Guild Wars 2

Bhima.9518:

If you make it too hard and too time consuming, your raiding end game could fall into the Wildstar trap of being way too frustrating for all but the elite raiding masochists. We all know how Wildstar is doing in terms of retention regardless of how many of the hardcore raiders in this thread want to move GW2 towards.

This whole argument is a false dilemma. Adding hardcore raiding wouldn’t somehow diminish the quality or the value of the rest of the game as you imply it would. I don’t do Arah because I find it too hardcore. Yet, I’m still playing GW2.

People aren’t going to rage quit the game if Anet decides to ADD content that caters to its hardcore gamers. The non-hardcore content isn’t going to just disappear.

Jure Simich.6154:

To clarify: some people WANT exclusivity, and if the result is not exclusive, all issues of gameplay, difficulty and rewards are unimportant. They are motivated strongly by being able to stand out of the crowd. There are some such, and their viewpoints are valid – there should be games around for everyone.

Sometimes, people just want to do their own thing with a group of people they know. You are very wrong to assume that people who want exclusivity just want to stand out in a crowd. The GW2 community is big, too big. It is very impersonal, especially with megaservers. Guild raids would bring back their purpose to guilds and allow smaller and more personal communities to build and to have a goal.

Proposal Overview
A boss that lasts days

Goal of Proposal
For there to be content that doesn’t force guildies to join at a certain time to partake in a raid and doesn’t force them to play a certain way (meta), while still being content that can be “worked on” as a guild. This could also provide some mild competition amongst guilds, with a leaderboard for record times.

Proposal Functionality
Inspired from Dragon’s Dogma Ur-Dragon : http://dragonsdogma.wikia.com/wiki/Ur-Dragon
Dragon’s Dogma is a solo game and the Ur-Dragon is an online boss with an insane amount of health. Players around the world contribute to damaging the same Ur-Dragon over several 10 minutes solo encounters. Once the Ur-Dragon is dead, players receive rewards according to how much damage they have done.

In Guild Wars 2, each guild would have their own instanced boss and people would contribute damage to it over several timed encounters. Entering the fight would be done using a system similar to the Mad King’s Clock Tower to make it so everyone enters the fight at the same time. The population cap would be 150 and there would be no scaling (see further below). The fight could have several different phases either through a single encounter or through the fight as a whole or both. Similarly to Dragon’s Dogma, the rewards would be given when the boss dies and would vary according to how much damage was done. There could also be additional rewards given through repeatable achievements.
The HP of the boss could be tiered the same way guild bounties are tiered. This would allow smaller guilds to beat the boss in a reasonable time, but they would receive smaller rewards. Since this would require build time, large guilds couldn’t just farm tier 1 bosses and reap large amounts of loot.
There would be a guild leaderboard with record times. No tangible reward would be associated to beating the record, but there could be a title given to the people who participated in the record breaking fight. That title would be taken away when a new record is established.

It would be nice if the boss had multiple targets, like arms, legs, wings, tentacles, tail and each could be individually taken down, progressively disabling the boss. To keep the challenge up during the whole fight so it doesn’t become easier as it becomes progressively disabled, the remaining attacks could become gradually stronger or the boss could fall back to different attacks as is gets progressively disabled. As it progressively becomes disabled, different parts of the boss would become accessible to melee damage. For example, it would become possible to melee the tail if both hind legs are disabled, as it would get into a different position. To save you some work, the boss could get its body parts disabled between encounters once the health bar for that part reaches 0 rather than handling inflicted disabilities live as they happen. By doing this, there would be no need to make animations for when a boss gets something disabled and it would allow you to (more simply?) load different boss states corresponding to their disabilities at each encounter rather than having the whole thing loaded to handle inflicted disabilities live.
Other ideas that have popped in my mind : Having to take down a flying boss by shooting its wings from a ring platform while its launching all kinds of attacks. Having to pick a bundle to spread a slippery liquid on the ground that makes a boss’ legs vulnerable to CC and CC’ing the legs at the same time causes the boss to slip and expose points that can be attacked (and if you stand behind the boss when it falls, you get crushed!).

Associated Risks
Whining from small guilds because they wouldn’t be able to get the higher amount of loot associated with beating a higher tier boss.
Whining from casual players that the content is too hard.

DarkWasp.7291:

I don’t think at the time of the official statement, that ArenaNet looked deep enough into the issue. Chris basically said the same thing I said. In short: “Just because you are making a lot of money, doesn’t make it an exploit.”

