I don’t see how GW1 missions were fundamentally any different than GW2 missions. One change that I would suggest is that the bonus achievements in GW2 be doable on the first play through.
The biggest difference with GW Missions and GW2 Missions was the mandatory grouping. You had to have a party of at least 4 other players or Hench/Heroes to even begin the missions. The henchies AI was so bad in Prohecies and Factions that you pretty much had to grab other players for missions. It wasn’t until Nightfall and Heroes that people began grouping less and using AI to fill out their parties.
I completed all of GW1 without the help of other players. Needing to have players/henchmen/heroes is a requirement in all of GW1. Most of the content cannot be completed by just your character alone.
(edited by Ayrilana.1396)
1 or 2 out of 12? Or 1 or 2 out of the 4 you have decided to limit yourself to?
sPvP is not going to be a pleasant experience to anyone who has combat issues.
For at least two of the achievement, you don’t even need to attack though.
I don’t see how GW1 missions were fundamentally any different than GW2 missions. Prophecies were on their own little maps but the mission areas in Factions and Nightfall became Explorable areas for the most part. Everything in EotN were Explorable from the beginning, I believe.
One change that I would suggest is that the bonus achievements in GW2 be doable on the first play through.
Dolyaks, Ruins, Guards and Camps are pretty easy in WvW. Usually no combat except with NPCs. Or Big Spender guarantees no combat.
It seems scary when you first enter WvW, but it really isn’t as bad as you might think. Also, Waypointing is free, as is Armor Repair, now, so even if you die, it doesn’t cost anything.
Good luck. =)
Some people struggle with capping camps as you have about 2 minutes to cap it before they start respawning. It’s more of a DPS issue and not stacking at certain spots to speed things up. However, those that can solo camps will find that achievement to be very painless to do.
Thanks everyone for the replies. I only do PvE as the others are too difficult for me. I will try to look into PvP and WvW again though and give it another try.
You will find some of the PvP and WvW dailies to be easy. The PvP rank points only require you to participate in the match (you need to score at least a point) for about a minute or so to get the 50 rank points. You can also capture a point by going to the point closest to where you spawn. If you’re only doing PvP for the daily, stick to the hotjoin which I think got relabeled to practice.
For WvW, capturing a ruin is very easy as you just run over to one and sit there for about 30 seconds. Killing a veteran is no different than in PvE including the sentries. Spending badges requires you to go to a vendor. EotM is a good source of badges if you’re running low and one of the best ways to level without using consumables or crafting.
You’re the one who refuses that this subject is about economics and are willingly not looking up what demand means in an economic sense. This is clear as day by your definition of demand.
You’re also the one who brought up desire vs demand because you’re unable to argue refute what I’n saying but instead make up some fictitious argument. I’ve already stated how desire fits in with demand. I suggest you take the time to read previous posts of mine and read up on economics regarding demand.
You don’t understand economics clearly by your example about needs vs wants and also the example about designer clothes. People don’t need certain skins in this game. The chainsaw or the jet pack skins don’t offer any benefit other than visual. By your faulty definition, there would be no demand for these items as they’re not needed. You even stated this outright. I highly suggest that you research into what terms means in the context of various subject. Did you happen to notice that demand has multiple definitions? You clearly just picked the one that suited your argument.
A clear hint towards where you’re incorrect is in the following:
Ascended and Legendary gears sure are desirable, but not on demand because they are not needed, players simply want them.
Fine let’s pull more sources;
“In economics, demand is the utility for a good or service of an economic agent, relative to his/her income.”(wikipedia.org)“The amount of a particular economic good or service that a consumer or group of consumers will want to purchase at a given price.”(investorwords.com)
“Demand means the quantity of a given article which would be taken at a given price”(para.)- F. A. Walker. (thefreedictionary.com)
“Demand is not just about measuring what people want; for economists, it refers to the amount of a good or service that people are both willing and able to buy.”(economist.com)
Some sources, like investopedia.com, misrepresents the definition of “demand” by using the word “desire” and to base your argument on that, you also suffer from the same misrepresentation.
I’ll also make one more edit. Research what happens when there’s a demand urge shift outward while supply remains unchanged. What happens to the price?
The price increases. The rise on demand is based on people’s willingness to pay even at a higher price — meaning they also have a high income, otherwise the demand won’t be so high if only a few can afford the price.
You’re still not getting it. Also, based on your previous posts, I don’t think you can claim that a specific definition is wrong. You also don’t have a strong grasp between what a movement along the demand curve is compared to a shift in the demand curve.
