So um. I used to use the quaggan tonic, enable walking speed and then move to the side and forward at the same time. It created this amazing thing where there would be no walking animation. It was super fun and wasn’t “fixed” until the recent patch. Just wondering if y’all can put that back in the game. Please.
How is that “Not Cool” ? I get that you liked the glitch. But ANet fixes stuff like this all the time, e.g. I miss when my mesmer would go skating after using blink.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Actually it’s a lot less than that. At a 1 in 3 chance 15 tries giving you 0 scraps is 0.23%. 0 tickets is expected, 73.9% of the time.
You are right; I posted the wrong number (I’ll fix my post to reflect that). The conclusion is still accurate: the OP had bad luck, well within the range we would expect to see given that there are 1,000s of players opening 15 chests.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Nothing of what is realeased in Gemstore today (29/9), or since a few days back, is new… still there are lots of things labeled “New”… Call them returning or something but not New!
They might be for F2P but not for us veterans.
If you’re a veteran, you should recognize that this is a traditional phrasing that ANet uses to announce “items newly added to the current options”.
I’m in favor of them using less ambiguous language. I doubt their current language is meant to be misleading.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Because it uses your inventory items instead. Right, that’s not really a real answer — it is probably, however, accurate, i.e. because they didn’t think of it originally. Now, they’d have to create a new UI for it.
I’d like that functionality (and I think it would be easy to avoid accidents, since the ‘inventory’ and ‘bank’ would be in separate tabs or panels, like they are now at crafting stations). I just don’t think it’s likely.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I wouldn’t waste wisdom and logic on someone who tosses around ‘fanboy’ as a counter-argument.
I wouldn’t waste wisdom and logic on someone who reduces the argument of your opponent on one word, completely ignoring the rest, as a counter-argument, while at the same time not contributing anything new to the discussion.
Interesting that, here you are, wasting time (if not wisdom or logic) on arguing about whether a follow-up argument was worth arguing over.
If your goal is to encourage ANet to change things, then I recommend these simple (although difficult to master) steps:
Accept the reality. In this case, it’s the ANet periodically removes, replaces, and returns just about all items to the gem shop.
Try to understand the theories as to why this might be so, even if you choose not to agree. In this case, there are three main ones: artificial scarcity (also used by Apple, BMW, etc.), clutter reduction (since the UI doesn’t leave room for lots of stuff), and reward revaluation (players devalue that which is always available).
Respectfully offer your critique.
Offer ANet an alternative that meets their needs and benefits the entire community.
Getting angry and calling people names might make you feel better; it’s not likely to catalyze action from ANet.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Currently it’s estimated that a scrap is 1 in 3 and a full ticket is 1 in 50.
If you start with 0 scraps, statistically it’ll average 28 chests to get one ticket, either whole or 10 or more scraps.
That said it’s also true that 30.4% of the time 28 chests aren’t enough to get even a single ticket while 5% of the time you could get 3. However due to the accumulation of scraps the overall average is a bit under 20 chests on average, using those odds for scraps and tickets.
To expand a little:
There’s ~1.8% ~0.23% chance of getting 0 scraps from 15 unlocked chests, i.e. the OP was unluckier than 98 of 100 ~998 out of 1,000 people with 15 keys.
edit: Behellagh’s numbers are correct; mine were not. I’ve updated my post accordingly.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Would a Dev please confirm the specific amount if possible?
They might not know yet (i.e. still tweaking things). And if they did know, it’s not likely that they would tell us — they usually want us to wait for launch/update to find out most details.
There is precedent, but it tends to be vague, e.g. for the introduction of specializations, they told us that [leveling up to 80 would grant enough Hero Points to unlock all specializations] — I don’t remembering them confirming the exact number.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
So with all beta characters being deleted “[d]ue to large back-end changes to core systems that have corrupted some of the beta data”, do we get a fresh bank loadout so I can actually stock up ascended armor to run frac 50s with a fresh beta ele/guard/ranger?
