Guild Wars 2

Chrispy.5641:

Draknar.5748:

Chrispy.5641:

In a game where technically no one wins (which is all MMO’s), winning is being a higher level, having more gold, or looking cooler than everyone else. If I can pay for a way to get more gold (which gives me more frequent access to food/nourishments which will help you win in WvW), I’m paying to win. Try again. Seriously, this is hilarious. Keep giving reasons that aren’t actually reasons, or tackle to issue head on!

Think of it like a race where everyone has the same car. The car costs $1000. Person A scrimped and saved and bought the $1000 car, cleaned out his account. Person B was given $5000 from his uncle to buy the car, but only needed $1000, so has $4000 left over in his account. Now they race, the exact same car. Explain how person B has an advantage in this race.

You can’t.

By your logic person B “wins” simply because he has more money. When in reality they both have the exact same performance and cross the finish line at the same time, which is the specific measure of winning in the context we are discussing. Having more money is irrelevant in this particular race between two identical cars.

Food in WvW is easy enough to supply yourself, especially if you play competitive WvW. Just because someone can buy gems to also supply themselves with food, doesn’t give them any additional advantage if the people they are competing against also have the same exact food. Does that make sense? Boy I hope this makes sense to you.

Keeping with the race example, the only advantage anyone would have in this race would be person B over, let’s say, person C who is standing on the sidelines not even competing. By your logic, person B wins because he has a car and person C does not. Technically that would be true because person C does in fact not have a car and if he wanted to compete in the race, would lose since he would be running on foot, but now I have strayed from the context of competitive WvW, thus negating the argument.

Person A scamped up and saved his money to buy car A. It probably took a few months. Person B has car A immediately, but the problem with your example, is assuming that person B is buying that crappy 1000 dollar car A. They got five thousand dollars and will surely buy the more expensive car B, which is faster, has better handling, etc, meaning they will win more often in encounters than person A driving crappy car A.

By the time Person A bought crappy car A, person B would have had the same amount of time practicing racing anyways, and with a better car, meaning Person B has the advantage. Therefore, Person B will win in a majority of the races.

Draknar.5748:

I can tell that you will hold onto your P2W perspective until the bitter end. But all your argument really boils down to is that someone who buys gems to convert to gold, will have some kind of advantage over someone somewhere at sometime, thus it is P2W. When in reality, all the gold in the game won’t give you an advantage in actual competitive WvW, competitive PvP, or competitive PvE (if there was such a thing).

Or you could read the thread before the white knights showed up and see that, no, I don’t actually have a P2W perspective at all. I specifically made the comparison that this entire system is “Pay to equality”, not necessarily pay to win,!

Actually you described it as pay to win twice before your first use of the phrase pay for equality and all three came after others commented that it was t pay to win. Nice try at backpedalling though.

Chrispy.5641:

Behellagh.1468:

So. Stop at nearest NPC vendor. Sell Junk. Salvage all unwanted salvagable items. Send mats to collection. If you don’t want to salvage the sell those unwanted items on the TP, no need to even visit a TP location. Now it’s only a problem if you want to keep all those items, for some reason. Other than ascended mats which are account bound, what do you need to keep for a rainy day? Skins go into the wardrobe now. Maybe BLSKs and a handful of GS items you get from the login rewards. I ran over a year with the original 30 bank slots and none of my characters have added bag slots.

I guess I’m doing something wrong.

No, you’re doing it exactly right. Your problem is the assumption that if the advantage is small enough, it no longer exists, and also failing to admit that. That is also the problem of the guy who replied to you.

Man, you guys would have fun playing Destiny, where all the weapons’ kill times are balanced to within milliseconds of each other, well, except for the part where those milliseconds count. Same as in this game when it comes to making lots of gold and making lots of gold fast.

I never said it was a bad thing, so stop replying to me assuming that I’m being negative just because I called it pay-to-win. Try again, or don’t reply to me. Either way, whatever. you have yet to prove yourself right in any way.

Ashen.2907:

1) Some pretty wild assumptions in your numbers.

2) The best looking skins cost no money to get. in fact they cannot be purchased with either gems or gold.

1. If it takes 10 minutes of hard event running to fill your inventory, it will take twice as long to fill an inventory twice that size. The actual length of time it takes to fully fill your inventory is irrelevant (so is the gold amount) and its sad that that’s what your clinging to. Even if it took 3 days to fill my inventory, the numbers show that the person with a larger inventory will still have a small advantage. No wild assumption there. Try again.

2. The best looking skins to YOU cost no money to get. For me, last I checked, a Mjolnir costs a hell of a lot to get. Try again.

1) and it still doesnt mean that you win anything.

2) exactly my point. It is subjective to the individual and therefore not a win or lose condition.

Finally there is nothing available in game for real money that cannot be attained through play. By definition if one can have it without paying then it isnt pay to win.

Chrispy.5641:

A person with 80 inventory slots can fill all that up in about 10 minutes of killing things. (probably has 20 or so slots taken already by gear and items)

A veteran player who already had 160 inventory slots (and got them cheaper back in the day) can fill all of that up in about 20 minutes. (probably has a lot filled with gear and other items)

Lets say it takes 5 minutes to go to the vendor and sell everything and travel back. And lets say you get 50 silver from selling all of that. One cycle of the player with 80 slots is 15 minutes. One cycle of the player with 160 slots is 25 minutes.

