Guild Wars 2

Killthehealersffs.8940:

Iason Evan.3806:

I don’t want the fix in the form of limiting how much a player can send.

It doesnt limit the gold you sent ….

You can send me 1.000 gold
But i can get 500 gold per week
Then an other 500 the next week

If you look closly , you have already answered the problem that are trying to solve :

That’s really interesting. Let me get this straight, someone hacks your account(you have 3000g) and they have like 10 accounts. They can send 500g to 6 of those accounts and still have 4 other accounts on which to use to hack other accounts and repeat the process and they can send as much gold out as they want? I didn’t even know that. That is really disconcerting.

By hacking 1 ACCOUNT to get the gold
> the foolish gold sellers will expose 6-10 other hacked accounts to transfer all the money and split among them

Rather than using 1v1 ( 1 account hack vs 1 gold seller account) trassing + banning , they will do the job more easily and faster .

Otherwise in ‘’normal 1v1 sutioation’’ the hacker will earn less money

Risk vs Reward …

i realize it doesn’t limit amount sent. I am saying that I don’t want to see legitimate players hurt if they decide to put limits on how much can be sent. If it is so easy to see which accounts are sending gold out to numerous accounts, and the numbers are as small as arenanet says they are, then why not do all of this by hand?

pdavis.8031:

You can set up 15 different layers of passwords, but if players don’t practice best online security practices, then it’s not going to make it more difficult to hack. It will just take a bit longer.

I agree. Being a proactive player, I want added measures. Many people have been saying in here that “people won’t use it”. That’s all fine and good. It still needs to be implemented for people that will use it. ArenaNet can supply the tools and players can decide if they want to use them. That way, if players choose not to use them, the fault is their own for not employing said measures.

pdavis.8031:

I wasn’t aware the loot tables have been changed, or modified in farming spots. I have a few that I visit occassionally and haven’t noticed anything amiss. But unless there is documentation that loot tables have been tampered with, I am going to assume that it is more a cognitive bias more than anything, and thus not really reliable.

My point with the farming spots was an example to a larger issue I see as a player:
I am tired of general player concerns taking forever to address and implement but when it has to do with ArenaNet’s bottom line, immediate action is taken. I am not ArenaNet. What I am is a paying customer that wants security holes for the players to be fixed. I am proactive in reporting bots and gold sellers and yet at any time, I could be hacked and stripped of all my wealth at any time and said hacker could send off all my wealth in no time flat. That doesn’t strike you as a flaw in their plan?

I don’t want the fix in the form of limiting how much a player can send. All that does is harm players who play the game within the rules like myself. I want a password protected bank because I am a partner with ArenaNet in being proactive about keeping my account and real money —->gems —-> gold which in turn means my gold is real money protected by a secure, long term solution in the form of a password protected bank in which I can store said real money.

You can agree with that or not. I really honestly flat out don’t care whether you do or not. I am asking for a measure of security that should have been implemented ages ago if player accounts are really of paramount importance. The proposed solution by ArenaNet goes too far by limiting honest players without going far enough to actually give honest, proactive players the security they deserve.

Commenting on farming spots that have had their loot dimished is missing the main thrust of my point. I get that you don’t agree. There are plenty of places that bots used to frequent that nobody farms like they used to because the loot just isn’t as good as it used to be. Trolls and Grawl in FS. Murellows as well. ArenaNet completely diminished the population of Skelk in Southsun as well. Sure, some of the water farms are still viable, but on the whole after hours and hours of farming at different times, the loot for the land based skelk are dropping way less and the populations aren’t what they once were….It’s partially my fault. I reported all of the bots I saw there, including bots that farmed sharks and would teleport in and out of the area with great frequency. But what message is ArenaNet sending me by being honest? The message I am getting loud and clear is, “We are going to eliminate the bots and nerf the amount of loot they drop and when said bots are no more, we won’t change the loot tables back to pre-bot levels.” Believe me or not. I don’t care. I can only go off of what my own eyes show me.

The main point is that this so-called fix has holes in it that can still be exploited. Real account security takes players and devs to accomplish. For ArenaNet to ban bots and gold sellers it takes players reporting said bots and gold sellers. The way they are setting this up isn’t a good long term solution. I know they aren’t surprised that people are taking umbrage with it. It’s flawed.

Dreamslayer.7659:

I have to say in my annoyance, I slightly misread the new policy.