(edited by Ayrilana.1396)
pay2skin……..lol
so you mad that they are trying to keep a good game free to play by adding skins to the store that you want but are not willing to pay for?
support the game and spend a little cash now and then so you can get what you want.
im sure $10 every few months is in everyones budgetCareful with that.
10 bucks every few months is not in everyone’s budget. While I think the game should have a means for support and that the gem store is a good way to get that support, there is still a large avenue for people to get that stuff for free.
They just need to quit thinking that “Farming” is the answer and actually start having fun with the game. Enjoying what you’re doing is the best way to find things that can net you some gold.
And if you save the gold as gems when the market favors gold price over gems (like after an update where a gold expensive item is introduced) then you have those gems for the outfits when they come out.
If we assume that a few means 3 or more then that’s pretty much a cup of coffee per month that you forego. Spending $10 every few months is entirely reasonable.
We’re in the context of economics. We’re using demand in the economic sense. Desire is part of what demand is. Your lack of understanding how they two are being used, but rather their definition, leads me to believe that you know nothing about them in the context of economics.
Demand is the following:
An economic principle that describes a consumer’s desire and willingness to pay a price for a specific good or service.
Someone’s desire to purchase an item is part of demand. I bolded that just for you. I highly suggest that you read up about demand as there’s a ton more regarding it than you can read from a dictionary. I especially suggest this based on your whole “needs vs wants” post.
Here’s my post before. Pay attention to what I’ve bolded.
Prices change due to changes in supply and demand. Precursors rose in price because of changes in the game that made them more desirable such as improved effects for some legendaries in Dec 2013 and the wardrobe changes last year. The ability of people to earn gold has had little impact on prices.
See what I bolded? Now take what I said into the context of economics and the game. The ability of players to earn gold has had little impact on prices. Majority of price changes were due to changes such as those I mentioned earlier in the post.
Your argument is faulty because you try really hard to argue that that desire and demand are the same.
Making an item desirable doesn’t necessarily means they are in demand.
I repeat.
Making an item desirable doesn’t necessarily means they are in demand.
I hope that I made that one clear.
By definition, demand is “an insistent and peremptory request, made as if by right” (MW.com) and simply put, it’s a request based on need.
Desire on the other hand means, “a strong feeling of wanting to have something or wishing for something to happen”(MW.com) and “feeling of wanting” is not need.
My counter to your argument is well within the context of economy. People will pay for what they need, that is, food, clothes and shelter which makes these items in constant demand. Designer clothes, expensive house, jewelry, etc. are all desirable but not on demand because they are not needed. People pay for them because they simply want it. Your lack of understanding of this concept is where your argument fails.
In the context of GW2, players will pay for what they need, that is Exotic gears, runes, sigils, food, etc. Ascended and Legendary gears sure are desirable, but not on demand because they are not needed, players simply want them.
What is part of demand is need. If you can make a need for an item, then you’ll get demand for it. In other words, at the time when it is necessary to have an Ascended or Legendary gear in order to complete a dungeon, for example, is the time when demand for those item may possibly exist — however unlikely.
You’re the one who refuses that this subject is about economics and are willingly not looking up what demand means in an economic sense. This is clear as day by your definition of demand.
You’re also the one who brought up desire vs demand because you’re unable to argue refute what I’n saying but instead make up some fictitious argument. I’ve already stated how desire fits in with demand. I suggest you take the time to read previous posts of mine and read up on economics regarding demand.
You don’t understand economics clearly by your example about needs vs wants and also the example about designer clothes. People don’t need certain skins in this game. The chainsaw or the jet pack skins don’t offer any benefit other than visual. By your faulty definition, there would be no demand for these items as they’re not needed. You even stated this outright. I highly suggest that you research into what terms means in the context of various subject. Did you happen to notice that demand has multiple definitions? You clearly just picked the one that suited your argument.
A clear hint towards where you’re incorrect is in the following:
Ascended and Legendary gears sure are desirable, but not on demand because they are not needed, players simply want them.
I’ll also make one more edit. Research what happens when there’s a demand curve shift outward while supply remains unchanged. What happens to the price?
(edited by Ayrilana.1396)
They’re fighting destroyers. If you want their background story then play/read/watch Prophecies and their story arch in EotN.
(edited by Ayrilana.1396)
Demand is the ability/willingness to act on desire. So you can have desire without demand. An example of this would be kids desiring an expensive car. They desire the car but lack the ability to actually purchase it and/or influence the demand.
