Guild Wars 2

Hey guys!
I have uploaded a new video. This time Core Guardian only. ^^
Took a long time editing it!
What do you think about the editing style? Please let me know!

Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaTOSzwdMV4

Thank you so much <3
-DoNotD

I’d rather be able to sell/buy tomes on the trading post.

My 14 yo son decided -finally- to give GW2 a try.
He’s a gamer, like me, but he prefers FPS games like CoD and CS:GO. You know, the bang-bang pew-pew – I Kill Ye Ded kinda games. I’ve never been able to enjoy that genre.

Anyway, my son is now playing GW2 and I made a new Mesmer just to play with him.
We’re leveling up slowly (L65 rigt now) and we’re just roaming casually around Tyria, participating in Dynamic Events as we find them, doing reknown hearts if we feel like, doing mini-dungeons and jumping puzzles if we’re in the mood, etc.

We’re having a lot of fun because we’re not pressured to “use the LFG or die”; “Find the ‘right’ map or don’t get this done”; “log in 20 minutes before the event or miss it”; “Pop a tag to get more people or fail”, etc .

We’re playing at our own pace and this is what I feel we lost with HoT.

And yes, we’re having fun. I still don’t know if my son will want to continue thru HoT once he gets Gliding… let’s see.

:)

I play to have fun. My other half plays to have fun. The youngest (30 yrs old) plays to have fun. The granddaughter (10 yrs old) plays to have fun.
The oldest son …… he plays to have fun BUT his fun is min-maxing his stuff. That’s his fun. Years and years of me telling him to let me play my way (not min-max) and he’s finally learned to stop telling me and everyone else in the family how to play. He does still get frustrated at times thou, lol.

MMO developers are in a way caught between a rock and a hard place. On one hand, they need to make game-play itself fun for a lot of people. If their game-play is not fun, they will loose people fast. That includes the game’s content. Interesting mechanics and interesting enemies make for a better game. A lot of people have fun with both game play and content.

On the other hand, an MMO thrives by keeping players playing long past the point where new content ceases to be engaging, and players are playing by rote. MMO developers use rewards to keep people playing past this point. Some (I’d say many, if not most) players find gaining rewards to be fun.

So, what we see in MMO’s is that people do play for fun. However, different people are going to have different ideas of what makes the game fun for them. The OP seems to find theory-crafting and number crunching to not be fun. He specifically mentions raids. The thing is, raids (at least before WoW came out with LFR) has always been dominated by theory crafters and number crunchers, and the players who did not do the work but want the same results. Generally, that’s because raids are content that is definitely kept alive by the pursuit of rewards.

Tl;Dr: While it may seem that other players are not having fun because they take a different approach to the game than you, it’s likely they are enjoying themselves, but value different things about the game than you do.

Weissbar.6348:

Please let us buy level 80 boosts it would be so much easier for the people who don’t have time to grind.

What grind? You log in you get tomes, you donany content you get tomes what more do you want everything on a platter with no effort?

I agree that it’s not needed. I think there are plenty of options for levelling quickly already.

Even if you’re only getting Tomes of Knowledge from the login rewards you can get 16 a month (if you choose them from the final chest), and they come from a whole variety of other places too. Add in XP boosters (which you can also get free), the XP rewards from dailies which can be given to any character, and all the old tricks like crafting to level up and it’s entirely possible to level multiple characters quickly in a short space of time.

Having said that for the same reason I don’t think it’d do any harm to add this to the gem store if the other items were removed. If it just levels you to 80 and gives you 1 set of soulbound gear then it’s not a problem. If it also gives you 5 Teleport to Friend items, a Celebratory Dye Kit, 2 gold and all the other stuff then it would either have to be too expensive for people to buy it just for those items (bear in mind some dyes go for hundreds of gold on their own), which would also make it prohibitively expensive for people who genuinely just want another max level character or it’d lead to people buying it over and over just for the bonus items.