That doesn’t mean that the devs won’t patch it, and if they don’t, I can guarantee those rats will be green instead of white next year if the event is the same.

You won’t get banned for it though. Its not so much an exploit as a developer oversight.

Exactly. It might be a BALANCE issue, but it is in no way an EXPLOIT.
People like to confuse the above 2.

mtpelion.4562:

Cuddy.6247

Deleting characters with items that people were unaware were on them is quite the same issue. It’s haste and everyone who legitimately views that there are any isolated instances of player-fault that shouldn’t fall within the norm of customer service are too far up their own kitten to be dealt with.

The fact that you typed in the name of your character is PROOF that you INTENDED to delete that character.

That’s why this is not the same thing. There is no proof that this player intended to destroy a Precursor by forging it (especially since no SANE person WOULD intentionally destroy a Precursor by forging it).

Do you have trouble reading? See what I bolded.

fellyn.5083:

Labjax.2465:

fellyn.5083:

It’s your own fault, you shouldn’t get it back.

Why would you even take the time to post something so mean-spirited.

It’s not mean spirited. It is his own fault, therefor he should not be reimbursed.

Their support cant refund items every time some one “accidentally” loses an item they wished to keep.

Not only that but in the past anet has said they actually have no way to do so, as well. Further there is no proof he actually had what he said he did and given the above, I don’t know if anet even has a way to verify his claim.

That’s like, your opinion man. And an especially uninformed one at that.

Simzani.4318:

No it is a scholar exploit of unintended game mechanism. Now we know that game exploits are legit. The red that posted here is tagged “Game Security Lead”, so he endorse exploits, and by him arenanet does. They just have to change their term of service now.

It is an intended mechanism working as intended. It is not an exploit.

Wow Anet. What a kittenty way to get people to buy more gems with real money.

What class/situation would it best be used on?
The only class I don’t have is a ranger.

Raap.9065:

The only improvement I need is an option to make the darn mouse more visible in the particle effect soup that is GW2 large scale combat. The amount of times that I actually have to spend several seconds looking where my cursor is, is plain silly and I do not have this issue in other similar games.

Yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes please.

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

Doesn’t one of the audio settings affect mini-pet sounds? I know I can’t even hear my own. I think it’s the one that controls instruments because I have that one turned way down.

I have just tried it and I can still hear my mini take out/sheathe his sword.

VodCom.6924:

kitten .9460:

I didn’t even know TVH existed, wht a joke lol doing zero damage in a DPS game

WvW commanders disagree with this statement. In competitive modes, conditions and tanking have their place.

As for tequatl, THANKS FOR NECROING THIS DISCUSSION BTW, a group can succeed with nomad gear (since a group can kill tequatl while naked just saying). So get off you high horses and stop telling players in open world what stats they should wear. Keep this kind of comment for your dungeon party.

I’d rather have a nomad noob doing very little dps than a berserk noob laying dead and doing no dps.

That would be with a guild group. With a pug group? Not sure about that.

VodCom.6924:

innocens.1582:

The amount of dead and downed people at the zerg group with teq is huge sometimes
If you factor in the time it takes to revive a downed player, and during this time the downed player and his rezzers dont do damage, i realy dont think it makes much difference in the end damage wise at these big events.

As somebody who did tequatl quite few times and spends lots of time teaching noobs how to deal with him, I cannot but agree with you.

Lots of players are amazed when I tell them that zerker is a bad choice for tequatl/wurm. They try to lecture me pretending berserker gear is the ONLY viable gear for the ENTIRE PvE section of the game.

However I’m not surprized anymore : I just browsed dulfy’s website. Members of [rT] are posting excellent quides for Speed Clearing dungeons and fractals. What is the only HUGE downside of these guides ?
=> They advertize it as PvE quide when it’s clearly speed clear in an organized group.

No wonder why elite wannabe are screwed up when they try larger event. They are truly misguided by this kind of stuff.

Back on topic : Nomad gear is made for those who want unkillable elementalist or necromancer commander. The goal of the commander is to…. command (duh!) and thus to stay alive. The zerg is supposed to dish out damage.

Of course in PvE where the goal is mostly to kill stuff quickly, going full tank does not make much sense. Power has always some use.

Did you all skip the part where the guy said he was doing defence?

Yes, yes you did.