See above.
See what? You said something about them not being separate. I just noted that desire can be separate from demand even though demand cannot be separate from desire. Nothing more.
Yeah. Desire can be separate from demand but you cannot have demand without there being a desire for an item. Desire is part of demand. How could an item have any demand if nobody desired it?
Was that meant as a question at the end? That’s basically repeating what I just said.
I know. We’re not really in disagreement here.
Demand is the ability/willingness to act on desire. So you can have desire without demand. An example of this would be kids desiring an expensive car. They desire the car but lack the ability to actually purchase it and/or influence the demand.
See above.
See what? You said something about them not being separate. I just noted that desire can be separate from demand even though demand cannot be separate from desire. Nothing more.
Yeah. Desire can be separate from demand but you cannot have demand without there being a desire for an item. Desire is part of demand. How could an item have any demand if nobody desired it?
Are you new to the English language that you request for a source that “demand” and “desire” are not synonymous?
I assume that since we are communicating online that you have access to sources that supports my statements.
A simply Google search will give you the answers you’re looking for. You’re being petty to ask for sources about simple words.
I even made it simpler by posting that “desire” is wants and “demand” is needs.
Is that really hard to understand?
We’re in the context of economics. We’re using demand in the economic sense. Desire is part of what demand is. Your lack of understanding how they two are being used, but rather their definition, leads me to believe that you know nothing about them in the context of economics.
Demand is the following:
An economic principle that describes a consumer’s desire and willingness to pay a price for a specific good or service.
Someone’s desire to purchase an item is part of demand. I bolded that just for you. I highly suggest that you read up about demand as there’s a ton more regarding it than you can read from a dictionary. I especially suggest this based on your whole “needs vs wants” post.
Here’s my post before. Pay attention to what I’ve bolded.
Prices change due to changes in supply and demand. Precursors rose in price because of changes in the game that made them more desirable such as improved effects for some legendaries in Dec 2013 and the wardrobe changes last year. The ability of people to earn gold has had little impact on prices.
See what I bolded? Now take what I said into the context of economics and the game. The ability of players to earn gold has had little impact on prices. Majority of price changes were due to changes such as those I mentioned earlier in the post.
Demand is the ability/willingness to act on desire. So you can have desire without demand. An example of this would be kids desiring an expensive car. They desire the car but lack the ability to actually purchase it and/or influence the demand.
See above.
Prices change due to changes in supply and demand. Precursors rose in price because of changes in the game that made them more desirable such as improved effects for some legendaries in Dec 2013 and the wardrobe changes last year. The ability of people to earn gold has had little impact on prices.
I disagree because the player’s “income” has a large impact. For instance, if I received an offer for my item and someone else beat that offer, then the price of my item just increased based on the highest bid. And if players are willing to purchase the item at that price and no more, then that effectively changed the price of that item. If player’s “income” is low, the bid for that item will remain low and might even lower the bidding price. TP is no different.
I’m talking about the changes in prices, not the price points. Also, what I bolded is called demand.
I’m talking about that the purchasing power of the player is mainly based on what they can afford, which is their “income”. Their demand for such item diminishes only because they can no longer afford it.
Demand and desirability are not necessarily the same thing.
Demand is based on player’s affordability mainly about “needs” and desirability is based on “wants” thus players can sometimes purchase something beyond their means (in this case pulling out the real money cash).
Therefore, your statement ; “Prices change due to changes in supply and demand” is not necessarily true. You said it yourself that the changes on Dec 2013 made some items “desirable” thus the price is based on “wants” not “needs”, thus it’s not based on demand.
I have to ask this. Do you know what demand is?
I believe I have illustrated it clearly.
The problem with your argument is that you confuse “demand” and “desire”, they are not one and the same.
Site a credible source that desire and demand are two separate things. I can site you numerous sources where desire is included in the definition of demand.
Prices change due to changes in supply and demand. Precursors rose in price because of changes in the game that made them more desirable such as improved effects for some legendaries in Dec 2013 and the wardrobe changes last year. The ability of people to earn gold has had little impact on prices.
I disagree because the player’s “income” has a large impact. For instance, if I received an offer for my item and someone else beat that offer, then the price of my item just increased based on the highest bid. And if players are willing to purchase the item at that price and no more, then that effectively changed the price of that item. If player’s “income” is low, the bid for that item will remain low and might even lower the bidding price. TP is no different.