But I think it’s unlikely they’d offer it anyway. They said it’s a way for new players to jump straight into HoT and play everything the game has to offer along with everyone else, and you only need 1 level 80 to do that. Especially since you can try out the professions to choose the one you like best.

While it’s true that leveling a character manually after your first is definitely not the same experience, especially since ANet introduced the NPE and level gated everything, GW2 has many ways of making the leveling up much much shorter, almost instant. The Level 80 boost on the Gemstore would just make the experience all too empty and meaningless.
While it’s been years and many players want to enjoy the newest content, that’s why each account gets one booster. The whole end game inGW2 starts at level 1, and has always been so.
ToK’s say hi though, it’s possible to stack those up way way fast.

Jski.6180:

It seems from the last set of nerf anet has an ideal of HOW we should be playing these classes. As in the newest thing they add in the update is how they want use to play them. I can only talk to ele but it seems Anet wants ele to support only with both condi share and healing but they keep nerfing the core class to do so. So Anet you want us to play the way you see the classes you need to tag them with there rolls.

Actually, it’s much more that they want to bring balance to the classes so there are multiple ways each class, and each role, can be fulfilled, to avoid anyone being stuck with “only one way” to do things.

There are two main things that happen to skills: adjustments down for things that are either over-represented, or over-powerful, and adjustments up for things that are under-represented, or not powerful enough.

When you see improvements to condition sharing, and to healing, it should tell you that people don’t play ele in those roles — even if they would like to. So, by making them more capable of doing those things, boom, suddenly those players can do their thing with the class they want, and enjoy it.

A similar example would be Warrior greatsword and axe changes in the patch: they move both of them around a bit to make them line up better against each other, reducing the difference, so people can use the one they prefer.

All of those things are focused on making more choices available to players, not less.

Sadly, the instant reaction of some players is to go and benchmark the changed things, then declare that the class is “dead”, or the trait is “the only viable meta option”, regardless of how close they really are.

It’s never a good idea to pay too much attention to what the “meta” builds are.

Ryou.2398:

I could not agree more, I think it has more to do with ego and the meta community acting like it has to go through them first to be acceptable.

There’s no such thing as a “meta community” and absolutely no one who has publishes data on “best DPS” builds insists that there’s only one way to play.

That’s like accusing the “fun police” of being against DPS meters — different people enjoy the game in different ways. This game makes it easy to have fun in dungeons and fractals and especially open world without worrying much about having optimized builds, so if you don’t care to research & won’t use someone else’s build, then why worry if anyone else is doing so?

Excelsior.

I am basically preaching since several years that fun and enjoyment > theorycrafting.
There is not a single week where I am not posting about people should enjoy the game/the profession more and not get mad at every nerf or changes, that they should try stuff on their own (no JP taxis) and not play with Youtube and/or Netflix besides.

Numbers are fine and required, because it’s basically the essence of this game (or similar games). It’s more about the players which apparently can’t enjoy stuff anymore in times of Facebook and “Speed watching” (TV series at 2x speed because they ain’t got time), every 5-liner needs a “TL;DR” and such. Only a few manage to have a passion for high numbers, the other ones are just jumping the hypetrain and cry on the forums when they are not even remotely near those numbers.

There definitely are people out there who just play for fun. On numerous occasions I’ve made some comment about not knowing how to do dungeons or not having the right equipment for raiding and my guild has told me to come along anyway and we’ll see what happens, and it ends up being a lot of fun even if it’s not the most “efficient” run.

I’m in a bit of a weird place though. I’m definitely willing and able to just play and have fun without worrying about the numbers and most of the time that is exactly what I do. But sometimes I find the numbers fun too. I can literally spend an entire evening theory crafting a build for one of my characters. I’m not even playing the game exactly – it sometimes involves a spreadsheet (complete with formulae), the game is just open for reference. But I find it fun. I can get really excited about the builds I put together.

