Guild Wars 2

Erukk.1408:

That’s why they gave you the option of unlocking it two ways. You can either search out the events themselves to unlock, since most of them was relatively easy to do, or you can simply pay a small fee and some skill points to unlock the ones you want but you don’t want to do the events for.

To unlock all your traits so you can experiment or re-trait depending on what you want to do (www roam, www zerg, pve, etc), you need over 40 gold and 360 skill points. That is not a small cost of gold and skill points. Now, multiply this by the number of alts you have.

I’m leveling a new character right now and I can’t do any any type of experimentation with my traits since it is either very grindy and tedious or expensive (costs too much gold and skill points) to try to unlock a trait to test out while leveling.

I am forced to look up a cookie cutter build and follow it to a tee since I can’t afford to waste any skill points on unnecessary traits.

This quote highlights one of the main reasons why the new trait system was implemented, and what I can see so far, the new trait system has failed to allow players to experiment with their new builds.

We want it to be much easier to experiment with and learn new builds as you explore the world of Tyria.

Proposal:
1) Remove skill points as a cost to unlock traits.
2) Lower the gold cost of unlocking traits substantially. If I recall, it costs less than 10 gold total to unlock all all traits with the old system. The total cost to unlock all traits in the new system should be the same as the old system.

Karizee.8076:

Just want to say how much fun I’m having with the new trait system. I started leveling a new character and was surprised to find I’m getting so many traits unlocked simply by running around the open world and doing different things. Has a real BONUS! feeling when I unlock one.

At level 40 now, there’s has been a couple that I’ve specifically sought out – seems like a really good direction for the game, very much like skill hunting in GW1.

That is the problem. Anet is forcing you to level your character 1 way. Before, you could level your character in wvw, through crafting, dungeons, ktrain, etc. Now, you can’t anymore since it’s a huge hassle to unlock your traits.

I hate this change. The new trait system is worse than the previous system. The new system is harder to use, confusing, and prevents me to do any type of experimentation. Your character is weaker with this new system and discourages you to even try to level it in wvw. To make it worse, traits with pve content that are difficult to unlock, you have to waste your skill points to unlock the traits that could have been spent on actual skills. Overall, it just seems more grindy and forces you to level your character 1 way.

I did not see a lot of complaints about the old trait system, and I was surprised anet spent resources on fixing/changing something that was working.

Bottom line:
If it’s not broken, there’s no reason to fix it. Now, with the change, it’s broken and worse than before.

I regret getting a new character slot. If it was possible to get a refund on the character slot, I would jump on that and save the trouble of leveling another character.

Distaste.4801:

Ross Biddle.2367:

SqueamishMoose.9216:

It’s clearly shown that Blackgate can win against either team when they are separated and when they aren’t allied against us. I personally don’t care if we get double-teamed in the off-season, because it doesn’t matter. However, it seems rather unfair to me that Blackgate is getting double-teamed during a tournament, where the score amounts to a reward. It’s pretty much impossible for us to win if it isn’t going to be a fair fight.

Can you define a “fair” fight for me? I’d <b>love</b> to see what BG comes up with within the context of it’s victories.

Just to start, I’m on IoJ server.

I could have sworn I remember reading a post with you saying you were from BG. Let me find it.

Edit: found it.

As for winning coming up. I AM FROM BLACKGATE, I’ve won plenty.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Tear-down-WvW-divisions-Why-not/page/2

mango.9267:

Reverence.6915:

mango.9267:

Reverence.6915:

blur.7905:

Well it seem like server unofficial alliances and match manipulation is the way forward. Well done anet now not only you can buy guild you can buy server as well. As if the unbalance is not bad enough. I will wait and see how people will react when unofficial alliances and match manipulation happen on their server. Only by then people will see the problem it create.

It won’t happen outside of T1 in NA. It has to have the agreement and cooperation of all major and minor guilds on 2 servers. I think in any other instance, such a meta may have never been created at all.

Actually, alliances and match manipulation happen all the time. Not all of them are as consistent or long-lasting as the JQ/TC alliance. But servers in the past have definitely made alliances and manipulated points. The most notable example in recent memory was the YB/EBay alliance last season.

To address blur’s point, it won’t be a problem. Anet has already given the passive okay on this. And it’s unlikely to be maintained offseason, when there’s no motivation to manipulate matches.

The YB and EBay alliance I would say, is similar to the BG/SoR alliance in S1, where we focused down JQ. I’m pretty sure YB and EBay weren’t protecting each other’s structures if they were in danger of being flipped by SBI and karma training SBI’d structures by having 2 map zergs inside a keep and waiting for RI cool down to swap caps

To my understanding, that’s exactly what happened. YB and EBay protected each other and only hit SBI. When YB had enough of a lead, they purposely gave up their structures to EBay and let EBay gain enough points to overtake SBI, putting SBI into third.