Nomad would be good if the plan was to kite and kill nothing until battery phase. Then everyone would have to be wearing it.
Zerkers will make quick work of those mobs assuming that no champ or creeper spawns and that the team knows to destroy the hypnoss first and no one will have time to go down unless they are reckless.

Having suboptimal gear for defense can be very problematic, because it can mean being unable to get rid of all the mobs before the next spawn, which can mean getting wiped when the other wave comes, because attrition. So that guy was wrong in using Nomad’s gear. You might as well have had just 4 members there…

Using a salvage kit on a bag on the left side of the inventory would salvage all white, blue and green items inside it, with a confirmation.

So I was standing at a crafting station, doing crafting stuff. Then someone came with that god awful ghost mini and stayed there for over 30 minutes.

DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW ANNOYING THAT MINI IS

The asura mini that constantly and repeatedly takes out/sheathe his greatsword is super annoying too. I avoid using mine because of that.

Redenaz.8631:

Dramatic much? While I don’t like people being kicked for now readily-apparent reason, you’ve probably wasted near as much time with this forum post as you would running through Spider Queen. Just don’t party with them again and move on with your life. If you report them, that’s that—Move on.

This thread itself is incredibly awkward. You don’t have a ton to work with, information-wise, and you’re just making up a lot of it from whole cloth to fit the situation. That might have seemed like a good idea, but it’s not. You’re asking for opinions on a made up situation, on a half-fictional person. Even if it started with something that really happened, you, a biased party, wrote it up from the perspective of someone you personally dislike, so is it any surprise at all that other people are finding the character your wrote unpleasant?

I’m not even going to add any more thoughts about the in-game situation, because the strangeness of the way this thread is written overshadows that situation.

Think about what you just said, then think about what life as a whole would look like if people did what you just very patronizingly told the guy to do.

There is a saying that goes something like “If you don’t do anything against it, you’re complicit.”

Those screenshots. Wow. That’s master manipulator right there, using kittenty and disgusting logic trying to coerce you into not reporting them. Rofl. I hope that dude gets banned.

juno.1840:

• New buy orders cannot be cancelled for TBD minutes (anti-spam)
• Fee to cancel a buy order (no fees to place a buy order)

Wow. I cannot believe that you don’t see the wide gaping flaw in those ideas.

I mass buy some items from the TP. I constantly have buy orders in for them to keep the items flowing. Sometimes I’m outbidded, sometimes I’m the highest buyer. Depending on how many items are in front of me, I will or will not add a new listing by outbidding by 1 copper. Like someone pointed out, such is the market. If you are willing to pay more, then you should have the item. It’s as simple as that.
What you’re suggesting as a solution is – I’m sorry – very short-sighted and stupid. You have clearly not thought about the very negative consequences that your solution would have on the economy and on the usability of the trading post.

Vayne.8563:

The game doesn’t revolve around what any one person wants. It revolves around what’s good for the game as a whole.

People want dungeons, particularly hard dungeons to be more rewarding than they are, but from experience, I know people in other games who hated raiding but ended up raiding because it was the only way to get better gear.

Making something more profitable (when it’s already profitable to many), just because it’s not profitable to a few people is a bad way to run a railroad.

The question is (and it’s always the question) is how many people feel the reward isn’t good enough. Because so far from this thread, it doesn’t look like you have a ton of support.

You fail to see the point completely.
There are people who find map completion boring as hell. I am one of them and there are many like me. That, in a game, “for the good of the game as a whole” as you like to see it, is a problem.
It is a problem that can be addressed either by making the process of map completion less grindy and more fun by itself, or by increasing the final reward to make their boring map completion worthwhile.

Belidos.3704:

Whatever happened to the simple satisfaction of completion, back in the day it was like yay I finished it but now days it’s like ok I finished it what do I get …

Belidos.3704:

Whatever happened to the simple satisfaction of completion, back in the day it was like yay I finished it but now days it’s like ok I finished it what do I get …

Here’s the difference. Back in the day, what you were playing (mostly) were platformer games. Platformer games gave a constant challenge, an immediate sense of progression and an immediate sense of achievement, all at the same time, as you beat individual levels. Platformers weren’t just some variation of the same thing from the start to the end. All levels were very different so even if you were on your 20th run of playing Super Mario World or Donkey Kong, it was still fun. So there was actually enjoyment in the process. Progress was also much more relevant. You couldn’t skip a level ahead unless you had beaten a previous level. Often, you would look forward to playing specific levels, which was another motivator to move forward. So when you finally got to the end, you really felt all that progress and constant challenge that you had to go through and had fun doing it.

