Guild Wars 2

Vayne.8563:

The reason for completing HOT maps is to get your legendary and some hot collections. You can ignore the handful of really hard hero points in HOT and still get your elite spec, which is the main reason to do them.

At the end of the day,. this is about completionists saying I can’t complete this map solo. And it’s true. It’s likely that they can’t complete that map solo. But it’s still relatively easy to complete the maps.

If you’re arguing that they should be able to complete maps solo, I’d have to ask why? Because it was mostly that way before?

Yes, I’m arguing it because map exploration is something to do. I’m arguing it because giving people more things to do is what makes MMO business models work. I believe that giving more value to solo players would have been better for the health of the game.

I believe that HoT offered too little for the demographic that prefers to play solo (and it’s a large demographic if other games are any indication). ANet set up their business plan so that those players had to buy HoT if they want to get new things to do, the ongoing story and superior specs and gear prefixes. The maps, however, offer those players a lot less than core did. Restoring exploration as a solo pastime would be a step towards adding value for those players. It’s fine, I suppose, to alienate a portion of your customer base, but I have a hard time believing that’s good for ANet.

I refuse to believe that changing a few HC’s to vets would have turned HoT into something that offers too little to the demographic that likes what Hot offers. It seems more to me like the battle lines are being drawn in fear of a slippery slope. I doubt that will happen. The LS3 maps still offer more varied mobs in terms of what players need to do to survive/defeat them.

Anyway, I think it’s a moot point. At some point, when more players have moved on from HoT, Anet either will or won’t change the champion HC’s. I doubt by the time that happens that most people will care. Meanwhile, I note that there are no HC’s on the new maps, and exploration is for the most part a solo thing. This makes me wonder if ANet is going to have us unlock any new Elite Spec via some different mechanic than Hero Points. If the new XPac maps are like LS3 in terms of exploration, I’ll be happier.

Djinn.9245:

Orr mobs were nerfed simply because they didn’t fit in the difficulty progression of core Tyria.

The only nerf to Orr was in the form of mob density reduction in some areas of Cursed Shore and Malchor’s Leap. Other areas remain unchanged. For anyone who wonders what it was like before, there are a few underwater areas in Straits of Devastation where the mob density is similar to how the rest of the Orr maps were.

In fact, in early 2013, the Risen army was buffed. Some Risen mobs were given a lot more damage — Veteran Nobles and higher are one example. Risen Pirates were given the Fire Field, leap and Aura, with significant burn damage. Risen Farmers/Fishers were given an underwater attack similar to Necro Spear 2, which to this day can take a huge chunk of one’s health if not dealt with.

The Krait army was buffed also, at a similar time. It was instructive to see people downed all over the place by Krait Hypnos condi fields, for instance. My opinion is that ANet was going to revamp other core armies, but shortly after those two army revamps, they changed tactics with Living World Season 1. The Molten Alliance were buffed Dredge/Female Legion. The Toxic Alliance were buffed Nightmare Court and re-buffed Krait (yes, the Toxic Krait got to keep the Krait revamp buff). The Aetherblades were a new army with mobs much more dangerous than Ogres, Jotun, etc.

So, the difficulty in content aimed at max level players has been ramping up since more than two years prior to HoT. Mordrem might (or might not, really) be a touch harder than some of the alter Living World stuff. There’s not really a dramatic upswing in mob difficulty in HoT. What there is are mobs that seem more difficult because they are designed to make players use more of the skills the game gives them. I had (and still do have) trouble with Shadowleapers, but frankly it’s because I didn’t want to switch my build to counter them. When I do, they melt and I don’t.

If you’re unhappy with the way ANet handles gamble boxes, don’t buy keys. The only things businesses heed are hits to their bottom line.

Lite Ning Strike.5203:

Vayne.8563:

I love how you use words like laughable to try to denigrade people’s opinions. HoT is end game, because legendary weapons are end game and you have to play HOT to make hot legendaries. This isn’t most MMOs. This MMO didn’t even launch with raids.

HoT IS end game for the open world. Something this game has always focused on…unlike other MMOs.

If HoT is end game why are they making an expansion? That doesn’t seem accurate to me, unless you are thinking the expansion will stay in the same area, even then that would suggest HoT wasn’t the end.

There are multiple definitions for MMO endgame. One is, “The hardest content in the game.” The other is, “The portion of the game that becomes relevant after getting to the highest level attainable.” Neither definition implies that “endgame content” means it’s the last content the game will have. In most MMO’s, prior content is no longer considered endgame when a new expansion hits, because expansions usually include level cap raises. GW2 HoT did not include a level cap raise, and I will be surprised if the new XPac does. If so, HoT will still be endgame by the second definition. Whether it will be by the first remains to be seen.

drcraig.9403:

I don’t mind the pip system because advanced players should earn more pips. I’m only rank 150. I have a problem with the chest reset at the end of the week. If a person can’t invest the time to get all the chests during the week to get the tickets they get screwed. Your progress toward your next chest SHOULD NOT reset.

I agree with this. While I understand that the system is designed to get players to spend a lot of time in WvW, the system already provides more reward for those who do. Perhaps ANet should consider that the pre-launch hype about the game being for part-time players as well as those who have a ton of time to throw at it need not apply only in PvE. The change drcraig suggests would benefit anyone who was partway through a track at reset.

The new system already overly stresses the zerg. The OP’s iteration does not sound like a move in the other direction.

Djinn.9245:

IndigoSundown.5419:

You can try to hold Anet to your standards as to what constitutes an announcement. However, most developers expect fans to read their blogs.

Do they? I have seen from various MMO developers that only around 10% of a game population regularly reads information outside the game itself. Perhaps you can tell me the source of your information?

The fact that developers in every game I’ve ever played put information about the game into blogs, interviews and forum posts which never makes it into the game. That’s about as specific as your “facts,” so if you want a list of games you’re going to have to pony up your info. By the way, if you are all aggrieved because GW2 did not in game tell you what to expect from HoT, does that mean you read developer statements for other games but not this one? In other words, just where did you get, “I have seen from various MMO developers that only around 10% of a game population regularly reads information outside the game itself?”

