Guild Wars 2

Sebi.4398:

You only need to look at what happened to wows sub numbers after they introduced needless grind behind gated content to know what’s in store for gw2 if this system persists in its current form.

…They went up significantly? TBC was the grindiest expansion and it experienced constant growth. Since Blizzard started adding heavy-duty catchup mechanics in late Wrath, the population growth begun to level off, and the more catchup mechanics they added, the lower sub numbers went.

Loading.4503:

I didn’t read through this thread, just skimmed through it, so I’m not sure if this was brought up here or another thread, I had a suggestion for that. Maybe guild hall upgrades can be scaled with however many members for the cost, and if the guild grows, the upgrades will be closed off and you’ll have to dump in more gold/materials before its accessesable again.

Seems like a very easy thing to exploit.

Just off the top of my head; assume the guild has the member cap of 500. Their costs are therefore massive. The GM organizes a second guild which will only ever have the smallest number of people in it (say, five). Guild members send money and resources to those five people, they build their guild hall for a fraction of the cost, and once it’s finished the entire guild transfers into the new, fully upgraded guild.

Hi

Sorry I know this is a bit of a late reply to this thread but I have read the 4 pages of comments and felt the need to reply.

A of comments on here referring to big guilds as the way forward yet people seem to be completely missing the point, as I believe do anet.

Every big guild once started out as a small guild. If you take away the ability for a small guild to become a big guild,which I am convinced this new system does for all the obvious reasons, then there will be no new big guilds created.

This of course means that as the current big guilds break up and disappear as most guilds do then there will be no new big guilds to take their place. Ultimately this means the death of guilds in gw2 with this new guild system in place.

I must admit I am staggered that anet. 1. Cannot see this obvious conclusion and 2. Implemented this system which in my view goes completely against what gw2 stands for and I might add has made it hugely successful.

You only need to look at what happened to wows sub numbers after they introduced needless grind behind gated content to know what’s in store for gw2 if this system persists in its current form.

Gw2 was about freedom to “play your way”. It needs to get back to what made it successful before it’s too late.

I for one would like to see Anet add smaller halls as options for smaller guilds – and scaling services/utilities accordingly.

I still remember guild halls in GW1; they didn’t take much at all to purchase/maintain/upgrade. Certainly gold (or rather, platinum), but everyone accumulates that. Not sure why the mechanic changed so much, since it’s the same world/lore/setting. Seriously, this is Guild Wars, not just Alliance Wars or Server Wars; there should be more support for continued guild play for guilds of all sizes.

For you big-guild chaps: come on, you don’t need to act so important. Glad you’ve got a big guild. Good for you. You’re probably getting the best-optimized experience.
For you little-guild/bank-guild chaps: yeah, you’ll probably always be hamstrung by the fact that you need a few more than 1-10 people to get serious progress without being left far behind. If Anet does ignore you, you might need to look into recruiting…
For the rest of us: we ought to be urging Anet to improve gameplay for everyone. It shouldn’t be about giant complaints or about flaming people who suggest changes, it should be about constructive criticism. Glad to see that most people do include legitimate suggestions.

Lobo Dela Noche.5127:

Shukriyya.7629:

PopeUrban.2578:

Raedwulf.3712:

PopeUrban.2578:

From a purely factual standpoint, it is though. I’ve pretty meticulously laid out why. Influence costs scaled up as you unlocked things, but earning did not. Your ability to use your upgrades depended heavily on having larger guild populations and more highly active players on a daily basis.

{snip}

These are all statements of fact, not opinion.

Ummm… No, they’re not really. Banner A cost X. Much better Banner B cost Y. Think, oh, XP banner vs Heroes banner or something. The item costs were fixed, not scaled. Those are facts. They had nothing to do with the guild size. If you’d unlocked the pre-requisites & you had the influence, you could buy them.

Whether you think that’s better or worse than the system now? That’s opinion.

If you were a small guild, and you had & you did… You can’t now. Anet took that away. You’ve got to go through a huge grind to unlock the ability to purchase those consumables now; consumables that you had access to before. Now, once you’ve done that, it might well be that the cost for the consumable is the same whether you’re small or huge; X number of Y materials. But for Banner B, which you had access to prior to HoT, you have a kittening great wall to climb over to get the access that you had already unlocked once… Hard for a small guild.

Now that I understand your point a bit better, I think nothing has really changed. Instead of the wall of “I have access to this but need X amount to make it”, we have a wall of “I need X amount to access this, and then I can make it”. That isn’t easier for a small guild, it just puts the same effort in a different, earlier place. If you see what I mean?

No, you don’t have to go through a grind to unlock them if you already had them unlocked. That’s the central point of misinformation I keep seeing.

The acquisition method is only changed for guilds that didn’t already have access to these consumables.

If you had them unlocked previously, you walk in to the guild initiative, and hand the NPC some favor, though one poster has said that NPC is temporarily disabled, that’s how I have been spending all of the excess favor we don’t use for hall upgrades because it’s actually cheaper and faster than making them via the new scribing system, and that level of cheap and easy actually can’t be obtained by new guilds who hadn’t unlocked them in the old system.

You keep repeating that and it’s not true. My guild and many other guilds like mine had +5 supplies unlocked and it’s gone now unless we get a guild hall and grind out all the upgrades to get it back. I can try talking to that temporarily disabled npc till I’m blue in the face, he won’t be giving me back my upgrade even though I had it unlocked.

So maybe instead of repeating your “upgrades aren’t lost” mantra, how about you start reading what other people are saying to you? Not every player wants banners!

Also, not every player wants to have to grind some pve maps to get the materials needed for upgrading guilds halls (silverwastes shovels, anyone?). That’s why the old influence system was superior to what we have now – you could play the content you enjoyed and were still able to upgrade your guild. Now, if you don’t like pve, you’re out of luck. And you keep acting as if the players who complain about the new system were unreasonable.

Guild halls could have been a nice addition to GW2, but instead we got a system that seems to be purely designed to be a gold and time sink.