15 minutes for 50 silver. 25 minutes for 1 gold.

After an hour. New player with 80 slots has 2 gold. Veteran player has 2 gold from 2 runs, and already halfway through another run with 50 more silver.

That’s 2 gold to 2.5 gold. Veteran player gets 25% more gold per hour than the new player (or new player has 20% less, however you look at it).

Since this while game is all about looking cooler than everyone else, and looking cooler than everyone else requires the most expensive skins…veteran Player wins, and the newer player can have the same advantage by either grinding for hundreds of hours, or just buying his way in.

Therefore…Pay to win, or I guess technically its pay to equality.

1) Some pretty wild assumptions in your numbers.

2) The best looking skins cost no money to get. in fact they cannot be purchased with either gems or gold.

What do you win with bag space ?

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Ashen.2907:

Sorry, I am not trying to be obtuse but I am still not getting it. You said, “what about players like me,” in reference to being punished. The only people that I have seen anyone speaking about being punished are those who choose to lie around rather than getting back up and into the fight.

Characters get downed, they die. Even people who are normally very good at timing dodges and other active defenses might die due to lag in some of the bigger events. Of course they shouldnt be punished for that. But the people who just lie there (Ive never seen a dev comment one way or the other about the dead scaling up content) and opt to not contribute should probably be encouraged to get back into the fight.

You know, it comes to mind there’s a specific challenge which gets tried in another game I play, the “Nuzlocke Challenge” for Pokemon games. The idea is simple – you can only capture the first Pokemon you encounter in any area, and once a Pokemon is KO’d, you must release it. A “permadeath” if you will.

I’ve thought about what would happen if we had something like that happening here, where the only way to return to life is to have someone else come pick you up. And you couldn’t call for help, either, you had to pretend you were a corpse. I think it could be pretty . . . interesting . . . but then, I’m a roleplayer at heart.

No, it’s not quite an answer to your post, just a reflection in thought aloud.

But according to this topic, and suggestions of auto/forced WP returns, there’s no distinction between players who were unlucky dodging or players who just sit there to wait it out. Fully dead is fully dead, and anyone laying on the ground needs to be moved . . . sometimes denied a reward . . . because they died.

It irks me, slightly, because I often enough die due to bad luck (Silverwastes KD/KB/AoE spam during fort defenses) or because I try to get someone sitting in one of Teq’s poison puddles up before they die, and I wind up down instead. Punishing me for that feels . . . wrong.

See the time element of those suggestions is what makes them work for me. If I just missed a dodge and got put down I am going to WP and head back within seconds, not minutes.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Ashen.2907:

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

What about players like me, who most often die entirely due to either repeated/constant CC on me (knockdown, launch, knockdown, stun, death) . . . or picking people who went down (but not dead) up and making it impossible to dodge a hit? I assume we should likewise be punished for bad luck or choosing to be helpful instead of focusing on the event?

Here’s my rebuttal to the idea of needing forced WP relocation. Stop letting dead players scale up an event.

I am not sure that I understand the point there. Don’t you want to get back into the event after youve been killed ? Why wouldnt you WP and run back to the fight ?

You should ask the people laying around. I get my rear up and back to running so I am not laying there uselessly, in the hopes of getting back into the fray and being useful.

(Even if I am a ranger.)

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

As far as we know, according to past Dev statements, the dead do not scale up events. This seems to be misinformation that is commonly accepted. I’m not sure why.

So WHY does it matter if they lay there dead?

Sorry, I am not trying to be obtuse but I am still not getting it. You said, “what about players like me,” in reference to being punished. The only people that I have seen anyone speaking about being punished are those who choose to lie around rather than getting back up and into the fight. If you are not lying around, then the various suggestions about “punishing” those who are dont really apply to you.

Characters get downed, they die. Even people who are normally very good at timing dodges and other active defenses might die due to lag in some of the bigger events. Of course they shouldnt be punished for that. But the people who just lie there (Ive never seen a dev comment one way or the other about the dead scaling up content) and opt to not contribute should probably be encouraged to get back into the fight.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

What about players like me, who most often die entirely due to either repeated/constant CC on me (knockdown, launch, knockdown, stun, death) . . . or picking people who went down (but not dead) up and making it impossible to dodge a hit? I assume we should likewise be punished for bad luck or choosing to be helpful instead of focusing on the event?

Here’s my rebuttal to the idea of needing forced WP relocation. Stop letting dead players scale up an event.

I am not sure that I understand the point there. Don’t you want to get back into the event after youve been killed ? Why wouldnt you WP and run back to the fight ?

Immortal.3647:

gw1 is older than WoW.

You sure about that ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guild_Wars

“Guild Wars development was first announced in April 2003.³⁵ Guild Wars Prophecies, initially marketed simply as Guild Wars, was released in April 2005.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_of_Warcraft

“Blizzard Entertainment announced World of Warcraft on September 2, 2001.⁶ The game was released on November 23, 2004”

darkace.8925:

Bag and bank size are conveniences, and I’d much rather then charge gems for conveniences than weapons or armor that could otherwise be in-game rewards to be earned. Unfortunately, they charge gems for the latter as well as the former.