I see this a lot in T1 matches too. In week 1 Season 2, when the 2v1 was on JQ, both TC and BG were in JQ’s garrison avoiding each other. One server was blocking JQ from entering garrison with siege while the other server was trying to cap garrison. When the garrison was capped, both sides cheered and one server would leave. In this scenario, one server is basically defending to allow the other server to cap. Match manipulation?

During the SOS/JQ/BG match when the 2v1 was on JQ, BG was constantly defending SOS’s structures to prevent JQ from capping to gain points to take 2nd place. BG zergs would literally camp next to SOS towers just to defend them for SOS when they could have easily taken the towers for themselves. Match manipulation?

These 2v1 scenarios happen ALL THE TIME so I’m not sure why there are threads after threads asking anet’s intervention since it’s happening to a particular server.

blur.7905:

Zhrek.9781:

blur.7905:

Zhrek.9781:

BG, easy mode players are so cute. Ah, the new generation of MMO players that think they should get everything for free. It is so sweet when things do not go their way. Anet brought 3-way fights back, Tyvm Anet, not since daoc has Open world fights been so fun. TY anet, for allowing the smaller servers tame the loose lipped ignorant kids, once again.

Smaller servers? It is funny that JQ and TC consider themselves as smaller server. All 3 server are of about the same size. It is the amount of skilled player and teamwork that is unbalance.

If that was the case BG would always be in last, and would of never beat SOR, Sor ran them over non stop. Coverage beat SOR

Well i dont know about SOR but it sure seem that BG TC and JQ have same coverage base on week one.

Are you new to T1?

blur.7905:

Zhrek.9781:

BG, easy mode players are so cute. Ah, the new generation of MMO players that think they should get everything for free. It is so sweet when things do not go their way. Anet brought 3-way fights back, Tyvm Anet, not since daoc has Open world fights been so fun. TY anet, for allowing the smaller servers tame the loose lipped ignorant kids, once again.

Smaller servers? It is funny that JQ and TC consider themselves as smaller server. All 3 server are of about the same size. It is the amount of skilled player and teamwork that is unbalance.

Every NA server has at least 1 glaring coverage hole. BG is the only server without a coverage hole, hence, the reason why everyone (except BG) agrees that BG has the best coverage out of all NA servers.

Niko Stark.8932:

It’s a 2v1 because it is the only way for JQ and TC to beat BG. Not the soft 2v1 where you have a mutual understanding of when and who to focus on, as with BG + TC and BG + SoS, but a real 2v1 where 2 servers are free to stand next to each other or back up each other’s zerg groups. Despite all the cries of “we only want BG tears” or “BG = stackgate”, it all boils down to the fact that this is the ONLY viable option for JQ or TC to have a chance at 1st place. Also because it’s sweet revenge for being stomped in Season 1.

One thing you’ll never see is a commander from neither TC or JQ claiming that their server can match BG in manpower, coverage, tactics, or discipline/cooperation of individual players.

Eitherway, I’m getting my weapon skin.

I think most will agree that TC and JQ cannot match BG’s coverage especially the last minute overstacking BG did before season started. I’ve also heard that BG has also recently recruited [GODS] from FA , and I believe they are able to enter wvw either last week or this week. The stacking just doesn’t stop unless other servers do something about it.

BAITness.1083:

jojojoon.8607:

BAITness.1083:

Another good indicator is the trolls above you trying their best to say that pictures and video aren’t proof. The one fail troll seems to be trying to imply that I faked the videos despite them being dated on upload. The other one is trying to say that when one server is attacked by two servers, it is the exact same as two servers attacking only that server and making an agreement between each other to let each server have a win every other week, without any actual contest happening.

I have already explained the reason for the 2v1 against JQ that week and the approximate length of it in one of my earlier posts. The 2v1 was to ensure JQ finish 3rd place and that was accomplished during the first half the week.

Since you mentioned dates of your videos, I decided to look them up. The one on twitch says it’s on DAY 7. The other 2 videos are dated on 10/23/13 which is on a WEDNESDAY. The dates on YOUR VIDEOS BACK UP MY DESCRIPTION OF WHAT HAPPENED THAT WEEK.

Seriously, I don’t think you actually played Week 1 of Season 1. Before I discuss anything with you further about week 1 of season 1 when BG planned the 2v1 against JQ, I need proof that you actually played that week. Without proof you played that week, anything you say, I am just going to consider as trolling or made up nonsense.

Also I am in one of the videos! I am the handsome charr.

That is not proof. I could say I’m the chubby asura in the video. I need solid proof you actually participated that week because you know nothing of what happened that week.

zbone.6287:

as a bg player I dont believe this is what anet had in mind

http://i.imgur.com/bFV3ysx.jpg

They have thought of this, hence, the reason why there are 3 entrances out of the spawn area. I don’t know what to say to the people just sitting in the main entrance instead of using the other 2 entrances.