He is being purposely daft and obtuse so that he can continue supporting anet when he knows he is wrong. I really wish we had a mute or ignore option on the forums, so we could hide certain players comments. I get very tired of being told that our opinion is wrong and we should just all be happy to play the way they tell us to.

At no point did I state your opinion was wrong.

I said that stating your opinion as fact is wrong.

You’re entitled to hold whatever opinion you like, and I haven’t disputed any opinions. What I haven’t seen, however, are statements of fact to back up the presumption that, for a PvE guild, this system is worse than the old.

Saying you don’t like it is one thing. That’s an opinion. Saying it is actually worse is another. I don’t give a crap about supporting anet. They botched a large number of very important things with this expansion. The doing away with the influence system, however, is objectively not subjectively better for small guilds than the old system.

I must however clarify. Yes. This is in regards to PvE play.

I won’t go in to detail as to why as I have already expressed, several times, logical, factual, opinion-free evidence as to why.

I’m not being willfully obtuse to support arenanet. I’m stating my position as a person that runs a small guild because the old system was almost completely unusable for my guild, and the new one actually allows advancement and use of all its features.

Go ahead. Check my post history. You’ll find I have no interest in blindly supporting arenanet.

Your desire to personally attack and discredit me rather than respond to my position doesn’t make a lot of sense. I have as much right to state fact as you have to state opinion.

I get it. You liked the old system. There’s nothing wrong with that. It was passive, non-inrusive, and gave out guild benefits for free. That’s an understandable position and one of opinion.

I understand that people would rather not have to do upgrades related to halls now that halls control both the old and new upgrades. That’s also an understandable position, and one of opinion.

I also understand people are upset that the NPC that equalizes these concerns is currently disabled for whatever reason. That’s also and understandable position and one of opinion (and an opinion I share)

Influence disproportionally rewarded large guilds and penalized small ones based solely on member count and play time. The new system does not. These are not statements of opinion. These are statements of fact just as much as adding two and two equals four.

Yes. All arena and WvW upgrades need a serious look. Yes, wvw and PvP rewards need a serious look and have for a long time. Yes, silverwastes shovel costs for any guild are complete BS. No, influence was not better for small guilds of any type than the new system, no matter what sort of content was played. That isn’t an opinion. That is a fact.

Simple reply to this thread – GW1 Guild Halls…….of course those that didn’t play GW1 won’t know what I’m talking about, but devs should. Let’s keep some integrity here.

Small guilds aren’t the only ones complaining about guild halls. Large guilds complain about them, too. Why?

Because some of the requirements really are annoying and because everyone knows that in any large group of people, a small minority do all the work and the larger majority does nothing.

So, what do they do? Complain about things because if only 10 people in a group of 100 are really contributing, then it feels like a small guild. Or they force a tax on their non-officer members and the members leave because they want to use their money and items to do other things. Then the large guilds come and complain on the forums or in-game chat about losing members.

Either way, both sides are doing their fair share of complaining.

Albadaran.1283:

Ok, I’m offering a solution: Make it so that all adjustments can be bought in the gem store as well as by playing the content. This would satisfy most small guilds and offers Anet some profit too…

I wanted to “LOL” at first, but you may be on to something. The price in mats has to be in the thousands. Guilds could hold RL fundraisers at their local K-Mart. Have some kids? Make mo’money! mo’money! mo’money!

Must remember to have the annoying bell that the Salvation Army uses as well. Along with the bell, a terrible Santa Claus outfit, since it tis the season. People will give you money over fist, to shut off that bell. Guaranteed!

GreyWolf.8670:

@PopeUrban: That argument is very tired. I could make banners two weeks ago. Now I cannot. I’m done with this as far as you’re concerned.

Yes. You can. Walk in to the guild initiative. Talk to the NPC. You now have a banner for favor.

Do another guild mission, go get more banners.

What you can’t do is get banners for doing nothing and if that’s what you’re complaining about then yes, you’re right. You don’t get guild rewards without investing any effort whatsoever in them any more. I’m sorry you feel that that was a better system.

Your argument is based on the idea that a system of passive rewards was somehow better or more engaging than a system of active rewards, but you phrase it as if you’ve been locked out of something. You haven’t. Stop saying that you have.

You’re mad that it is harder for you to get something that was trivial to acquire before. There is not a single banner that you had the ability to make before that you can’t make without even claiming a guild hall now.

GreyWolf.8670:

It doesn’t matter how many people are in a guild. They should all have access to the same content. As it is they do not.

This is not about Ferrarris or the game economy or how easy it was for someone else to blow through guild hall requirements. This is about smaller groups of people not only not having access to features they earned and could use a few weeks ago, but also cannot earn new ones because of seemingly unnecessary and arbitrary changes that were made.

I don’t know how many times I have to say this.

The new system is massively more friendly to small guilds due to the permanent nature of unlocks.

Did you seriously enjoy a system in which you could produce at best buffs for one weekend a month and maybe two failure chances for guild missions a week?

You have sticker shock from the upfront cost of upgrades, but in the overall life span of your guild the new system is massively cheaper for much larger overall benefit for small guilds.

That is a completely inarguable point.

The new system in terms of actually acquiring upgrades is no different than the old. It is easier and faster to progress by having more members actively contributing to it financially. Where you had old upgrades, you can still use them and got massive savings in material costs for having them. Have you seen how much those banner, siege, and bank unlocks cost now? upgrades you already have because you alreadu unlocked them in the old system, and can actually use before unlocking their prerequisites?

If I were a new guild, today, i couldn’t be building a single consumable due to the upgrade level of my structures. My old upgrades were grandfathered in. I can still absolutely produce and use all of them. The only thing anyone at all lost was the broken, old, constant time and influence sink of the old buff system, which, quite frankly, was absolutely unusable by small guilds.

PopeUrban.2578:

Just a flesh wound.3589:

PopeUrban.2578:

Kamara.4187:

PopeUrban.2578:

Kamara.4187:

PopeUrban.2578:

What I’m saying is absolutely true. Guild systems were not designed to make solo bank guilds, or provide “duos” with banners and the like in the first place. The revamped system simply reinforces the idea that a “small guild” is intended to be at least a party’s worth of players, and even then is extremely generous with those requirements, allowing use and progress of all systems to be done solo, including guild missions. You will make progress no matter your size, you simply won’t make it as fast. In this respect it is no different than the old system.