Yeah.

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

If you oppose a reasonable means by which a goal can be accomplished, and arguably the only reasonable means, you in fact oppose the goal, if only because you feel the goal is not worth the means. You may have played with groups of similar interest because you lacked definition and precision. A lack of care is not the same thing as care. Because you don’t care who you play with, or only care on the broad scale, you can’t say that you’ve played with people with more defined and specific interests.

1. I’m arguing that these add a legitimate functionality that would improve gameplay. If my arguments hold, it wouldn’t be a waste of resources. It would be adding value to the game.

2. Anet hired a raid designer, I’d be surprised if raids weren’t coming to the game. Anet already said with HoT there will be a fractals mastery track, and they’ve recently started fixing some fractal bugs. They may not have a dungeon team, but they are at this point making a minimal effort to at least shape up SOME of the dungeon content. In PvP you could use it to group with others with specific builds. You can already Rank check people if you want – and not many do – so why not gear/build check? It just makes sense! Same thing with WvW. Wanna form an elite hit squad with similar players? Wanna form that perfect 5 man team that you so meticulously theory crafted? Allow players to GHIW!!!

3. Some people will use it! Of course! But you don’t have to! There are lots of tools in this game that add functionality! Like how you can turn off aoe indicators! Or how you can adjust different graphics settings! Or how you can use auto target! Tools enhance functionality. They give people options! Don’t like it, don’t use it! If people want to use the tool, why shouldn’t they be able to? Other people wanna have fun too! Don’t monopolize fun!

4. The good zerkers can tell after a minute or two of looking, but even the best zerkers can’t tell the exact mix and match of gear someone might have. Sure, when I play Mai Trin on fractal 50 and we have a nomad warrior face tanking her, I can tell! And I’m glad he’s there! But most of the time it’s more subtle! A piece of PVT here or there, maybe not quite enough agony, maybe a mix and match of zerkers and rabid, who knows? This tool isn’t redundant. It fixes a problem and allows people to GHIW!

Why do you not want people to GHIW? Why you gotta be so mean?

Its not a reasonable means of achieving the goal (see I can state opinion as fact too). It is also not the only means. If people can play with others of similar interest without it then it is by definition not the only means.

Feel free to speculate all you like about raids in GW2. As we do not know what form they will take it is not relevant to this discussion.

As to whether or not its a waste of resources…..adding a specific functionality or element of gampelay does not inherently add value to the game. Cost vs benefit comes into play. I am not saying that I know how that comparison would play out but the simple fact of the matter is that spending money on a given/specific option does not inherently add to the value of a product.

Peileii.9845:

After being told the benefits of fighting Lyssa vs. defending the temple in say chat, map chat, and whisper…. knowing that you will STILL get the trait, you will STILL get access to the armor merchant, you will end up with MORE karma (shield events), a bonus chest, and a ground chest that has a chance of dropping a 100 gold item, and you STILL decide to defend the temple? Yea, you’re an idiot. I stand by what I said.

It’s like having the option of buying a junker 1980s car or a brand new car with all the features for the SAME price, if you’ll only wait 15 minutes, and you choose the junker car, after being TOLD all you have to do is wait 15 kitten minutes… you’re an idiot.

Nope. You are completely wrong.

If you had to choose between 1) enjoying playing the game for 15 minutes or 2) standing around waiting (perhaps when you only have 15 minutes remaining in your play session) which would you choose. You are asking for others to choose option 2 or be called an idiot. I, for example, dislike the Lyssa fight. I suppose if you paid me real world money (15 minutes of my time is worth quite a bit to me) then we could talk.

Is that brand new car a 1965 Shelby Mustang (using a ’60s reference rather than 80s because that is where my automobile interest lies but I know some who have similar attitudes about some 80s vehicles) ? If I could get such, even as a junker, for the price of a brand new vehicle I would be all over it. Last one I saw auctioned off was not at all a junker and went for over $900k. I wouldnt expect a restorable junker to go for less than $100k. I am not aware of any brand new mustangs going for anywhere near that price (and the new model would include all sorts of features not available in the ’65)

Maybe, just maybe, beauty (and desirability, and even fun) is in the eye of the beholder.

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

No, I asked the same question both times, you just don’t realize it. This tool would enable people to play with others with the same interests. Your opposition to the tool is de facto an opposition to more control of allowing people to “GHIW.”

You didnt ask about opposition to more control. You asked about, “opposition to allowing all people to group with others of similar interests.” There is a difference between a goal and one possible tool that might contribute to achieving said goal. As an example I have, in every single instance since launch, only ever grouped with people of similar interests…and yet a gear inspect function does not exist. If the two were synonymous such would not be possible. I also support the long term goal of reduced reliance on foreign sources of fossil fuels…and yet I oppose returning to a pre-industrial lifestyle. A goal and a tool are not the same thing.

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

1. I concede it would take up developer resources. I don’t concede they’d be better spent elsewhere.

2. Dungeons, fractals, new raids, PvP, WvW, basically anything BUT open world could use this tool. In essence, any content that requires a brain!

