to find the same sexist stuff thrown as them as irl.

There’s actually a study done in 2014 I believe that pegged female gamers at 56% of the gaming population. Fastest growth demographic compared to as little as five years ago. I’ll see if I can’t dig it up.

The gaming population of all games, including casual games. Which doesn’t say anything about the demographics of hardcore online games, specifically for a pvp game mode.

Tyler Bearce.3427:

Alpine Borderlands will be rotated back in with the next release (not hotfix.)

Please do something about trebs in SW camp being able to hit inner Bay before reverting the map.

1. They’re great

2. Fine

3. A lil slow, but it would be acceptable if boosters increased track points?

4. Fine

expandas.7051:

I believe issues such as population balance (gold vs bronze server pop) and “nightcapping” (primarily directed at eu/ocx/sea players) will resolve themselves if an effective and engaging framework for WvW is reintroduced.

I have been playing WvW since day 1, and nightcapping has been an issue since day 1, even when all 4 maps were queued during NA prime. Back then Anet’s stance was that the players need/will balance themselves out. In 3.5 years, it hasn’t happened. My server perpetually has no ocx force, any ocx guilds that come give up and bandwagon somewhere else because they don’t want to be blobbed day in and day out.

no, do not want

Tyler Bearce.3427:

We’ve avoided adding this feature because we don’t believe it would be healthy for WvW. While we can appreciate why some players would want a feature like this, lots of other players only engage in WvW when, upon entering a WvW map, immediately see a commander icon to follow. We try and avoid adding features that can be used to intentionally exclude other players.

It seems extremely silly to ignore the reality that guild groups have been running tagless for 3 years. May as well just allow them to have a guild only visible tag.

Dragon banner, at least, is indeed over the top.

Porqington.3189:

Agreed. Almost every change to WvW in HoT had some form of PvE bias. I play WvW to fight other players not a 10 million HP SMC lord or some bullkitten air ships.

Bottom line get the PvE out of my WvW!

Higher lord HP gives the defending team more time to respond which leads to more fights. Only ktrainers want fast caps.

“Players will also no longer be able to revive defeated players while in combat.”

Been waiting 3 years for this, finally!

Annatar.2907:

Veteran here, and I’m going to throw my hat in the “shafted” bin. $50 is entirely too much for an add-on expansion. No MMO charges a full game price (or near to, some full games are still $50, others $60) for an expansion.

Warlords of Draenor was kitten pre-purchase for the standard edition, and you still needed to pay the $15 monthly fee when it came out to play it, so I don’t know how you can say “no MMO charges a full game price for an expansion.”

Personally I have no idea if HoT’s content (at launch) is gonna be worth $50 or not, but seeing as how I’ve been playing GW2 for almost 3 years, and plan to continue playing it, I’ll surely get $100 value out of it. YMMV, welcome to capitalism.

desertleaf.5403:

new players are still better off – they will get everything you just got and save the initial $60.00 you gave for free.

Uh, they didn’t get to play the game for almost 3 years.

Personally, I’m still debating on the ultimate edition. If I ever was going to buy more gems, then I might as well go for it and get the extras too.

Rainshadow.4926:

Stephen please join us on the Blackgate borderland map during NA prime (around 8pm EST) and we can show you what a 3 way garrison fight does for our skill lag. All three servers would be more than happy to demonstrate for you. The green map has consistently been the worst as far as lag for a while now.

There is just something wrong with the green borderland map server in T1(currently Blackgate). People get lag spikes/dc that don’t happen on any of the other borderlands or EB, even when there are less people on the green map.

They actually never removed this, what was removed was the ability to stack stealth off of walls while in stealth.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs/Cloack-Dagger-on-WvWvW-walls

Rainmaker.7594:

Also, it’s not so much a matter of the hardware as it is the software. Microsoft won’t release newer versions of DX on older OS, so DX12 that someone mentioned is a very bad idea because it won’t work on Win7. OpenGL and 64-bit isn’t controlled by MS.

Microsoft is offering win10 & DX12 as a free upgrade to win7 users so that point is moot.

Mitch the Fish.1947:

Personally my guild is a havoc guild and now we have the capability to not only attack waypointed structures but if the scouts are not paying attaention we regularly capture them.