I interpret the quote to mean they completely refreshed the data and we have to start from scratch. (That’s far easier to do than to delete individual characters and since it has no LIVE game consequences, it’s lower risk, too.)
It’s unclear when they are taking the snapshot tho…
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
In my inventory there is a total of 7 guild commendations, when i go to a vendor to try and cash them in it says i have 0? How is this possible?
Greetings,
Plurp
It’s a temporary bug and the developers are aware of it already. However, it won’t prevent you from spending your commendations.
It affects several different currencies:
Your wallet shows the correct amount.
You can spend that amount at the relevant vendor.
However, the vendor window shows the amount as zero.
tl;dr it’s a known display issue with no impact on our ability to spend (and they haven’t given us an ETA for a fix — I’m hopeful we’ll see it in the next patch)
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
If HoT is in the Gem store then ANET still gets the box price. Because the money spent to buy the gems is still money that goes into ANET’s pockets.
You keep saying this and it’s still not true.
ANet gets the cash for purchased gems.
In the current situation, they also get cash for the cost of the game; in your scenario, they don’t.
Unless you think that people will spend just as much on gems as they would on the game itself — and if that were true, ANet would never have needed to have an expac; the gem shop alone would have paid for the same features.
tl;dr ANet gets more money because they lock certain privileges behind a pay wall and enough people are willing to pay to remove the restrictions. (Or just buy the expansion pack.)
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
This topic came up more often during the early days. I don’t think you’ll be satisfied with any answers. I just assume that the game will always include some content and some “vanity” items that I won’t be able to obtain; I find that helps me to enjoy the other bits more.
In the past (including GW1), ANet has always released some items that can only be obtained in obscure ways or in tiny supply or with infinitesimal drops rates. In GW1, some of those items were later made available through other means.
In GW2, everything in the gem shop eventually has come back. The exceptions are almost entirely due to changes in the game (for example, town clothes no long exist and were converted to outfits or tonics). So mostly you just have to wait long enough (again, with some notable exceptions).
It’s up to you how you want to deal with ANet’s marketing strategy.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
You don’t understand how the gem store works. For a gem to be available for someone to buy with gold the gem first needs to be purchased by someone with real money. That is where ANET gets paid.
You’re correct that any gems exchanged for gold are there because someone else is exchanging them for gold. However, you’ve assumed that that’s all the cash that people would have spent. The way it works now: ANet gets cash for the gems and they get more cash when people buy HoT. (Or when Amazon buys copies of the core game to sell to folks.)
Once someone has purchased gems with cash, ANET doesn’t have any reason to care who spends the gems as ANET has already been paid.
Except ANet has already been paid only for the gems; they haven’t also been paid for the expac or the core game.
Or put another way, the equivalent scenario would be that Player A buys the core game for cash and then puts that on the exchange (in return for gold). Then Player B would exchange coin for that Core Game unlock. I guess ANet could do that; it’s just easier to ask everyone to pay for their own unlocks.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
If they want to remove the restrictions, they are “forced” to buy the full expansion even if all they want is the core game.
How else should it work? If permissions are locked behind the pay wall, then you have to pay to unlock them.
Or do you have a Plan B for maintaining ANet’s revenue stream, finding other things that distinguish cash accounts from non-cash, and protect the community from gold traders/bots/etc?
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Then I will just chalk this down as another line of BS from Anet. Thanks all.
Why? There’s no evidence at all for what the drop rate was pre-patch (except: very very low). And there’s no data now either for whatever the new drop rate might be (except: very very low). All we have is stories from people who did or didn’t get a few keys; we don’t know how many drops they are getting, so we have no baseline with which to compare.
tl;dr we don’t know the drop rate before the patch; we don’t know it after — it’s (so far) impossible to say if it’s higher or the same.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Cheapest I have seen lately is $15.99 for GW2 Core Heroic Edition at greenmangaming.com, in the VIP sale section. They are a legitimate online retailer.
I bought it that way, didnt want to waste $50 on an expansion before I even played the core game. I’m in no hurry for the expansion,. I’ll get it when its on sale some day.