I’m talking about the changes in prices, not the price points. Also, what I bolded is called demand.
I’m talking about that the purchasing power of the player is mainly based on what they can afford, which is their “income”. Their demand for such item diminishes only because they can no longer afford it.
Demand and desirability are not necessarily the same thing.
Demand is based on player’s affordability mainly about “needs” and desirability is based on “wants” thus players can sometimes purchase something beyond their means (in this case pulling out the real money cash).
Therefore, your statement ; “Prices change due to changes in supply and demand” is not necessarily true. You said it yourself that the changes on Dec 2013 made some items “desirable” thus the price is based on “wants” not “needs”, thus it’s not based on demand.
I have to ask this. Do you know what demand is?
Prices change due to changes in supply and demand. Precursors rose in price because of changes in the game that made them more desirable such as improved effects for some legendaries in Dec 2013 and the wardrobe changes last year. The ability of people to earn gold has had little impact on prices.
I disagree because the player’s “income” has a large impact. For instance, if I received an offer for my item and someone else beat that offer, then the price of my item just increased based on the highest bid. And if players are willing to purchase the item at that price and no more, then that effectively changed the price of that item. If player’s “income” is low, the bid for that item will remain low and might even lower the bidding price. TP is no different.
I’m talking about the changes in prices, not the price points. Also, what I bolded is called demand.
(edited by Ayrilana.1396)
Anyone that just wanted to kick around and do cool things perhaps involving the smashing of many digital foes had better buy a neck brace these days, lest they suffer a fatal case of whiplash for how fast you wind up being obligated to invest deeply into Spreadsheet Wars if you want to be anything other than terminally broke.
That’s hardly the case. I am a casual player and sometimes even miss a 1-2 months of playing but never in my GW2 experience ever been “terminally broke” nor I ever play with TP to maximize my gold cache nor I ever play “Spreadsheet Wars”.
My point is, it’s impossible to be broke in this game — it’s literally impossible. A couple of T9 Fractals will generate enough loot that you can vendor for gold.
You’re adorable if you think you’ll make as much money farming fractals for even a month as a halfwit flipper can make in a lazy week.
Prices keep rising on a great many things. I’d hazard a guess that the average player’s overall income isn’t rising at an equivalent pace.
But hey, I’m just a guy that likes to hit dragons in games about hitting dragons. Me personally being terribly tired of discussions about MMO’s these days frequently being discussions about macroeconomic theory will never interject upon you doing whatever you like to do with your days.
I, personally, think its a bunch of garbage that many MMO’s seem desperately eager to make finance simulators out of themselves. Wallstreet Online would presumably do amazingly well, provided its developers simply had a robust enough achievement system.
He wasn’t arguing which one give you more gold. Prices are also not rising because players supposedly can make more gold off TP flipping.
Would you rather be playing WoW and have a gear system like theirs?
An irrelevant question, to which the tacit answer is no. And I have no interest in speculating with neither data nor motive of concern as to why prices are rising on many things – they are.
Why does not matter – how it needs to be addressed matters. Farming has become increasingly less lucrative, which has the incidental effect of making casual gameplay less valuable as well.
The purchasing power generated per activity has been increasingly rendered lopsided, leaning ever the more in favor of activities strictly involving marketing on the TP.
Everything else becomes less and less worthwhile to do if your interest is, for any reason, to make gold.
Why? Because the people that designed this game made it that way. All other reasons are moot.
Why do game devs keeping making their games about hitting digital beasties (at least ostensibly) less and less about hitting digital beasties while, at the same time, leaning ever the more heavily in favor of creating economies more elaborate and robust than most of the rest of everything going on in their game combined?
In no event does my personal opinion need to be taken like a deep, personal attack on anyone’s sacred cows.
Prices change due to changes in supply and demand. Precursors rose in price because of changes in the game that made them more desirable such as improved effects for some legendaries in Dec 2013 and the wardrobe changes last year. The ability of people to earn gold has had little impact on prices.
My question was completely relevant. Would you prefer a system where you’re required to spend substantial amount of time grinding for the gear or would you prefer a system where you could do that but also have the option of buying it off of a TP equivalent? I brought up WoW because of your earlier posts where you disliked its system with gear.
Anyone that just wanted to kick around and do cool things perhaps involving the smashing of many digital foes had better buy a neck brace these days, lest they suffer a fatal case of whiplash for how fast you wind up being obligated to invest deeply into Spreadsheet Wars if you want to be anything other than terminally broke.