Since there does not appear to be a limit on how much you can send, my original concerns can probably be addressed by adding a couple extra accounts and rotating them as needed. Not ideal, especially with the new account restrictions, but if I had known this earlier, I would have bought more.

That said, the lack of send restrictions is pretty interesting – it does not keep a hacker from sending out all your gold (they could send it to multiple accomplices if you have more than 500g).

I guess if they limited sending and not receiving, you could just have a lot of accounts send small transactions to the RMT customer until it adds up. That would be hard to monitor.

Still not loving it, but I’m slightly less annoyed.

That’s really interesting. Let me get this straight, someone hacks your account(you have 3000g) and they have like 10 accounts. They can send 500g to 6 of those accounts and still have 4 other accounts on which to use to hack other accounts and repeat the process and they can send as much gold out as they want? I didn’t even know that. That is really disconcerting.

Man, I wish some people had been asking for a way to store gold in their personal bank and an optional password protected bank account feature was implemented so that you could keep the bulk of your wealth protected there.

Why the heck aren’t limits being placed on how much can be sent IF we are never getting a way to secure our gold in a bank with password protection? Is account hacking limited to idiots who buy gold from gold selling sites? Or can it happen to anyone? If it’s the latter then why not limit sending of gold too? Surely, the good folks at ArenaNet aren’t suggesting that gold bots don’t have access to multiple accounts with which to carry out their nefarious plans?

There are so many ways around what you guys are suggesting is a fix for this issue. That, or you are doing other things as well behind the scenes, and that is all well and good, but there are better ways to implement this that don’t cause so much collateral damage.

I have reported/blocked more gold selling bots than I can count. I am tired of being an upstanding citizen and then being penalized for the work of cheaters, scammers and gold sellers. Heck, the bot population is WAY DOWN from where it used to be and you guys still haven’t brought the loot levels of good farming spots back up to their pre-gold bot loot drops. You guys make needed fixes, eliminate bots and then instead of bringing back the loot to said creatures, you leave the loot tables as if the bots are still there! It sucks.

If you have money and skill points and want to play now rather than waiting for the traits overhaul, your skill trainer will sell you the traits instead of you having to unlock them via busted game play options. If you were not logging in to at least get the Season 2 unlocks you will have to pay for Season 2 episodes. In the future, even if you never play, remember to log in every two weeks to get the episodes for free. Otherwise, you will have to pay for the episodes.

Welcome back after a year of being gone.

All that’s left to do is buy more of them whilst it’s a buyer’s market. Everyone who speculates gets burned from time to time. It’s just a fact. Most people will only tell you about their successes though. The more times you fail, the more often you will be able to spot bad decisions in purchasing.

Sorry if I wasn’t clear but you’d be able to buy a booster at the laurel vendor that would boost PvP Reward Track progress. Currently we can use the one we get a month in the daily track(that’s if you play every day) and we can use a birthday booster. It would be nice to see some stuff at the laurel vendor for PvP players.

So can we get ranked solo queue back?

Or nah?

I would really like to see some items added to the laurel vendors for PvP. A reward track booster springs to mind initially. Lasts an hour, offers the same stat increase as the Daily Reward Track ones do.

Any other ideas on what they could offer? Custom Arena Tokens? IDK, I am just throwing ideas around. PvPers get laurels the same as other Tyrians. It would be nice to see some rewards for it on the laurel vendor.

Thanks.

mrstealth.6701:

Iason Evan.3806:

We keep getting told that our security is top priority and yet the only thing happening with this change is limiting movement of funds—something that benefits ArenaNet. Awesome. I am all for them getting their “security” on their wealth.

How is this benefiting Anet? Aside from helping to fight illegitimate RMT and maybe getting those players to use the gem exchange instead. That’s better for all of us.

And anything that makes RMT sellers’ business more difficult is actually helping to protect players. Cleaning out stolen accounts is more difficult, less efficent, and less profitable now.

It would be nice to see an option for a secondary password-protected bank, but that’s a feature most are likely not to use, or not use properly. If people had even basic password/security practices, account theft would be a tiny fraction of the issue it currently is.

So you ask a question that you then go on to partially answer yourself and gloss over the gist of my overall point? Come on, man.