Anet obviously does not want to make a cheaper option available when they can use the F2P trial to coerce new players to buy a full price expansion instead.
Maybe it’s because they are a company, not only with bills to pay but with stockholders who need to see that the expansion is bringing in the sales. The trouble with using gems is that gems bought before a quarterly report’s time period can’t be counted towards current sales. Let’s say a significant number of people buy the expansion with “old” gems. All those gems have been reported already and all the expansions sold that way don’t count towards that quarter’s finances. It hurts ANet’s financial records and makes the expansion look like it’s not selling well.
I didnt say anything about using gems. I dont think its right, however, to force new players to buy an expansion when the full core game was being sold by Anet for $10 just a few months back. They seemed to be paying the bills just fine then.
No one is forced to buy the core game. The US$10 price for the game was for limited amounts of time; the price went back to ‘normal’ and there were also smaller discounts.
Again, if you want or hope for ANet to change the current policy, you need to help them address these issues:
Ensure that there is a meaningful distinction for paid accounts vs unpaid ones.
Ensure that ANet has an equivalent revenue stream to make up for the lost income.
Ensure that gold sellers, gold farmers, and account thieves aren’t able to take advantage of the system, which would hurt the entire community in several ways.
Limited access to certain features is certainly the easiest approach. It might also be the “best”, in terms of costs (both to ANet and its players) and benefits (both to ANet and its players).
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Small annoyance easily solved. As many of us do, I keep stacks of crafting materials in my bank. And for some reason when I craft “x” the crafting uses materials out of the stacks (that I deliberately put into my bank AS stacks) instead of materials in my collections… Can we get that reversed please? Draw material from the incompletely stacks within the collection BEFORE using materials out of bank? Didn’t it used to function that way anyways?
( bump or comment if you agree please =P )
ANet commented on this in these very forums some time ago and their general take seemed to be that it was better to err on the side of reducing clutter first.
Whatever way they set it up would be counter-intuitive to someone: if they removed from collections first, there would be those trying to free up bank space that would be annoyed.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Some of you are saying it’s not a big deal. But, in fact, it is.
Did you mean that some people think it’s a big deal? Because, as a factual matter, it affects one out of a potential 52 mission nights over a 364-day period. How is that “big”?
Further, how else do you propose that they handle it?
Change it so that there are will be two resets within 7 days? Then people (presumably different ones) will complain that some groups got an advantage, since not everyone plays as often.
Postpone the change to happen close to HoT’s launch? That means that ANet has to consider other potential issues, which in turn leaves less time to work on things that can’t be postponed.
If they push 2 resets in 7 days (normal on Saturday, new one one Monday, Monday from there on out), then anyone that goes to the effort will get a whopping 2-day head start on a whopping 7 guild commendations. Of course people will complain, but the actual gain is trivial. Compare that with (in effect) removing content, and it should be the obviously better choice.
It’s not at all obvious that it’s a “better” choice to me, since they aren’t “removing” content — at the very worst, they are removing a single opportunity to earn a certain set of rewards.
If the actual “gain” of providing two resets within 7 days is “trivial” then isn’t it equally true that the actual “loss” of allowing only 1 reset in 10 days is equally trivial?
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Some of you are saying it’s not a big deal. But, in fact, it is.
Did you mean that some people think it’s a big deal? Because, as a factual matter, it affects one out of a potential 52 mission nights over a 364-day period. How is that “big”?
Further, how else do you propose that they handle it?
Change it so that there are will be two resets within 7 days? Then people (presumably different ones) will complain that some groups got an advantage, since not everyone plays as often.
Postpone the change to happen close to HoT’s launch? That means that ANet has to consider other potential issues, which in turn leaves less time to work on things that can’t be postponed.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I’m not sure what people were expecting for precursor crafting.
ANet said all along that they didn’t plan to upend the existing precursor market.
They also said that it was going to be a journey, not something you could whip out in a day or three.
They also implied (if not actually stated) that existing collections were the model or test runs for precursor acquisition.