If you can PUG for a dungeon, or a fractal, or LFG for a map taxi, you can do the same one time for a guild hall. I’ll personally help you with this if you can’t find anyone else.

You can still get banners. They’re just more expensive. If you had banners unlocked before, go buy them with favor in the guild initiative. If you didn’t, go level a guild hall and a scribe like any size guild also has to.

Again, the difference in the new system is that you have to put in the work wheras in the old system you didn’t have to put in any work and just got influence and the selection of things it provided on top of the rewards you already got for playing content.

That system, as I’ve said repeatedly, was broken and skewed extremely in the favor of guilds with massive player rosters. Now the only thing skewed in the favor of those guilds is progression speed but not the ability to progress or the ability to actually utilize earned upgrades

Funny thing is I don’t recall reading “anywhere” that such changes were being applied to the game when I pre-ordered HOT (4 Copies I might add for the whole family).

Had I known prior, it would have influenced my decision…and saved me a few bucks.

There are some really cool things about the expansion that I do like, but the truth be told I’ve not even bothered to log in for close to a week now because it seems like everything with HOT has slanted or nerfed things in such a way as to funnel players “more towards buying gems”….

I don’t know about the rest of you but I’m over getting into a game just to see my time and investment turned upside down by an industry that can’t even be bothered to include us in the loop before making dramatic changes.

Its time for players to have some protections. We are after all what determines the success or failure of a game.

The argument that ingame economic decision are made from the lens of encouraging people to buy gems is just plain wrong due to the basic nature of the gem exchange.

Specifically, the more people that buy gems and convert them to gold, the cheaper it becomes to buy gems with gold.

No amount of nerfing gold gain or increasing gold costs encourages or rewards converting gems to gold.

With admin privileges and a couple of key strokes I’m sure any of that can be altered just like in every other MMO that has admin functions for economy adjustments..
not to mention there is nothing balancing, devaluing, or adjusting those dollars they are taking in. Its pure profit.

With admin priveledes and a couple keystrokes they could send also charge your preferred payment method thusands of dollars, sell your personal details to a number of direct avertising firms, or delete everything on your account, strip you naked, and jump your characters off a fatal cliff.

Yet they don’t.

If the basis of your argument is “well they could do something underhanded” that’s not really much of an argument.

Do you apply the same logic to every service which you pay for and every product you buy, or is it reserved for this one specifically?

or delete everything on your account, strip you naked, and jump your characters off a fatal cliff.

Yet they don’t.

Lol. Not your best example of what they won’t do to you, since they did do it to one guy. He “deserved” it, but still. ANet will do it if they decide to. :P
Character stripped naked, jumped off cliff, then deleted

I was specifically referencing that (hilarious) event actually.

Greed has no bounds, which is why regulations are applied sooner or later. In fact its already happened in some nations that recognized their people were being taken advantage of. My example is forsaken world. The game milks the heck out of players.

Funny thing is the game is in fact a product of China. While the players of China are protected from many of the fleecing game mechanics in Forsaken World, those same rules don’t apply to their U.S. or Euro markets…Which are bending players over the cash register at every turn….

“Free to play games” have turned into a one trick pony that always leads the player down a path of walls and obstacles that strongly encourage players to open their wallets.

Which is another gripe of mine. When you actually purchase a game up front you shouldn’t find trash mechanics like that in the back bone of the games economy.

I don’t blame Anet for this. I loved GW1 and with GW2 they created a beautiful world with many amazing new concepts. They have my respect here.

However I do blame those that hijacked the game out from under them. Their history and hand is all over the vampiric squeeze towards the paywall….

On the same note I realize you are a huge fan and you don’t agree with any negative remark made towards the game. I respect that, but by the same token I am entitled to my views and opinion, and I strongly feel that I’m either close or on the right track till proven otherwise.

And by the way the entire world watches the NY exchange market daily, yet year after year there are always those that are being indited for insider trading. And a games economy doesn’t even need a person at the keyboard to monitor it. A running script can keep fluctuations within a set parameter while increasing or decreasing inflation and sinks to just an individual. I’m not saying Anet/NCsoft is doing that. But I am saying it is not beyond the capabilities of what can be done with code.

Shademehr.1397:

I’m in a small guild. Anywhere from 5-10 players on consistantly. We’re up to GH Level 17. A fully built Guild Hall is going to take some time and effort and that’s just the way life is. This isn’t about instant gratification. In fact most of the things in HoT aren’t instant gratification. However, lots of people seem to want everything NOW NOW NOW and not have to work for them.

I can’t expect to own a Ferarri if my bank account is only big enough for a Civic.

This is SO FAR from what is being discussed in this thread that the wrongness is making my head hurt.

Here’s what happened: I owned a ferrari, but then the city said that my garage was only suitable for a civic, and that I could earn back the ferrari if I jumped through a bunch of hoops.

Now everyone is saying that I should be happy there’s a Civic in my garage, because there’s no way one person deserves to own a Ferrari, and that I shouldn’t feel entitled to my Ferrari. And I’m like, “Yo, this Civic doesn’t even have a motor in it.”

And you’re like, “So greedy, wanting everything NOW NOW NOW. GO EARN YOUR MOTOR.”

And I have no idea why people think that’s even appropriate.

Lobo Dela Noche.5127:

PopeUrban.2578:

Kamara.4187:

PopeUrban.2578:

Kamara.4187:

PopeUrban.2578:

What I’m saying is absolutely true. Guild systems were not designed to make solo bank guilds, or provide “duos” with banners and the like in the first place. The revamped system simply reinforces the idea that a “small guild” is intended to be at least a party’s worth of players, and even then is extremely generous with those requirements, allowing use and progress of all systems to be done solo, including guild missions. You will make progress no matter your size, you simply won’t make it as fast. In this respect it is no different than the old system.

If you can PUG for a dungeon, or a fractal, or LFG for a map taxi, you can do the same one time for a guild hall. I’ll personally help you with this if you can’t find anyone else.