Even there though I’m doing it “wrong”. I don’t follow, or even pay attention to the meta-game, I haven’t got a clue what builds are popular and I’m not trying to replicate them or improve on them. I’m just making something that interests me. For example my ranger is currently using a mix of sinister and rabid stats chosen to give a baseline of 50% critical chance, about 1,500 condition damage, power and toughness (it ended up at 1,548, 1,543 and 1,509 respectively) for no reason other than those numbers seemed good to me. But it seems to work well enough for me.

Organic combat feeling is important, but so is math. I’ve played an MMO with obscure numbers once, I wasn’t happy about it when all the testing had to be done at my expense.

People have always been obsessed with min-max, from day one, even in this game. Maybe you were too busy having fun to notice how many people demanded specific comps or stats for dungeons, for the Mad King fight, for… well, just about everything. People raced to finish the personal story, raced to finish world completion, and so on.

The thing is, there’s no point in hiding the numbers really — some players always want to see all the details and get involved in the math. What’s great about GW2 is that you don’t have to if you don’t want to — virtually all of the content in this game can be done without worrying about builds.

Raids aren’t designed with the “just have fun” player in mind; the rest of the game already focuses in that direction. Raids are for the people who want a bigger challenge and for whom the numbers are interesting.

So ignore raids, enjoy the rest of the game, and don’t worry about what others are doing outside your circle of folks.

zinkz.7045:

Miyafuji.1340:

The problem is WvW is not making money.

I’d say the problem is their business model rather than WvW, cash shops generally get money from new players, “whales” and very casual players, I mean do you think most long term PvE players sitting on mountains of gold are contributing much to the revenue or PvP players? (Revenue of which has had 4 record low quarters in a row, where has all this PvE revenue gone?)

That is why for an MMO if the game can sustain it then sub is the best model, every player is of some value, resources need to be put into many areas of the game, if your game relies on a cash shop then bad companies simply focus excessively on minorities like new players (you could see this with GW2 for years), “whales” who buy every piece of kitten in the cash shop, etc

Which is why whatever critics may say, a 13 year old MMO still has far more players than the rest and still puts most others to shame (including this one) in terms of the way it is run and the resources that are put into different parts of the game.

I agree with you on this one. I also think P2P is the best business model, but it does not make the most money, that’s why. It is safe to do FTP P2W cashgrab which we see everywhere these days, kuddos to GW2, Anet did not do that here. They cannot go to P2P, everyone would leave (especially WvW players cause lets face it the content quality and amouth in WvW is not P2P worthy), only thing they can do is to add some more fashion wars (and real one, the amouth of stuff there that actually looks good is small) or some sort of premium account stuff, like if you pay xx a month you get better dailies, etc. Its tricky to not get instant community backlash there tho.

One thing is for sure. The WvW servers are obsolete concept as a whole. This should have been reworked the moment megaservers were introduced,, cause it actually reflects PVE population, yet PVE players are unaffected by their home server as everything is megaserver now. On Desolation for example, we constantly have problems with numbers in WvW, yet our server is full, you cannot transfer there. It is full by PVE players that do not actually care what server they are even on.

SubHonour Guard.6498:

The Ideal Win/Loss Ratio

I believe that a group winning 100% of fights is going to create a negative outcome for all sides, firstly for the losing side because they will not enjoy the game. I’ve seen many guilds quit because they were on the losing side for too long, including my own, and a lot of these people blame matchmaking or population imbalance for the state of the game. After these people quit the winning groups are left with no one to fight, a common complaint comes up: Unchallenging fights can be as bad as no fights.

I saw a video online: a psychologist talking about young rats play fighting. The larger rat, while capable of winning 100% of the time, will only win 70% of the time so that the younger rat will keep coming back to play with him. I’ve talked to guild leaders about it but no one is happy to lose fights on purpose: Shifting your win rate from 100% to 70% for the sake of your opponent is not something people find easy or enjoyable.