This makes no sense. If a keep is waypointed, attacking it will contest the waypoint. This is the same thing as having white swords. Moreover, it is something that is noticeable across WvW maps, you don’t even need to be on the same map!

Gudradain.3892:

It’s a good change.

It’s a good thing if you like karma training. It is, however, not a good change if you’re an attacker who wants fights. Or a defender who wants fights. Or if you don’t want to waste your time idling in a structure waiting for an attack that may never come performing sentry duty that is unrewarding.

I agree that having a system that allows smaller groups a chance is something that should exist. A system that treats 5 attackers the same as 30 or 60 is not.

Evalia.7103:

The way at look at it is that while removing White Swords by itself may not be the greatest idea(though we have no idea which way it will go), it provides more possibilities and opportunities to WvW, especially with other changes that can come together with this specific change.

A system that truly provides possibilities and opportunities is one that does not treat all attacks equally, but handles attacks by a small force, 25+, and a map blob differently. It should also handle camps and towers/keeps uniquely. A “one size fits all” change is not gonna cut it, sorry.

First of all population caps need to be sorted out based on active WvW population and not total players on the server, most of which are PVE only and may or may not even be active accounts anymore. That’s step 1. Step 2 is probably to consolidate servers, there just isn’t the same number of people playing WvW proper that there were at launch, especially with EotM sucking people away. Step 3 is to then to redistribute the population so we have healthy WvW on every remaining server.

As has been apparent since launch, the playerbase will not evenly distribute itself, we don’t need to go down this road again, don’t even entertain it. Quite frankly this has been a problem with every PVP game I’ve ever played, players always stack because it’s easier to win when stacked and more people care about winning than they do about challenge or the health of the game.

Removing white swords is nonsensical. Sticking a few people across the map to sentry doesn’t “break the zerg” even assuming that it doesn’t already happen.

Instead of toying with the idea of removing white swords entirely, which is assuredly doomed to fail, the white sword mechanic should be re-tuned.

Camps can be handled differently as they have different requirements (e.g. they flip fast for solo/small groups and a zerg can flip it before 30 seconds are even up) from towers & keeps.

Gates/walls should parse how much damage is being done to them. If the damage/time is indicative of heavy damage, e.g. 5 rams or a golem rush, white swords should pop immediately. If it’s 2 rams worth of damage, maybe it should stay 30 seconds, as it is now. If it’s 1 ram, maybe it should take 45 seconds or some number over 30. If it’s 1 guy hitting a gate for 10 damage, no swords should pop at all, until some significant damage has been totaled (like 1% gate hp). And perhaps these numbers should all be tweaked based on the structure’s upgrade status.

I echo sentiments that the number of really toxic trolls on each server is very small. Trolling can be mitigated but prevention is impossible. The question is, is it worth developer resources to brainstorm, implement, and then tune a system to try to curtail the behavior of a very few players? Invariably GM oversight will still be necessary due to discovered loopholes. Presumably, reports happen already which must be waded through.

With the current proposal it seems like it will be a race for a troll to waste as much siege as possible before they get voted exhaustion. What if they just switch to using trebs, which aren’t all that expensive, instead of ballistas? This would be a minimum of 500 supply, and could be more if votes don’t happen fast enough. What prevents them from just changing characters, of which everyone has at least 5? That is a minimum of 2500 supply, or all of the supply from a fully upgraded and stocked keep + all of the supply from a fully upgraded and stocked tower.

DaveGan.8065:

Visiroth.5914:

It could be argued that this is harassment of the server community.

Then this is where you should be arguing from.

Again, this is irrelevant. We don’t need to argue anything, it is either punishable or it isn’t. This isn’t the first time and it won’t be the last time that siege trolling has come up in the forums. And it has been actionable in the past
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Siege-griefing/first#post1785268

We also have an anecdote from this very thread, where ANet has supposedly stepped in: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Anet-s-stance-on-siege-trolls/first#post4413266

If policy has changed, then a 2 page thread isn’t going to get their attention, not when everyone is mad with the gaffes of the New Player Experience.

You’ve combined a strawman with a non sequitur. Nice job.

You’re the one who said it, not me. You dismiss out of hand any basis of definition of what siege trolling may be(amount used, discerning intent through chat logs, repeat offenses), which suggests you demand some ironclad inviolable definition of it or are trolling. Then cry strawman when you’re called out on it because I used the qualifier “perfect definition.” Then, when you’re called out on that, it is a “non sequitur.”