You can still get banners. They’re just more expensive. If you had banners unlocked before, go buy them with favor in the guild initiative. If you didn’t, go level a guild hall and a scribe like any size guild also has to.

Again, the difference in the new system is that you have to put in the work wheras in the old system you didn’t have to put in any work and just got influence and the selection of things it provided on top of the rewards you already got for playing content.

That system, as I’ve said repeatedly, was broken and skewed extremely in the favor of guilds with massive player rosters. Now the only thing skewed in the favor of those guilds is progression speed but not the ability to progress or the ability to actually utilize earned upgrades

Funny thing is I don’t recall reading “anywhere” that such changes were being applied to the game when I pre-ordered HOT (4 Copies I might add for the whole family).

Had I known prior, it would have influenced my decision…and saved me a few bucks.

There are some really cool things about the expansion that I do like, but the truth be told I’ve not even bothered to log in for close to a week now because it seems like everything with HOT has slanted or nerfed things in such a way as to funnel players “more towards buying gems”….

I don’t know about the rest of you but I’m over getting into a game just to see my time and investment turned upside down by an industry that can’t even be bothered to include us in the loop before making dramatic changes.

Its time for players to have some protections. We are after all what determines the success or failure of a game.

The argument that ingame economic decision are made from the lens of encouraging people to buy gems is just plain wrong due to the basic nature of the gem exchange.

Specifically, the more people that buy gems and convert them to gold, the cheaper it becomes to buy gems with gold.

No amount of nerfing gold gain or increasing gold costs encourages or rewards converting gems to gold.

With admin privileges and a couple of key strokes I’m sure any of that can be altered just like in every other MMO that has admin functions for economy adjustments..
not to mention there is nothing balancing, devaluing, or adjusting those dollars they are taking in. Its pure profit.

With admin priveledes and a couple keystrokes they could send also charge your preferred payment method thusands of dollars, sell your personal details to a number of direct avertising firms, or delete everything on your account, strip you naked, and jump your characters off a fatal cliff.

Yet they don’t.

If the basis of your argument is “well they could do something underhanded” that’s not really much of an argument.

Do you apply the same logic to every service which you pay for and every product you buy, or is it reserved for this one specifically?

You are very naïve if you think anet won’t adjust the rates manually to make money. Like I have said before, if everyone quit buying gems with gold today and I wanted to buy a million gold with real money, the gold would be there. To think otherwise is just foolish.

They don’t adjust the ingame economy to encourage gem purchases they add stuff to the gem store

That’s why black lion tickets, outfits, and other such annoying crap exists, and why rewards in the game are so quickly outpaced by more gem store shinies. Anet’s model to drive gem purchases assumed people that want gem store items more often buy gems with money than gold. They’ve gone on record several times stating that gems to gold conversion has an extremely negligable effect on the ingame economy because of the low ratios that result from how that exchange works.

You can track gems to gold conversion rates easily on a number of sites, and any adjustment that didn’t jibe with player patterns would be easily and quickly recognized.

The fact is the current economic rates were adjusted to curb gold inflation, because ensuring that the various services and rates of ingame gold gain are inline with how anet feels people should be earning based on intended play patterns are far more important to the long term health of the game than the rate at which people buy gold with gems.

Whether you feel their intended play patterns and rates of gold acquisition are valuable or fun is a whole different matter, but this really is a game design issue, not a real world financial one, for arenanet.

Assuming anything else, with the massive amount of public data that we keep track of as players would be foolish.

PopeUrban.2578:

Kamara.4187:

PopeUrban.2578:

Kamara.4187:

PopeUrban.2578:

What I’m saying is absolutely true. Guild systems were not designed to make solo bank guilds, or provide “duos” with banners and the like in the first place. The revamped system simply reinforces the idea that a “small guild” is intended to be at least a party’s worth of players, and even then is extremely generous with those requirements, allowing use and progress of all systems to be done solo, including guild missions. You will make progress no matter your size, you simply won’t make it as fast. In this respect it is no different than the old system.

If you can PUG for a dungeon, or a fractal, or LFG for a map taxi, you can do the same one time for a guild hall. I’ll personally help you with this if you can’t find anyone else.

You can still get banners. They’re just more expensive. If you had banners unlocked before, go buy them with favor in the guild initiative. If you didn’t, go level a guild hall and a scribe like any size guild also has to.

Again, the difference in the new system is that you have to put in the work wheras in the old system you didn’t have to put in any work and just got influence and the selection of things it provided on top of the rewards you already got for playing content.

That system, as I’ve said repeatedly, was broken and skewed extremely in the favor of guilds with massive player rosters. Now the only thing skewed in the favor of those guilds is progression speed but not the ability to progress or the ability to actually utilize earned upgrades

Funny thing is I don’t recall reading “anywhere” that such changes were being applied to the game when I pre-ordered HOT (4 Copies I might add for the whole family).

Had I known prior, it would have influenced my decision…and saved me a few bucks.

There are some really cool things about the expansion that I do like, but the truth be told I’ve not even bothered to log in for close to a week now because it seems like everything with HOT has slanted or nerfed things in such a way as to funnel players “more towards buying gems”….

I don’t know about the rest of you but I’m over getting into a game just to see my time and investment turned upside down by an industry that can’t even be bothered to include us in the loop before making dramatic changes.

Its time for players to have some protections. We are after all what determines the success or failure of a game.

The argument that ingame economic decision are made from the lens of encouraging people to buy gems is just plain wrong due to the basic nature of the gem exchange.

Specifically, the more people that buy gems and convert them to gold, the cheaper it becomes to buy gems with gold.

No amount of nerfing gold gain or increasing gold costs encourages or rewards converting gems to gold.

With admin privileges and a couple of key strokes I’m sure any of that can be altered just like in every other MMO that has admin functions for economy adjustments..
not to mention there is nothing balancing, devaluing, or adjusting those dollars they are taking in. Its pure profit.

With admin priveledes and a couple keystrokes they could send also charge your preferred payment method thusands of dollars, sell your personal details to a number of direct avertising firms, or delete everything on your account, strip you naked, and jump your characters off a fatal cliff.