Djinn.9245:

Ashen.2907:

Seera.5916:

vesica tempestas.1563:

Silmar Alech.4305:

If it is so easy and clear as you write, well, why do threads like these constantly pop up since HoT release, where people write about their problems, which are all the same since release? For you it might all be easy and clear, but for (too) many people it seems not, and that fact is proved by the pure existence of these threads. A non-issue would generate none of these forum threads.
Don’t look at the design itself, look at the people how they deal with the design. They clearly have their problems with it.

you know HOT came out nearly 2 years ago right? People saying they are still struggling after nearly 2 years of gameplay are either being disingenuous or are going to struggle with every game known to man. People don’t post for non issues, that’s why the vast majority don’t complain about the difficulty of HOT, because actually its not really a difficult game. Dark Souls is a difficult game, or a tightly tuned raid is difficult, even some GW1 elite zones, but GW2 lol, no.

Or they could be new to the game and not a veteran who was around before HoT launched. Given the level 80 boost, a good portion may enter HoT areas within a short time frame of joining the game because they want the elite spec.

Solid point. I think that a good counterpoint might be that we should, politely, encourage new players to hold off on jumping into endgame content while they are learning to play the game. A game whose endgame content is not a struggle for people new to the game is going to have problems providing any challenge at all to people who have been playing for a while.

Of course some new to gw2 players are very experienced mmo players and will become skilled here very quickly.

HoT is not “end game” content any more than any level 80 zone is “end game” content. If Anet would like to make it “end game” content they will have to find a way to communicate that in-game so that everyone is clearly informed.

ANet does not communicate that stuff in game. Most developers don’t. Blizzard never told me that max level dungeons were endgame content. It was just assumed.

Around launch, Anet was saying, “The whole game is endgame.” Technically, that would mean that HoT is most certainly endgame because it is part of the whole game. However, Ashen was in all likelihood referring to endgame content to mean max level content, especially in an area where ANet had announced their intent to make the persistent zone content more challenging.

You can try to hold Anet to your standards as to what constitutes an announcement. However, most developers expect fans to read their blogs. They have to write the blogs as advertising anyway, and having to then put the same information into the game itself would be redundant. Your expectation may even be reasonable, it just isn’t industry standard.

Panda.1967:

IndigoSundown.5419:

Were you around when the only dungeon being farmed was CoF1 and only 4 warriorsand one mesmer, using specific builds, were wanted? I was.

Believe me, I am not someone who cares about meters. I just don’t think the past was any better.

I’ve been around since the very beginning, I’ve seen how things were then and now… and from what I see, atleast on my server, things have gotten much worse. I was even around for day 1 of GW1.

Did you mean region? I thought we were talking about instanced PvE, and servers are afaik, a thing of the past for that type of content. Although, to be honest, I did see a post in the WvW forum about rangers and thieves kicked from zergs, and WvW is still server-based.

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

IndigoSundown.5419:

- snip -

You think there’s too little for casual players to do after leveling to 80 in GW2/core or GW2/HoT? I can’t agree.

Since the topic is HoT HC’s, and some of the HoT HC’s require the defeat of Champions, why talk about core? You want to throw the old saw about if people don’t like HoT, they can just keep doing core? Remember that core is just as old for some solo players as it is for prefer-to-group players. Remember that HoT is the game going forward, and solo players who want to do story and get LW updates need to pay for HoT. It should offer their playstyle as much value as core did.

Core
Dungeons: not for solo (except maybe the top 1%)
Meta events: solo can play, but cannot be soloed
Other events: almost all can be soloed
Exploration: completely solo; less than 10 objectives across dozens of maps may be dependent on temple meta completion

Heart of Thorns
Raids: not for solo (not saying they should be so no one needs to jump on that issue)
Meta events in HoT: solo can play, cannot be soloed
Other events in HoT: solo can play; some can be soloed, some can’t
Exploration: solo play discouraged by game design because 3+ HC’s per map require the defeat of Champions (unless one is in the top 15-20% [spitballing] in PvE skill-wise)

Substantially the same, but overall less value than core. The changes are that the bar was raised in HoT for non-meta events, and exploration was discouraged for solo players.

What I find interesting is that with BSF, EB and BFF, exploration is once again solo-friendly for most everyone. What I wonder is whether the lack of HC’s there mirrors future design, with some other means needed to unlock Elite Specs. If that happens, this is likely going to be a dead issue, and ANet may leave the HoT HC Champs as is or downgrade them as HoT gets older.

Panda.1967:

Funny how many of the people claiming to love meters and/or claiming they dont add to exclusions, have actually posted reasons why they have added to exclusions and reduced build versatility.

Without meters many exclusions were based on generalized and vague information. Some classes sufferd blanket exclusion, necromancer, while others excluded you if they didnt saw a certain weapon or buff. With meters those exclusions expand to everything but a few select builds. If they see anything that hints that you arnt using the meta build, you’re excluded… for most classes, exclusions jumped from anyone using this one weapon or skill to everyone who isnt using this one build. That is a MASSIVE increase in exclusions, and it was caused by meters.

Does everyone who uses a meter base exclusions on what they personally see in the meter? No… nor are all the exclusions comming from people using meters. But the reasons for the exclusions are directly tied to meters. Someone somewhere recorded X weapon/skill/whatever to be extremely weak, so now everyone using it is excluded… someone else somewhere recorded X build to be the strongest for the class in this role, so you must use this build or be excluded.

The major difference between then and now is that dungeons were more amenable to anything-goes parties than raids. Build-based exclusion was an issue pre-meters, also. There are actually more builds in the raid meta now than in the old dungeon meta due to the inclusion of a need for tanks and a healer for some bosses, and the condi/direct damage thing. Were you around when the only dungeon being farmed was CoF1 and only 4 warriorsand one mesmer, using specific builds, were wanted? I was.

Believe me, I am not someone who cares about meters. I just don’t think the past was any better.

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

Healix.5819:

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

IndigoSundown.5419:

Map completion ought to be solo play for the vast majority of players.

Why is that? Shouldn’t the emphasis in an MMO be on groups, whether PUGs or guilds or in between?

In general, the majority of players play MMOs as single player games. If they can’t simply show up and do it, they’re going to skip it. People simply don’t want to waste their time, which is why for example most people don’t bother with dungeons, yet WoW’s LFD (queue up and play) opened them to the majority. Events were originally designed for this, to naturally group solo players together as they played, but then they went zerg happy during season 1, which clearly influenced the design of HoT. They somehow failed to realize however that it only worked in season 1 because it was temporary content and thus always active. Group content is simply not sustainable – see the empty mid-level maps, or even the old current events, and imagine HoT in a few years. If they want to continue with bigger events, they would be far better of by splitting them from the maps and having you actually queue into them.