Map completion has none of those things.
It is not challenging. It is very, very, very grindy.
There is little variation. It is very, very, very grindy.
There is no real sense of progression due to the lack of linearity. All there is for a sense of progression is a percentage in the upper left corner of the world map.
The sense of achievement/accomplishment isn’t exactly high because the process is grindy. I don’t know for others, but I find myself looking at what I have yet to do as if it were a burden, rather than at what I have done with fond memories of how fun it was.

My gripe is with heart quests. Kill a lot of this. Collect a lot of that and bring them back. Go to various things and press F to activate. Very few hearts deviate from that. There is very little challenge and very little variation. I would take fewer, more complex, multi-step and more challenging heart quests over a lot of the same boring crap. I would also make quests that have other quests as prerequisites but aren’t dynamic event chains to give some sense of progression and interconnectedness. Heart quests should also be sending us all over the world to do or fetch things, especially in higher level zones. They could also be used in lower level zones as a vector for map completion by sending you to different areas. This would help make the process of completing a map less grindy, since map completion would naturally happen as you get sent to the 4 corners of Tyria to complete those quests. For example, a norn in Wayfarer Foothills could ask you for a big piece of cooked boar meat that you’d fetch from Carthage’s hunting lodge in Queensdale. Once there, you’d have to kill the giant boar to collect a piece of meat that Carthage would cook for you, maybe requiring honey from that bee hive lady in Queensdale as an ingredient. Then you’d bring the piece of meat back to the norn.

(The heart where you have to throw snowballs at kids in Wayfarer Foothills is my personal favourite. The message you get when you knockdown a kid is hilarious. Their parents thank you for it! Hahahaha)

Vayne.8563:

There are people who really don’t like map completing who would feel pressured to if you made the rewards so vast.

Please explain the psychology behind how people would feel “pressured” to do map completion if the reward was high, because that makes absolutely no sense to me.

azyume.6321:

I don’t agree with any sort of immunity, everyone should have equal powers since there is no more host. However the kick system is broken.

There should be a rule for kick vote. One person to propose and another to second is not correct nor fair. It is democratic and fair if the notion is shared by the majority of players.

My suggestion is to change the kick vote depending on how many players compose a party:

Every single player in the party can see and vote for the kick, including the one that is being voted.

*Full or 4 members in the party: Once it is suggested for the kick, needs at least 3 positive votes (agreeing with the kick); if receives 3 negative votes, the player isn’t kicked from the party;

*Party with 3 players: Needs 2 positive votes for the kick or 2 negative to deny;

*Party with 2: No option to kick, only to leave the party.

Except if the player is disconnected. Then all it should require is 2 votes.

So what was the issue that Anet wanted to fix by no longer making instances owned by a player? Everyone being kicked if the owner disconnects or leaves? Which is is something that could have been fixed without making dungeon instances ownerless. There could have been a fallback system where ownership of an instance falls to the second person who joined the party if the instance owner leaves the party or gets disconnected.
So was there something else they were trying to fix?

DonQuack.9025:

What would truly fix this problem? People reading and adhering to requested info in LFG. Oh and make you own kitten groups

I swear i think the only people scared of being kicked are those that are incapable of making it and terrorists.

Wow. That’s some interesting parallel universe in which you’re living there.
Did you forget to read the problem the original poster tries to solve with his suggestion?
Did you forget that you can’t fix stupid and force people to do things like read?
Did you forget that most people can’t make their own kittening group, which is WHY LFG WAS INVENTED IN THE FIRST PLACE?

mulch.2586:

The moral of the story is good players don’t condition-build.

Was the same way before launch.

Go ahead and make one. Play a Mantra Mesmer. Play a Signet Ranger. For most of the game, you’ll be fine, cuz the game’s just not that dependent on dps. Your choice.

But it’s absurd to complain about your choice. Cuz you’re the one wot made it.

Congratulations on missing the point entirely.

“LFxM to help build our Barbie playhouse on Px. We have absolutely NO cookies. Funny name required.”

If playing the instruments wasn’t this clunky with the cast times and delays and whatnot, I’m pretty sure there would be less macro players.

All the servers now display a population of “very high”?

PaxTheGreatOne.9472:

I run dungeons if I want to and the dungeons paid for most of the armors gear and trinkets of 14 characters, as well as secondary armors, ascended weapons, and 2 legendaries…

Right. And where do the mats you bought from the TP to craft those came from?