I mostly agree upon that one, even if I somehow think the “winning group” will keep on playing for the sole pleasure of trolling and burrying the outmanned server deeper in the mud. Think about spawn camping, or such things…

SubHonour Guard.6498:

Keep Fights: Pre-HoT vs Post-HoT

Thinking about it some more I come to the conclusion that keep fights play a major role in the spread of the win rate between servers. If a map is unbalanced the natural outcome is for the defenders to be pushed back to their keeps, which gives them better odds of winning fights against attackers. Kind of obvious. This is the part where I think I can put this bad feeling of mine into design terms.

The Advantage of Bannering Lords and Waypoint Gaps Pre-HoT

The major difference between pre-HoT and post-HoT keep fights is that there are no post-HoT keep fights. Attackers are very effectively held off by siege, siege disablers and tactivators, if they manage to get into the lords room they will generally be able to take the keep. The outcome of this is more population imbalance complaints. Pre-HoT it was much easier for a larger force to get into keeps but the defenders also had more options for defending against a force that was inside the lords room. Bannering the lord and using the keep waypoint between events were ways to prolong lord room fights. Prolonging lord room fights allow a smaller force to potentially cut off reinforcements and whittle away at the larger force.

While defenders have a better chance of keeping their structures post-HoT it’s often done with no fighting involved. A larger force will poke a keep, be showered with ac’s and siege disablers, leave before a fight can happen and then continue to win against anyone that fights them open field. If the population is imbalanced this is a bit of a lose-lose situation for everyone compared to pre-HoT keep fights, where a larger force would kill as many people as they could before getting repelled. While some people found it frustrating to take a keep with banner warriors, this is a situation where both forces get to fight and the smaller force gets to win. If your goal is fights then everyone wins. This also created a more natural connection between ppt and fighting.

Conclusion

Keep fights are important for keeping a 70/30 fight win rate between uneven groups which is important for the longevity of the game. For this to happen, keeps need to be redesigned to prolong the fights in keeps, not the fights to get into the keeps. Examples of this can be seen in pre-HoT gameplay that has now been removed.

I don’t think this will solve everything and I understand that skill balance might make it impossible to return to the pre-HoT days of keep fights. However, this proposal is a tangible and realistic starting point to start bringing WvW back on track.

That part bugs me more, because you’re reducing “keep fights” to “PvP fights around a keep”. Yet, defending a keep can involve more than just PvP, and your example of AC’s shower is fair in that case. The issue here is you’re totally dismissing the PPT part of defense.

Also, about keep (or tower) fights : some other day, we were a bunch of 5-6 players defending a tower, and another 5-6 players were trying to take it. Who won ? The most skilled ? Nope. Only the ones who go to bed the latest. Yet, there were PvP fights, there were siege fights etc. They were killed ? They spawned back. We were killed ? We spawned back. Until one had to go have dinner, or just left to do something else, or went sleeping. And so the tower fell. This honestly made me feel really bad, because all that defense eventually was pointless.

So, I understand the idea of “making keeps fights longer”. Yet, on another hand, I feel like it’s only a small part of a bigger issue.

Events have advantages and disadvantages compared to personal quests (less personal gameplay, much better multiplayer gameplay and sense of living world). They shouldn’t be seen as a replacement.

Instead, we should be looking at hearts, which are mostly generic quests without a decent narrative presentation. Or, alternatively, we should be looking at collections, which are also quests in everything but name, but with terrible UI support (why is such a quest system hidden beneath the achievements tab?)

I think GW2’s quests could be a lot more interesting if:

• Collection quests were more visible (give them their own tab, and additional UI support for future adventure-driven collections).
• Hearts had more interesting and unique gameplay scenarios, like the stealth mission in Lake Doric.

Events, ever since they Anet started expanding them from season 2 and on, are actually one of the most polished open world systems in this game.

apharma.3741:

zinkz.7045:

Svarty.8019:

This is a problem because THERE IS NO COUNTERPLAY.

There is no problem, because the counterplay is to stop hugging siege in your tower, go out and fight them, you know, what you are supposed to do in a PvP game mode…

Doesn’t work when it’s 5 people and 10 headless chickens defending vs a group of 30-40 fully supplied with those gawd aweful necros plaguing WvW atm.