Those ideas alone rule out precursor crafting being cheap or easy and instead suggest it would close to the Lumi Armor/Mawdrey process: a lot of steps, related in lore to the goal, some farming, some gating, some options to save time|money via TP, a lot of traveling, a lot of miscellaneous steps.
So far, the preview shows exactly that.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I was apart of Guild Wars 2 pre-launch and had access to the Celebration Hat (a cap with the GW2 symbol on it)
But after the Wardrobe was introduced although I had it, it’s not unlocked on my account.
Can anet fix this please?
You’ll have to work with customer service to see if they can help. It’s not a ‘bug’, in that any skins you had in inventory or as skins (or even a recently-used skin) were added to everyone’s wardrobe — this includes the Celebratory Hat.
Templates are something we would love to do. We have talked about this quite a bit, and with the frequency we’re seeing raid builds get tweaked we agree this would be a huge help.
Kormir be praised!
(Looking forward to seeing the implementation of some of the ideas people have offered in these forums.)
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
That just doesn’t seem right. More HP than exist in the game?
Technically, it’s only more HP than exist in the Core game. My expectation is that there will be more ways to get HP in HoT (or ANet should expect a lot of rage from anyone with more than 5 characters…and maybe even from those with fewer than 5).
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I have a friend who is doing F2P but unfortunately he cannot afford the full HoT price. I think there should be either a token or a way to “upgrade” him from a F2P to Core game, without having to buy the expansion. You could even put it in the in-game store for 800 gems or say if you buy gems on your account it lifts the F2P restrictions. I would personally be glad to buy the token to lift the F2P restrictions. As we are playing, I keep hearing, “I can’t do this, or that” from him and as annoying as it is to him to not be able to sell certain items or make more characters, or have enough storage, I really want him to enjoy the game so that when time comes that he can afford to buy the expansion, he does.
Technically, your friend has the core game. What he lacks are the unlocks. Those are there to (a) provide part of the substantive difference between paid and unpaid accounts and (b) to restrict gold sellers from exploiting play-for-free.
Allowing people to upgrade without paying cash negates both of the above. Losing the first hurts ANet’s bottom line (and would anger some customers that paid with real money). Losing the second hurts the economy.
Do you have a way to address either/both in a different way? I don’t see ANet changing the system otherwise.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
ANet never releases drop rate info. Never. The most I’ve ever seen them do in 6 years of following drop rate data is to confirm a data-supported theory that players have proposed (and I only remember that happening 2-3x and in GW1).
In the case of keys, there is absolutely no way for players to come up with a plausible theory: we just don’t kill enough foes and given the low drop rate, you’d have to track thousands and thousands of drops.
For example, one player recently opened 25,000 champ bags and got a single precursor. And there are plenty of examples of folks opening that many ToTs before getting their first mini gwyn (ghost puppy). The rate for keys (even after the buff) is presumably lower, which would mean tracking enough kills to get 25k drops. You’d have to forgo auto-looting, to ensure you were counting drops correctly.
tl;dr
Those who know (ANet), won’t say.
Those who say (any of us posting here), don’t know.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
In another (related) thread, the three most prominent theories were:
Rewards require some stacks of perseverance before the VW begins. (Everyone starts with ‘1’, so I have presumed the theorists mean ‘2+’.)
There is some sort of ‘diminished returns’ that limits characters to 3 VW per day.
There is a different sort of DR affecting those that jump maps to just do VW or VW+Breach.
In that other thread, other posters disagreed with each of the theories above for various reasons, most notably that if any of those were true, we should expect a lot of such reports.
That said, the easiest thing to try is to change the character you use to vinewrath every so often. Each of the theories above would be addressed by that.
Finally, regardless, Inculpatus’ advice is good: contact Customer Service.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Perhaps the engineer is swapping into or out of a kit, just after starting to channel the pick-up. If on an ele, you could try swapping attunements; on other profs, try swapping weapons.
(This is a complete guess on my part.)
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
It currently appears to be bugged as i have run the dungeon multiply times today, and killed all the chickens i could find, and i still haven’t been given the achievement.