3. This is a bad argument friend! People form anything goes groups all the time! They’d still be able to after this is in place, and if it was designed as the OP stated, as an OPTIONAL check box, no new norms would be created!

4. Sigh, I’ve argued this again and again! People lie! They lie all the time! And it’s really hard to tell who is lying in a full group of 5! If the checkbox allowed you to right click on people at will, nobody would be able to continue to lie! It adds a HUGE functionality over the current tool, because it prevents lying cheaters and allows GHIW functionality!

1) You are of course entitled to your opinion about whether or not resources in question should be spent elsewhere. You asked for my opinion, and I gave it.

2) I see it for dungeons. If Fractals is not considered part of the dungeon experience then that brings us to two. I don’t think that it is particularly valid to argue that raids, which do not exist in GW2, count as a place where it would be useful. PvP ? Are speaking of premade groups ? or random hotjoin ? I will be honest here, I think that anyone choosing to PUG when facing premade/guild/etc groups should expect the worst and dont think that a gear inspect would make any difference at all. Gear inspect for the equivalent of random arenas seems ludicrous to me. Gear inspect for membership in a WvW zerg seems like an odd idea and havoc groups (my preferred playstyle in WvW) seem unlikely to gain much (if any) benefit either. I suppose solo roamers could inspect themselves.

3) Give people a tool and they will use it even if the dont need to. This is particularly the case if the tool carries some patina of official utility.

4) Yup people lie. I commented to that effect. It would not prevent lying or cheating. It would provide another option for catching them in their lies and cheating. Its already possible to do so, this would be a somewhat redundant addition. I say somewhat because it might make it easier for unobservant zerkers to catch the liars by spending a moment to do an inspect. The good zerkers, of course can already tell without taking that time.

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Ashen.2907:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Ashen.2907:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Windsagio.1340:

Edit@Nevets

“Carried” isn’t right. They’re entirely capable of completing the content and contributing. Neither is the ‘lowest common denominator’ really, it’s just different interests and different styles. Judging everyone by your personal tastes and treating your personal tastes as law of gameplay is exactly the problem.

Carried is right. If they’re entirely capable of completing the content and contributing on their own, they should have no issues if the zerker only or clerics only or PVT only or necro only groups want to exclude them via a gear check option. Everyone should be given tools to play with people of similar interests. Anyone opposing tools to enable this type of gameplay simply wants to leech off others. End of story.

I disagree completely.

I have never joined a zerker only, speed clear, etc group. I form my own group or look for existing groups that match my preferences. I think that non zerkers joining groups advertised as zerk only are in the wrong.

I oppose a gear check system and yet have zero desire to leech off of others. This sort of generalization is ridiculous.

Then please vocalize your legitimate opposition to allowing all people to group with others of similar interests.

Nice strawman.

I do not have any opposition to players having the option to group with others of similar playstyle/interest.

You have even quoted and responded to my posts in which I state that I support players having this option. I assumed that you read and understood the posts to which you were responding. Apparently I was mistaken.

You might want to go back and reread my posts over the last page or two before making inaccurate posts about my opinion on the matter. If you need help understanding please feel free to PM me.

Now, and again feel free to ask for help if you are having trouble understanding what is being said here as I am more than happy to help, disliking a specific proposed solution to a concern does not equate to dismissing the concern itself.

I went back and read every single post you wrote on this thread. You started with:

I dont really see an upside to this but plenty of downside. Gonna have to disagree OP.

And said nothing else more substantial since. You’ve provided no argument, you’ve just stated time and time again you’re against it.

So, let me ask again, in public, why are you against it?

This is a very different question than what you asked in your previous post so you are not asking anything again. This is the first time youve asked the question (of me). I do thank you for stepping back from the previous dishonest (or perhaps merely based in a failure to read or understand what had been posted in the past) assertions.

I oppose a gear check system for a number of reasons:

1) it would cost dev resources to imement that I feel could be better spent elsewhere.
2) it would be primarily of use in dungeons which seem to have been back burnered by Anet. If the game mode is not seeing significant growth or development then the tool itself seems of questionable value.
3) it seems likely to create the impression that gear inspection of others is the expected norm leading those who might not bave been otherwise so inclined to join the phenomenon because they are led to believe by Anet’s inclusion of the mechanic that they are supposed to use it.
4) it is redundant. It would not add significant utility over gear pinging. Nothing would keep the guy who is already fake pinging a secondary gear set to sleaze his way into a zerker group from wearing zerker and switching to a different set after the round of inspections. A berzerker player with good situational awareness should already be able to tell that the guy in the group who didnt dodge the big hit didnt take enough damage, that bosses arent dying fast enough, and so on.

It doesnt really add anything of significance while carrying opportunity costs that outweight its benefits.

I wouldnt mind the ability to shrink my characters’ weapons a bit. More realistic scale would make some weapons that I currently dislike much more appealing.

Sakri.7234:

Ashen.2907:

Sakri.7234:

Anet always says, there won’t be anymore grind in this game yet their actions always contradict them. Would it kill them to make a game with interesting content that doesn’t depend on endless grind to get achis and nice skins?