I have mulled this over in my mind for a little bit. Part of the reason I am railing against this is because ArenaNet misused my trust with the gem shop interface fiasco. They got forgiveness when they dealt with the issue so swiftly, but now I am always on guard with them. I love when we get honest reasons for why changes are happening and as a consumer I can see that their actions match up with their words. This issue is again another instance of that simply not being the case. Their words aren’t matching up with their actions.

If account security were paramount, we would have personal banks that had the ability to store gold in them and had a way for us to password protect them. That way we could store gold and it would give players a 2-fold way to protect their in-game, and actual wealth.

If I buy gems and convert that money to gold—my ‘fake’ game currency is no longer fake—it’s real money at that point. I want to store gold in my bank because it’s giving me the ability to store real wealth. I shouldn’t even have to type that out. I shouldn’t even have to list the other reasons why I want to do that.

We keep getting told that our security is top priority and yet the only thing happening with this change is limiting movement of funds—something that benefits ArenaNet. Awesome. I am all for them getting their “security” on their wealth.

I have been asking for password protected personal banking for over a year now. I have seen a lot of blog posts by ArenaNet saying our account security is top priority. Prove it. Your words don’t match up with your actions and are doing so less and less as the years go by. As players, our in-game gold is often times “real money”. Give us a way to further protect our wealth.

ArenaNet is super quick to act on protecting their own money. And for good reason. I am not faulting them for that. They just don’t seem to be as quick to respond to protecting our investments. As a paying customer, I would like to see that change. I would also like to see some honest reasons and transparency for changes like this.

Stop treating me like an idiot even though I am one. You guys had a lot of cache with me. I have been with you since the beginning and you are starting to lose the trust you have built up over the years. Rectify it by putting your money where your mouth is on how much of a priority it is to protect your players.

Gaile Gray.6029:

Xdmatt — this is great, what a fine community spirit you’re showi… wait a minute, I see what you did there!

Iason — I am not sure about the answer to this. As pdavis and mtpelion point out, the wallet is account bound and does not have a limit. So I’m curious why you feel a second storage option is needed.

steve and others — I will ask about the functionality of a “sent items” system. However, off the top of my head I suspect that implementing such functionality would not be a trivial or easy process, and I can see it would involve several teams (programming, UI, art, etc.). As Ic points out, it may be seen as more a QoL factor than an essential system change. But again, I’ll see what I can find out or a dev may post here to answer this question.

suffish — I have not heard that there’s a motivation factor involving preventing player-to-player trading. As the statement says, this is about curbing fraud, RMT, and the oft-related account thefts.

Rising Dusk — another question I’ll need to ask. But when accounts are proven to have been hacked, the account is restored (rolled back) so would that not accomplish the same thing that you’re proposing? And wouldn’t doing what you propose make restorations a moot factor?

hrasna — you’ve hit a very important point here: This change will impact very, very few players. In fact, in previous statistical reviews, the percentage of players who would be impacted would be in the low single digits.

I still haven’t gotten an answer to my question and would totally love one. I did however answer the question I got in response for my question.

Thanks.

Hambone.4267:

5.) ANET’s pro arguments are lame in the extreme and reminiscent of Comcast switching from unlimited downloads to data caps because “most people won’t be effected”.

I lol’ed. ArenaNet is the Comcast of MMO makers? Ouch man.

This is awesome! Thanks so much!

Zaklex.6308:

For those of you wanting the put the ability to store your gold in your personal bank, I have some news for you, and you’re not going to like it. You have problems if you can’t keep yourself from spending the gold in your account, it’s called impulse shopping, and if you do it in GW2, then you do it in RL too and really need professional help

If you bother to read the Gold Sellers notices, they all start at 1000 gold for $XX.XX, by limiting the amount they can transfer to 500g a week, you’ve effectively, at the minimum just doubled their cost of doing business. More likely you’re looking at a 66 – 75% increase in cost of doing business. Think about that for a while.

Think about this for a while: Personal banks used to be in the game. Was it for impulse spending? Who knows. ArenaNet made a mistake, had to remove them and has done literally zero to bring them back. Most MMOs including GW2’s predecessor had banks that could store gold in them. Was that just some arbitrary thing thrown in because, “Hey! Everyone else was doing it so we thought we would too!” No. It wasn’t. There are myriad good reasons for allowing players to store gold in their bank. It’s why so many games including this one had it in as a launch QoL feature. They are appreciated by the community.