There are many things that can reduce morale, and people can do them freely.

A strawman and a non sequitur. We aren’t discussing “many things,” this is about siege trolling. But I see where you going with this.

Perhaps they are still trying to come up with a more preventive (as opposed to reactive) measure.

They have actually said this in the past. I’m not going to find the link for you though. Regardless, we’re still waiting for this and many other things that were promised.

DaveGan.8065:

• Many of you have yet to cite a rule that said siege troll is breaking, falling back on the flawed assumption that the majority is entitled to its playstyle.

“Many of you.” Nice strawman.

• You guys have so far failed to produce a single outcome where a siege troll definitively landed your server in a lower place than it deserved.

There is no way to “definitely” prove it, and you know it. Someone would just say “you would have lost that keep or tower anyway.” “Morale loss was caused by other issues.” “Players would have burned out anyway.” “It’s their fault for giving up.” “They just have to fight harder.” etc etc ad nauseam.

DaveGan.8065:

• An outsider looking in (or the siege trolls themselves) could easily accuse you of scapegoating all of your server’s morale, recruitment, coverage, and general performance failures on siege trolls instead of taking proper responsibility.

Now this is a true non sequitur. Such accusations would be irrelevant. The discussion being “will ANet do anything,” not “what do I feel ANet should do” or “if ANet should do anything at all.”

DaveGan.8065:

Perhaps it’s time to drop the “ANet is evil” narrative and think about why this issue isn’t getting the attention it seems to deserve.

We get it. Toxic players should be able to do whatever they want.

dandamanno.4136:

Whether someones motives are malicious or not is not answerable since it is impossible to really know someones intentions. All we can do is look at the evidence and make a reasonable guess as to their intentions.

It’s answerable if they admit to it in chat, like the person in question has.

DaveGan.8065:

I’m sorry, but what rule does that break? (would you like to make this a rule?) I know you’re frustrated, and while I do not disagree with your stance, your argument for it is only starting to develop.

It could be argued that this is harassment of the server community. Suiciding golems could be seen as harassment of an individual, as they spent some resource acquiring those plans. There is also a blub about causing other players distress. But at the end of the day, it doesn’t even matter because ANet reserves the right to change the rules of conduct.

They were banned according to an obscure catch-all “you shall not exploit” clause. Being a vague clause, there was still controversy surrounding it, and ANet was even pressured in the karma weapon case to reduce many bans to suspensions. However, even though it was vague, it was still there, so people by and large took ANet’s side.

Yes, I know that. It is an extremely broad interpretation of the word exploit. The point is they did not punish everyone in these cases. The point is, some vague clause/definition is enough.

Nice try on the strawman with “perfectly”. Moreover, this whole bit amounts to little more than “I know it when I see it”, and I have another post addressing this somewhere above.

Don’t get all coy after you said ANet “can’t” define it if we can’t. They are aware of siege trolls, and have commented in the past, back when the siege building achievement was intact.

It’s funny that you bring up the dungeon thing when the guy this thread is about is one of the most egregious siege trolls. If they take any action, it would be against them. This thread is not about a guy building 6 ballistas one time at a camp, in case it wasn’t clear enough. ANet can comment in this thread themselves and say it’s not viewed as an issue. Since we have a post that they have stepped in on another server in the past, apparently it is. But who knows, maybe they think keeping a few extremely toxic players around is ok.

DaveGan.8065:

Honest and serious question: is there actually a matchup where this supply/siege blockage is actually affecting the outcome (rather than just the points), or is this more of an annoyance/morale issue?

Siege caps, supply for for defensive siege, upgrades, and repairs are of the utmost importance in WvW. Are you more or less likely to try harder and devote extra time when your side is being actively sabotaged for hours? Morale ties into points, which ties back into morale, which affects the outcome. Pretty sure even WvW devs have thrown out the term “snowballing” here before.

DaveGan.8065:

Anyone who hasn’t done so already should probably read this post by Romek on the first page

Again, this achievement is no longer a factor. Stop bringing it up. For someone who threw out the accusation of a strawman, this is ridiculous.

DaveGan.8065:

Visiroth.5914:

No one is asking ANet to do anything except in the most extreme cases. Your argument falls flat and being some kind of Devil’s Advocate isn’t going to get you anywhere. ANet also has harassment and offensive name policies to which you could apply your question, yet they exist and apparently work fine at ANet’s discretion.