By making 1 single element of map completion group content, that means there’s no point in doing any of it. They’re only encouraging people to skip through the maps, though most likely would regardless. ArenaNet should already know what didn’t work however, since they have the numbers.

Shouldn’t the emphasis be on groups? They call those co-op multiplayer, whereas MMOs are simply virtual worlds with other people in them. MMOs were once group-only years ago, but then WoW cracked the market by being solo-friendly, yet still offering group quests, which later turned out to be a waste of resources as they had to rebalance them for solo play. Nowadays, most simply appeal the majority by making almost everything solo content and balanced for the casual players, as in easy mode. GW2 however is oddly going in the opposite direction, but it doesn’t matter as much as long as you play it while it’s active.

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

and challenging group content has only recently been added to the game.

Dungeons were originally called “challenging group content” and people even complained that they were impossible at first, especially back in pre-nerf beta.

It’s true that many people considered dungeons to be difficult at launch, but that doesn’t mean that they were considered to be “challenging group content” — they were 5-person instanced content and more challenging than the personal story. Guild missions came later and haven’t been updated in ages. We’ve had world bosses and… not much else designed for larger groups.

And I simply don’t agree with your contention that most people want to solo the game. I think many (perhaps most) people genuinely enjoy doing stuff with pick up group. It’s one of the great features of this game that everyone gets the same rewards, rather than having to share or divide it up. That means it’s often in everyone’s advantage to do stuff with others, and it can be a lot more fun.

So I think it’s not only fine, it’s a good thing that there are some champions and hero challenges. Maybe a few are too difficult and/or maybe there shouldn’t be as many.

I do understand why you don’t agree (or at least, I think I do). However, I don’t agree that it’s inherently better for the game or its community for more content to be soloable — I think that might even make things worse.

The thing is, players can explore most maps in core solo. Other than a few points where temple effects require a temple be in Pact hands (Melandru and maybe Balth fields are the most problematic), players can explore all of Tyria solo. Even the temple events don’t require you actually do the temple, you just have to check back from time to time.

In core, players can also solo a lot of events (I’d say most events, really). However, the rewards are concentrated more in meta events, which require at least a modicum of players to show up. Completing a zone does offer some reward, and other than map rewards, a relatively recent addition, is the best reward for solo play.

So, then we have HoT. The percentage of events which can be soloed in HoT is smaller than in core. Map completion requires other players in the form of the champion HC’s, at least for average (or below) players. Rewards are relatively better for solo play in HoT because events award bags and “can openers” for the reward boxes (pods, cargo, etc.). However, exploration rewards are not so friendly for solo play. And Healix is right. A lot of solo players are going to blow off exploration if they can’t solo it.

Wildstar had two failure points according to NCSoft. One was that raiders didn’t want to go through the lengthy pre-raid preparation the game offered. The other was that once leveling was over, there was nothing for solo players to do. The devs tried to correct both issues when the game started to falter, but it didn’t work out so well. Developers cheesing off solo players is generally not good for the game’s financial health. There’s too much competition.

Sartharina.3542:

Sojourner.4621:

The largest MMO releases their expansions at a $30 price point, this is true, but they ALSO require you to pay a monthly fee.

Nope.

World of Warcraft: Legion is at kitten price point, as was Warlords of Draenor before it, and Mists of Pandaria before that, and Cataclysm before that, and Wrath of the Lich King before that, and The Burning Crusade before that.

Yeah, when released all the WoW expansions retailed $10 below the industry standard price for a new standalone game. So did HoT, for that matter.

Dashingsteel.3410:

There was a rather enigmatic statement made a while ago by either Anet or Ncsoft that “they had learned their lesson with HoT” ….

I am rather curious to see with the next expansion what those lessons were.

That statement, iirc, immediately followed the admission that HoT had not produced revenue in the amounts they predicted. “Meeting expectations” is a big deal for businesses with shareholders. So, the most likely lesson learned is in how to modify the predictions for the next XPac to match the likely revenue.

Sure, they could be referring to any number of other things ranging from the business model to price point to type of content offered. However, shareholders may not be aware of any of that. It’s more likely, imo, that shareholders interpreted the statement as referring to predictions.

Raids are not the usual MMO content. They way they work is like this:

1. When the raid launches, players who jump into it right away get the joy (pain?) of learning from the content. Of course, most of them are already using builds that are considered the best in other instanced content. However, they at least get to learn the mechanics by playing through the encounter.
2. At some point after this, the preferred tactics and builds get published. At that point, most pick up groups expect people to research the published material if they don’t already have first-hand experience.
3. Latecomers to raids can still get the learn-in-game experience, but for the most part they have to find a party of latecomers to do it with, or at least a party which includes experienced raiders who have the time, energy and patience to go yet again through the learning process with someone else. This is likely to be harder than finding a learning party on the release date, when no one knows the encounters.

Randulf.7614:

As above, you don’t need to do a single champ HP to max our your hero points for core + elite.

The champ ones are for those who want that extra challenge in the open world and it is fair for that to exist, whilst not impinging on others who want to be able do things on their own. The number of hero points allows for balance between the two types of players.

If the time ever comes that HoT is abandoned (which isn’t now), then perhaps they could readjust the champ HP’s, but as it stands, I am unconvinced of any need for it.

How many people are regularly doing the HC champs at times when no one is asking for help? There may be some, but I rarely see anyone doing them now that HoT is in the second half of its second year. The rewards for those events are lower than what comes from doing any of the events the zone offers. If GW2 has taught us anything, it should be that rewards drive the vast majority of players, not challenge.

If the “challenge” is the point, then having champ events on the map unconnected to HC’s would serve that purpose. There are champion events not tied to HC’s all over core. How many of those get done regularly if at all? Once, you could find champ trains in zones. Those weren’t being done for challenge, they were done for loot. Now, just doing regular events in HoT or in S3 zones is a lot more rewarding than champ trains used to be. So, champ trains are rarer these days, it they happen much at all.

The fact is that the HC’s are part of map completion. Map completion ought to be solo play for the vast majority of players. Dwayna knows there’s very little that’s rewarding in this game for solo play as it is, and there’s tons of rewarding content for groups.

A damage meter is a convenience tool. It is more convenient to know what one’s (or the group’s) numbers are than it is to guess. The LFG is also a convenience tool. Getting into any group available at the time one wants to play is more convenient than starting one’s own group.