Heck, I think they should take it a step further and give us banks that optionally can require a 4-digit pin or password that is required to be wholly different from our login password to further assure players of ArenaNet’s absolute commitment to player security.

Ark Bladesteele.2943:

Wow, so we’re going back to GW1 and ecto trading again? That’s forward-thinking.

At least there you had a spot to store 1 million gold. The fact that this game doesn’t have build templates or a personal bank but used to have one and now has a trading cap and GW1 had both those things is mind boggling to me. Will templates and personal banks come back to the franchise once you figure out a way to monetize it?

I am normally very affable on these forums but this is an issue to me like the gem shop switch. It’s infuriating. Part of the reason it’s infuriating is the obfuscation of the whole truth of what’s behind this. What’s being said as the reason, coupled with the action being taken, It just doesn’t add up. Methods that look a lot better to both ArenaNet and player have been put forward in this thread just as reactions. That’s not even with serious time invested in thinking about it.

At this point, why not get rid of the TP and we can add a Trade channel? Between what the house(ArenaNet)takes in posting fees and now this garbage and the way it limits how much mail we can send. It’s off putting to say the least.

pdavis.8031:

Dreamslayer.7659:

TooBz.3065:

Guys. It’s 500 gold a week. It’s not going to impose on anyone except RMT.

Kitten, it’s more gold each week than I’ve ever seen.

This is flat out not true. Some people craft items in very high volume for very thin margins. If you’re dealing in the 500-2000g range, even a 5% profit is good money if you can turn it over in a day.

It’s not that crafters are “making” 500g per day, but if you send a few hundred gold to your secondary accounts to buy materials and assemble or refine them, you can hit this limit in a day – two or three days if you’re an amateur.

It’s very depressing how often we see “new features” that are “for our protection/benefit” that just reduce our quality of life when we know that the bag guys are going to find a way around it, but we’re going to have to live with it every day.

So instead of sending gold to crafting alts, why not purchase the items and send them?
If effectly does the same job, invloves the same steps, and has the exact same result.

because you are very limited on how much mail you can send in a row. there aren’t that many slots per mail either. heck, you can’t even mail your whole party something.

MashMash.1645:

Surely the gold seller accounts are easy to spot via AP, time played or some other metric? Surely real players can be id’d this way and get access to moving larger amounts of gold or something?

^This is actually a really good idea. Couple that with how long someone has been your friend/length of time w/out infraction. There are myriad ways to handle this and protect the community without punishing them along with the offenders.

People are just spitballing ideas here and they sound a lot better than the one that is going to be implemented.

CzarZ.3405:

Even though I don’t regularly trade that much gold, I can definitely see the grief with this. This seems like a poorly planned out “fix” to a larger problem.
Also, I think it’s probably a push by NCSoft to restrict people from converting gold to gems, especially if they farm gold on multiple accounts and want to send it to a central account. They’d rather put restrictions like this to force people to buy gems, then convert to gold (anyone else remember the 400gem minimum fiasco that happened earlier on? They didn’t learn their lesson).

If this is implemented, as people have stated, it can easily be circumvented by simply trading items now in lieu of gold.

Also, while we address this issue, how about also highlighting some others.

1. Remove the 2 mail limit for friends, guildies, and party members. We are not RMT, and it’s ridiculous that ANet can’t code to allow legitimate mailings to go through without wasting time waiting for the limit to go on cooldown.
2. Remove the TP listing fee if something doesn’t sell. Right now I want to put up an a skin worth 1000g onto the TP but I can’t invest 50g into the listing fee that I might loose if someone decides to undercut me. The current TP selling and listing fee are very restrictive to new players and to people that aren’t racking in a lot of gold, but do get the occasional RNG gods to smile upon them. The idea of making more money until you an list something is ridiculous. If there is a listing fee, it should only be included if the item successfully sells. Evon Gnashblade doesn’t care about gold sinks like this; listing fees are petty money for him.

These are all fantastic points.

The “Friend/Guild” mail limit thing in particular. Heck, I can’t even send “scarlet’s minion slaying potions” to everyone in my fractal group if we get one of the fractals that those potions help with. There is an issue when you can’t send everyone in your party something, let alone guild mail etc.

Zepher.7803:

if you can’t hold onto gold because “it’s there” that is a personal problem….and one that might need to be addressed by professional help, come on….take responsibility for your own actions; anet doesn’t need to babysit impulsive people.

Your argument doesn’t make sense to me.