I imagine examining the chat logs would easily determine who is siege trolling in most cases. If you are constantly emptying keep, tower, and camp supply, to the point where you are camping yak arrivals to build more ballistas while an upgrade is running, it’s pretty kitten clear what your intent is.

What’s funny is that I don’t think I even asked a very difficult question. Yet after three replies I’ve yet to get a single semblance of a definition.

As far as the naming policy goes, there is a whole section that outlines it pretty explicitly.. There is probably still some subjectivity, but subjectivity at least needs some objective context around it. A simple objective definition needs to be the starting point.

What part of “people constantly emptying multiple locations of supply building useless siege” for hours is not a semblance of a definition? You are purposefully being obtuse. Clearly a siege troll would be defined by some number of supply used, their correspondence with other Tyrians, and whether they do it repeatedly.

Since you insist on being pedagogical, here’s some more relevant examples. When the game was first released, you could buy items from karma vendors and sell them for gold. Later there were also some crafting recipes involving snowflakes that people salvaged into ectos. Some people who took advantage of these (poorly) designed game mechanics were banned. People who crossed a threshold. That was arbitrarily decided at the sole discretion of ANet.

The whole argument that we the players need to perfectly define who and what is guilty of abuse is ludicrous. We are not the GW2 police, ANet is. They draw the lines in the sand, they decide how much is too much. The culprits know what they are doing, we know what they are doing, and ANet knows what they are doing.

Let me reiterate one more time: THERE IS NO ACHIEVEMENT

The multi-stage achievement was removed some time ago, and everyone who ever spent 10 supply to build siege got full credit. The excuse that people are doing this because they’re achievement hunters doesn’t fly anymore, as flimsy a defense as it ever was.

DaveGan.8065:

CheezeStix.1076:

Deli.1302:

Samis.1750:

I started another thread here titled “Wouldn’t pay another 5 cents for this game” due to experiencing this problem.

Please tell me how anet is going to tell the difference between:
-a person building useless siege with malicious intent
-a person building useless siege because they don’t know better

I’m going to assume you have no idea what we’re talking about or you’re trolling.

It’s a serious and legitimate question. Can you describe “siege troll” without going to extreme cases or naming specific people?

Neither of us are defending it, but you have to be able to define it. If even you can’t answer the question how can ANet? The only thing they could do without a proper answer/definition would be to take action only on the most egregious trolls with multiple violations and reports. Someone in this thread would seem to confirm ANet is doing (or trying to do) at least that much.

No one is asking ANet to do anything except in the most extreme cases. Your argument falls flat and being some kind of Devil’s Advocate isn’t going to get you anywhere. ANet also has harassment and offensive name policies to which you could apply your question, yet they exist and apparently work fine at ANet’s discretion.

I imagine examining the chat logs would easily determine who is siege trolling in most cases. If you are constantly emptying keep, tower, and camp supply, to the point where you are camping yak arrivals to build more ballistas while an upgrade is running, it’s pretty kitten clear what your intent is.

X T D.6458:

some just decide to work on that title

Everyone has that title, and its been that way for a long, long time precisely because ANet didn’t want unsuspecting players to indiscriminately waste supply building siege trying to get the title.

X T D.6458:

and if you encounter dirty tricks you think are coming from your opponents, well welcome to t1, we in SoR had to deal with this constantly, TC wanted t1, well…its what you have to put up with…

Your comment makes no sense, there have been siege trolls outside of t1.

FourthVariety.5463:

Shouldn’t one of the question ArenaNet asking its customers be what they would like to spend their money on? Living World gets torn apart quite a bit, but the most powerful statement you can practically can make in this forum is not just saying that you want something, but that you would even be willing to pay for it.

The problem with this is you don’t have any guarantee that people who say they will pay for something actually will, for any number of reasons. They could have been lying. They might not like what was delivered. They could have fallen on hard financial times. They might have increased life responsibilities and don’t play anymore. They might have moved to another game.

ipan.4356:

Anything we want, anyway.

More LS I’m sure – but it won’t open any new maps or dungeons, or anything else people want.

You mean like how Dry Top is a new map that is part of LS?

ipan.4356:

“Rework huge portions of the game” is almost never in the agenda.