How many did you kill? Sometimes, the chickens get stuck in a corner and are difficult to find.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Standing still and mashing a rotation is exactly what you get with the trinity.
Standing still and mashing a rotation is exactly what you get with BAD ENCOUNTER DESIGN.
The thing is, we have zero evidence that ArenaNet got any better in encounter design.
We have plenty of evidence that they are changing the types of encounters. It’s fine if you don’t like the direction the game is headed in (although that begs the question as to why you still want to keep playing it — but that’s your choice to make).
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
we was promised that we wouldn’t have dedicated healers (or atleast make it equal for all classes) and it seems like that is what the druid is directly,
I don’t understand why you think this is different from the current game. Some people already play with healing elementalists (see: WvW zerg play), healineers, and support-heavy guardians (other classes can also do this, just not necessarily as effectively).
so has Anet changed its stance on this and the “play how you want” (with new content that will probably HAVE to have healers/support classes to complete)?
The game was always structured for a combination of damage, support, and control. In the past, that has mostly meant a focus on damage, including support focused on increasing damage — this is because quicker fights are not only more efficient, they are also less risky.
What’s changed is the balance that will be required to tackle the new content. And until we actually play the new content, it’s hard to say if this means a huge change or just ANet thinking there will be a huge change.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
It’s great that ANet added Healers but some of us enjoy tanking, perhaps we could turn Reaper, Scrapper, and Herald into some hard control/tank role.
They didn’t add “healers” — they added a spec that has a very strong healing component. The point of a “tank” is control foe behavior and there are already plenty of ways to do that.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Black Lion Chests use something like this method: they have a decent chance to drop ticket scraps; collect 10 to create a ticket.
They could do this for every item in the game with a tiny drop rate by introducing new currencies. And they are doing something like this with map rewards and masteries and collections, allowing folks to make measurable progress (even if it’s still inherently random).
I’m in favor of this. However, it takes a lot more effort to set it up, test, and balance it and to a certain extent, I still might prefer to see a greater variety of loot, even if the drop rates are terrible for specific shinies.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
Would there be more use for this material during heart of thorns? If not would there be some sort of conversion available, where we could upgrade dark matter to dark energy?
I don’t think we’ll know until 23 October.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I may not agree with the daily/weekly system, but I understand why you guys do it.
However, with Raids on a weekly lockout, what is my incentive for raiding again in the same week to help other players?
I feel that this will create an environment where raids will be set teams and you are in or you are out unless someone wants to tag along and help which may in reality be spending many hours for no personal reward.
How will this be addressed? This is promoting exclusionary play which is always detrimental.
There are competing issues:
Prevent the feeling that you need to grind out raids over and over. The time gate addresses this.
Prevent a few people from getting all the loot (while others are not able to do that). Time gate also addresses that.
Encourage successful veterans to team up with less successful ppls. Time gating makes this worse.
The main incentive to help out is to make sure you have more people with whom you can run Raids. Or because you like helping out.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I use the site to find stuff in different character’s bags. I had something I’d crafted on a character and couldn’t remember which one. This was very useful for me.
If there are a bunch of elitists who want to use it as opt in, I’m all for that. Because I can actually look at those LFG ads and remove those people from the list of people I’d ever want to play with.
I’ll post my casual run LFGs (when my guild isn’t around) and happily run with anyone regardless of this site.
Oh, it’s usefulness is not in question – I use it myself. What others may do with it however, may be of concern.
The sun rising in the West is also of concern to some. Doesn’t mean the community or ANet needs to start considering it.
How about we wait until we see if this is actually an issue before going DefCon5 on a single website among many that offer this utility.
And if it turns out to be an issue, ANet can simply disable parts of the API; there’s no need to worry about any particular site.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
The website isn’t the issue — it’s opt in only. Further, it’s not the only such website that offers features like these — this is enabled by the official API that ANet has published.
The concern being expressed is that some groups will use something like this to do gear checks. While I’m against gear checks as a matter of principle, there’s certainly a vocal group that would like to see them.