Why do you think other games have banks that can hold gold? Why did this game used to have it? Why does its predecessor still have it? It’s not like it’s some bygone system from Ultima circa ‘99. *It’s still a totally valid approach to storage for in-game wealth.*

I would almost understand the petty tone of your argument if it weren’t something that almost every MMO offers access to.

This game had it and lost it due to technical difficulties when they made a switch to some things in a feature patch. This game would still have it if there wasn’t a complication that has absolutely zero to do with me.

Stop acting like people asking for this are careless children wanting to blow all their allowance at the candy shop. I am asking for a very basic QoL item that used to be in the game that ArenaNet made a mistake with and it went away. If anything they should be rectifying the issue and fixing it.

timmay.2613:

Artaz.3819:

Dear ANet, you do realize that Gold Sellers will now pick a highly liquid asset that represents approximate gold value (i.e. Globs of Ectoplasm) and use that instead, right? Of course, they’ll continue to use +500g immediate sales as well.

I’ve seen similar measures done by other MMOs and guess what happens? Alternate items are used instead and it’s a very vicious cycle.

Limiting gold transfer rates does not work. Monitoring and then quickly freezing/holding suspicious activity like a credit card company does work (quick release logic, is the send on the receivers friend list/in his or her guild/did they actually send a reply or to message, were they recently in a party, etc.). The KEY to gold sellers is quick delivery. If the gold sellers can’t guarantee a 48-hour or less turnaround, they go out of business as word gets around.

This is bad bad bad. Stop before you reinvent the economy for players. At best you killed a portion of the Gold Sellers gold assets (which they stole) from the 15% gold lost from Trading Post fees. BUT that all that doesn’t stop the hacking and only effectively increases the outside sale price of gold by 15%. At worst, you just upended the trading post economy and lots more legit playing and core players will lose out on the new screwed up economy.

Thanks for the Glob of Ectoplasm rise … doh ><

This

And the economists at ArenaNet are smart enough to know this. Yet they do it anyways. Maybe that is part of the reasoning behind it?

In my opinion, part of the reasoning behind not letting us have gold storage is leaving us with the temptation to spend said gold on gems or back into the economy. I would imagine the economists are aware of the metrics and research behind employing such methods for that as well.

It would be nice to actually get a response to my original query though instead of just being asked why I want it. I think enough people here have stated reasons as have I. I still haven’t gotten a response as to whether or not we will get personal gold storage back.

I have said what I wanted to say now.

I went looking through a lot of the MMOs I play and a lot of them have a gold storage option. It makes me wonder why a lot of the people criticizing my opinion of not having a personal bank option to store gold are doing so.
What’s so hard about understanding that I want a place to put my gold I want to save?

What’s so hard about understanding that I also want access to all my gold when I want to access it and not on a per week basis?

Whether or not I have that much gold is moot. I don’t want to be told how much of my money I can have access to at any given time.

Storing gold in banks should just be a standard issue MMO thing. Putting caps on what I can share with characters or friends or whatever is (and I mean no disrespect) flat out garbage.

Gaile Gray.6029:

Xdmatt — this is great, what a fine community spirit you’re showi… wait a minute, I see what you did there!

Iason — I am not sure about the answer to this. As pdavis and mtpelion point out, the wallet is account bound and does not have a limit. So I’m curious why you feel a second storage option is needed.

steve and others — I will ask about the functionality of a “sent items” system. However, off the top of my head I suspect that implementing such functionality would not be a trivial or easy process, and I can see it would involve several teams (programming, UI, art, etc.). As Ic points out, it may be seen as more a QoL factor than an essential system change. But again, I’ll see what I can find out or a dev may post here to answer this question.

suffish — I have not heard that there’s a motivation factor involving preventing player-to-player trading. As the statement says, this is about curbing fraud, RMT, and the oft-related account thefts.

Rising Dusk — another question I’ll need to ask. But when accounts are proven to have been hacked, the account is restored (rolled back) so would that not accomplish the same thing that you’re proposing? And wouldn’t doing what you propose make restorations a moot factor?

hrasna — you’ve hit a very important point here: This change will impact very, very few players. In fact, in previous statistical reviews, the percentage of players who would be impacted would be in the low single digits.

I don’t want that much gold on any of my characters. If I had my druthers and if security was really a priority, then we would get a password protected bank as well. That way, people could store gold in their bank and if their account got hacked, the hacker would need to hack a password that would have to have a mandatory different password than the account password.