Convenience is a big issue for MMO gamers. The entire exclusion issue is about convenience. Players posting reqs want the convenience of a smooth instance run with no wipes. Players joining groups whose reqs don’t fit their play preferences want the convenience of getting into a group now.

Honestly, the LFG tool is a greater source of conflict over what the group is going to accept than meters. All you need do is look at the history of grouping in this game, going back to when the LFG was via a 3rd party site. Conflict over meta reqs was around long before meters. People don’t clamor for the removal of the LFG tool, though. It is a potential convenience for everyone that uses it. Meters are only convenient for those who want the data.

That does not mean that meters are evil and need to be removed. What it means is that those who don’t care about the convenience meters provide and those who do care should not be in the same groups. The problem is that players who don’t care for the convenience of meters still want the convenience of rapid grouping. Unfortunately, their solution for the problem is to demand that players who want the convenience of meters need to lose that convenience so they don’t have to pass on the convenience of rapid grouping.

The irony, of course, is that removing meters is not going to remove the conflict. It would just remove one excuse for the conflict.

Lokki.1092:

Sigfodr.9576:

1) Blocks: Blocks also block incoming condition dmg (unless the specific skill is listed as un-blockable), it do however (naturally) not stop already aplyed conditiones on you from doing dmg. Just like a block dont heal you from a direct dmg hit you got before you started blocking, it will not revome dmg from conditions you where hit by before you started blocking.

2) Invulns: same as blocks

Anet should put this info in the game somewhere. Because this is just plain not how conditions work in every other MMO. It runs counter to what most people assume coming from any other game.

From MOBAs to FPS games If you get in a bad spot and turn on your invulnerability skill, it makes you invulnerable for the duration. It’s what we are used to.

In GW2 the reason you used your defensive skill was because you got condi bombed, and so you still die because conditions work in ways players that are new (to GW2 PvP) are not prepared for. I feel it’s one of the major reasons behind the condition backlash of late.

Most of the skills that apply invulnerability say that conditions still affect the character right in the tool tip. If that’s a major reason people are complaining about conditions, they need to learn to look at tool tips.

Linken.6345:

IndigoSundown.5419:

I fully expect that, irrespective of validity or lack of validity of the OP’s points, ANet will avoid/ignore HoT once the new XPac launches, except for fixing the occasional bug or exploit. After all, isn’t that what all MMO developers do with old content once new content rolls around?

More importantly, though, I expect that players will not avoid HoT, at least not for quite some time, especially if significant numbers of players who have not bought HoT get access to it via the previously announced bundling of HoT in with the new XPac.

Yes this is true but that is becouse they add levels so the old content is dead content, gw2 will never have dead open world content as long as it gets in new players.

My first response was to have asked, “How much did they do with core after HoT released.” However, my answer was, "Not that much, but they did do little events like the Caladbolg collection, bandit and ley events. So, you’re right.

I fully expect that, irrespective of validity or lack of validity of the OP’s points, ANet will avoid/ignore HoT once the new XPac launches, except for fixing the occasional bug or exploit. After all, isn’t that what all MMO developers do with old content once new content rolls around?

More importantly, though, I expect that players will not avoid HoT, at least not for quite some time, especially if significant numbers of players who have not bought HoT get access to it via the previously announced bundling of HoT in with the new XPac.

Ryou.2398:

IndigoSundown.5419:

DPS meters have only confirmed what was already taking place in PvE meta play. Exclusion of non-meta builds has been a thing in this game since meta play first developed. The existence of meters has not in any way increased exclusion behavior. In fact, the existence of a meter gives someone the opportunity to prove their non-meta build is competitive, or perhaps even better.

In other words nothing to see here people do not think for yourselves, do not use rational thought like how dps meters literally show people how much dps meta does vs non meta it literally cannot have an effect on how people view on non meta. /Sarcasm.

Lol seriously think about it, all of a sudden people have something to compare it to and suddenly say well that’s ok I will not ignore the non meta and let them under perform in my raid group because they suddenly have a change of heart? Does that sound rational to you? It is baffling how many of you claim it has no effect in getting people kicked.

Nice straw man. If you’re going to quote my post and respond, how about sticking to what I said instead of misplaced sarcasm based on fabrication. There is overwhelming evidence that exclusion was been an issue long before meters. There is little to no evidence that exclusion has increased due to meters. There is every reason to believe that if meters had not been allowed, we would see similar volume of complaints about exclusion. The obvious conclusion is that exclusion occurs independent of meters.

Finally, of course someone could use a meter to prove that a non-meta build can do competitive dps. That’s how meta comps change. I never said that a player could drop in to any LFG group and be granted the opportunity to prove it. The players who set the meta do their experimenting with a guild or group of friends. They don’t drop into a PuG.

TexZero.7910:

Except nothing i said was baseless. It was entirely based in reality. I did pay those values. Yes i know base had been discounted, i know HoT is currently discounted. That does not change the cost associated and the fact that the current model is double dipping consumers.

A more reasonable model since the entire thing is Digital anyway is paying only for the content you do not own.

So to use your prices

10 – Core
30 – HoT
30 – Future (for sake of adhering to previously known statements)

As opposed to what we had happen in the past

60 Core
50 HoT
50 again

Which is literally double dipping the consumers as there’s no reason for people to re-pay for content they already own.

That was “baseless insinuation” not baseless pricing. Insinuation, by the way, is, “an unpleasant hint or suggestion of something bad.” You made an insinuation about unethical behavior on ANet’s part. It’s baseless, and a cheap tactic to try to shame the company into charging you less.

As to price points … The current value of core GW2 is $0. That’s what it costs to play. The current price of HoT is $30, though if that will remain the case when XPac 2 drops is anyone’s guess. If Anet sticks to the announced business plan, HoT will no longer be for sale at any price. They might open HoT maps to PFF players, they might not.

What I hope they do is bundle core and HoT and have the new XPac priced separately, at whatever price they think it’s worth. Doubtless, there would still be complaints about the price, but at least all this muddled thinking around bundling would be put to rest.

TexZero.7910:

2) Great! I’ve already paid for the base game @ $60, then again with HoT @ another $60 (you could say base was 30 / HoT was 30) but i had no option to just pay 30 at launch /shrug. If this continues players will be paying another at the same price point you’d be paying $20 for each unit bringing your total cost for Core to $110…. Is that really ethical ?