That’s hardly the case. I am a casual player and sometimes even miss a 1-2 months of playing but never in my GW2 experience ever been “terminally broke” nor I ever play with TP to maximize my gold cache nor I ever play “Spreadsheet Wars”.
My point is, it’s impossible to be broke in this game — it’s literally impossible. A couple of T9 Fractals will generate enough loot that you can vendor for gold.
You’re adorable if you think you’ll make as much money farming fractals for even a month as a halfwit flipper can make in a lazy week.
Prices keep rising on a great many things. I’d hazard a guess that the average player’s overall income isn’t rising at an equivalent pace.
But hey, I’m just a guy that likes to hit dragons in games about hitting dragons. Me personally being terribly tired of discussions about MMO’s these days frequently being discussions about macroeconomic theory will never interject upon you doing whatever you like to do with your days.
I, personally, think its a bunch of garbage that many MMO’s seem desperately eager to make finance simulators out of themselves. Wallstreet Online would presumably do amazingly well, provided its developers simply had a robust enough achievement system.
He wasn’t arguing which one give you more gold. Prices are also not rising because players supposedly can make more gold off TP flipping.
Would you rather be playing WoW and have a gear system like theirs?
The problem with economists is that they foster economies only another economist finds stimulating or interesting.
I’m John Q. Player, and I don’t give a rat’s tail about ROI metrics, velocities or variable exchange rates.
I want a cool sword to hit the giant dragon with while my buddies shoot fancy spell effects out their bums, and a rousing battle tune to go with it.
Only kitten way to function in this game anymore is o turn into a wallstreet maverick spending more time paying Spreadsheet Wars and aggregating data than anything else.
Economists should never be involved in making anything fun for anyone but economists. The commonality of this tendency for MMOs to all be turning into Investment Simulator Online makes me want to know exactly how hitting dragons with swords and fireballs came to this.
Bugger it all. People can turn anything into drudge work, and apparently will if allowed one minute alone with anything.
I don’t believe you understand exactly what it is that the game economists do. Imagine what this game would be like without the trading post.
I very well do understand what they do. I am getting rather tired of it being done, however, and since these are absolutely artificial environments, very little happens within them that is not the intended or incidental product of design.
Games continue to be designed with increasingly thin veneers of exploration, adventure and rising activity when, all the more commonly, they should be being packed with an undergraduates crash course in economic theory and a licensed copy of Excel.
Anyone that just wanted to kick around and do cool things perhaps involving the smashing of many digital foes had better buy a neck brace these days, lest they suffer a fatal case of whiplash for how fast you wind up being obligated to invest deeply into Spreadsheet Wars if you want to be anything other than terminally broke.
Imagine a game which the real point was to play the game, not the metagames of strategic grinding strategies and/or auction house investment career.
Some clearly find those fun.
I find them, as a player, to be every bit as distracting as most would find their game of Call of Duty pausing itself every five minutes and refused to unpause until the player solved ten random physics equations.
So yes, I know that the economists ‘try to regulate and streamline the economy to prevent game breaking imbalances and disruptive means of player manipulation’, yadda blah blah blah.
The fact remains that it wouldn’t be necessary if these games weren’t increasingly designed to be less and less game, more and more financial strategy and investment planning simulators.
You don’t need to flip on the TP to be successful in this game. The TP is not the end all, be all source of gold.
The problem with economists is that they foster economies only another economist finds stimulating or interesting.
I’m John Q. Player, and I don’t give a rat’s tail about ROI metrics, velocities or variable exchange rates.
I want a cool sword to hit the giant dragon with while my buddies shoot fancy spell effects out their bums, and a rousing battle tune to go with it.
Only kitten way to function in this game anymore is o turn into a wallstreet maverick spending more time paying Spreadsheet Wars and aggregating data than anything else.
Economists should never be involved in making anything fun for anyone but economists. The commonality of this tendency for MMOs to all be turning into Investment Simulator Online makes me want to know exactly how hitting dragons with swords and fireballs came to this.
Bugger it all. People can turn anything into drudge work, and apparently will if allowed one minute alone with anything.
I don’t believe you understand exactly what it is that the game economists do. Imagine what this game would be like without the trading post.
I also noticed that his conclusion regarding how precursor crafting would impact TP prices was wrong.
This is also the user who wrote the article if anyone was curious to see their other posts:
(edited by Ayrilana.1396)
TL:DR should be the name of that article.