BAITness.1083:

Another good indicator is the trolls above you trying their best to say that pictures and video aren’t proof. The one fail troll seems to be trying to imply that I faked the videos despite them being dated on upload. The other one is trying to say that when one server is attacked by two servers, it is the exact same as two servers attacking only that server and making an agreement between each other to let each server have a win every other week, without any actual contest happening.

I have already explained the reason for the 2v1 against JQ that week and the approximate length of it in one of my earlier posts. The 2v1 was to ensure JQ finish 3rd place and that was accomplished during the first half the week.

Since you mentioned dates of your videos, I decided to look them up. The one on twitch says it’s on DAY 7. The other 2 videos are dated on 10/23/13 which is on a WEDNESDAY. The dates on YOUR VIDEOS BACK UP MY DESCRIPTION OF WHAT HAPPENED THAT WEEK.

Seriously, I don’t think you actually played Week 1 of Season 1. Before I discuss anything with you further about week 1 of season 1 when BG planned the 2v1 against JQ, I need proof that you actually played that week. Without proof you played that week, anything you say, I am just going to consider as trolling or made up nonsense.

BAITness.1083:

ykyk.2740:

BAITness.1083:

ykyk.2740:

OK. Here we go.

You think win trading is not OK. Take it up to Anet. Escalate it. Make things happen.

Can’t? It’s happening. You can’t do anything about it. Deal with it, or cry and amuse all the other 23 servers.

#BGTears

I would love to spend time crying but I am spending too much time correcting the TC and JQ propaganda machines that are trying to get people to believe they aren’t the first scumbags to do this.

Because you aren’t part of the propaganda machine trying to shake accusations off your own server?

The motivations are inconsequential. Whether we are the first to do it isn’t even the problem, the problem is if an organized 2v1 is inherently wrong or against what is acceptable in WvW. If you want it to be, go do something about it. Until Anet speaks up about what is or isn’t allowed, everyone who tries to paint any server on the moral high ground and condemn other servers has no basis whatsoever.

Yes, this includes accusations of BG stacking, or spying, or whatever. There’s nothing inherently wrong with any of those, just like there’s nothing inherently wrong about 2 servers teaming up. But when you only select one of those things and single out TC and JQ for your condemnation, then you are clearly a hypocrite.

There is nothing wrong with a 2v1 either.

There is an awful lot wrong with fixing matches to trade wins so you can guarantee first and second place.

A 2v1 against JQ to ensure that they finish 3rd place due to their easier schedule isn’t fixing a match? Such double standard…

BAITness.1083:

CuRtoKy.8576:

LOL a SoX member from SoR at the time just said it happened. That isn’t proof cause you said it isn’t. Man BG at a new low really.

2v1 is 2v1 doesn’t matter how it is done. It can be a soft 2v1, a hard 2v1. It is a 2v1. You from BG are denying that you 2v1 ANY server at all. JQ and TC has never said anywhere they don’t 2v1. Yet BG tries to say they don’t 2v1. What a joke. So say BG hits TC WPed (on JQ BL) bay S gate and JQ hits TC bay N gate. That isn’t 2v1 on TC bay? How about if JQ seeing BG has more numbers let them do the work inner while they take out TC reinforcements. That isn’t 2v1. It isn’t 2v1 if BG + SoR hit Garri in JQ BL constantly on both sides cause they “fight” each other.

There is a lot of 2v1 and if you think it doesn’t happen for even a short period of time you aren’t a core WvW player. I would seriously recommend that you consider a lower tier server to transfer to meet your needs.

Let me ask who actually believes what you say is true except other people from BG? BG is the underdog. Who believes that? BG never 2v1. Who believes that? BG never recruits people. Who believes that? BG doesn’t do paid transfer even at say 50% or something. Who believes that? BG has a low chance to win S2 before the 2v1. Who believes that? BG has been a weak server compared to other T1 servers after S1. Who believes that? lol

Look at you, you are literally trying to redefine what a 2v1 is to make it sound like win trading is ok. By your definition, you think any time a server plays wvw they are engaging in a 2v1. So why don’t we only call it what it really is – win trading.

Two servers teaming up to give each other first place every other week. Not fighting each other for that top spot.

Also, yeah he said SoR and BG were allied, I said they weren’t, then I provided pictures and videos proving that BG and SoR fought both each other and JQ throughout the tournament.

You need to quit the trolling game dude.

Seriously, I am not even sure if you actually played during Season 1. If you did, you would actually know what occurred that week. There was a server wide 2v1 against JQ from BG/SOR to make sure they were 3rd place for the first part of the week. Once that was ensured, BG and SOR battled it out for first place. JQ then pushed whoever was 2nd at that time to at least salvaged that week.

To say there was no 2v1 against JQ is just plain lying since BG made a thread on the public forum requesting SOR to 2v1 JQ that week due to their easier schedule. The 2v1 just didn’t last as long as one in week 3 this season.