Yet they don’t.

If the basis of your argument is “well they could do something underhanded” that’s not really much of an argument.

Do you apply the same logic to every service which you pay for and every product you buy, or is it reserved for this one specifically?

You are very naïve if you think anet won’t adjust the rates manually to make money. Like I have said before, if everyone quit buying gems with gold today and I wanted to buy a million gold with real money, the gold would be there. To think otherwise is just foolish.

Kamara.4187:

PopeUrban.2578:

Kamara.4187:

PopeUrban.2578:

What I’m saying is absolutely true. Guild systems were not designed to make solo bank guilds, or provide “duos” with banners and the like in the first place. The revamped system simply reinforces the idea that a “small guild” is intended to be at least a party’s worth of players, and even then is extremely generous with those requirements, allowing use and progress of all systems to be done solo, including guild missions. You will make progress no matter your size, you simply won’t make it as fast. In this respect it is no different than the old system.

If you can PUG for a dungeon, or a fractal, or LFG for a map taxi, you can do the same one time for a guild hall. I’ll personally help you with this if you can’t find anyone else.

You can still get banners. They’re just more expensive. If you had banners unlocked before, go buy them with favor in the guild initiative. If you didn’t, go level a guild hall and a scribe like any size guild also has to.

Again, the difference in the new system is that you have to put in the work wheras in the old system you didn’t have to put in any work and just got influence and the selection of things it provided on top of the rewards you already got for playing content.

That system, as I’ve said repeatedly, was broken and skewed extremely in the favor of guilds with massive player rosters. Now the only thing skewed in the favor of those guilds is progression speed but not the ability to progress or the ability to actually utilize earned upgrades

Funny thing is I don’t recall reading “anywhere” that such changes were being applied to the game when I pre-ordered HOT (4 Copies I might add for the whole family).

Had I known prior, it would have influenced my decision…and saved me a few bucks.

There are some really cool things about the expansion that I do like, but the truth be told I’ve not even bothered to log in for close to a week now because it seems like everything with HOT has slanted or nerfed things in such a way as to funnel players “more towards buying gems”….

I don’t know about the rest of you but I’m over getting into a game just to see my time and investment turned upside down by an industry that can’t even be bothered to include us in the loop before making dramatic changes.

Its time for players to have some protections. We are after all what determines the success or failure of a game.

The argument that ingame economic decision are made from the lens of encouraging people to buy gems is just plain wrong due to the basic nature of the gem exchange.

Specifically, the more people that buy gems and convert them to gold, the cheaper it becomes to buy gems with gold.

No amount of nerfing gold gain or increasing gold costs encourages or rewards converting gems to gold.

With admin privileges and a couple of key strokes I’m sure any of that can be altered just like in every other MMO that has admin functions for economy adjustments..
not to mention there is nothing balancing, devaluing, or adjusting those dollars they are taking in. Its pure profit.

With admin priveledes and a couple keystrokes they could send also charge your preferred payment method thusands of dollars, sell your personal details to a number of direct avertising firms, or delete everything on your account, strip you naked, and jump your characters off a fatal cliff.

Yet they don’t.

If the basis of your argument is “well they could do something underhanded” that’s not really much of an argument.

Do you apply the same logic to every service which you pay for and every product you buy, or is it reserved for this one specifically?

Kheo.2504:

Thanks for the heads up, I got a little fed up with never seeing anything positive on these forums. Especially the really sarcastic threads.

Negativity mostly thrives in discussion >

Positivity mostly thrives in action >

Thus, internet forums at bound to be 90% negative, allowing for the rare positive to slip through (but it doesn’t last long).

It’s a simple matter of, when people are happy and things are going good, there isn’t a lot to talk about. In fact, I think it’s safe to say that talking in general largely comes from the discussion of problems (whether problems in the sense of “malfunction” or problems in the sense of “question/answer”).

There is friendly banter too, but seeing as how game forums don’t like people talking about stuff other than the game, that sort of thing is limited. So in a way, game forums tend to force the negativity by design. They remove one of the few things that can go on for pages while being positive (friendly banter) by keeping things on-topic. The result is that game forums tend to be either really negative or really inactive. One of the two.

Compare hub city map chat when it’s busy, to any old thread on here, and you will see what I mean. That stuff can go on for hours, and be largely whimsical and friendly, because it’s allowed to go way off the rails.

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

Just a flesh wound.3589:

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

Actually, I like this system much, much better.

• The buffs last longer — I no longer have to worry about them expiring.
• I get to choose the buff, instead of the GL (most of whom would forget to queue up a buff).
• The buff remains no matter which guild I’m repping.
• It’s easy to swap: I just stop in the guild hall before starting a long session devoted to a particular type of gameplay.
• I don’t have to waste inventory space on potions.

In exchange, I’ve lost a minor amount of convenience.

If you don’t want to waste inventory space on potions, then only buy the one you want right then and each time you wish to switch then go back and buy one more to use. You get what you want and I get what I want.

That addresses one and only one of my points about why I like the current system better than the old system, which was in response to the original post stating a preference for the old system and your post stating that “it’s cumbersome”.

Or in other words: in my opinion the current system is better (for the reasons stated) and not cumbersome, so it wouldn’t be improved significantly by changing the mechanics.

Would I be disappointed if they changed it to potions instead of just a bartender interface? No, I’d adapt and perhaps carry the potions, too. Still, if they are going to tinker with aspects of guild mechanics, there’s at least 20 things I’d rather they worked on first.

It addressed the only thing that I said on this thread. I’m not going to bother to debate the other points that didn’t have anything to do with what I said earlier and aren’t relevant to my post.

i would be for having 3 active; magicfind, gathering, and exp = win

Let’s face it most Central Tyria maps are boring and ridiculous once you were on HOT maps for a while. It’s like a child’s play.

But actually only one HOT map is really complex and that’s Tangled Depths which really has multi-layers. VB has almost no root level and the canopy isn’t that big either. Still a great map though. Auric Basin is mostly one layer like most maps and Dragon’s Stand is mostly one layer.