The loot is horrible most of the time because of the RNG but occasionally it will surprise you with something nice.
If you take away the grind and add a goal to earn elitist items instead of farming or relying on RNG you lessen the value and desirability of them.
A lot of people equate goals as grind.
So the author argues that the gold standard is the problem because of the grind for gold but then praises other systems which likely require even more grind? The author was wrong in regards to their example about Dusk.
Another expansion thread?
I just report every one of them as LFG Abuse as the tool is not Craigslist.
It depends on what you do but generally the MF will give you more profit. I personally went with the karma one as I could convert it into items (via the mystic forge) that I could sell on the TP . This gave more consistency rather than relying on RNG.
You can only use one gold infusion per character as only one item has an utility slot that can have a gold infusion.
Thank you for your answer!
I thought, that a BackItem has an utility slot .
Thank you for your information!
Does Magic Find Infusion give chance to get more rare items from boxes and bags? Or only from killed mobs.
Killed enemies only.
It depends on what you do but generally the MF will give you more profit. I personally went with the karma one as I could convert it into items (via the mystic forge) that I could sell on the TP . This gave more consistency rather than relying on RNG.
You can only use one gold infusion per character as only one item has an utility slot that can have a gold infusion.
If there were more PvP players than PvE, why were (are?) the PvP choices of arenas so limited to one, capture point? Why do the PvP forums complain so much about how they never get new arena fight types like capture the flag. If PvP was Guild Wars 2 bread and butter with most people there, they would be spending most of their updates there,
What many a lot of the PvE-only players fail to grasp is not everyone focuses solely on one aspect of the game as they do. Many people play more than one of the game types. For example, I played in PvE, WvW, and sPvP. Nobody but Anet knows the actual percentages of players who play solely one specific game type. Anyone else claiming that they know are doing it based solely on speculation.
People who PvP and complain about the lack of game modes is no different than those who also PvE and complain about the lack of new, interesting dungeons. The same could also be said about maps as we’ve only gotten 3 new maps in a little over 2 years since Anet has mainly been focusing on providing new stories as additional content.
There are also a smaller subset of players who play only a specific game type and would prefer Anet to ignore all others. It’s as if they feel everyone should play and only get content for what they personally enjoy.
(edited by Ayrilana.1396)
I went to this horrible restaurant last night. They had over 100 menu items. I have chosen to not eat meat or carbs which only left me with 5 choices for meals. Needless to say, I was not impressed and wrote them a negative review about how they lack choices.
Lol, not a good analogy. Most MMO players don’t like PvP. That is proven by how few open world PvP MMOs there are. Yet the vast majority of Dailies are in PvP. WvW is PvP no matter what Anet says. What people don’t like about PvP is other players stalking / killing them which can happen in WvW which makes it PvP by definition.
So there go 2/3 of the choice for most people off the bat. To use the restaurant analogy it would be like a restaurant being silly enough to have 2/3 of its menu consist of food that the majority of the customers don’t like.
I’m going to assume that you have never really played PvP or WvW. You’re also speculating that the “majority” of players are PvE only. If you’re going to use that to back up your argument then provide proof.
I went to this horrible restaurant last night. They had over 100 menu items. I have chosen to not eat meat or carbs which only left me with 5 choices for meals. Needless to say, I was not impressed and wrote them a negative review about how they lack choices.
The daily achievements have awards tied to them to reward players for doing that particular task. Just about all of the rewards from the old system as been moved so that you get them for simply logging on. You do not miss out on anything if you cannot login for a night. All that’s left is the AP. If you don’t care about AP, you don’t have to do the daily.
The daily achievements were made easier to complete and you now only need to complete 3 of them. Doing this rewards 10 AP whereas you would have had to do 10 achievements before. It’s a pretty good deal. For those that don’t have the time to do the achievements, they can now be done in under 10 minutes. I’ve completed the daily in a couple minutes a few times.
There’s not really a lack of choices as we had 12 options before and we still have 12 options now. If players want to hinder themselves by refusing to do PvP and WvW then that’s their own prerogative.
Whether an item is bounded or not doesn’t matter. Whenever you put something into the mystic forge, you get an entirely new item. This new item will not be bounded unless it was coded to be that way. Legendary weapons were not coded to be this way.
And then there’s the backlash from another group of players if Anet does state that they’re not working on an expansion. They’ll receive backlash regardless.
It’s pretty much Nostalgia. There’s really no difference between that or anything else.
