Guild Wars 2

If they made, say, DE’s in the cursed shore like they were in the january update we’d see more people doing DE’s. It’s not about making everything equal, but, rather, rewarding a variety of playstyles with comparable rewards. I’d much prefer to play DE’s than champ trains as it’s a more social, community building playstyle. I met a lot of people and had a lot of fun back in the old days of Orr. Champ trains are, hopefully, an unintended aberration.

VOLKON.1290:

What’s funny is that people are thinking about the wrong definition of grind. They’re not saying new gear that will take a lot of effort to get. They’re talking about the endless treadmill of raiding endlessly for a tier of gear only to have that tossed as new tiers come in ad nauseum.

Two definitions of grind. They’re living up to the promise based on the definition that relates to the endless cycle of gearing and re-gearing quite well. Yes, it’ll take some time to get the ascended items. But you’ll never have to worry about throwing it away when hyper-ascended is released in three months (or something equally silly).

The tier grind is non-existent here, which is what they promised and as it should be. They never said no time-sinks though. Time-sinks are necessary for the health of the game. If you did it all in a week you’d be bored and wander off in a hurry.

This isn’t the case actually. What they introduced was not a final power level of gear with ascended. Gear or tiers itself really makes no difference. What they added was vertical progression with a low power curve. If the first year is any guide, that power curve will be ~10% power increase per year. They said they had no plans for an additional tier of gear and would carry VP forward through infusions to the existing tier (cf. the AMA).

It is VP itself that violates the promises of the pre-release marketing. VP is about non-optional (power) treadmills that add no value to a game for those who recognize that the emperor is naked. No doubt some will take issue with the non-optional claim around the low power curve. If you are tempted, let’s consider adding 10% more fat to your body each year IRL. If this happened, all of us would recognize intuitively that if we didn’t hop on the treadmill, we’d soon be a hutt. Sadly, on these forums, people often lack the ability of logical inference around vertical progression.

Peetee.9406:

You guys want to hold ArenaNet to quotes taken a year ago or worse yet a manifesto taken five years.

But what if new information comes to light? What if the majority of players like to grind?

You wouldn’t want your doctor or stockbrooker using outdated information.Why should ArenaNet be any different?

Yes, I would really like Anet to behave as a company with integrity that honors their word. And, perhaps you don’t understand what a manifesto is. It is a guiding document and I would expect the results we see in the game to follow the DNA of the manifesto. I will admit that that certainly isn’t what we find with Anet and their manifesto.

And, I don’t suppose that the majority of players in GW2 want to grind, not if the forums are any indication. It (gear grind) itself is an outdated idea. Anet should have used the outcry by a few demanding gear progression as a teachable moment. Sadly, they didn’t.

Retraiting is often the lowest aspect of the cost of changing your build. When I talk about different builds I’m often talking about direct vs condition damage. Throw in vertical progression and a number of alts and I have an untenable situation—and, that’s before we get to the cost of retraiting.

Yes, a thief will bleed out near instantaneously, while a warrior will take a few seconds depending on the mobs focusing him. It’s surprising how fast a warrior goes down under the right (well, wrong, actually) circumstances in full berserker.

Early on I tried various options to increase MF but gave up on it over time. It just didn’t seem to make much difference; but, the loss of primary stats did seem to make a demonstrable difference.

So, today, with MF off gear and combined with a salvage jones, when the stars align, I have ~200% MF. Does it make any difference? Not that I can tell.

I think the pre-launch devs would be the most surprised at what GW2 has become.

I’m going to say S/W ranger. Not because it’s true, I’d just like the ranger to be on top in a discussion somewhere.

Guilds are not useless as the buffs are definitely an incentive. However, they are not really supported by the game. Multi-repping alone kills the guild system altogether. But, yeah, they are useful, especially if you are leveling.

Man, am I glad I built up karma before the nerf. I just outfitted my ranger with a wvw set of rabid gear at a cost of ~500k karma or so. It would be impossible to do stuff like that under the current system. In a skill based game it should be easy to get max level gear and the old system allowed this. I really feel sorry for new players as they are the ones feeling the effects of the nerf.

Salvage, salvage, salvage. I’ve been surprised by how quickly the MF has gone up. Taking MF off gear was one of the better decisions Anet made in its first year. And, putting it on the account was brilliant.

Imagine a mission to Cantha. Imagine the beautiful new permanent territory that that march would open up. Imagine the storytelling potential. Imagine Anet was doing something like this rather than throwaway updates every two weeks.