Also they aren’t that big. Compare the map size with Lornar’s Pass for example. They aren’t bigger although they may seem bigger.

runeblade.7514:

There may be four maps, but they are leagues better than the core 25 maps combined.

They are good… but to say HoT is better than core Tyria? No. Maybe for you… but not for everyone; definitely not for me.

Daddicus.6128:

It’s closer to 20 maps worth of material.

Don’t blindly buy into the “biomes”. Consider the surface area of the ground level of these maps. Are the other levels the same size? If you dig in the ground and drop in there its ok to call it another level? Granted I exaggerated the size difference but I hope the message is clear. They are very good… among the best map in the game even. But not that good

I’d argue there are actually only three maps as the last one is basically a meta event that resets on a 2 hour timer.

Also I don’t see how you could possibly consider the maps we got to compare to 20 maps (70+) from the original game. Although HOT map are larger it’s often for seemingly no reason as their size doesn’t equate to more content just more running around.

I’ve heard that arguement too, and it doesn’t make sense. Because something is above ground or underground doesn’t make it another map. It makes it another level of the same map.

Using that logic, almost every map in Warcraft is actually three maps. Above ground, ground, and underground or underwater.

Sorry, but most of us aren’t buying that it’s three maps or more because of elevation. That’s like saying the Empire State Building is 103 buildings because it has that many floors, a basement, and an observatory.

My apologies, but it’s still one building and HoT only has four maps in this so-called ‘expansion.’

IEatCabbage.1907:

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

Just curious….how did you manage to get a copy of the game (now) that didn’t include Heart of Thorns, and why would you not have purchased the bundle instead of (in essence) purchasing the core game twice?

Or did you purchase the game long, long ago and never played?

Only ask because if you obtained the game outside the rules of the ToS, you might want to just go ahead and purchase HoT now and play that account, rather than lose all progress from a possible account termination.

Good luck.

The core game is free… GW2 is completely f2p now and only the HoT expansion requires $50

Free to play accounts can’t post on this Forum, so if he’s posting here he bought the account.

PyrateSilly.4710:

To me “end game” means that there is an end and the game is over when you are done doing x quest or event. Since this game has no end and it keeps going I don’t see what you are asking.

As for what I do every day online? A little PvE or WvW, I may get into PvP at some point but I still have so much to do in PvE that I don’t have time for any other mode at the moment.

“Endgame” in MMOs has never referred to a final quest and then the whole game is over and no one plays it any more. “Endgame” usually refers to the body of activities one does in an MMO once they finish the leveling content.

They had 6 years to develop anything(even the 37 gear) without pressuring of Live Uptades/schedules/X-packs and other bullcrap they must face now

Edit: i hate ‘’sympathy attacks’’ , can we go back into the kiddo and ’’shocks’’ ones ?

Can the word “lazy” be offensive? Yes. But just as importantly, I think it’s the wrong word for what people really want to say.

The right word, I think, is “ineffective”.

We’ve all been there from time to time. Spend hours playing a single player game, chasing after some big goal, only to lose your progress? Congratulations, you were ineffective. Ever spend all day at work dealing with something, only to have someone above you do something that makes all your work pointless? Again, you’ve been ineffective. Spend all night on a report, only to have the word processing program crash and take your document straight to hell? Once more, you’re ineffective. And it feels pretty awful, right?

We know ANet has some pretty dedicated people working there. And yet, the company’s output seem lacking. Maybe it’s meddling from above, or aiming higher than they can reach, or their iterative process, but something leaves them ineffective when it’s all said and done. It must be ungodly frustrating.

With that in mind, let’s go back to the OP’s topic of gemstore releases vs in-game rewards. Compared to the in-game stuff, the gemstore team probably has a very straight forward goal when they’re given an assignment. There’s very little complexity from outside to derail their work, so it’s only natural that they get more done faster than the people that have to deal with changing requirements and other complexities. And even then, we know that some of their work is simply cast aside. (Anyone remember the 4 paper bag “helms”?)

ANet has a problem, and they do need to address it. But the next time you think that the problem is that they’re lazy, look at the meta events in the four HoT maps and ask yourself: “If this is what they managed to get working in time, how much more was left on the cutting room floor because they simply couldn’t get it in?”

(PS: Yes, I still hate the HoT maps. I’m just willing to admit that a ton of work went into them.)

Labjax.2465:

IndigoSundown.5419:

Vayne.8563:

I’m not sure it’s necessary to malign the company to critique the game at all.

It’s absolutely unnecessary. It’s either people acting out because it’s the internet and the consequences are trivial, or it’s a bald-faced (and ill-advised) attempt to shame the developer into acting. Either way, it’s rude and uncalled for.

First of all, it’s not really maligning if the person is saying stuff about the company’s practices that they believe to be true.

Second, you pretty much have to criticize the company if you’re going to criticize the game. The company as a whole is what made the game and made the decisions that turned the game into what it is (this is more so relevant for AAA games, with hundreds of employees, less so for 5 person indie teams).

Third, there is a bit of a distinction between developers and company because most devs have very little say in what goes on (which is why I, personally, tend to avoid criticizing developers themselves). But either way, hemming and hawing over the use of the word lazy is extremely idiotic. So what if it’s not entirely respectful? There are more important things in this world to get offended over. Unless you work for Anet, chances are, the developers are not your friends and you know nothing about them. Why defend them over one word in the first place? Just because you like parts of their game?

Just stop and think for a moment how absurd that is. They are adults who are getting paid to do a job. If they were getting harassed and stalked, I would be right there with you defending them. Them getting called lazy as a whole, in a generalized sense, is not worth the blink of an eye in defense, much less an ongoing argument.

I don’t know. Chris Whiteside told us he found it offensive when he still worked for Anet, so I guess maybe it’s offensive.

Now you may not think it’s offensive but he did. He was protective of the team and seemed to think they were hard working. I’m guessing he’d know better than anyone in the company.

It kittened him off and he did write something about it.

So maybe, just maybe it’s offensive even if you don’t find it offensive And since there’s no reason to be offensive, not at all, my crusade is just me being decent.