Yep.

Farmers.

So warduke, are you ready to pay 10s per T5 mat? Because that’s gonna happen if you have your way. If you have your way, even YOU might have to start farming for mats. The irony.

I’d like to add a suggestion to your suggestion : To make it possible to log off and log back in the same instance, without losing your progress. This way, we could have dungeons that last for days and weeks. It would be awesome!

… because I don’t think that the best loot should be reserved to those who can go over 24 hours without sleeping.

bradldz.3728:

I’m not willing to risk our brilliant economy system for this. There will still be issues with them fighting each other, griefers coming in just to annoy them because thats what they like to do etc. If anyone harasses you you should always report it.

The only way I could see this implemented permanently is if the rewards were nerfed quite a bit but then I think farmers would complain and probably not bother with the place altogether. Also as i mentioned before for the pavilion to work as a good farm the map needs 6 leaders and a lot of cooperation, which is actually not that easy to obtain, there will be issues of ppl standing on other maps spamming to try to get into a particular one because other maps will be no good as a farm.
I think a lot of people farm because its just mindless easy zombie stuff so you can watch things on your other screen but still be earning gold…. well I think in the pavilion that would be hard to do. So for a big chunk of the farming community they will probably stick to what they have now in open world as it’s quite easy to access.

Here’s the thing. The CP is enough of a pain to farm that hordes of farmers couldn’t just go in there and mindlessly farm it. This means that the high rewards were limited to a small set of people. Near the end, there were between 1 and 3 maps rolling at a high rate, raking in silver and gold chests. Maps were capped at 75 people, if I remember correctly. This means that at any time, no more than 225 people were in there raking large amounts of loot.
You can look at the effect it had on the price of T5 mats here : http://www.gw2spidy.com/item/24288
(Enter 2014-05-01 and 2014-07-30 in the date fields of the graph)

The price of large scales took a dip shortly after the CP started, but as you can see, that didn’t prevent their price from slowly rising over the length of the CP starting early June. Bringing the CP back would hardly kill the economy, just like it didn’t kill the economy for the 6 weeks it lasted. Plus, you have to think that if the supply is higher and the price lower, there is less of an incentive to farm and more of an incentive to buy straight from the TP. As a result, there would be less farmers farming in FG. (Did anyone notice a change in the farming habits in FG during the CP?) Another thing you have to take into consideration is what Vayne.8563 said above. It would end up dying. So while it would disrupt the economy in the first weeks, it would likely not last.

Another thing. To avoid the toxic environment in the CP, the CP could be made into something that is akin to the sPvP arenas. If you want a private arena, you have to buy a 2 weeks pass from the gem store. Voilà! Gold sink.

Having said ALL this and having stated that I would like the CP to come back, I’d rather the CP be left as a limited time event, as something to look forward to every spring. There was an exciting atmosphere during the last festival that I really liked. It was festive!

bradldz.3728:

3.Last, and biggest issue imo, the economy. Farming is not good for the economy, Anet doesn’t want you to have gold. Expensive stuff is supposed to stay expensive and rare. For as long as such farms are temporary its not really an issue, yes there will be an influx of mats/exotics into the economy and cause prices to go down but that is temporary and once the farm is removed the excess over time gets absorbed into the economy and the prices eventually stabilise and rise to what they were pre farm. If the farm was to stay then all these prices of common mats would stay really low, rare mats prices would drop too, making farming less profitable. The truth is, those precursors that people want so bad are never going to get cheaper. As prices go down (if more drop from people farming lets say) the demand for them will go up thus pushing the prices back up, and eventually your legendary would be worth even less because it’s more common. As a result of farming prices of common mats going down would also cheapen the rewards of any other activity in game as most of earning gold potential comes from loot.
.

First, no it does not. The CP didn’t make gold appear from thin air. Dungeons and world bosses have always been the primary way for new gold to enter the economy. That didn’t change with the CP. What we got from the CP were mats, not gold. With Heal-o-Tron requiring (IIRC) 10G to start a new round, one could even argue that the CP was a gold sink.

Second, it’s well known that the price for precursors and legendaries is controlled by a few people who keep the prices high by buying out everything and selling higher.

Third, there will ALWAYS be a need for farmers and there will ALWAYS be a need to farm, for as long as people need materials. Those mats have to be acquired somewhere. Gold is completely irrelevant here. So what Anet have to constantly ask themselves is how hard they want getting enough materials (for crafting) to be. If they make it too easy, people will get bored quickly and leave the game. If they make it too hard, casuals will find it too much of a grind and leave the game. They have to strike a balance.