I was under the impression, because it has been stated kitten, that Anet intended that there would be grind for cosmetics.

Since cosmetics is the end game content of this game, grind is really necessary in this game if you want to play it.

Odd, I play the game and yet grinding for cosmetics has not yet been necessary for me. Perhaps it is not necessary, but rather optional.

loseridoit.2756:

Kirani.2690:

My biggest fear for HoT is that the maps will require extensive jumping. I hate jumping puzzles. If the new maps cannot be explored by people who hate jumping then they are eliminating a portion of their player base from the game. I am an older player with arthritis, but I am financially secure. I am probably in the top 10% of players when it comes to spending real money on this game. I don’t think my demographic is one they should try to exclude.

how do you feel about dry top?

I share his opinion to a certain extent and do not particularly care for drytop.

Windsagio.1340:

Ashen.2907:

Windsagio.1340:

Ashen.2907:

I dont think that choosing to not play with someone is limiting their play. I suppose that if they define their personal playstyle as being able to play with people that dont want to play with them then they have chosen to limit their own play.

Edit to clarify: As previouly mentioned. I still oppose a gear inspect function.

You’re in essence saying ‘if you aren’t set up the way I like you can’t play with me.’ and it’s certainly MUCH more controlling than joining a group that doesn’t want you (and can kick you)

Which is anyones right, but do you really think it’s an attitude Anet wants to encourage?

Point of clarification: I only play in “open to all,” or no requirement listed groups.

I think it is not only perfectly reasonable but actually ideal for people to choose to play with others who have the same or similar definition of fun. It is not controlling at all to choose to play with people who are going to have fun the way I do. It is completely unreasonable, IMO, to insist that four other people have to forgo having fun in order for me to enjoy myself.

They can do that now. It’s not in anets interests to encourage exclusion.

I think that’s the other piece of it actually, they have a very clear policy of being gear and build neutral. It hasn’t worked out in the wild, but that’s pretty clearly the goal.

As a statement of intent, gear inspections would be entirely undermining that goal and philosophy… and every feature implementation is a statement of intent. Gear inspection goes against their core philosophy. They don’t limit people trying to filter their groups in other ways both for the reasons you’re stating and because it would be utterly unenforcable, but making a tool to make it easier is an entirely different beast.

~~~

Anet lets people play how they like, even if it’s in the form of excluding others. They’re not going to legitimize it with a tool, just like they don’t legitimize run-selling by protecting sellers or legitimize DPS tracking by putting in an in-game DPS meter.

I have specifically and emphatically stated that I oppose the addition of a gear inspect feature.

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Ashen.2907:

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Windsagio.1340:

Edit@Nevets

“Carried” isn’t right. They’re entirely capable of completing the content and contributing. Neither is the ‘lowest common denominator’ really, it’s just different interests and different styles. Judging everyone by your personal tastes and treating your personal tastes as law of gameplay is exactly the problem.

Carried is right. If they’re entirely capable of completing the content and contributing on their own, they should have no issues if the zerker only or clerics only or PVT only or necro only groups want to exclude them via a gear check option. Everyone should be given tools to play with people of similar interests. Anyone opposing tools to enable this type of gameplay simply wants to leech off others. End of story.

I disagree completely.

I have never joined a zerker only, speed clear, etc group. I form my own group or look for existing groups that match my preferences. I think that non zerkers joining groups advertised as zerk only are in the wrong.

I oppose a gear check system and yet have zero desire to leech off of others. This sort of generalization is ridiculous.

Then please vocalize your legitimate opposition to allowing all people to group with others of similar interests.

Nice strawman.

I do not have any opposition to players having the option to group with others of similar playstyle/interest.

You have even quoted and responded to my posts in which I state that I support players having this option. I assumed that you read and understood the posts to which you were responding. Apparently I was mistaken.

You might want to go back and reread my posts over the last page or two before making inaccurate posts about my opinion on the matter. If you need help understanding please feel free to PM me.

Now, and again feel free to ask for help if you are having trouble understanding what is being said here as I am more than happy to help, disliking a specific proposed solution to a concern does not equate to dismissing the concern itself.

Nevets Crimsonwing.5271:

Windsagio.1340:

Edit@Nevets

“Carried” isn’t right. They’re entirely capable of completing the content and contributing. Neither is the ‘lowest common denominator’ really, it’s just different interests and different styles. Judging everyone by your personal tastes and treating your personal tastes as law of gameplay is exactly the problem.

Carried is right. If they’re entirely capable of completing the content and contributing on their own, they should have no issues if the zerker only or clerics only or PVT only or necro only groups want to exclude them via a gear check option. Everyone should be given tools to play with people of similar interests. Anyone opposing tools to enable this type of gameplay simply wants to leech off others. End of story.

I disagree completely.

I have never joined a zerker only, speed clear, etc group. I form my own group or look for existing groups that match my preferences. I think that non zerkers joining groups advertised as zerk only are in the wrong.

I oppose a gear check system and yet have zero desire to leech off of others. This sort of generalization is ridiculous.

Windsagio.1340:

Ashen.2907:

I dont think that choosing to not play with someone is limiting their play. I suppose that if they define their personal playstyle as being able to play with people that dont want to play with them then they have chosen to limit their own play.

Edit to clarify: As previouly mentioned. I still oppose a gear inspect function.

You’re in essence saying ‘if you aren’t set up the way I like you can’t play with me.’ and it’s certainly MUCH more controlling than joining a group that doesn’t want you (and can kick you)

Which is anyones right, but do you really think it’s an attitude Anet wants to encourage?

Point of clarification: I only play in “open to all,” or no requirement listed groups.

What I am saying doesnt match what you claim. What I am essentially saying is, “if what you find fun and what I find fun are different then maybe we wont have fun playing together and should each go have fun with people who share our respective definitions of fun.”

I think it is not only perfectly reasonable but actually ideal for people to choose to play with others who have the same or similar definition of fun. It is not controlling at all to choose to play with people who are going to have fun the way I do. It is completely unreasonable, IMO, to insist that four other people have to forgo having fun in order for me to enjoy myself.

I think that there is some bad game design going on here. Setting players up to be at odds with each other over completing vs failing an event seems counter to the supposed cooperative nature of GW2’s design philosophy.

Must admit that its hard to sympathize with someone who calls others idiots for trying to defend in an event designed to be defended though.

Windsagio.1340:

KGS.9842:

Honestly it’s hard to see why people have a problem with this idea
I assume that people who don’t like the all zerker meta don’t want to join all zerker groups in the first place, and so a gear inspect won’t affect them in the least
(also whenever I check lfg only 1 in 8 parties or so is zerker only so they certainly have where to go, and no one is imposing anything on them)

seeing how this thread is going i’d say that some people will just take any opportunity to try to spite and insult other players just because they have a different play style and want something to facilitate it

This ties in with the posts aboe (bold mine)

It’s always the other guy, it’s never me!!!