Accordingly, I’m inclined to wait to see if this is actually an issue or not. If it is, all ANet has to do is disable aspects of the API.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
they are on eu and i am on american but i thought it wouldnt matter because of mega servers…
i suppose by you asking i am wrong about that then?
Correct. Players from EU worlds can’t be in the same instance as those from NA worlds.
ANet hasn’t found a way to synch data across data centers quickly enough. Right now, your latency is only affected by your distance to a single server farm (either in Germany, EU or Texas, US). To be able to place players in both regions in the same instance, they’d have to put everything in a single data center (increasing latency for anyone in NA or EU) or ensure that both centers synch’d in real time, which would mean everyone would have to suffer the latency for the distance between Germany and Texas.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
So basically: Let people get the expansion for free?
Comparing it to LotRO doesn’t really work either, seeing as the TP you can “farm” is limited, while the amount of gems you can buy for guilds is basically limitless.
Its not free. When you trade gold for gems, then someone else bought those gems with their money and put them up for sale. Similar to REX system in Rift or PLEX in Eve Online.
The gems have been paid for with peoples $$. When you go to the trage gold/gems tab, you dont have to buy or sell at recommended prices lsited there, note that you can input your own custom prices, just like buy/sell orders on items in TP. In fact, people that use the insta trades, are missing out on a whole lot.
In GW2, paying with gems is getting the game for free. ANet will get less money if they make HOT available for gems than they do with the current model.
Scenario 1: current (everyone pays cash). Player A & B spend US$50 each on the game and Player C buys 4000 gems for $50 and converts them into gold, leaving 4k in the exchange. ANet gets $150 cash.
Scenario 2: OP’s suggestion (can buy HoT with gems). Player A spends US$50 for the expac and Player C converts 4000 gems into gold. However, Player B doesn’t spend a dime and instead uses gold to buy those 4,000 gems, which they use to get the expac. ANet nets $100 cash, 1/3 less than in Scenario 1.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I am sure that everyone was expecting this elite spec to have a lot to do with nature, plants and animals.
I don’t know why anyone was thinking that, especially since the “ranger” in GW2 doesn’t match the traditional “ranged attacker” trope common in MMOs.
I’m sorry if the current Druid doesn’t match your expectations; I don’t see what that has to do with whether it’s an interesting and/or useful spec to add to the existing game.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
1. Zerker gear won’t be obsolete. Chances are raids will still need dps roles.
2. Nothing so far suggests that you can’t run 100% zerk for everything else HoT related aside from raids.
3. If you have ascended gear, you can cheaply change stats through the mystic forge. If you don’t, then it’s not that costly anyway to get another set of exotics.
Exactly.
It’s (relatively) cheap and easy to update your stats. The vast majority of players with full sets of ascended gear can afford the recipe; I don’t think we can count this as “forcing us to grind” even in a non-obvious way.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
I love how people are jumping to the conclusion that including an elite with a major healing component means the same as the traditional trinity.
This game has always had the unholy trinity (damage, control, and support) present in each character. What ANet didn’t plan on is how quickly we would figure out how to reduce all their encounters to DPS meters. Until we actually see how raids play out, it’s impossible to say whether teams will need specific classes/specs or whether (as with other things in the game), people work out how to handle them using a variety of builds.
For example, the early defeats of Tequatl pretty much required certain specs, while now any PUG map can kill off the little beastie at will, simply by understanding the overall mechanics of the fight. (It’s only quick fights that require more coordination or specific builds.)
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
While you are waiting, you can also try running the game as an admin:
If you find that the Black Lion Trading Post does not load for you, try right-clicking Gw2.exe and selecting “Run as administrator” and then attempt to access the trading post.
And make sure the default browser you chose works by using the in-game command to access the official wiki:
/wiki
If that isn’t working, then choose another default browser (maybe IE) until it does.
Customer Service is pretty good at tracking this stuff down; they’ll help you get to the bottom of it, although it might take a few iterations.
Good luck and please let us know what you find out.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