The length of the 2v1 depends on the purpose of the 2v1. Week 1 of Season 1, the 2v1 was to ensure JQ finished 3rd place. The 2v1s this season is to ensure BG not finish first place in Season.

All your videos and images don’t really mean much since it could have been towards the end of the week. Again, if you were actually playing during that week, you would know why…

Master Farkha.1857:

Prior to seasons BG was getting their kitten s handed to them every week and they rarely cried 2v1.

I’m not sure if you’re trying to troll or if you’re new to wvw. You do realize BG was trying to tank intentionally months prior to season. Why would they complain about a 2v1 when they pray everyday for a 2v1 against them to ensure they lose big every week to help with their tanking.

ManaCraft.5630:

Lord Kuru.3685:

Look at the bloodlust area and EoTM — both have turned out to be massive failures.

We can more or less agree on EotM, but I’m curious why you think bloodlust is a failure. It seems to me that in terms of game mechanics, it does precisely what it is supposed to.

Anyway, on the topic, I agree that now that population balance seems to be effectively off the table, actual new content – primarily new maps – moves up to the no. 1 spot in terms of priorities for WvW.

I agree with this. I do not think bloodlust was a failure.

1) It gives roamers and havocs another objective on the map.
2) I’ve seen commanders assigned players to form havocs to prioritize on capping bloodlust which is a step to “anti-zerging.”
3) It reduces the impact of ppt on the scoring system since fights which leads to stomps add a big chunk to the overall score.

Zikory.6871:

jojojoon.8607:

The question here is why pick JQ to 2v1 instead of BG.

There was a post on Gw2wvw for a TC post that said there was a “incident” where instead of pushing a 2v1 on BG, JQ hit some TC objectives while TC was attacking BG. So if there is any truth to this is looks like JQ (or the JQ commander involved) made a bad call shifting a possible 2v1 on BG to JQ.

This is almost the same thing that happened in week 1 of season 1. SoR made some bad map politic calls and BG took advantage. Thus taking the lead.

You have been around long enough to know how easy things like this can shift and how commander will change focus depending on who is attacking who. If the above statement (from the TC player) is true, it could have easily been BG on the wrong end of the 2v1 if we would have made a bad call (Map politics wise)

Nah, that’s not it. That incident led to JQ losing a wp keep but everything went back to normal after that. That incident occurred on reset night, and the coordinated server wide 2v1 on all maps for 2 full days started on Sunday. I seriously doubt someone would go “hey, let’s 2v1 this server because I remember that guild attacked us 2 days ago.” Remember, on reset night, all servers were using standard reset night strategy and you see fights between all 3 servers.

From what I heard from TC, there was some “fishy stuff” going on that cannot be mentioned on the forums, so I won’t go into details here.

nerovergil.5408:

jojojoon.8607:

I question TC’s strategy in 2v1ing JQ and playing for 2nd from the start. If it is 5-3-1 point format, winning second twice yields the same points as winning 3rd and then winning first in the 2nd match. Why give up playing for first without even trying? SOR did the same thing last season and now the ex-SOR on TC are doing exactly the same thing again this season.

BG has the best coverage out of all servers on NA. I’ve been saying this months ago even when they were intentionally tanking to recruit more guilds. You want squash any momentum BG has from the start, but by 2v1ing JQ, TC has essentially made BG stronger.

Something smells fishy and I’ve been hearing a lot of things that can’t be mentioned here..

I play from 1st day and i still remember TC snatched BG Bay when BG was defending from JQ. (Clearly TC and JQ team up to beat BG here)

Even when this 2 server team up to defeat BG, they still cant succeed.

When BG lead JQ by 5k ++, TC change strategy and double team JQ because they know they cant get 1st but 2nd place they can.

I do think that it was a mistake on TC’s and JQ’s part also for not launching a full 2v1 on BG on reset. What I saw was the standard strategy on reset where you 2v1 the server on their home border. Hence, JQ was getting 2v1 on JQ bl. TC was getting 2v1 on TC bl and BG was getting 2v1 on BG bl. So for the first couple of days, JQ and BG were neck to neck while TC was falling behind (but still a shot at 1st place).

TC then shifted strategy on Sunday and launched a full 2v1 on JQ with BG for almost 2 FULL DAYS ON ALL MAPS, essentially securing BG 1st place since TC is now playing for 2nd place. The question here is why pick JQ to 2v1 instead of BG.

This is just my opinion, but I thought a better strategy from the start should been a full 2v1 on BG by both TC and JQ to demoralize their PVE population early and eliminate any momentum BG may have. In a way, I feel that the tanking BG did intentionally for 2 months worked again despite numerous warnings on the forums since there are still many from both servers underestimating BG heading into Season 2. If both servers didn’t underestimate BG, both serves would have 2v1 BG from the get-go.

I question TC’s strategy in 2v1ing JQ and playing for 2nd from the start. If it is 5-3-1 point format, winning second twice yields the same points as winning 3rd and then winning first in the 2nd match. Why give up playing for first without even trying? SOR did the same thing last season and now the ex-SOR on TC are doing exactly the same thing again this season.