Labjax.2465:

IndigoSundown.5419:

Labjax.2465:

First of all, it’s not really maligning if the person is saying stuff about the company’s practices that they believe to be true.

I couldn’t disagree more. Baseless belief is not a free pass to say whatever one wants in a private setting.

Second, you pretty much have to criticize the company if you’re going to criticize the game. The company as a whole is what made the game and made the decisions that turned the game into what it is (this is more so relevant for AAA games, with hundreds of employees, less so for 5 person indie teams).

It is completely possible to criticize both the game and the company without resorting to pejoratives. I do it all the time. You do, too. Use of such terms is in itself the mark of a weak argument.

Third, there is a bit of a distinction between developers and company because most devs have very little say in what goes on (which is why I, personally, tend to avoid criticizing developers themselves). But either way, hemming and hawing over the use of the word lazy is extremely idiotic.

If it’s idiotic to comment about the use of a word, ANet might as well delete 80% of the posts on these boards, including some of yours.

So what if it’s not entirely respectful? There are more important things in this world to get offended over.

Are there more important things to care about? Absolutely. None of us are posting on a game forum to change the world.

Unless you work for Anet, chances are, the developers are not your friends and you know nothing about them. Why defend them over one word in the first place? Just because you like parts of their game?

I’m not posting my opinion of cynical forum tactics to defend ANet. I’m not pleased with the way ANet management has moved the game, either. I just don’t like cynical forum tactics.

Just stop and think for a moment how absurd that is. They are adults who are getting paid to do a job. If they were getting harassed and stalked, I would be right there with you defending them. Them getting called lazy as a whole, in a generalized sense, is not worth the blink of an eye in defense, much less an ongoing argument.

I made one short comment. You made a longer response. If it wasn’t worth commenting on, why was the comment worth commenting on?

FWIW, my post was more directed toward Vayne than yourself. He has been going on about the use of the word lazy for a good page or so.

That said, Anet can delete whatever they want, including my own stuff. I commented on it mainly because of Vayne going on and on about it at the guy. It’s borderline obsessive the way he is/was defending the developers against one word. It’s almost as if he considers himself one of them.

No one gets a free pass, sure, I was just pointing out that there’s a difference between saying what you think about the content produced by the developers and creating elaborate lies to make them look bad. Pejoratives are a weak way to criticize, sure, but if they’re weak, why is anyone giving it the time of day?

And I’d hardly call the use of the word lazy “tactics.” It is an opinion, and arguably a rude one, but it’s hardly tactics to describe a group’s work as lazy. I’ve seen “tactics” all the time on internet forums and this is nothing like that. Tactics is, incidentally, what Vayne’s crusade against the word lazy looks like to me… painting it as rude, using it as a platform to discourage criticism of the company. Looks like tactics to shut out criticism to me. I’m not saying he has any ulterior motive other than being a fan, mind you.

Ah, I responded because you quoted me, Lab. I have to admit I wondered why you singled me out. Maybe because my post was short?

Vayne has certain things that get under his skin. When he’s on about one of those, he won’t let go. I’ve kind of given up commenting on it. I find that Vayne has very few issues with my criticisms of ANet, but then I avoid pejoratives and speak only for myself. If I comment on trends I use terms like “some people” rather than the sure-to-provoke “majority.”

Whether accusations are a tactic or not probably depends on the poster. A great many aren’t. I call it that whether the poster is doing it consciously, or not. Humans tend to build support for their ideas by using words they think will resonate with a portion of their audience. I believe that calling attention to that can have the effect of waking the occasional person up. I believe the great majority of readers shine it on, but if I make one reader think, then I think my post was worthwhile.

Labjax.2465:

First of all, it’s not really maligning if the person is saying stuff about the company’s practices that they believe to be true.

I couldn’t disagree more. Baseless belief is not a free pass to say whatever one wants in a private setting.

Second, you pretty much have to criticize the company if you’re going to criticize the game. The company as a whole is what made the game and made the decisions that turned the game into what it is (this is more so relevant for AAA games, with hundreds of employees, less so for 5 person indie teams).

It is completely possible to criticize both the game and the company without resorting to pejoratives. I do it all the time. You do, too. Use of such terms is in itself the mark of a weak argument.

Third, there is a bit of a distinction between developers and company because most devs have very little say in what goes on (which is why I, personally, tend to avoid criticizing developers themselves). But either way, hemming and hawing over the use of the word lazy is extremely idiotic.

If it’s idiotic to comment about the use of a word, ANet might as well delete 80% of the posts on these boards, including some of yours.

So what if it’s not entirely respectful? There are more important things in this world to get offended over.

Are there more important things to care about? Absolutely. None of us are posting on a game forum to change the world.

Unless you work for Anet, chances are, the developers are not your friends and you know nothing about them. Why defend them over one word in the first place? Just because you like parts of their game?

I’m not posting my opinion of cynical forum tactics to defend ANet. I’m not pleased with the way ANet management has moved the game, either. I just don’t like cynical forum tactics.

Just stop and think for a moment how absurd that is. They are adults who are getting paid to do a job. If they were getting harassed and stalked, I would be right there with you defending them. Them getting called lazy as a whole, in a generalized sense, is not worth the blink of an eye in defense, much less an ongoing argument.

I made one short comment. You made a longer response. If it wasn’t worth commenting on, why was the comment worth commenting on?

Animism.6849:

Vayne.8563:

Manthas.6234:

Vayne.8563:

Wryscher.1432:

Vayne.8563:

Manthas.6234:

Vayne.8563:

Nope you don’t have to say that. Nor do you have to trot out trite words like lazy to express your dissatisfaction which is a lazy way to complain, and an offensive one.

Anet can’t be lazy, because Anet isn’t a person. Anet is a company comprised of people. It is extremely likely that a percentage of employees of any company are in fact lazy, but the company itself can’t be lazy unless you’re personifying it. Whether you’re a developer, a customer or a norse god is not really relevant to the conversation.

You chose to use a word some would consider to be an insult and directed it at a group of 300 people. So unless every single one of those people is lazy, you’re doing a disservice to them, and you’re potentially being offensive.