~~~~

Coming from other games, there’s a lot of ‘being judged by your gear’ that goes on. It’s less meaningful in GW2 (except for people who decide to make it meaningful to exclude), but people are people, both in remembering past slights and in wanting to be exclusionary and ‘better’.

One side wants to inspect explicitly to judge and exclude others, and the other side naturally bristles at that concept. The second is especially a natural reaction, if a little irrational.

Back to the quote, you’re getting it exactly backwards. You are trying to limit others play, and arenanet isn’t giving your more tools to limit others play. Other people with gear you (arbirarily) don’t like isn’t limiting your personal play, unless your style is so limited that it just falls apart if your group isn’t perfect.

I dont think that choosing to not play with someone is limiting their play. I suppose that if they define their personal playstyle as being able to play with people that dont want to play with them then they have chosen to limit their own play.

Edit to clarify: As previouly mentioned. I still oppose a gear inspect function.

I must admit that I wouldnt mind something being implemented to discourage/prevent people from just lying there scaling an event up, making it more difficult/increasing likelihood of failire for those actually participating. I dont see this behavior as significantly different from any other form of griefing intended to make content unplayable or more likely to fail.

I use boosters that I get for free, often wasting them in the process (such as using a WvW XP booster when I am only going to play in that mode for a few minutes). I dont like them taking up space but I also dont like just deleting them (except for crafting boosters).

Buying them ? Even if I were inclined to spend money on the game I would not buy boosters.

Cuddy.6247:

Lifestealer.4910:

Cuddy.6247:

Lifestealer.4910:

The thing is most zerk players (I can’t speak for all of them) do have their own guild and do form their own groups in the lfg. We play with like minded people. PHIW people (again i can’t speak for all of them) insist that we must play with them, and that they should be entitled to any group they want. Most lack the initiative to form their own groups, we “elitest jerks” form our own group all the time.

Then use that guild to form your group with all the expected criteria met. As I’ve said, the moment you PUG you forfeit your right to care about who joins your group, because it’s not like gear makes a competent player in the first place. Your inability to grasp such a basic level of understanding doesn’t magically rid you of accountability for the tools you use or the illogical reason behind your discrimination with those tools.

Actually the moment i form a group, i don’t forfeit anything. If a person does not fit my criteria i can always kick. LFG descriptions are used to clearly set up standards for the party, if you PHIW don’t like it, you can always go make your own group like i did. Don’t pollute our party with your nonsense.

Maybe its you that do not understand, you call it illogical but i say that is just your opinion in which most people don’t share.

Explain to me how it’s illogical, then. Use reasoning. It’s as basic as it gets:

Zerk != Skill

The inherent risk of inviting anyone with LFG doesn’t matter if they have Zerk gear or not, because Zerk gear doesn’t automatically equal contribution. You instead want the community to foot the bill of your grievous failure at being socially approachable. You have inherent risks with any PUG, you forfeit your rights to discriminate when you PUG but you maintain your right to leave/vote to kick. Your incompetence is not logical, in fact – it’s the exact opposite. I am not accountable for your ineptitude, so please don’t shovel on bullkitten like it’s my responsibility.

My only responsibility, as well as yours, is to accept the LFG tool as a pugging system to acquire players for specific content (not to play content a specific way). You’ve made LFG ads and had people join them who were likely to your standards, get out of your own head for a little while and befriend them. Boom, you just got another person who you can invite. People who use LFG on a regular basis, expecting particular results, are foolish, incompetent and deserving of their frustrations for being incapable of establishing a social network.