BG has the best coverage out of all servers on NA. I’ve been saying this months ago even when they were intentionally tanking to recruit more guilds. You want squash any momentum BG has from the start, but by 2v1ing JQ, TC has essentially made BG stronger.

Something smells fishy and I’ve been hearing a lot of things that can’t be mentioned here..

Looking at MOS, it appears that TC decided to play for 2nd place at around Sunday and started a 2v1 on JQ which lasted until early Tuesday. With 1st place out of the picture, it looks like JQ started retaliating on Tuesday and are now focusing on TC, leading to a 2v1 on TC.

The ex-SOR on TC did not learn anything from their mistake in Season 1 and basically repeated the same mistake a second time. Just not smart at all…

Aeros.2046:

So people stacked even in Gold League too? Somehow I am not surprised.

Yeah, BG was able to stuff 4+ guilds into their server last minute. They should roflstomped season 2 like how they did season 1. I’m surprised that there are people who can be easily fooled twice with the exact same trick..

Jeff.5139:

SOS? the underdogs?

Thought that was BG

Don’t want to hijack the thread but I thought it was funny too since “we are the underdogs” has been BG’s tactic the last two seasons. My guess is that other servers are adopting this strategy too for recruiting.

Kaamau.5341:

Omaris Mortuus Est.2738:

TBH this thread should have been closed due to it being a matchup thread, like all other matchup threads that have been posted after the matchup forum section was closed.

Again this is just another observation

er.. this is far fro ma match up thread, this is reporting an issue that effects hundreds of players day/night. Just because the OP formatted it similarly to a match up thread, doesn’t mean the content is the same.

It’s still a matchup thread though. It even says so in the thread title “SBI/FA/IoJ matchup.” Content talks about lag during fights in EB for the sbi/fa/ioj matchup.

Dark Catalyst.1028:

jojojoon.8607:

When I see someone with a legendary, the first thing that comes to my mind is that the player is a pve player since it takes tons of hours to grind for one. Or that player is super rich who just buys them from tp.

What’s legendary about grinding or buying from the TP?

That’s my point. Do you think a pvp player can show off his legendary as some sort of “pvp trophy?” He’ll just get labeled as a rich player or a pve player. A unique skin, on the other hand, he will be able to show off with.

Blade.3456:

I’d love to turn your frown upside down, jojojoon <3

I think you will find my post above to be far more accurate.
And I hope you at least took the time to check out our Guild hype vid

We are getting ready to have a blast in season 2, I hope you are too, jojojoon.

I’m sure many BG will have a blast in season 2 when they finally get to play normally again. Many BG players went on for more than a month not being able to play normally because so many BG servermates constantly encourage them to not do wvw, since if they play, it’ll boost up the BG’s wvw score and BG wouldn’t be seen as the underdog server.

You even said so in your post that you’ve suggested to “many of [your] usual Commanders, and WvW players, [to take] this time to chill out, train other commanders, do some casual spvp, grind a bit of pve, etc” which basically points to manipulating the score so that BG appears to be the underdog.

A unique skin should be given and not a legendary. A legendary means absolutely nothing to a pvp player since they can’t even show it off. When I see someone with a legendary, the first thing that comes to my mind is that the player is a pve player since it takes tons of hours to grind for one. Or that player is super rich who just buys them from tp.

Tyr.1965:

Hey I’m on Blackgate. Why’s it so dead now? There isn’t any PvE event crap going on. It seems every time I try to come back to this game, WvW is just dead on my server so I just quit again. Maybe my timing is off lol

BG isn’t dead but just intentionally tanking to help with recruiting. This tactic worked in season 1 so it’s getting used again. BG was able to ZD’ed a few guilds with gullible leadership to join for season 2. The server with the best overall coverage on NA servers got stronger going into season 2 than they were in season 1.

I predicted this more than 1 month ago and everything is going exactly as how I outlined in the post from a month ago. BG is in phase 3 of this tanking process..

1) Intentionally tanking before season starts to make it seem like they’re the underdogs.

2) Run propaganda on forums to make sure everyone knows they’re outmanned by every server on every time zone to help with recruitment (still couldn’t believe BG claimed to be outnumbered by SOR in EU even after SOR lost their first batch of guilds).

3) Hope that some gullible guild (cough… zds…cough) gets tricked into transferring over.

On behalf of the wvw community, I would like to say thank you for releasing the new patch today before the wvw reset.

Atreidies.6257:

We have moved to #Believegate

lol.. You guys got ZD’ed..

Lag has definitely gotten worse. Before, you only really lag when 3 servers are at one location. Now, it lags even when 2 servers are fighting at one spot. Possible that they switched the good servers for pve since all of the new content released requires 150+ people on the map (scarlet, wurm, knights, etc)? I’ve only noticed the lag getting worse with the new content coming out..

style.6173:

@OP: Bad idea.