Fear wall in EotM. Goodbye zerg.
Check all cities and Explorable areas that have been impacted by the living story.
Finally, in a release coming early next year, we will merge the existing daily and monthly achievement point caps into one pool. This will allow players to continue working toward the maximum point totals for the daily achievement system without the existence of monthly achievements.
I have just a question about the new daily system. I have no problem with it, but when you said the monthly will be removed, I thought you would merged AP from daily and monthly, and raise the cap to 15000 (as it is said on the wiki : http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Daily )
But that’s not the case as you can see on my screenshot. Did I misunderstand something or this is a bug ?
https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/introducing-the-new-daily-achievement-system/
It’s to make our wintersday RNG junk even more miserable
Most of it is vendor price. The items that do have value, drop less frequently than the others where you would not encounter the error when trying to sell them.
(edited by Ayrilana.1396)
I’d just like to point out a few things that seems to have been glossed over in this thread, at least so far as I can tell.
Firstly, a lot of people who do not like this but aren’t complaining about it, are refraining from doing so because they don’t give a flying crap about AP. I don’t care about AP and I have 11500, I know only one guy in game who cares about getting every last piece of AP, only one. Most players do not care about these new dailies since all they really give is AP, but that does not mean they enjoy this system or that it is a good idea, because…
Second, I have so much AP because the old way of gaining it rewarded you for having fun, and set a reward to ‘kickstart’ your playtime. I almost always wound up having fun getting the dailies and then playing even more after my dailies were done. Under this new system, dailies are for AP chasers and no one else, and I can’t get myself to do them, let alone much of anything after them.
I hate this system. And ever since this nonsense started, I’ve been playing less and less. Why on earth was this changed for such a tiny portion for the playerbase as those players who are competitively seeking AP is beyond my comprehension. Players want to play the game, but it can be a bit daunting when you first log in, and broad but clearly rewarding dailies helped players past that, this new system fails to do that.
TLDR: The old system got people playing, this new one does not. And hardly anyone cares about AP anyway.
Although I don’t have as much AP (8770, had to look it up) I’m right there with you. The previous dailies were more fun and I played much more.
Beyond my comprehension are those who actually hated the old dailies but would grind through every possible task to get more AP.
I think the difference is between those who “play” and those who compete.
A lot grinded for the skins and not to compete.
ERP shouldn’t even be allowed in this game as it was rated for Teens and not Mature or Adult. You don’t know who is on the other end, and if it’s a child, well there may be issues.
I can have it both ways.
There are two types of disagreeing:
- The new system fits my needs, and I’m happy. I can now get more rewards and faster, compared to the old system. I’m sorry that your playstyle didn’t fit in it, and you’re unhappy about the change, but my happiness is more important to me than your happiness, so I will defend this system.
- The new system fits my needs, and I don’t care about anyone else’s experience. I had to grind while you were enjoying the game – and now I’m happy that you will be grinding and I will be enjoying the game instead! So shut up and stop whining, your whining means nothing because ANet said that my way is the correct one now, and if you don’t, I’ll keep coming and saying that you’re wrong, completely ignoring your problems and presenting my benefits as absolute.
I can respect the first type of disagreeing, and I loathe the second one.
You’re purposely misrepresenting the opposition’s argument(s) in order to strengthen yours. Don’t do this.
Add more generic but laaarge achievements for players playing PvE for a considerable time each day (view vista in map or kill 50 mobs anywhere; do 4 events in map, 10 events anywhere or do a dungeon; gather 4 plants in map, 10 anything anywhere or salvage 40 items) – compromise between goals and user-friendliness.
I prefer these as static achievements everyday:
- Complete 15 events
- Gather 30 times from any node
- Complete two explorable/story paths
- Complete a full fractal run
- Daily activity participation
- Defeat two world/temple bosses
- Defeat 100 enemies
- Complete three jumping puzzles
- Complete a personal story instance
More options for the PvE-only player that refuses to play the game in its entirety. If you’re against these then it’s likely not the lack of choices that you have an issue with but the amount of effort required.
As you can see, all this things can be done, and most players will be happy. Of course there always will be a very specific minority (hi, AP hunters and WvW solo roamers), and there always will be entitled kids, but there’s also the happy majority which will help you defend any friendly system.
The same argument could be made that those who want to be rewarded the daily by passively playing the game are entitled. It goes both ways. Also, you do not know which group is the majority or minority. For all we know, they could be split evenly.