You are setting a value on an old game far higher than the market price. At the time of the HoT announcement, core had been on sale multiple times for $10. As of just before HoT launch, access to core was free (with restrictions). Other old games can be found in store bargain bins or at sites like Steam for a pittance. Bundling old games is a fact of life in the gaming industry. The current WoW package bundles vanilla and 5 XPacs for one price. That’s the business reality of old games, which you’re completely ignoring.

About all I can figure is that people like yourself are complaining about Anet’s policy because ANet is bundling the old stuff in with the current XPac. All that is is ANet setting a value of $0 on the old stuff. That’s completely within their rights as a business.

Ethical? Did players who purchased either core or HoT have the opportunity to gain value from their purchase by playing the game? Afaik, the servers have been up 24/7 with one or two exceptions, a far better record than other MMO’s I’ve played. There’s no rental fee on top of the box cost, either. So, the opportunity was there. There is no validity whatsoever to the aspersions you’re casting at ANet. That’s not to say you have to like it, just that you should reconsider the baseless insinuations.

Panda.1967:

IndigoSundown.5419:

DPS meters have only confirmed what was already taking place in PvE meta play. Exclusion of non-meta builds has been a thing in this game since meta play first developed. The existence of meters has not in any way increased exclusion behavior. In fact, the existence of a meter gives someone the opportunity to prove their non-meta build is competitive, or perhaps even better.

Actually the existence of meters HAS increased the exclusion behavior… and it only gives you the opportunity to prove your non-meta build if you’re willing to use a meter yourself and record the results. Without prior proof, most groups now won’t give you a chance if your not Meta… before meters were “acceptable” groups were more willing to accept non-meta builds and allow people to prove themselves. It wasn’t even uncommon for some groups to secretly use meters when they were still a potential ban risk. At that time, meter using groups were more open to accept non-meta builds out of fear that rejecting them outright might put them at risk of being banned for use of 3rd-party programs…

With meters being made acceptable, these groups have no fear of ban, and as a result reject anyone who’s not meta.

Funny, I used to see a lot more exclusion complaints before meters became a thing. Now, what I am willing to believe is that you may have encountered more exclusion since meters were legitimized, but I question whether your sample size is significant. While I readily believe that people point to meter data to justify exclusion, people pointed to other things before meters. I’m not a meta fan, but I can usually tell what builds players are using. If I believed that build X does better damage, I would not need a meter to tell if player Y was using build X or not.

ProtoGunner.4953:

Don’t get me wrong the very idea of events is a great idea and a lot of other MMO producers introduced it as well. I loved the HoT maps at first and completed all achievements/events within the first couple of months. But I understand people who play off time, want to play alone or whatever and feel a bit off, when they can’t do anything. The idea of meta events on every single map and the few maps they released at first has a lot of people driven off. Understandable, if you ask me.

I play now extremely sporadically (1-2 hours a week if any) and what I see is that in whole Tyria are events no one is doing. That’s the standard case. It’s just there and you don’t really meet a lot of people. You simply can’t expect casual people to check all the timers, taxiing and trying to join a bottlenecked map. It’s just very consumer unfriendly. But this is crucial to just finish the standard procedure in DS for example.

I understand your feelings. There have certainly been times in the past when ANet has failed to consider the most likely reactions of players. The HoT price point issue was one such. I’m not sure that they didn’t think about the path of least resistance with Hot map events, though.

The more I think about the way the HOT maps are working out, the more I wonder what ANet could have done differently. The algorithms used on mega-server seem to be placing enough people in new shards to complete events, but people prefer the sure thing, so they taxi. Filling shards one by one would result in a lot more people not being able to Join In than we see now, and that’s very frustrating. Disabling Join In would also work, but that’s not viable.

As I noted earlier, LS3 maps like BSF and EB are not really meta-dominated at all. However, retrofitting HoT maps to eliminate the meta is going to anger the people who do those metas (yes, there are people out there, I’ve done a VB and a DS in the last two days). Also, completely revamping HoT maps would unduly delay Living World and the new XPac releases.

I cannot come up with any way to make the HoT maps more accessible to players who don’t want to taxi. As to core events, well, I still see them completed, but with less frequency than before. As more and more maps are added, this is going to happen, just as it does to other MMO’s.

DPS meters have only confirmed what was already taking place in PvE meta play. Exclusion of non-meta builds has been a thing in this game since meta play first developed. The existence of meters has not in any way increased exclusion behavior. In fact, the existence of a meter gives someone the opportunity to prove their non-meta build is competitive, or perhaps even better.

If there is a phenomenon where queues are not advancing, I think we need look no further than the new reward system. The best way to accumulate the new rewards is by being in WvW long enough to get through four tiers of pips. I’d bet we’re seeing a lot less people running around for a half hour and then going elsewhere.

ProtoGunner.4953:

Imo it’s a kitten mechanic in the first place to have to use taxiing etc. to do world events. Additionally, many argue that ‘you are in a low populated map be cause of megaservers, so you have to taxi to a map with more population’. What is this kitten? Why don’t they transport me automatically to a more populated map?

The mega-server software could just fill maps rather than spawning a new map when the old one is partially full. There’s a problem with that, though. If there is no room for taxiing, then there is also no room for players to join friends or guild members.

How could ANet solve this? They could make the events scale so that fewer players could complete them. In fact, they did use scaling.

What happens, though, are human issues. A lot of players don’t want to be the one to organize an event that requires some degree of coordination to succeed. So, they seek maps where someone else is already doing the organizing. Add in that a filled meta map is going to out-population the scaling, so the fuller map is going to get an easy win.

My take, though, is that the organization is a bigger barrier. I’ve done the Jade/Guardian meta cycle in BSF any number of times, and I’ve never had to taxi at all. The difference is that there’s no need to organize that event chain.

So, you can call the system bad all you want. However, any solution is going to require draconian measures. Players are not going to take the path of greater resistance unless the game forces them to do so. The most likely ways to do so would be to fill maps rather than spawn new ones when the old is partway full, or to reduce the player caps on map copies. Neither method is likely to be well received.

Raids are for players who are committed to raiding. That can be via a guild, or PuG. It’s OK not to be committed to raids, but that means raids are not aimed at you.

I’ve been noticing things like this for some time. It’s not consistent. For instance, in Ember Bay, Volatile Destroyer spit will change direction in midair to follow your strafe. Lava Elemental spit, on the other hand, does not. Some Destroyer attacks apply burn, etc. even if the projectile misses. I suppose the design intent behind this, if there is one, is that in order to avoid attacks, one must use the dodge mechanic (or block, reflect, etc.).