Plus only a few people really care about PPT anyway. Most just want to have good fights whenever they play.

Not true. Few care about ppt only or fights only. MOST care for both.

This won’t work since it puts restriction on when and where players can play. I think a more better approach is to change the scoring system to diminish the effect of coverage on the score. This way, everyone gets to play the same way and it doesn’t restrict any players in any time zone.

Currently, the scoring system is this:
total score per tick = structure points + bloodlust stomps

Now if it is changed to so that the structure points becomes a percentage of held structures over total structures multiplied by the number of kills, then during off peak hours, a server with superior coverage won’t be able to score as much since the scoring depends on number of kills.

695 = total structure points

points per tick = [(structure points held / 695) X number of kills] + blood lust stomps

Example:
If a superior coverage server holds 90% of the structures but can only kill 10 players since they are facing a server has no off peak coverage, then the scoring is as follows.

(.9 X 10) + 0 stomps = 9 points

Nick.6972:

BG already tried buying few FA guilds.

Just curious, how much gold was offered? And did they say that “BG is outnumbered on all timezones so they need more wvw guilds?”

geist.3980:

you couldn’t swing a JQ corpse without hitting 50 BG invaders pouring out of the bushes this morning, I’d say the hibernation is over

So teamspeak, website, bathroom toilet, etc all magically fixed?

PattyCakeChamp.5268:

jojojoon.8607:

PattyCakeChamp.5268:

Alright I see it like this… I feel as though after this has happened as many times as it has, there could possibly an underlying issue that we as players do not know about, and its not really worth the effort to explain to people their reasoning behind it. Or it could be complete ineptitude. Whatever works for me. As I said before, this also effected my guilds raid and we even discussed the silliness behind it. The difference here being we moved on
as people and continued having fun and let it be forgot. Where as you decided to get in a huff and post some pretty idiotic assumptions about how anet “doesn’t go to wvw sub forums” and they have a low priority for wvw. It makes you look like a kittening moron, and does absolutely nothing to address a situation that I feel, regardless if its a minor annoyance, doesn’t deserve much attention. Also, seeing as not much has come from those multitudes of posts, someone at anet probably feels the same way.

“I hope everyone understands now”

Dear angry, disillusioned anet pve gamer:

You’re the FIRST person that I know of who actually thinks that anet cares for wvw as much as they care for pve. I thought it’s already a proven fact that wvw is low on the priority list as compared to pve.

Obviously, it’s not a minor annoyance and a situation that “doesn’t deserve attention” when there are multitudes of posts from many customers expressing their concerns.

Well, maybe those posts didn’t get attention because most are posted in the wvw sub forum which even the anet wvw developer doesn’t go (yes, there are topics about it). That’s why I am trying to see if it would get anet’s attention if I post it here.

This is good kitten, we should keep going I would like to clarify I am not a “pve gamer”. It kinda hurts my feelings cus, like, I generally wvw and stuff. I also do that spvp kitten (you should see how those guys feel about being rejected by anet, almost makes you wanna cry). My general pve experiences involve getting meta achieves and farming dat dragonite yo. Next, you still sound angry and stuff. I suggest either a few beers or some pot. But don’t do that kitten a lot, it’ll make you dumb. Moving right along here, let’s get to bewhat anet does or does not care about. I still view all of your comments to be convoluted and ignorant in their essence therefore its hard to actually justify your points (save for the original issue of patching the game shortly after reset). Can I also say, this has been really fun so far.

Maybe some other time. I’m grabbing lunch right now.

PattyCakeChamp.5268:

Alright I see it like this… I feel as though after this has happened as many times as it has, there could possibly an underlying issue that we as players do not know about, and its not really worth the effort to explain to people their reasoning behind it. Or it could be complete ineptitude. Whatever works for me. As I said before, this also effected my guilds raid and we even discussed the silliness behind it. The difference here being we moved on
as people and continued having fun and let it be forgot. Where as you decided to get in a huff and post some pretty idiotic assumptions about how anet “doesn’t go to wvw sub forums” and they have a low priority for wvw. It makes you look like a kittening moron, and does absolutely nothing to address a situation that I feel, regardless if its a minor annoyance, doesn’t deserve much attention. Also, seeing as not much has come from those multitudes of posts, someone at anet probably feels the same way.

“I hope everyone understands now”

Dear angry, disillusioned anet pve gamer:

You’re the FIRST person that I know of who actually thinks that anet cares for wvw as much as they care for pve. I thought it’s already a proven fact that wvw is low on the priority list as compared to pve.

Obviously, it’s not a minor annoyance and a situation that “doesn’t deserve attention” when there are multitudes of posts from many customers expressing their concerns.

Well, maybe those posts didn’t get attention because most are posted in the wvw sub forum which even the anet wvw developer doesn’t go (yes, there are topics about it). That’s why I am trying to see if it would get anet’s attention if I post it here.