I mean I’d happily fight them all 1 by 1 if they’d form a nice orderly queue….

That isn’t a problem as such, if I am 5 vs 40, then I am meant to lose in that situation, that isn’t an issue with players being able to damage doors, that is a problem caused by the fundamentally bad design of server vs server vs server when it comes to creating even vaguely balanced populations / situations and Anet’s failure to address that.

WALL OF TEXT ALERT

So this is a question that has a million answers depending on who you ask but in one way or another I think all people can agree that post-HoT WvW feels bad compared to pre-HoT, this is coming from someone that still enjoys WvW. Thinking about it for a while, I think I have been able to work out some of my feelings about WvW and I’m going to try and express my thoughts on what I’m going to call keep fights.

The Ideal Win/Loss Ratio

I believe that a group winning 100% of fights is going to create a negative outcome for all sides, firstly for the losing side because they will not enjoy the game. I’ve seen many guilds quit because they were on the losing side for too long, including my own, and a lot of these people blame matchmaking or population imbalance for the state of the game. After these people quit the winning groups are left with no one to fight, a common complaint comes up: Unchallenging fights can be as bad as no fights.

I saw a video online: a psychologist talking about young rats play fighting. The larger rat, while capable of winning 100% of the time, will only win 70% of the time so that the younger rat will keep coming back to play with him. I’ve talked to guild leaders about it but no one is happy to lose fights on purpose: Shifting your win rate from 100% to 70% for the sake of your opponent is not something people find easy or enjoyable.

Keep Fights: Pre-HoT vs Post-HoT

Thinking about it some more I come to the conclusion that keep fights play a major role in the spread of the win rate between servers. If a map is unbalanced the natural outcome is for the defenders to be pushed back to their keeps, which gives them better odds of winning fights against attackers. Kind of obvious. This is the part where I think I can put this bad feeling of mine into design terms.

The Advantage of Bannering Lords and Waypoint Gaps Pre-HoT

The major difference between pre-HoT and post-HoT keep fights is that there are no post-HoT keep fights. Attackers are very effectively held off by siege, siege disablers and tactivators, if they manage to get into the lords room they will generally be able to take the keep. The outcome of this is more population imbalance complaints. Pre-HoT it was much easier for a larger force to get into keeps but the defenders also had more options for defending against a force that was inside the lords room. Bannering the lord and using the keep waypoint between events were ways to prolong lord room fights. Prolonging lord room fights allow a smaller force to potentially cut off reinforcements and whittle away at the larger force.

While defenders have a better chance of keeping their structures post-HoT it’s often done with no fighting involved. A larger force will poke a keep, be showered with ac’s and siege disablers, leave before a fight can happen and then continue to win against anyone that fights them open field. If the population is imbalanced this is a bit of a lose-lose situation for everyone compared to pre-HoT keep fights, where a larger force would kill as many people as they could before getting repelled. While some people found it frustrating to take a keep with banner warriors, this is a situation where both forces get to fight and the smaller force gets to win. If your goal is fights then everyone wins. This also created a more natural connection between ppt and fighting.

Conclusion

Keep fights are important for keeping a 70/30 fight win rate between uneven groups which is important for the longevity of the game. For this to happen, keeps need to be redesigned to prolong the fights in keeps, not the fights to get into the keeps. Examples of this can be seen in pre-HoT gameplay that has now been removed.

I don’t think this will solve everything and I understand that skill balance might make it impossible to return to the pre-HoT days of keep fights. However, this proposal is a tangible and realistic starting point to start bringing WvW back on track.

I would already be happy if I could go to the Black Lion guys, pick up the stuff I ordered, come back to the crafting station and would be right at the crafting point where I left, instead of clicking through the 5 sub-recipes.

Also, the settings I made to only view Master/Grandmaster recipes should stay that way until I make changes again. When you log in next day, it resets to show all.