How are people consistently map jumping at the tick with queues as they were last night?

Pifil.5193:

If you use LFG you can normally get onto busy maps doing the events. For example, I did Dragon’s Stand today in the afternoon in EU with no problem.

This is the best and only way to find a map where there are a lot of people. The way the mega-server works is:

• Let’s say we start with a single copy of a given zone.
• The software creates a new version of the map when the first copy reaches a certain population level.
• This can go on as more players come to the zone.
• Usually, players will start to organize at least one of the map copies. They form (a) squad(s), and post in Looking for Group.
• Players begin joining the squad(s). If they are on a different map copy they use the Join In feature (right click on someone in the squad and choose Join in [zone name]). This moves them to the map copy which is being organized.
• The side effect of players moving to a different map is that there are now fewer players on the map they left. If there are too few, the mega-server software begins the map closure routine.
• If a given player is on a map where the closure announcement happens, and accepts, s/he will be moved to a different map. This will not in all likelihood be the crowded map, unless that map is the only option. The mega-server software will instead move hi/her to a different, less-full map copy. If enough people move out of that map via LFG/Join In (this is called taxi, or taxiing by players), that map copy will also start the closure process. You can also run into zone closure when a meta-event cycle ends, as people move on to something else.
• Map closures present the illusion that the zone is empty. What they actually means is that there are a lot of people in the zone, they’ve just moved to one or more map copies that is organized.

And that’s why taxiing is pretty much essential if you want to do map meta events in HoT. In core, it’s seldom necessary, as players tend not to taxi to do, say, the Fire Elemental. They will taxi for Tequatl The Sunless, or Triple Trouble.

ANet tried to go with only a few things which required a large time commitment, aka “grind,” at launch. The player base disabused them of that idea by racing to every goal in short order, then asking, “Now what?”

Vayne.8563:

Healix.5819:

Vayne.8563:

We know that sales are down, but we also know that when games are older sales DO go down.

Launch quarter sales were also poor, which NCSoft/ArenaNet said themselves were disappointing. The population was estimated to be around 3 million at the time, up from 1 million the previous year, but they only sold around 300k boxes; 500k being generous. Since it’s all estimated however, the population could simply be much lower and down ~50% since their last official reveal years ago, so we won’t know for sure until the next expansion’s sales. Considering the leaks however – them caving and introducing one of the biggest sale items in MMOs – they’ll likely be trying hard to appeal to the masses this time.

slashlizardy.9167:

its trying to be a niche game now

ArenaNet has always been a niche however, as they’re for the gamers rather than the casual majority as seen in most MMOs. The problem is, they heavily nerfed the game during the original 2012 beta due to players face tanking enemies and likely in fear of early losses. If they would have never done that, the difficulty of the core game would have been similar to HoT, where enemies could kill you within seconds right at the start in Queensdale. Going in this direction is obviously bad for business, but if they do plan on continuing, they need to revert the core game instead of misleading players.

I guess my point is this. There is zero way to know that if every zone was flat and as easy as core, there would be know way to know or prove that the game wouldn’t be dong the same or even worse.

If downturn a year after an expansion is an industry norm, and downturn as a game ages is an industry norm, then trying to attribute any reason to a downtrun is just a guess. It’s just a case of confirmation bias.

I’m saying income being lower should be expected, because it pretty much happens across the industry on similar timetables, so trying to attaching a reason to this is not very helpful.

To add to this, we also have no way of knowing how much Hot difficulty affected sales. There were also other issues that seemed likely to have done so, such as the tumult over various issues such as price point, core bundling, perceived slight to Vets, perceived paucity of content, lack of character slot, etc.

Essence Snow.3194:

I still find it funny that some think that making a story (easier) mode would somehow be detrimental to the game. It could literally be a mote that gives non-standard boons (think outnumbered in wvw)…no substantial development time needed. A small amount of dev time would open up raids to a lot of players that otherwise wouldn’t participate in the content.

In a prior thread on this very topic, Gayle Gray cautioned posters about basing arguments around assumptions as to just how much work would be involved in developing different modes for raid content.

phys.7689:

IndigoSundown.5419:

— snip —

it isnt really a trick, its actually a necessity of the game design. What you are missing is people WANT to have a reason to beat it repeatedly. the design’s reward structures have to encourage people to play the game, or at very least, not make it feel less rewarding.

i am not saying that in every game they find that right balance of matching people’s desire to repeat with an appropriate amount of reward, but that goal isnt a trick, its actually an integral part of designing an enjoyable system.

Something can be both a necessary part of game design and a trick at the same time. Designers are using anticipation of reward as a substitute for the flow state generated by brain chemistry when confronted with challenge and/or new experiences. Yes, it’s necessary for the MMO business model. Yes, large parts of the MMO audience want rewards, and want to have a reason to play “their” MMO into the ground. It’s still tricking the brains of players.

In the MMO’s I’ve played prior to GW2, there always came a point where I stepped back and looked at what I was doing. Whether it was a F2p grinder or a gear-treadmill game such as the big gorilla, I always got to a point where I thought, "I’m doing X so that I can get to a new “level” (whether it was an actual level or a new gear tier). But why?" Then it would hit me, “I’m doing it so that when I finish I can go do it again.” And then, “That’s all this game is, a cycle that never ends, with me doing the same things over and over in slightly different places.”

That realization is why GW2 is the best MMO for me. I don’t have to do that. I can choose to go for a reward if I want to, but I do not have to. In those other games, there was no choice. As long as I wanted to do the new stuff that came out, I had to stay on the treadmill.

So, GW2 is in large part a compromise. It tries to present long-term goals for those that want the excuse to play content over and over and over without making that a requirement to be able to do the new stuff. For some of those who want the reward chase, the compromise isn’t good enough. I can see that. For those of us who got disgusted by the trick, and who play games mostly for fun, it works.

Even though I’m cynical enough to believe that the actual average skill level in GW2 is pretty low, where the average skill level for the entire player-base is is not really the point. PvE challenge is not a fixed point. Once players figure out mechanics and know what the AI is going to do, challenge devolves down to execution. Challenge comes from uncertainty. PvE content does not present uncertainty as the content ages.