Dear anet pve gamer,

I think any customer would have this tone, when they are ignored and not respected:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Yet-again-a-patch-just-after-reset/first#post3736810

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Wat-anet/first#post3734744

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/archive/suggestions/Stop-pointless-patches-on-WvW-reset-night

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/New-Build-at-Reset

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/archive/suggestions/No-Patches-on-WvW-reset-nights

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Release-Build-NOW-and-NOT-After-Reset

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/New-patch-before-match-resets

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Nice-time-to-set-a-Patch

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Please-give-us-some-advanced-warning-before-patches

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Siege-disappearing-after-todays-patch

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/archive/wintersday/Does-ANet-care-abt-WvW-players

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Patch-and-golems-despawn-lost-lot-of-gold

I hope everyone understands now…

lordkrall.7241:

Hotfixes are released when they are ready, due to fixing issues that needs fixing.

Or would you be just as keen to have them wait a few days extra with a patch that fixed an issue that made lords permanently immortal in WvW?

There are many game breaking issues in wvw that do not get patched up immediately. Instead, they are pushed back until normal updates are released.

In the past, players were able to go to certain spots on a tower/keep and be able to jump inside. There were issues with orbs and certain pve items doing insane damage. All of these glitches/bugs were not patched up immediately.

Most recently, there is a bug with a necro heal skill that would allow 1 necro to do as much damage as a ram. Fully upgraded gates were taken down in matter of seconds with a group of necros abusing this glitch. Some servers that abused this glitched saw their scores skyrocketed when the glitch was made public. Anet developers found out about the glitch, and instead of patching it immediately, the fix was put in an update that wouldn’t be pushed out until like a week later.

As you can see, not all game-breaking bugs are prioritized the same..

Dear anet pve gamer,

Constructive criticism? Like suggesting a time that makes sense (before reset) to actually do the push? Like also offering reasons why it shouldn’t be done after reset (players re-queuing, lost siege)?

I heard that there was a bump on the road….

I know anet probably doesn’t go to the wvw sub forum often since wvw is low on the priority list, so I think it’s best to make a thread here. Please DO NOT PUSH A PATCH OUT ON A RESET NIGHT, ESPECIALLY 1 HOUR AFTER THE RESET. Not only do players have to re-queue, siege are also randomly deleted. It just messes everything up in wvw.

Why can’t the patch be pushed out 1 hour BEFORE RESET? It makes absolutely no sense to push out a patch after the reset.

Logged in to check and discovered siege missing after the patch. That is why YOU DO NOT DO A PATCH RIGHT AFTER RESET. These siege can easily be rebuilt on a non-reset night but they cannot be rebuilt easily on a friday reset since most towers and keeps do not have any supply.

Please anet employee/developer, the next time you push out a patch like this on reset night, think how it affects wvw. The pve population doesn’t even care if the fix is delayed for another day but you see WVW PLAYERS COMPLAINING EVERY TIME YOU DO AN UPDATE AFTER RESET.

I just don’t get it.. Why is it difficult to do the update before reset? You have all thursday and half of friday. Why the hell do they have to wait after reset to do a pve update that messes up wvw, especially on a reset night? It makes absolutely no sense..

These dps checks remind me of diablo 3 and why that game failed miserably. In D3, we call it gear check…

This has been predicted weeks ago when EOTM was released. BG is basically “tanking” to make it seem like they are weakest server going into Season 2 to help get recruitment and for map politic purposes (2v1 another server).

The same formula was used in Season 1. If I recall, BG lost like over 100k points on the final week before Season 1 started. Other servers labeled BG as the “underdog” server. They were able to recruit ZDs and got SOR to double team JQ. Everyone only found out it was a trick when BG basically dominated the entire Season going undefeated…

Reverence.6915:

You know, BG never called ourselves the underdogs. We were always confident of getting a good result in S1. It was always those from other servers calling us underdogs. You know why? We lost MERC, SUPR, RISE, TKG and a big number of smaller guilds to other servers. Our Oceanic coverage was decimated at that point, and we’re still rebuilding from that. We (BG) knew we were going to pull out all the stops to get the win, and we’ll do that for S2 as well, but with our server having been on Full status for so long, many prospective guilds have been unable or unwilling to transfer, while JQ and TC has been gaining guild after guild.

Yes, we have coverage gaps. Yes, we’re outnumbered during Oceanic and between EU~EST. No, we’re not really complaining (there’s a few, but most of us are just pointing out facts rather than outright complaining).

Watch out for BG in S2, we’ll be coming after everyone. I believe in our PvE population to show up for the server. All those 500 man PvE guilds will have people show up, I’m sure of it.