With the exception of FFXIV – the only MMO in my memory that was rebooted – I’ve never played it, so I have no idea how well that went.

WoW? There are fairly large changes over its history with new expansions. Star Wars Galaxies NGE as well.

ZudetGambeous.9573:

It was more a comment on the fact that it was imo a legitimate concern that was dismissed outright.

The CDI produced a number of good ideas. There was 8 months of development time and all that we got out of it was a switch from the word “soul bound” to “account bound” and a palette swap. That is something even a novice programmer could do over his lunch break on a Friday afternoon, yet it is all we are being given after 8 months of waiting.

Imo a more appropriate response would have been any of the following:

1. I’m not sure why this took so long I will find out and get back to you (and actually get back to him)

There is no response like this that would be satisfying or useful. The answer(s) are pretty obvious anyway:
-they were working on other, higher priority issues that have been deployed already and just got around to this
-they are working on other, higher priority issues that they won’t tell us about
-the feature was ready some time ago but they wanted to deploy it for WvW Season 3

Normal triple monitor looks like this, does it not?

https://dviw3bl0enbyw.cloudfront.net/uploads/forum_attachment/file/76345/Cant_See_Sh_t_Captain.jpg

Regardless, let’s all continue to give a free pass to people who shoot ACs into places they know they shouldn’t be able to…

insanemaniac.2456:

2nd gen i7 is getting old. 4th gen will run much much better. i do minimum 20 fps on a stock 4th gen i5 / geforce 750 on medium graphics in large zergs. i can run high fairly well i just dont like feeling zergs that much.

Clock for clock 4th gen is not amazingly faster than 2nd gen, unless you are measuring the performance of the integrated graphics, which we’re not. This can be confirmed on any major hardware site.

Distaste.4801:

Visiroth.5914:

Lord Kuru.3685:

It keeps people like you strung along.

Towards what end? It’s not like they are getting subscription fees while we’re waiting with bated breath for WvW updates. Nor is there the constant introduction of new tiers of gear that we must chase, or even WXP traitlines. There is literally nothing stopping people from taking a break from WvW or even GW2 as a whole, and waiting for updates to return to the game.

Statistics. People not playing the game or following it don’t buy gems. Let’s say on the lowest of low ends that 1% of players buy gems. If they can keep even 10k people baited and waiting for WvW, statistically 100 of them will buy gems. There is also the added social factor, friends will play what their other friends are playing. If they can keep people playing GW2 they can thus have the chance at increasing population and once again gem sales. Then of course we have the word of mouth portion of this. If they say they have stuff coming it calms the playerbase down and lowers the amount of negative word of mouth, however ArenaNet has passed the tipping point of promising this too much and it’s now a negative. You of course can see the effects of this not only here but on other forums.

The consensus of this forum is that WvW has not been monetized much in the gem store beyond server transfers. I’d be surprised if 1% of the WvW population is buying gems for WvW purposes and not for their PVE. If you are on the verge of quitting the game, why would you buy gems at that point? I think most people who don’t enjoy playing quit. They don’t stick around for changes that were never given a rollout date, that may never come, that may come but aren’t what they want. The large majority of players may wish for change, but their continued existence in Tyria is not contingent on it.

As far as the social aspect, that is a reason why they don’t need to string people along. If you have friends playing you’re more likely to continue playing regardless of the direction the game takes. Not particular to GW2, but all MMORPGs.

As far as lip service, it is just that. Anyone with life experience should not expect much, especially given that ANet never gave a timeline. As the old saying goes, don’t count your chickens before they hatch.

pdavis.8031:

Its part of WvW because it employes the same structure of play as the main part of WvW, but not tied to your specific homeworld. The players turned it into a karma train. The exact same mechanics are there. Each “world” is in control of a certain territory and its main objective is to capture the other “worlds” territory. To say otherwise is just an excuse to point out that nothing has been added to WvW because EotM doesnt count because those playing the map are doing it differently than intended. Its almost as if people are purposely leaving it put of the equation because doing so fits the answer that they want to see. But that doesnt change the FACT thay EotM IS a part of WvW whether you want to believe it or not.

The concept of WvW was server vs server vs server which EOTM does not adhere to. If I leave and rejoin EOTM there is no guarantee that I will even enter the same instance I was in before which is another central concept of WvW proper.