@Djamonja – if scoring can be done personally for each player it’s easy to do work out scores for individual servers even if they are linked. Simply add up the personal score for each player on the server.

The real question is how do you achieve an individual player score?
I had thought of WvW XP gained, but then XP boosters become score boosters. Perhaps WvW participation could be used, but then what about the “tap and AFK” method suggested for those who want an easy Gift of Battle?
Or could the current scoring system be used by assigning the points to each player individually instead of to a server?
If you have better ideas please suggest them!

One key advantage of personal scoring is that WvW could be developed into something that allows player choice, accommodates population changes and promotes server identity. The idea could work something like this:

• Keep the existing tiers but allocate different population caps to the maps so T1 now allows large group fights, T2 works with medium groups, T3 smaller groups and T4 small parties and solo/duo players. Group size would be limited by map population cap.
• Remove server based matchups and allow players to select the Tier they wish to play in every time they enter WvW. So if you want big zerg action one day you go into the T1 map and then if you fancy something a little smaller you’d change to a smaller group tier.
• Allocate servers to a colour for a fixed period of time (a week? a month?).
• Introduce Player Leader boards, Guild Leader boards and Server Leader boards with scores made up of individual player scores. This lets people play for fun, or with the aim of being the highest scoring individual, or to contribute to their guild score/position, or for their server.

Please note there would not be a colour score so this is not about creating factions, the colours are just a way of allocating servers to a borderland map, and might be a way of balancing the total population per side. Sort of a mega-linking that doesn’t actually change the scores.

Something like this would treat large and small servers equally in terms of identity, no one would ever be stuck in a poor matchup for weeks, and since players can choose the tier they play in (up to the map limit) it would be easier for players to even out fights if they wanted to.

I think it could work and bring a much needed rejuvenation to WvW, but it all hinges on changing to a viable personal scoring system.

DeceiverX.8361:

Swamurabi.7890:

The problem I see with the update is that there was only one instance where WvW was specifically mentioned.

Necromancer
Our biggest focus in this iteration for necromancers was that of Epidemic, in that its impact is too instant in most PvP scenarios, as well as its heavy toll on our servers.

It seems to me that if the sudden condition transfer from one skill taxes the server, what happens in WvW when one zerg hits another zerg and every skill adds a condition?

A three way fight in SMC caused lag in WvW years ago, before epidemic was meta.

Should the WvW version of skills have less conditions to improve WvW server performance?

The same is said about boons.

I’ve been saying this for a while because it was commented on by ANet programmers years ago, but server lag is pretty much entirely caused by effect and ability spamming (especially passive boons and condis) in ZvZ scenarios.

When we see cuts to mass condi application, mass boon application, and extended passives (which often apply these), the server lag issues will be mostly fixed.

Yet again, the problems lie in profession design.

Yes absolutely, for both conditions and boons. First of all, the spam makes for completely mindless play. It takes a lot of fun and skill out, since these are just kitten out by professions now.

Secondly, it would go a very long way towards reducing lag, especially in WvW zerg fights. Less condi and boon spam means less things to check each tick. While the actual impact is yet to be seen, it will directly reduce server load, which will reduce lag.

Thirdly, the spam needs to be reduced because its bad balance plain and simple. A lot of skills are doing too many things at once. Skull grinder was a great example of this, it dealt decent power damage, applied 4 conditions at once (and 4 stacks of the damaging ones to boot), dazed for 1 second, and was a finisher. And all of that on a 3 second CD when traited. That was way too much from one skill. (Personally I still think it does too many things, daze, power damage and 4 conditions all applied at once is still a lot more things than most skills in the game do, but its in a much better spot than it was pre-patch). Skills should be doing 1 or 2 things, and then can be traited to doing 3, maybe 4 things (though this should require an entire traitline dedicated to it. Should never, ever be baseline or require just a single major trait).

Swamurabi.7890:

The problem I see with the update is that there was only one instance where WvW was specifically mentioned.