Right now, Anet has to find a way to bring farmers in an area meant to be farmed and keep a good drop balance. I believe that this is what they tried to do with Dry Top, but the farmers don’t seem to like it. I think it’s in great part because Dry Top is challenging to navigate versus the rewards. Frostgorge is easier to farm for slightly better loot. So I think that the way to fix this would be to improve the loot in Dry Top and add more scalable events. Right now, I think that the only event that scales and spawns champs in Dry Top is the basket event.

I support the idea of bringing back the CP because I LOVED it, but if what Anet and the community want is to bring the farmers to an area meant to be farmed, Anet should probably work at making Dry Top more appealing. Dry Top, in the end, is more “accessible” and troll-proof than the CP.

Deli.1302:

Kasima.8143:

A few suggestions on how to achieve that :

• Let people transfer for free in the few days leading up to the next tournament, but make switching servers impossible during the following regular season. Do it once and see how it plays out.
• Give everyone a free transfer or reset everyone’s server selection, lower the server caps and let people reorganize themselves. I know, this would be unfair to many because then, some people would be unable to get back on the server they were on, but that’s kind of the point. This could force entire WvW guilds to move around, improving 24/7 coverage.
• Remove the 1 or 2 lowest population servers and give everyone in those servers a free transfer.
• Give a free transfer to everyone in the fully populated servers and reduce the population cap gradually as people move out to other servers.

Forcing people to move out of servers is gonna cause a huge outcry and a lot of negative PR for anet. It is akin to forcing families to move out of their homes. Even if people did leave, it is 100% certain that the problem will still exist after. People need to start thinking a little more in the long term and about the ramifications of their suggestions.

These people could move to other low populated servers together if they wish to stay together. Nothing that can’t be solved there.

Dusty Moon.4382:

Simple – only allow a certain number of players in from each server into a specific BL at a time and have a timer on the player so they can’t jump at will between the BL’s. This is what is happening now – blobs are transferring and to try to avoid fights – I think once a player is in a BL, except for EotM, then they need to be in that BL for an hour in game time – for each 24 hr period.

OR

Only allow a player ONE BL each 24 hr period. Once in – they are stuck.

lol that would suck… a LOT.

Berk.8561:

Boreal.9826:

Why not a simple, perhaps elegant even, solution like:

(#1 + #24) vs (#2 + #23) vs (#3 + #22)
(#4 + #21) vs (#5 + #20) vs (#6 + #19)
(#7 + #18) vs (#8 + #17) vs (#9 + #16)
(#10 + #15) vs (#11 + #14) vs (#12 + #13)

This would be much more balanced, top to bottom. BL caps would have to be increased, but lag hasn’t really been an issue (for me) in many months… and I play in the T1.

I play in T8. It I wanted to play on Blackgate (and that’s what merging ET with Blackgate would amount to), I’d transfer to Blackgate. There are quite a few people in the lower tiers who are there specifically because they don’t like or want the play they get on T1. If you like T1 play and are having fun, that’s great. Not everyone wants the same thing, which is why I also think the megaservers are a disaster (everyone gets high-population play now in PvE, whether they wanted it or not). I would think it’s in ANet’s interest to cater to a wide variety of player preferences to reach the largest audience possible rather than a single narrow preference that appeals to a more narrow audience.

This could be solved by having 2 types of servers ; high-cap and low-cap servers and make it so high and low cap servers can’t face each other.

Sorry in advance for not reading the 21 pages.

The issue cannot be fixed by changing the population caps on the maps, because the real issue brought by low population is lack of coverage.

Fort Aspenwood (my server) can hold itself just fine against JQ, TC and SoS at reset, when all the maps are queued. EU and especially NA are our prime time. But once OCE hits, we get our butt handed to us because we have no coverage and everything gets capped. Changing population caps of WvW maps isn’t going to change our lack of OCE coverage.