Also the guild bank changes are terrible for those of us with more than 1 account. It’s bad enough that for the first month of having a second account, I have to take gold out in like 5g increments. I appreciate the protection, but clamping down on this stuff and taking away QoL options for storing gold isn’t that great. Heck, we had gold storage in GW1 as well as this game and you removed it. I disagree strongly with the choice to do so.

To be fair, why did you guys put gold storage in the game in the first place and then remove it? That is the question you should be asking. I am just asking for something back that should be in the game again. It gives you a place to put gold you don’t want to be tempted to buy stuff with on impulse. Then again, maybe that is why you removed the ability to store it.

mtpelion.4562:

Iason Evan.3806:

Does this mean we can get some form of gold storage back for our personal banks then? We were told a long time ago when gold storage in personal banks was removed that we should use guild banks to store our gold if we wanted a way to do that. With limits, it means that storing copious amounts of gold is no longer an option.

I would love some clarification on this. Thanks, Gaile.

You can store as much gold as you want in your wallet. Storing gold in a personal guild vault is a meaningless exercise (and super dangerous since you could accidentally leave your personal guild and lose all of your gold forever).

Hence why I am asking about our personal banks getting back the ability for us to store gold. It was a feature we had, that we lost and ArenaNet staff told us to use a personal guild bank. All I am asking for is clarification on whether or not they have the intention to add personal gold storage back to our personal banks.

Does this mean we can get some form of gold storage back for our personal banks then? We were told a long time ago when gold storage in personal banks was removed that we should use guild banks to store our gold if we wanted a way to do that. With limits, it means that storing copious amounts of gold is no longer an option.

I would love some clarification on this. Thanks, Gaile.

Temple of Lyssa. It goes a lot faster and you don’t get those dumb champ gorillas.

I am really excited about the long overdue precursor collections and crafting. I know that Linsey said that the icons in the collections tab were placeholders so that led me to wonder if that means there will be new content to go play in the base game.

This system has been in demand and talked about by players and dev. staff for 2 years or maybe more. If it was added like 6 months to a year into the game’s life cycle a simple collection of items + completion of existing content would have been fine. The fact that it’s coming after years of delays and frustration and silence on the topic has me hoping that a lot of game play has been added to the core game. If it’s just a simple collection(albeit time consuming) then why the extended delays? Couldn’t this have been implemented when collections were added as a feature to the game if that were the case?

I will be sorely disappointed if this were held back for the x-pac to get more people to buy the x-pac because you have to own it to even have access to the collection. This was something that ArenaNet had been talking about when some employees were quoted as saying they had no intention of ever doing an x-pac.

So what do you guys think? Are we getting new content to do or is this just going to be doing the same stuff we’ve been doing for 2+ years?

Players will generally always go for easiest and quickest methods of acquisition. If the new system is easier then precursor prices will drop due to demand going down. If it’s easier to farm gold and get your precursor that way, then prices will stay high due to high demand. It actually has the chance to be a fairly balanced method and I am sure that prices will stabilize around an amount that keeps buying or the new mastery method around the same amount of time vs. money.

P.S. This should have been implemented ages ago.

idk. i can’t be bothered to track such minutiae.

PaxTheGreatOne.9472:

Well… This is in open field while on the move, not in a WvW battle..

The second is in combat due to some ghosts popping up when I wanted to make my picture. All Plains of Ashford…

FPS will drop significantly when on world bosses or on wvw battles… so this is just to show it is possible to get good Fps.

This just proves the points people have been making though. You shouldn’t have to blunt-force trauma your way through a 3 year old game with two 780GTX’s. 2 of those cards can run anything like that. This game should be getting that kind of performance out of a single card solution.

Gern.2978:

Rift had a wardrobe long before GW2 even existed.

And LOTRO before that and others as well. I found it laughable that this game didn’t launch with it. Certain systems come around in games that other developers should take note of because they are so good and say to themselves that they need to add it on their launch day features checklist. A wardrobe system is one such feature.

It just doesn’t fit in this game at all. Now if you could get GW2’s combat mechanics/animations into ESO…

i appreciate the work that the team is doing for the leaderboards. i do however think that solo/team queues need to be separate. I want to be able to jump on and play a few matches without having to put a team together. I want to play in ranked against other like-minded solo-queuers.