Before that other game threw together LFR, what characterized raids was commitment. It took commitment to gear, commitment to sit through the process of organizing a lot of people, commitment to watch videos and read walk throughs, and most of all, commitment to try again after wipes. It’s commitment that turns this type of PvE content from a pastime to a hobby. If I had to say, I’d say that ANet wants raids to appeal to hobbyists.

As content ages, even harder content, it becomes more accessible. For one thing, there are more veterans, and more resources on third party sites. If it still takes some commitment to actually engage with that stuff, then so be it.

Rhysati.4932:

mtpelion.4562:

Adding new tiers of gear (i.e. higher stats) is a trick used by game companies to fool people into thinking that they are being rewarded but what they are really doing is stealing money from you every month to play the same content over and over.

Ahh, I see! So it’s a trick used by game companies to add new challenging content that rewards your efforts!

No, I’m afraid it is a trick used by game companies to keep people coming back. MMO business models require regular player logins. Not only does a populated world convince other people the game is thriving, but — whether they use a sub, sub plus store, “optional” sub plus store or just store — players who aren’t playing aren’t paying.

The human brain produces chemicals when faced with challenge and/or new experiences. Those chemicals produce an experience that we think of as fun. MMO content tends to lose its newness faster than developers can throw new stuff into the game. So, developers substitute anticipation of reward for the newness and challenge.

Consider the term “On farm.” This term essentially translates to, “We’ve beaten the challenge. Now, we are repeating the content we’ve mastered over and over ad nauseam until everyone gets what they need. Then, we can progress to the next all-too-short window of newness/challenge, which will be followed by more months of farming.”

Developers could just push out new content and challenges as often as is possible for them and the fun factor produced by the newness would be exactly the same, both in terms of quality and longevity. The thing is, that would mean players would leave when the content gets old, and that doesn’t work for the bottom line. Every time people leave, some of them don;t come back, Thus, carrots on sticks.

The other thing is, different companies use different reward structures. GW2 originally aimed at cosmetics as the endgame rewards. This attracted the people who dislike the repetitive nature of gear treadmill games. However, there are people who like stat chases (imo, it’s crap, but ommv).

So, what we have in GW2 is a compromise. There’s level progression, but not past 80. The idea that every player would have max stats by 80 was abandoned for the Ascended pursuit, but so far there’s no stated intent to go beyond Ascended. So, there’s not a new gear tier every (insert time period). Elite Specs and the HoT gear prefixes are technically horizontal progression, but are considered more powerful.

ANet is using compromise because while they want the game to appeal to players who like vertical progression, they also don’t want to lose the members of their core fan base who came to GW2 to escape the treadmill. As is often the case with compromise, people on both sides are not happy. However, just maybe enough people are in the middle to make the compromise worthwhile. Time will tell.

Sly.9518:

You think the majority of player are bads (sic), so your view point is very skewed on what average is

And what makes you think your perception of average is not also skewed?

TexZero.7910:

I think it needs to be said, that you should keep in mind when astral talks of average it’s average of his relative circle. The player base average is greatly above that because they actually care.

The question is, “Since average would be a skill level rating in the middle of the distribution, just how many players are in each rating band?” Your perceptions of what average is is more likely to be skewed than that of someone playing content in the open world, because (according to conventional wisdom, anyway) fewer players are going to be playing harder content.

Redfeather.6401:

I like how conditions in guild wars 1 did health degen and not damage ticks. And health degen was capped. Too anyone who plays revenant, but never played guild wars 1, health degen is like energy for revenant. It shows pips.
https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/File:Health_bar-poison.png

edit: For GW2 it could be implemented and only the players have the degen cap, and pve mobs/objects/etc would have no cap.

The lack of anything but an absolute cap is mirrored by the lack of anything but an absolute cap on direct damage. Assuming a less-than-absolute cap on condi damage, why should direct damage not also have such a cap?

Just a flesh wound.3589:

From the Guild Wars wiki on Condition: https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Condition

Bleeding — While suffering from this injury, you lose Health over time.
Burning — While suffering from this Condition, you lose Health over time
Poison — While suffering from this injury, you lose Health over time
Disease — While suffering from this ailment, you lose Health over time

How is losing health over time different from condition damage in this game?

The OP wants a system like WoW’s, in which all spell damage, DoT or direct, is fueled by the same attribute. While comparing such a fueling system to the one used in the original GW is a bit off, I can see where Aeolus is coming from. In GW, the same attribute could fuel both direct damage and damage over time. What’s less straightforward is that characters had multiple attributes, and in a lot of cases attributes might have both DD and DoT skills, so you’d see builds with both types of damage maximized by choice of attribute.

One of the 2 prevailing arguments against condition damage in Gw2 centers around how it is fueled. Detractors say only one stat — Condition Damage — is required whereas Power builds need three. What that argument ignores is that Power builds need three stats to maximize output, but so do condition builds. That leaves us with the question of how effective a non-maxed condition build is compared to a non-maxed power build.

Regardless, there is a flaw with the OP’s request. Let’s say that Condition Damage was removed as a stat, and Power made to fuel DoT’s as well as DD. After the massive complaints by anyone who’d invested time into condi gear, Soldier Gear would serve the same function as Dire does now. Knights would serve a similar function to Rabid. After not too long players would badger ANet into producing the most advantageous stat combos for their preferred play styles. So, the change would create a lot of animosity and in the end, we’d likely be back where we are now.

Vayne.8563:

IndigoSundown.5419:

While “small adjustments” were ANet’s announced approach to balance changes, according to complaining players, their adjustments are heavy-handed and extreme. My take is that sometimes the players are right, and sometimes it’s just the, “My favorite X is no longer top of the heap.” angst.

Perhaps the most extreme change in my mind was inviting (via the NPE) players who found it too hard to click 2-3 times to progress a heart, then offering them HoT.

Okay usually I agree with most of what you say, but this is way out of whack. What they did with the click 2-3 times thing, it was removed from level 1-10 areas. That means people had 70 levels to come to terms with clicking 3 times. The NPE affected a whole lot less than people claim it did.

There are usually three bottlenecks in game uptake that most games go through. First it has to be simple enough up front for enough people to understand. And even with the changes made, I still speak with people quite frequently who have no idea what to do. The idea of slowing down the rate at which people get new info is a sound one.

Second barrier is when people actually level and how fast they level and how interesting that process is. Again they sped up leveling to 15 to get you past the easy area faster, still without throwing too much at your too quickly. I think this is well done, even if not everyone needs it. Now obviously there are people who find the whole leveling process boring, but I don’t think that’s a problem for most of us.