If I were working really hard on something and someone called me lazy, yes, I’d take offense. Last I’ll say on the subject since to anyone reading it, this was obvious a while ago. Only someone deliberately ignoring what I’m saying would keep going and what I’m saying is factual. You can’t call a company lazy, without impugning everyone in the company.

Really? Are we really talking about how word “lazy” should be used? Ok.

First of all, be honest with yourself. I’m pretty sure you were not running around at release (when reviews were glowing) saying how we can’t praise Anet, because it’s not a person. There still could have been one slacking programmer, you know

Secondly, companies have personalities, in fact, they’re juridical persons. Companies are not the people working for them. For example, 2 of 3 Anet founders have left the company, does it meen Anet is no longer Anet? No. It’s still the same company, even though it changed over the years (people change too, right?). Companies could be good, evil, corrupt and yes, lazy. Its personality is represented by:
1) the people working there. It’s usually the senior officers, but there’re a lot of exceptions. In Anet case, that would be every red post we see on forums. Yes, there’s a living human being with the name who says something on those forums, but in the end, we remember that it was the Anet, who said that thing. Anet can’t go behind that persons back and say: “Dont look at me, it was he who said you that the fractal rewards will be fixed” (yeah, I know it’s still December).
2) its work. It this case that would be the expansion. And if someone, who had the ability and resources to produce something good, presents me a half-finished product… well, I have a pretty nice word to describe that person.

Basically, you say that I can’t call Anet lazy, because that would hurt their feelings. Well, it’s the reality talking and guys from South Park even made an episode about this. Saying anything else just gives them a wrong message that they could get away with this. No, they can’t.
Yes, you could say that my critisim is not constructive. But how can I been constructive when all I want to say is “give me more stuff for the money I paid”?

If you’re defending your use of lazy to describe a group of people, my conversation with you is pretty much over. Using a legal fiction to create some type of reality is what lawyers do. It’s offensive to call people lazy if you don’t know how hard the work and doing so only makes your argument weak. Surely you can complain without inventing stuff.

As for getting your money’s worth, you’re absolutely entitled to that opinion. I have no problem with you feeling that.

But using the word lazy? I can have no respect for that argument.

By the gods do I love you. You are so freaking good at this.

But i am curious because he actually makes a valid point. Is there a list of words that you are ok using to describe a company? Just the positive ones then?

I’m not sure it’s necessary to malign the company to critique the game at all. Look, I’m a professional editor and I’ve been in my critique group settings. Nothing like what appears on this forums would be allowed. I’m also older and find a lot of stuff to be disrespectful and rude.

So it’s very easy to say, I don’t feel like the expansion has enough content for what I paid. I expected more. That’s a perfectly valid criticism. It doesn’t impugn the devs. It doesn’t blame or set fault. It states it as a fact.

Saying that the devs are lazy is not constructive, it helps no one, not a single person and it’s almost definitely untrue. If Anet has an issue it’s more likely to be an organizational one than one of laziness.

But again, I don’t work there, I don’t see the devs every day and I think it’s bad to draw conclusions about them based on the game. If I want to critique something an author wrote, I focus on the work. I don’t use language to malign the author.

I could say you’re too lazy to have done the research but who does that help?

First of all, has the lazy become the new n-word?
Secondly, it was never the statement of fact. I don’t know how hard working they are and you don’t know it either. It’s an assumption based on the facts I have and I all have have is an expansion.
Does calling someone lazy help? I don’t know. It’s a feedback from a player and a negative one. It’s not about giving an advise on how to fix this or that. It’s all about saying that what you gave us at release was more than enough and what you are giving us now is not. I do not compare Anet to other authors. I am comparing the creators work now with it’s previous work. Does the “now” pale when comparing with the “past”? In my opinion, yes (and, as you said, I am entitled to that opinion). You could say that I could have draw the line here. Yes, I could have. But I am a customer. I don’t have time for this “in my opinion, developer used to give us more stuff”. I have one simple word and use it when I feel the need to. Anet is not a child. I don’t have to hold its hand and try not to make it cry. It’s a cold and unforgiving market. Deal with this.

You can be a customer and not be offensive or insulting to an entire group of people. I’ve worked in the retail sector and the customers who were most insulting were the customers I was least likely to try to mollify and the ones who often got ignored by a percentage of my staff just by human nature.

If you are the kind of person that wants to be offensive to people when you’re angry that’s your own lookout. It doesn’t really belong on the forums. Complain about the game, not the people making it. It’ll be better for you AND them.

I’m sorry you’re so bitter about the game that you feel the need to venture into something that isn’t that far off a personal attack. But I promise you it’s not helping your argument at all.

Saying that’s not far off a personal attack is a bit of an exaggeration don’t you think? Yes his bitterness shows through, as does mine. BUT his points are still very much valid. GW1 was a free game, with a very small element of the ‘gem store’ – in different form. This game received proper expansions, more content. HOW? Lesser budget = more content? My mind is absolutely boggled as to what has been happening in the local company of Arenanet since the very release of GW2. Seems they just want to keep experimenting to try and maximise their profits constantly – without much thought into the repercussions. I honestly think GW2 is now on a slippery slope to death. What is there for me to do in this game now? There is aetherpath – the only rewarding dungeon left, daily adventures – which I am capped by mastery points for doing dull world events, degraded fractals which are even more dull than before, and finally the infamous world events, which over half of the player base didn’t really find much interest in.

Nope. It’s not an exaggeration, I think it’s hurtful and if enough people say it, it’s potentially damaging to people. There is zero reason to get personal and judge people.

If I were working my kitten off at Anet, as no doubt many people are, and I saw me being called lazy it would hurt. Developers are human beings with feelings. By implying they’re simply not trying, you are in fact maligning them, particularly if you don’t know them. It’s a judgement that doesn’t need to be made. It’s the type of language that sullies any argument because it’s unprovable and off topic.

Complain about the game, don’t point fingers at people you don’t know. There’s no reason to do it. It doesn’t strengthen your argument.

You can complain about not getting enough updates without being personal.