The only real solution is to even the servers out. Now this can be accomplished in 2 ways : Lower the maximum server population to force people to “trickle down” to other servers and/or modify the barrier to servers transfers.
A few suggestions on how to achieve that :

• Let people transfer for free in the few days leading up to the next tournament, but make switching servers impossible during the following regular season. Do it once and see how it plays out.
• Give everyone a free transfer or reset everyone’s server selection, lower the server caps and let people reorganize themselves. I know, this would be unfair to many because then, some people would be unable to get back on the server they were on, but that’s kind of the point. This could force entire WvW guilds to move around, improving 24/7 coverage.
• Remove the 1 or 2 lowest population servers and give everyone in those servers a free transfer.
• Give a free transfer to everyone in the fully populated servers and reduce the population cap gradually as people move out to other servers.
• Edit : I actually LOVE the idea of enlisting that GreenRipper.6432 proposed. It’s the same as the first point in the list, but could it be guild-wide enlists instead? Say that guilds pick a server to enlist in for a season and in turn, players pick one of their 5 guilds to WvW with for the length of the season with a 2 weeks cooldown if switching WvW guilds? This would give guilds a purpose again and would be generally awesome, I think.

timmyf.1490:

This always comes to mind. Attached for convenience, linked because I’m not a dirty thief. http://xkcd.com/1425/

Yep, this. Very much this.

timmyf.1490:

I get frustrated with the overreaching – Guild Halls as player housing, really? – because making these threads significantly longer and harder to read hurts the discussion and limits the ability for others to participate. When contributors drop 12,000 characters of a proposal that WILL. NEVER. HAPPEN., it just pushes away people with good, small, workable ideas.

Keeping ideas brief and realistic shows respect for the dozens or hundreds of individuals trying to participate.

Agreed. I started reading, but then stopped in the middle of page 2 after the (already) bazillion of unrealistic “player housing” and “guild cities” suggestions.

Keep it realistic and feasible people. Remember that there are thousands of guilds in this game.
The devs are also not looking to write a whole new game. They want to make GUILD HALLS.

Proposal Overview
For guild halls to contain a large empty area for preparation for guild missions.

Goal of Proposal
To make it easy for guilds to split up in groups and for commanders to have plenty of room to use /supplyinfo without interference.

Proposal Functionality
There only needs to be a large empty area.

Associated Risks
None

Proposal Overview
To make the guild halls customizable using an interface similar to the crafting interface and a system similar to the Skyrim Hearthfire expansion pack.

Goal of Proposal
To have a way to customize guild halls that allows a good deal of flexibility while keeping it in the realm of the feasible.

Proposal Functionality
I think it would be useful to look at how the Skyrim Hearthfire expansion pack makes it possible for players to build their own home while allowing a good deal of flexibility.
You can read about how it works here : http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Construction

Mainly, there are predefined locations and the player chooses what to build in those locations from a list of predefined furniture and additions. Everything is built automatically provided that the player has sufficient materials.

Guild halls could function in a similar manner. Guild halls could be built, expanded and furnished using an interface similar to the crafting interface, using materials stored in a guild material collection. Guild halls could have, say, up to 9 different expansions in which various things can be built : Crafting area, merchant area, mystic forge, belcher’s bluff tables and so on. Each expansion would have to be built first before being furnished.

If possible, customization could be pushed further by letting guilds choose between different types and colours of walls, carpets, wall banners, decorations, lights and so on.

Associated Risks
Material costs will skyrocket. It could be prevented by adding special nodes to the guild hall instance that yield materials that can only be used to build guild halls.

Clerigo.9475:

GH would be inside capital cities and major locations like the stronghold of ebonhawke, where the constant flow of players getting in or out of GH would help fill these places.

Pros: help to increase the flow of population to major game hubs, like capital cities and other important areas.
Cons: FPS related issues when we get the WvWvW raid party stopping by for refreshments ?

We must not have been playing the same game. The cities are already plenty populated as it is. It’s already taking ages to load these maps, especially Lion’s Arch which can take up to 1 minute to load. So I fully disagree with requiring people to zone into any of the cities to go to their guild halls.

I prefer AlienMenace.7516’s idea by far. Having the possibility to choose amongst multiple guild hall locations all over the world is a great idea.

I’m with everyone else : Huh… why?

Here is the definition of “anti-social” from Wikipedia. Maybe that will enlighten you.
“Anti-social behaviours are actions that harm or lack consideration for the well-being of others. Anti-social behaviour is labelled as such when it is deemed contrary to prevailing norms for social conduct.”
Which is exactly what the people who come in and disrupt the farms “for the lulz” are doing, and being.

fellyn.5083:

Kasima.8143:

fellyn.5083:

DeWolfe.2174:

This is still a design issue when one or two antisocial players can ruin the game for an entire map. Obviously if a large group starts reporting you, odds are you’ve done something to warrant it.