This is the equivalent of having RA and TA in GW1 and queuing in RA and going up agaisnt TA queue. We used to have to win like 10 matches in a row before that happened.

It’s a bad system that pits soloers vs. team comps.

ZudetGambeous.9573:

2012: you WILL see new legendary weapons in 2013

2013: …..

2014: We are revamping the rewards and started over on the new legendary weapons, we will have them out asap.

2015: you will now have to pay for the legendary weapons but they WILL be coming with the expansion

2015: Well they actually won’t be coming with the expansion, only a couple will.

2016:… we wanted to make them even better, so you will need to buy the next expansion to get the rest of the legendary weapons

2016: actually we won’t be able to make that deadline, we will release just a couple

…
…
…

People are still buying this? time to wake up people, they are just bait and switching you into buying the expansion, there will not be any new legendary weapons.

Sadly, this argument uses evidence from the past to prognosticate the future and can’t really be faulted.

Behellagh.1468:

You said “critical phase” which implies to me what I suggested. Again crucial, via definition “involving an extremely important decision or result; decisive; critical”. I don’t see anything being extremely important decision wise going on.

The cake is in the oven and now all they have left to do is decide what type of frosting and decoration it’ll have. That has always been ANet’s modus operandi before telling us anything so why now assume it’s only half baked and the head chef needs to be hanging around to micromanage?

i guess we disagree. it’s all good. i do however think that the design of the revenant is crucial to the game. it’s a whole profession. when he left and even now, they are still shaping that profession from a design standpoint, but i respect your opinion and that we disagree.

Behellagh.1468:

My point is to me “critical” implies in midst of a crisis, a turning point that could mean success or failure of the whole game. I don’t see that. I see business as usual.

It’s also not uncommon for a lead designer to move on once their baby is born and got over their “teething” years. They live for the creation process and not the “maintenance” phase of a game.

To assuage your concerns, I didn’t use that version of critical. For example, I used critical in this sense of the word: “Pete is critical to the team. He brings a lot of talent to the team.”

If you’d like to substitute the word ‘crucial’ that’d be fine. The game is in a crucial stage of development. They are still creating it by designing things. HoT is still being birthed. I am saying exactly what you are. It’s odd for someone to be leaving while this is all still going on.

Behellagh.1468:

Iason Evan.3806:

A key person in design leaving mid-project is troubling. People come and go from game studios all the time, just not usually during such a critical phase. Sky ain’t falling or anything. Eye brow raising for sure though.

Critical phase? What critical phase? The game’s been out for over two years. Nothing “critical” was going on other than what some may feel to be a PR problem between players and developers. The expansion was likely simmering for the last year or more, simply waiting for the right time to announce it.

HoT design is in critical phase. Heck, as of a month ago they were still deciding what the other Legendary Stances were going to be for Revenant. When people leave a company during creative phases, something has usually happened. I am in no way saying that is what happened here, but when you design stuff you usually want to see it through to the end as with any job. When you start a project you want to finish it.

A key person in design leaving mid-project is troubling. People come and go from game studios all the time, just not usually during such a critical phase. Sky ain’t falling or anything. Eye brow raising for sure though.

“For now, I’ll say that we’ve been working kitten new legendary weapons, the first handful of which will be introduced in Heart of Thorns, with more to come in subsequent updates.”

This sounds to me like we aren’t getting a new legendary for every weapon in the game at HoT launch either. A “handful” doesn’t scream “full set” of new legendaries to me. It’s also quietly tucked into the text as well.

I’d be down with it being 2000 gems. That seems a fair price.

If I were a bean counter for ArenaNet though, I would put it in as a rare chance to drop from the BL Chests just like the Perm. Makeover Kits. Those people are against fun.

I login to both my accounts for daily login reward. I actually complete my daily every once in a while and do some pvp. I logout.

LS is cool. Most of it has been temporary though. The good content goes away. The battle in LA was awesome. It’s gone though. The Marionette was rad. It’s gone. LS 2 has really great instances that give no reason to repeat them. There aren’t loot drops. Isn’t loot a part of replayability? Why make content that isn’t really replayable? Isn’t that part of the allure of an MMO? A lot of the design hours that go into this game are to make content that doesn’t stick around.

TL;DR Bleh state confirmed.