Necromancer
Our biggest focus in this iteration for necromancers was that of Epidemic, in that its impact is too instant in most PvP scenarios, as well as its heavy toll on our servers.

It seems to me that if the sudden condition transfer from one skill taxes the server, what happens in WvW when one zerg hits another zerg and every skill adds a condition?

A three way fight in SMC caused lag in WvW years ago, before epidemic was meta.

Should the WvW version of skills have less conditions to improve WvW server performance?

Words of wisdom from an old sage living in seclusion analysing the WvW crisis. Praise the light (field) so we can hope and cure our condition problem (cancer).

Seriously, it would not hurt to tone down this cancer!

Swamurabi.7890:

The problem I see with the update is that there was only one instance where WvW was specifically mentioned.

Necromancer
Our biggest focus in this iteration for necromancers was that of Epidemic, in that its impact is too instant in most PvP scenarios, as well as its heavy toll on our servers.

It seems to me that if the sudden condition transfer from one skill taxes the server, what happens in WvW when one zerg hits another zerg and every skill adds a condition?

A three way fight in SMC caused lag in WvW years ago, before epidemic was meta.

Should the WvW version of skills have less conditions to improve WvW server performance?

The same is said about boons.

I’ve been saying this for a while because it was commented on by ANet programmers years ago, but server lag is pretty much entirely caused by effect and ability spamming (especially passive boons and condis) in ZvZ scenarios.

When we see cuts to mass condi application, mass boon application, and extended passives (which often apply these), the server lag issues will be mostly fixed.

Yet again, the problems lie in profession design.

Swamurabi.7890:

Should the WvW version of skills have less conditions to improve WvW server performance?

Yes, please, by all means.

~ Kovu

Comical when it was still effecting allies. Players were Epi lords and it would flatten 5 friendly players.

Nocturnal Lunacy.8563:

I also love the assumptions made by the ones leaving comments. w/e

I am curious why you seem to apply this statement to others but not to yourself?

I have to love the irony/hypocrisy.

Fwiw, I am having great fun in wvw on TC. Some really fun wvw guilds on that server. And I am seeing action out there whenever I play. Oh yea, and I am one of those players that just likes to have fun in wvw.

zinkz.7045:

Packit.8576:

The care bear status hasn’t changed on TC i see

The irony… Are you under the impression you are playing EVE Online? Or maybe you think you are playing DOTA 2 competitively for a few million dollars at The International?

Newsflash GW2 is a low skilled, casual MMO, that makes great efforts to avoid “hardcore” sorts of gameplay, where WvW is about as “carebear” as you can get for any PvP mode, and you are playing it…

I completely agree with you. Now for my 2 cents. Lol get ready!

While another MMORPG that no longer has to worry about GW2 as a competitor. Is basically weeks from releasing a PvP based expansion, with balance geared behind PvP which in turn is going to hurt it’s PvE community abit.
However this MMORPG heavily punishes the casual can’t be bother to learn how to play or put forth effort in getting good, type player base.
So I’m just going to say pick your poison.

A.) Casual, super zerg and troll friendly game.
B.) Super punishing, skill based, numbers without skill means very little game.
or
C.) quit gaming altogether.

So many complain about how the game is. Yet there are other offerings on the market that support what players are complaining about on these forums.
Could it be that inside these players are just being vocal against the things they actually love? And trying to get devs to implement things that they totally will hate? And if so then, is it that ANet knows this and pushes the game in the way. It current player base would actually like?

I mean ANet does have the metrics. I personally watch two of the most Hardcore WvW guilds on my server, and many ex friends try out skill based games. I even made them kitten low level crafted gear, and gave them many tips. They usually only last 2 to 3 weeks. Let me tell yall they all left me high and dry, and either came back to GW2, went to WoW, or stopped gaming altogether. So in the end ANet is actually doing yalls job for you all, and looking out for your best interest.

People talk about WvW imbalance yet refuse to destack servers, over bogus reasons. Lol I guess the only people these guys are fooling are themselves. And ANet knows it.