What makes them anti social?

The fact that they don’t want to stand around in a ball and spam 1 for hours on end?

That they’d rather finish an event?

Confusing argument is confusing.

It’s the equivalent of destroying the sand castle of dozens of people.
Dozens of people like to have fun in one way (farming an event), then there is one or 2 other people who come and ruin it for everybody.
Considering that a game is meant to have fun, who is right and who is wrong?
My money is on those ruining the fun of a large amount of people being wrong. It is indeed being INCONSIDERATE and selfish, i.e. antisocial. That’s regardless of how the game is supposed to be played.

Maybe you would have a point if the people building the sand castle weren’t blocking access to the water at the beach. Which in your analogy is what the people farming these events are doing. And then they are telling the people who want to play in the water to go else where to do so.

And this in no way makes them anti social. It’s still a really odd accusation to make.

“It is indeed being INCONSIDERATE and selfish, i.e. antisocial. That’s regardless of how the game is supposed to be played.”

Not unlike telling people who want to finish their living story (some of which paid money to do so) that they need to go else where and THEIR farming spot is more important? Let’s talk about being selfish..

Still being neither inconsiderate or selfish makes a person anti social. If that’s the case then the fail farmers fit that bill just as much and if not more so than the people you claim are ruining their fun.

This is the logical conclusion using your argument.

No, that is your argument. My argument lies in the numbers and in the intent. Those trolls go in and purposefully ruin the fun of dozens of people for the lulz, i.e. destroy their sand castles. I’m not talking about those who want to complete their LS.

fellyn.5083:

DeWolfe.2174:

This is still a design issue when one or two antisocial players can ruin the game for an entire map. Obviously if a large group starts reporting you, odds are you’ve done something to warrant it.

What makes them anti social?

The fact that they don’t want to stand around in a ball and spam 1 for hours on end?

That they’d rather finish an event?

Confusing argument is confusing.

It’s the equivalent of destroying the sand castle of dozens of people.
Dozens of people like to have fun in one way (farming an event), then there is one or 2 other people who come and ruin it for everybody.
Considering that a game is meant to have fun, who is right and who is wrong?
My money is on those ruining the fun of a large amount of people being wrong. It’s not against the ToS, it’s not a bannable offence, but in the end of the day, they are ruining the fun of a large amount of people, so it’s morally wrong. It is indeed being INCONSIDERATE and selfish, i.e. antisocial. That’s regardless of how the game is supposed to be played.

I think that the best way for Anet to fix this is to make it so farmers will gather around an area designed to be farmed. Dry Top seemed to be that, but it seems that the lack of champs and the lack of scaling makes it unappealing for farmers. The only event I can think of that scales and spawn champs in the basket event. There needs to be more events like that and they also need to be on a short timer with a reward for succeeding so people will want to extend them but also win them.

I like your suggestion a lot okalevi. I would get behind that. Please Anet, make Triple Trouble more worth doing. As it is right now, I do Teq on all my 4 80’s for the ground chest, but I only do the wurm once because the loot is too crappy for the effort.

Lately, I have been keeping an eye on how many people join on TTS’ TeamSpeak for Tequatl and Wurm raids. People have just been up and leaving after being done with Tequatl – a boss which does not even require TeamSpeak anymore. It’s probably because the Wurm is not worth the effort. I’ve been doing the Wurm every day for a very long time and I have only gotten ONE ascended armor chest from it. Not only would I like better loot for the Wurm, but I’d also like to be able to collect the ground chest on several characters, just like with Tequatl.

Kaamau.5341:

One risk is that people will be torn between two guilds that require them to be major members and people are forced to choose between them at the beginning.

Two?
Try 5.
I have a main guild, 2 smaller friend guilds, then I’m in TTS and have to keep an empty slot for temporary invites for guild missions. This means that I cannot have a WvW guild in addition to that, let alone 2 WvW guilds, which I would like to have because one likes to go after zergs, while the other likes to cap things. I guess if I was doing PvP, then I’d like to have a PvP guild too.
There are just way too many aspects to this game for one guild to be enough.

Proposal Overview
To make it possible to buy additional guild slots

Goal of Proposal
To make it possible to be part of more than 5 guilds.

Proposal Functionality
They could be bought from the gem store.

Associated Risks
None, really.

I’m sorry if it has already been suggested. I didn’t feel like combing through 20 pages and the search bar didn’t come up with anything for “slots” or “slot”.