The biggest hurdle in my opinion is getting people who come to a game for free to actually spend money. A lot of changes are going to be geared toward that end, because this is, after all, a business.

Before or after the NPE, the journey from Orr difficulty to HoT difficulty still has to pass through Dry Top, Silverwastes and Season 2. That’s the real issue. Not the NPE.

As for does Anet have a middle ground? Well that’s the thing. Anet tends to react very strongly to strong criticism. The stronger the criticism, the stronger they tend to react.

People complained for years about jumping in Guild Wars 1 and look what they did to us. lol

Yeah, what can I say, I liked opening the fish trap, picking up the fish and feeding it to the little bear. The NPE is one of my pet peeves, even if it might make more sense if I wasn’t biased. However, I’ll retract the statement about it being an extreme case.

Vayne.8563:

IndigoSundown.5419:

Vayne.8563:

And party play isn’t required. It’s like the temples in Orr. I can’t solo them but I don’t have to be in a party to do them either. It’s no different.

Really? No. Group events wherein most of the rewards in a given zone are found is not the same as wandering around a map trying to get HC’s, Vistas or PoI’s.

Actually this is completely untrue. Rewards in VB and TD are better doing map events than doing the meta. Therefore you have two wide, huge sprawling HOT zones you can explore.

Less people do the VB meta because the rewards for doing it are mediocre. The rewards for doing events are much better, because you get crowbars and chests are always there.

The only meta that gives you better rewards is the AB meta, and that’s almost always populated, and easy to do.

So I’m not 100% sure of your point.

Edit: DS doesn’t require you grouping either, though you might want to join a squad to take you to the active map.

I quoted you referring to Temple Events in Orr (which do contain a lot of the rewards Orr offers now that Plinx and the other farmable events were nerfed), and you respond as if I were referring to meta events in HoT? My point was that I can go to a temple meta in Orr. Even now, assuming anyone at all is on the map, people will come out of the woodwork. It’s a lot less likely that you’ll find random people following you around to PoI’s and HC’s in a HoT map unless you make overtures that Lady Rhonwyn seems to not want to make.

Djinn.9245:

Healix.5819:

Djinn.9245:

Why do you believe that people should be doing something they don’t like during their entertainment time? I completely disagree.

People need to be encouraged to try different things, otherwise they never will.

Like my Mommy? Sorry, I’m an adult and can decide to try brocolli or not. And when it comes to my entertainment, I especially don’t need someone else to decide what I should try.

Notice he used the word “encouraged,” not, “forced.” And the developer is not doing it for your good, they’re doing it for theirs. The more people they can encourage to engage with content they expend resources creating, the better for them. ANet is not a parent telling you to do something, they’re people who created something to do and who are wise enough to know that without rewards, a lot of MMO players will blow that content off. The real issue, if you read more of what Healix says, is not that they put incentives behind content, but which incentives they put behind content.

While “small adjustments” were ANet’s announced approach to balance changes, according to complaining players, their adjustments are heavy-handed and extreme. My take is that sometimes the players are right, and sometimes it’s just the, “My favorite X is no longer top of the heap.” angst.

Perhaps the most extreme change in my mind was inviting (via the NPE) players who found it too hard to click 2-3 times to progress a heart, then offering them HoT.

Vayne.8563:

LadyRhonwyn.2501:

Vayne.8563:

My answer to all of this was to find a couple of friends. 90% plus of the hot maps can be done by a group of 3.

And this is the biggest problem I have with HoT maps.

I started playing GW2 because party play wasn’t required. Yes, you could make parties, but only because you liked the closer association that gave. Dungeons were the only place were parties where required. In all other areas you could do it alone. Having others around might have made it easier and more fun, but it wasn’t required.

Fast forward to HoT: parties are mandatory to even get the hero points, let alone events or most of the personal achievements.

I don’t have a lot of friends and I don’t want to always ask their help if I want to do something in HoT. They might be doing something else or just don’t feel like going to that one area/help with that one personal story bit.

And party play isn’t required. It’s like the temples in Orr. I can’t solo them but I don’t have to be in a party to do them either. It’s no different.

Really? No. Group events wherein most of the rewards in a given zone are found is not the same as wandering around a map trying to get HC’s, Vistas or PoI’s.

The OP can be broken down into two issues:

1. Elite specs are more powerful than other options.
2. Elite specs should not lock new weapons or skill types behind choosing the specialization.

I think number 1 is an issue. Elite Specs were supposed to be a new way to play the profession, and were billed as horizontal progression. Even some attempts by ANet to bring them more in line in competitive play have not addressed this issue in its entirety. However, the issues therein are complex. It’s not only that Resistance with boon share is making WvW zergs immune to conditions for far too long, it’s that conditions are far more powerful than they used to be. Some of that comes down to Elite Specs, but it’s more an issue with the adjustments to Condition Damage that preceded HoT along with the more powerful stat prefixes introduced with HoT. Addressing the game’s power creep is not going to be easy. The job will not be finished when XPac 2 hits, and it might introduce more creep.

Number 2 on the other hand, is a classic example of a designer introducing opportunity costs into a build design system and players wanting more choice with little to no opportunity cost. I’m always going to come down on the designer’s side on this issue. Some players may not like having to make hard choices in build selection, but having such is better for the health of the game. Contrary to popular belief, opportunity costs are the friend of build diversity, not the enemy.

Does anyone have any experience and/or advice concerning disconnects at the end of story steps, while the character is in the final conversations with long-winded NPC’s. I’ve experienced this three times in the HoT story, in the Prisoners of the Dragon Step, after freeing Eir; once in Out of the Shadows/Confessor’s Stronghold while talking to Canach after Caudecus leaves and once, tonight in Rising Flames/Dragon Vigil after the lengthy fight while talking with Caithe.

I have not DC’d in other content in a long time, so I’m guessing there is something specific about the story. I’d appreciate any thoughts as I’m frustrated enough to not do the story at this point.

The likelihood of my doing such events in core is usually in inverse proportion to the number of players involved. The more players, the less likely I am to want to bother. Event scaling does not keep up, and mobs dying so rapidly the only challenge is making sure to get some credit towards event completion is not my idea of fun. As to the daily events task, yeah … no.

Perhaps the LFG tool is not aimed solely at veterans but also at potential newcomers attracted by other features. PvE people have been conditioned by HoT to look in LFG to find a squad. Why wouldn’t they do so were they to enter WvW?