Man i love this, Guild Wars 2 have changed a lot, “Play how you want to” is completely gone… and every update its like the make the rope tighter and tighter… oh great we have tons of Styles appeal … but no content.
I love to multi-box! I’ve multibox on many other MMORPG but with so many restrictions… and hey SURPRISE the post for multibox/macro is gone does that mean that a ban stick is coming??
Well in short.. my love for MMORPG is fading really fast.
Best of lucks Anet, its been fun!How is it completely gone?
If you don’t want to pay for traits, play the very narrow path that Anet has created. If you want Daily rewards, play the very narrow path that Anet has created. If you want to use costumes you must use the whole costume. etc. Less and less choice every time you turn around.
You had to pay for traits before only that they were bundled. Now you have the option to pay for them individually or to do tasks to unlock them. They increased your options.
Daily rewards had 12 choices before and still have 12 choices now. You, as a player, are the one limiting your choices.
You cannot mix and match costumes. Hardly game-breaking. You couldn’t even wear them in combat before and now you can. You have more options to adjust your appearance than you did before the costume change.
(edited by Ayrilana.1396)
Why not find a counter to the builds? There has to be one.
They’d have to wait for someone to publicly post one which may not ever happen.
There are many websites that post all types of builds, also simply asking friends, guildies etc usually works for most people. Its not hard for anet to know what people are running. They nerf one, to bring up another, it gets abused, nerfed etc etc
Except people don’t otherwise we wouldn’t have this thread to post in.
Why not find a counter to the builds? There has to be one.
They’d have to wait for someone to publicly post one which may not ever happen.
Man i love this, Guild Wars 2 have changed a lot, “Play how you want to” is completely gone… and every update its like the make the rope tighter and tighter… oh great we have tons of Styles appeal … but no content.
I love to multi-box! I’ve multibox on many other MMORPG but with so many restrictions… and hey SURPRISE the post for multibox/macro is gone does that mean that a ban stick is coming??
Well in short.. my love for MMORPG is fading really fast.
Best of lucks Anet, its been fun!
How is it completely gone?
I mean, more choices is better than less, but if you’re going to fix it, why not fix it right? – More choices, less specificity.(for all game modes)
You mean more choices that can be completed easily.
Why do you assume that’s what we mean? The old dailies had “Kill 40 mobs” or whatever. What we object to is being limited in our open-PvE choices AND being given specific maps instead of choosing where we want to play. And no one said we wanted only easy stuff.
I made a post earlier that removed the zone specific requirements but increased the completion requirements.
- Complete 15 events
- Gather 30 times from any node
- Complete two explorable/story paths
- Complete a full fractal run
- Daily activity participation
- Defeat two world/temple bosses
- Defeat 100 enemies
- Complete three jumping puzzles
- Complete a personal story instance
What if they had the following choices for PvE which remained static (did not change each day):
- Complete four events in a specific zone
- Gather in a specific zone
- Complete an explorable/story path in a specific dungeon
- Complete a full fractal run
- Daily activity participation
- Defeat a specific world/temple boss
- Defeat 50 enemies of a specific type (e.g. risen, krait, grawl, etc)
- Complete three jumping puzzles
- Complete a personal story instance
That’s nine choices for PvE when you had eight before.
Why not…
- Complete five events
- Gather a certain amount
- Complete an explorable/story path in a dungeon
- Complete a full fractal run
- Daily activity participation
- Defeat a world/temple boss
- Defeat 50 enemies
- Complete three jumping puzzles
- Complete a personal story instance
Oh, those were the old dailies…
Why the constraints? Why not let the people decide for themselves where they like to play?
And if you must have a constraint, make it area instead of map.
Because you only need to complete 3 daily achievements. I did make another post with them less constrained but with much higher completion requirements. A lot of people just want the daily to be a passive reward system.
What you’d be asking for is basically a reward for playing the game such as rewarding everyone who plays for 30 minutes.
What? This makes no sense. Viewing a vista, doing 4 events, and gathering x things will take pretty much the same time no matter where it’s done. Or I could potentially make the daily longer and harder for myself by doing a fractals 50 instead of a level 10. Why do those doing level 10 get rewarded for doing easier content? Why must those with a higher level be required to nerf their rewards and spend time doing a lower, easier and more boring level? But for the majority of the dailies, again, the biggest difference is subjective, as the ones with more choice (ie they can be completed anywhere in Tyria) are completed organically, are enjoyable and not as forced.
The difference being that you cannot passively complete them.