Who is saying that zerk equals skill ?

Character performance is comprised of three primary factors.

1) player skill
2) character build
3) character gear

Just because gear is not the only factor contributing to character performance does not mean that it does not contribute to a significant degree.

Add in that zerk, or glass cannon, is not only a gear set up but also a playstyle that can conflict very heavily with other gear/build set ups and playstyles, and it becomes perfectly reasonable that people choosing to play in this manner might want to stick to playing with others who prefer the same playstyle.

You speak of logic. You mention that this is a game wherein one should be seeking to have fun. where is the logic in joining a group whose playstyle doesnt match one’s own? Where is the fun in joining a group where one is not wanted?

If I want a casual, any build/class, dungeon run I either create a group advertised as such, or join an existing one. I dont speedrun. I dont join groups looking to have fun in a manner that is not fun for me. Anyone who does, or tries to, or comauns that others’ fun must conform to their definition is being illogical.

IndigoSundown.5419:

On the subject of players lying there while dead, I wonder how many do this because it’s what those other MMO’s train players to do?

Not just other MMOs. In most GW2 content where there are plenty of other players around a player can expect a rezz when his character is downed/dead.

I think that, in general, FX added to weapon skins actually reduce the aesthetic appeal of the skin itself. Its the equivalent of adding more ’splosions to a movie as a distraction rather than making a better movie. In this sense fewer FX for axes improves the category.

Ardenwolfe.8590:

Zok.4956:

I think you misunderstand players that just do not want to play the way you want.

Keep in mind, the players in the OP’s example screamed, “Why didn’t you tell us?!” after the event failed.

May I ask this question?

Where to you think the players who knew what to do originally learned? Yes, through experience and research.

It doesn’t strike anyone as a tad hypocritical for those players to scream what they did, but demand others look up, learn, and lead them into success? Because they couldn’t or wouldn’t be bothered to do the same for themselves?

Please think about what you guys are saying.

In the OP’s example people asked why didnt you tell us AFTER the supposedly knowdgeable people complained that people werent doing what was desired of them. The people who didnt know the encounter were doing exactly what everyone had to do at first, learn through trial and error. The people complaining that the newer to the encounter players werent doing as desired were the ones coming closest to hypocrisy because they were expecting of the new players something that the experienced players didnt have to do (couldnt really) at first.

Again, if you want someone to do X, you might want to tell them so.

Would this system work along side the existing system ? I ask because some creatures would realistically have more acute hearing than sight.

edgarallanpwn.8739:

checking for gear doesn’t really do anything.

This is not necessarily true because gear does contribute to character effectiveness and group synergy.

Of course player skill is important, but that does not mean that gear is irrelevant.

DeathPanel.8362:

Ashen.2907:

I suppose one could counter with:

Why didnt people take a couple of minutes to explain what was about to happen before the encounter began ?

Kind of goes both ways. If you want or expect people to be informed while playing olen world content with you it seems like common sense to contribute to informing them.

Because players come and go from the zone at all times and you can’t be expected to realistically explain in /shout for each new person that zones in every minute. So no it doesn’t go both ways. I’ve seen plenty of instances of where someone did explain in detail in /shout to people only to have a new person zoning in 2 minutes later ask in /shout the exact same question or not asking at all and messing up anyway.

It seems highly unlikely that a player joining at the last minute is going to cause an event full of fully informed and on top of things players to fail.

Beyond people joining after an event briefing, if you want someone to do something you probably should tell them so. If you choose to not tell someone that you want them to do X, then you really dont have a lot of room to complain when they do Y instead.

A level 80 does have advantages in a low level zone such as Queensdale. Not only does he have access to a full build of traits but also to better gear. My main character, at level 80, generally one or two shots most foes when visiting Queensdale and doesnt normally die.

What you will find, if you stick with the game, is that your skill as a player and your character’s build will improve and negate the concern you are facing.

I really hope you continue to play long enough to see the situation change. If you do I believe that you are likely to look back on this thread and situation with a smile.

Good luck.

RoseofGilead.8907:

Nodes have a pre-set group of locations they can spawn in, and the nodes will change their locations any time a new instance is made. So, the instance you enter one day can very likely not be the same one you enter by the time you’re doing a daily gathering achievement.

Yeah, this aligns with what my wife suggested (as described above). Wasnt a complaint, just an observation looking for either corroboration or contradiction.

Thanks.

Sakri.7234:

Anet always says, there won’t be anymore grind in this game yet their actions always contradict them. Would it kill them to make a game with interesting content that doesn’t depend on endless grind to get achis and nice skins?

I was under the impression, because it has been stated kitten, that Anet intended that there would be grind for cosmetics.

Astral Projections.7320:

Speaking as someone who has done many, many farm runs, nodes have always been scarce (if they weren’t, the prices on the trading post would be even lower). What makes them currently appear lower is the specificity of the daily. Before, it was harvest all nodes. Now it’s only one type. This means you run past multiple nodes of the wrong types looking for the right type. Running past multiples of the “wrong nodes” makes the nodes you want appear fewer since you get frustrated by all the ones that don’t count.