A guildy of mine brought up a great point about the end of the post that says, “handful of new legendaries”. I wonder if every weapon will get a new legendary or just like 4-5 of them and then we have to wait until the next batch to get more(or the rest)? I don’t know why i assumed that every weapon will get a new legendary, but it surely wasn’t phrased like it was in Linsay’s post before.

They could tell everyone SAB is active, but if you try to enter it, it puts your character into a cage for 24 hours where you get lectured by Trahearne about why SAB is dumb.

Gildhur.1548:

So is this new crafting process going to be any shorter than the existing gathering process? Because at the rate I play and given all that is required to collect for the legendary I want, I will literally never have it.

It would be nice if there were a method that doesn’t require sacrificing your entire life to get a nice weapon skin.

It’s not really like that. You just have to make it the focus of your game play. Set small goals. “Today I am gonna get x, y, and z done.” Doing it that way is much better but yeah, it’s an involved process and should be. Most of this game is tailored around playing for short periods of time. It’s nice to have long term goals in the game for people that play more. It can still totally be done even by people with limited time.

Cele was released so they could test out Ascended time gating.

for Dreamer you just have to /sleep in a town and BAM! Here’s your precursor! :P

Tree.3916:

@OP, From your post, it is obvious that you have not experienced all game modes to their fullest. It is also obvious that you are speculating on the expansion since information is still quite sparse. How about you wait a month or two after the expansion is released so you can better kitten whether or not you want to purchase the game before you make inflammatory posts on the forums.

I didn’t find their tone to be inflammatory at all really. I think these are valid concerns to have given what little we know.

I don’t know that it will go down like this, but I can see where they are coming from for sure. How long will 2-3 maps keep the seasoned veteran busy for? Will I feel like this x-pac was worth my time? None of us can answer than until later, but asking the question isn’t inflammatory. It’s a good question.

I for one wish they had used the same release structure as GW1. Getting standalone games frequently with new classes and skills etc. was great. Eye of the North brought about the release of armor sets, weapon skins, new dungeons and new skills as well as racial skills. It was a blast. LS S1 & 2 paled in comparison for me.

I think the most subtle annoyance for me is going to come in the form of this x-pac being wholly set in one region: The Jungle. It will offer no variety in climate. Variety of maps is a big deal that not a lot of people think about because it’s such a subtle thing, but how much time am I really going to want to spend in one climate type?

This is how I have wanted the system to work since day 1. People that want a specific legendary don’t have to rely on RNG and those that don’t care aren’t flooding the market with ones they have grinded out. You get a precursor as a drop and it still has value on the market.

Good stuff ANet!

I am bummed we aren’t getting new dungeon content. I am also bummed Chris Whiteside left because he was the one hinting at the possibility and talking about Guild Raids. I would imagine those still may be a thing albeit not a great chance of that with this x-pac.

I game with a tight-knit crew of pals that has been playing this franchise since 2007 together and apart since launch.

Dungeons are our fave thing to do together and have spanned multiple titles. The thing that is so disconcerting about this game not getting any new 5-man instanced dungeon content replete with earnable rewards from said content is that the mechanics in this game are far superior to other games in the genre in my opinion.

I don’t know what happened that made them decide to nix creating new dungeon content when they have made some of my favorite dungeons over the years. There is a good segment of the population that likes dungeon content. Heck, there was even a time that dungeon speed clear competitions were getting more views than PvP in this game. For good reason too. It’s way more enjoyable to watch.

ArenaNet, please reconsider your stance on creating new dungeon content. It adds to my fears that we won’t even be getting any new armor skins or glider skins for playing content in the game as rewards or crafting. I fear they will all be on the gem shop.

None of this even has anything to do with my biggest complaint of the x-pac: Zero climate diversity. It’s all jungle all the time. Have fun staring at the same flora and fauna in 2 or 3 maps for a month, let alone 6 months. It’ll get grating really quickly.

just game the system.

• get 5 random people together that all have access to an internet connection, headsets, gw2 and TS, vent, or whatevs.

• everyone rolls turret engies

• win matches against all the random teams

• lose less matches than you win because random teams won’t win vs. 5 engies

• claim your jolly llamas at the end of the test

I am tired of tests. I am tired of solo queue not having it’s own queue. you had to win 10 games in a row in RA to get into TA when you queued for RA. Bring Solo queue back.

We need tiers. We need rewards for tiers we are in.

All this testing is getting old. This stuff should have been ironed out ages upon ages ago.