#Believegate2014

I agree with you, and that’s basically what everyone is saying at this point. BG knows that they have the best coverage out of all NA servers. But by playing dead right now and claiming to be “outnumbered in every time zone by every server” on the forum like in Season 1, it is just to get other servers to “think” that they’re not the favorites to win. That is why you have non-BG saying BG are the underdogs and that is why guilds transferred there for the start of season (e.g. ZD leader said the reason they transferred there was because they saw BG get farmed on a daily basis when they were scouting the server a couple of weeks prior to the start of season). He was in a rude awakening when the he found out later that BG actually had the best EU coverage on NA servers when BG players started to play normally again, and ZDs ended up pvding the entire season.

The #Believegate2014 trick worked in Season 1 but it’s going to be hard to get the same trick to work for Season 2 since other servers probably won’t be fooled again.

Thanks for confirming what everyone has been saying on this thread and letting us know that this strategy is called #Believegate2014.

Waage.2047:

We are also the biggest PvE server with some of the largest PvE guilds.

Psht i heard that “BG killed JFK to cover up the fact that they got every guild on SoR to play for the fights only”

JQ is known for their PUGs. TC is known for their RP (role playing). Every server has pve or casual players.. JQ and TC are 2 of the biggest causal/pve servers also.

Waage.2047:

They got KAZO and they also have some ohter smaller EU guild that i can not remember the name of that is not very big, but great at attacking blind spots.

KAZO isn’t a new guild transfer to TC. The guild is composed of all TC natives. TC is not the only server with smaller TC guilds. If TC has them, then BG has them also. Again, please don’t inflate numbers for other servers by including certain groups of players while excluding them for BG to deflate BG’s numbers. I’ve seen this countless times in posts from BG players. For example: Claiming SOR outnumbers BG in SEA by including Choo (an NA guild) while excluding Knt, icoa and other NA guilds for BG.

Vol.7601:

jojojoon.8607:

TC has also gotten a massive EU guild in that outnumber every thing on BG so right now we do not have the advantage.

Which guild did TC get? At the moment, HB which resides on BG is the largest EU guild that I know of on NA servers ? If an EU guild that is larger than HB just transferred to TC, I think there would be more buzz about it. So far, I have not heard anything. Please let me know which guild it is or I am assuming you are making it up.

Now i know no one remember’s history. The reason BG was slotted to lose season one (among tier 1) was because we lost almost all of our night coverage. We lost RISE and most of MERC to JQ.

I do remember Season 1’s history. BG went undefeated in Season 1 and some can argue they dominated every match. JQ who came in 2nd place still lost by over 50k pts when they went head to head. The only reason why many were tricked into thinking BG was the underdog for Season 1 is due to them losing horribly the few weeks before Season 1 started. It is very similar to what you are seeing now as we get closer to Season 2.

After season 1 we lost ZD and COIN.

BG STILL dominated after losing ZD and COIN. If I recall, they still won every match for more than a month after Season 1 started. BG only appeared “weaker” when EOTM was announced. EOTM signals that Season 2 is approaching since it provides a solution for the queue issue.

Just a word of caution. Tanking for Season 1 may have worked but if people aren’t getting fooled the second time, tanking for Season 2 may backfire on BG.

Well maybe that’s because of all the influx of players BG got after season 1? Not to mention the lower morale from JQ/SoR after a 9 week long match up.

If you check the server status, BG is still full at the moment. In other words, the influx of players they got after Season 1 are still on BG. So, it isn’t an issue of BG not having coverage, but the question of why BG isn’t doing wvw. One possible reason that many people are saying is that BG is currently resting or tanking (however you want to call it) for Season 2.

TC has also gotten a massive EU guild in that outnumber every thing on BG so right now we do not have the advantage.

Which guild did TC get? At the moment, HB which resides on BG is the largest EU guild that I know of on NA servers ? If an EU guild that is larger than HB just transferred to TC, I think there would be more buzz about it. So far, I have not heard anything. Please let me know which guild it is or I am assuming you are making it up. It is just very difficult to believe what BG says about EU coverage, since not to long ago, BG claimed that SOR outnumbers BG in EU even though IRON and a few other guilds have transferred off already. It just seems like we hear BG say every server they face outnumbers them in EU.

Now i know no one remember’s history. The reason BG was slotted to lose season one (among tier 1) was because we lost almost all of our night coverage. We lost RISE and most of MERC to JQ.

I do remember Season 1’s history. BG went undefeated in Season 1 and some can argue they dominated every match. JQ who came in 2nd place still lost by over 50k pts when they went head to head. The only reason why many were tricked into thinking BG was the underdog for Season 1 is due to them losing horribly the few weeks before Season 1 started. It is very similar to what you are seeing now as we get closer to Season 2.

After season 1 we lost ZD and COIN.

BG STILL dominated after losing ZD and COIN. If I recall, they still won every match for more than a month after Season 1 started. BG only appeared “weaker” when EOTM was announced. EOTM signals that Season 2 is approaching since it provides a solution for the queue issue.

Just a word of caution. Tanking for Season 1 may have worked but if people aren’t getting fooled the second time, tanking for Season 2 may backfire on BG.