I am sure that I didnt express it well but more than anything else I meant nodes that seem to always (or nearly so) be in a given location on non daily days not being there when the daily applies to that zone and node.

My wife suggested the possibility that different maps will have different node distribution patterns and that a given zone will have more maps generated due to increased population due to the daily. This could result in being on a map with a different node distribution than I normally see.

have others noticed scarcity of gathering nodes associated with dailies ? I am not climing anything as fact but it seems as if nodes that are normally present when that zone is not a part of the gathering daily are less so when it is.

Completely anecdotal, I know, but anyone else seeing this ?

Iyeru.5240:

http://i.imgur.com/YrHBV1Z.jpg

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

http://i.imgur.com/E9Mc9a0.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/ZbpP6YT.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/hjp4Mn8.jpg

Might want to edit out names in those screenshots.

Ashendale.2165:

Money making is not a sign of experience, as you’ve stated; that’s not the way to go.

And just because I have 5 character slots, I am in no way obliged to use them. I don’t want special privileges, but I should not be at a disadvantage for having chosen not to use them. What? You buy a game and should be forced to play it because you can?

You are not at a disadvantage. You have the same options as everyone else….to use a purchased commander tag on 100% of your characters.

I dont really see an upside to this but plenty of downside. Gonna have to disagree OP.

I dont think that this is a slope we should be starting down.

“I only want to use my infinite tools on one character, I want a discount/refund”

“I only want to use my Legendary on 3 of my 9 characters, I want a proportionate discount.”

And so on.

Choosing to not use something to its fullest potential should not mean that one should get a discount IMO.

Agreed.

J envy.5270:

Ashen.2907:

I am not sure that farming ranks in EotM is any more legendary worthy than farming gold or using a credit card.

your like the 3rd person who mentioned WvW ranks, it is not the only requirement that i gave as an example, nonetheless, it is not as easy as it sounds, you would still have to put ALOT of time into it, i don’t know which PRO commander train you follow but 1000 ranks is not something you get in a day or 2 or 3. As far as credit card goes, i can go to work for a day and that would be enough to buy me a new legendary. How legendary is that.

Some people are missing the point that this requirements make people do particular contents of the game before actually acquiring a legendary weapon, It will take you weeks/months/years to make but it is only a unique skin, it does not make you any stronger than others, but rather would just feel way more prestigious—-bragging rights, as not just about anyone can get there hands on it. Also, it is not something a random player can just have after buying the game 2 days prior.

My point stands. There is nothing particularly legendary about grinding ranks that are easily attained. There is no prestige in whatyou suggest because it is a primary just a measure of time spent.

phys.7689:

Ashen.2907:

I suppose because GS for necro and shield for mesmer are every bit as thematic as GS for mesmer and daggers for necro, etc.

mesmers can wield whatever, they are basically manipulating minds, who knows what they really are wielding even if it looks like a greatsword.

daggers for necros are actually pretty thematic, sacrifice, blood, ritual, that fits daggers pretty well.

my problem with the theme, is shield implies, defense, and tankiness, i dont think mesmer really needed to specialize in tankiness.

Also, though we dont know the details, getting a one hand weapon for specialization implies 2 new skills versus 5 , thats super lame.

Hadnt thought about the 2 skills vs 5. That does seem to merit some attention IMO.

I havent played a necro yet, does their use of daggers look like ritual blood sacrifices and the like ?

VaLee.5102:

@Ashen
you can’t expect someone to write in chat in the middle of the fight the story of their lives regarding tactics..

I dont expect such. Made no such claim.

It is not nonsense to tell someone what you want if you expect them to give it to you.

Players ignoring advice from more knowledgeable players is something else entirely.

I am not sure that farming ranks in EotM is any more legendary worthy than farming gold or using a credit card.

I suppose because GS for necro and shield for mesmer are every bit as thematic as GS for mesmer and daggers for necro, etc.

VaLee.5102:

Ashen.2907:

I suppose one could counter with:

Why didnt people take a couple of minutes to explain what was about to happen before the encounter began ?

Kind of goes both ways. If you want or expect people to be informed while playing olen world con

tent with you it seems like common sense to contribute to informing them.

Well usually people do, like they say “build the honeycomb” or “kill pustules”, but if you do 10+ events every day you get bored of spamming the same stuff over and over again. You expect people to know what to do.
But that’s not the issues of this topic, it’s about the players complaining “you should’ve told us what to do!” instead of looking it up for themselves beforehand.

I would agree with you if you hadnt stated in the OP that the argument started with people complaining about other people not doing what was desired of them. If someone complains, “why didnt you do X,” a perfectly reasonable response is, “why didnt you say that you wanted me to do X?”

If you want someone to do something then it might be a good idea to tell them so.

That said, killing the adds seems pretty obvious to me. Really sounds more like your map just didnt have enough damage IMO.

And finally, I dont think that wiki, or any outside site, should be necessary for event completion/success.

I’d say that 100% of WoW armor/weapons (that Ive seen) are ugly. I guess its all a matter of opinion.

You could dodge projectiles in GW1.