You should check out the collaborative development thread on the living world under general discussion. A consistent theme is how temporary content is both grindy (in terms of achievements and rewards) and a poor model for evolving a living world. OP, many people share your concerns.

Main Ranger issue: no sporebat. Add a sporebat, fix the profession.

shaidyn.4016:

Guhracie.3419:

Knighthonor.4061:

shaidyn.4016:

Respectfully, Knighthonor, you’re playing the wrong game. In fact, you’re playing the wrong genre. You should go find some nice action adventure games to play.

again hate when people say this, because Levels wasnt always the Genre.

Playing with others in a world, was define this genre. not levels, since Character level trail didnt become popular until Everquest 1, and made standard from WoW which uses the same system as Everquest 1. those games were popular, but doesnt mean level locking mechanics is a good game design.

Okay, you are obviously trolling. Leveling was a huge part of RPGs well before computer games, and certainly before Everquest. Levels originated in tabletop gaming, and have been adopted by the vast majority of RPGs and MMORPGs have carried them along as a natural progression.

He’s not trolling, he’s just deluded. Note the points he keeps bringing up in his posts. FPS games. He wants MMO-RPGs to be FPS games with a fantasy skin.

What I don’t is people like him who play games they know they won’t like, and then complain about it. “I hate games with level progression. I’m going to play this game that has level progression. THIS LEVEL PROGRESSION IS STUPID AND THEY SHOULD REMOVE IT.”

The OP looks about as crazy as if I went to the Madden forums and demanded they introduce levels.

It would probably surprise you then that Anet originally conceived of GW2 as a game without level progression. I believe the point being made is simply that there is no inherent need for level progression in the MMO. The OP is not being crazy, just thinking the same thoughts as the Anet devs did before him.

The scary part is that someone thought this all to be a good thing. That is, expanding your crafting solely to manage mats or craft weapons for yourself. That’s really not what crafting is about, at least what I’ve experienced it to be in every other MMO I’ve played.

All this is around managing vertical progression more than it is around crafting. I’ve always seen crafting as a way to make coin in other games. Here it’s a way to level and a way to grind out gear. I wish they would focus crafting on crafting.

OP may be a minority in this thread, but he lines up well with the general themes in the LW collaborative thread. Many players have a problem with temporary content and achievements that come with a deadline. If you don’t do them now, they are gone forever. The problem here is that they are grindy by design and experienced gamers know this. And, in that thread, they are letting Anet know.

One of the problems Anet has right now is that it has adopted a bad model for evolving a living world. The model they have chosen is an old school episodic TV show that has the characters participate in an event (an adventure) and then resets (removes) everything at the end of the show. It’s not how a living world evolves.

A much better model would be to consider a traditional expansion. Generally, with an expansion, you have a permanently evolved game world in terms of story, territory, and characters. If you want to evolve a living world, why not deliver an expansion, but do it over time. Then updates (hopefully now months apart) will be greatly anticipated for the new content they will bring rather than be greeted as a bi-weekly to-do list.

It always amazes me that people “invest” in RNG. When was the last time you heard a financial adviser suggest that you just buy more lottery tickets to increase your chance of winning (and increase your wealth). RNG items in the game fulfill the same function as lotteries in life. Sure, some people will win, and some will win big, but the odds are it won’t be you.

Yes, traits and skills, or the horizontal progression that Colin suggested we do “instead” of the gear progression. BTW, those suggesting we have already seen it don’t understand it. It’s about character progression through new skills and abilities, not reworked old ones or new universal ones that apply to everyone. It not only provides a sense of character progression, but also promotes interesting and diverse builds with interesting effects on game balance and play.

It would have been good to follow up the blog post with a step in the right direction, however small. Instead, immediately, we have more gear progression and nothing whatsoever to indicate movement in a horizontal direction.

I really don’t care about the LS updates—at all. I am personally hoping that Anet will get religion out of the feedback (which is pointed and consistently themed) they are getting in the LW thread. If they begin evolving the LW instead of giving us TV episodes that leave the world unchanged, then I will care. I will look forward to updates with anticipation instead of dreading the burnout I feel at the temporary content and achievements.

I think one of the fundamental problems with the current model is an event-driven framework for emulating an evolving living world. The problem comes from the fact that it’s a bad model.

Consider the trans-continental railroad which was built in the USA in the 19th century. You can argue that it was an event and I’ll give you that one, perhaps a series of events. But, the key is that it didn’t come and go as, say, a concert would. It came, stayed, and forever changed the lives of many people. I’ll argue that that is how a living world evolves. There is continuous change, but a perception of permanence.

I think everyone agrees that an expansion satisfies the requirements of an evolved game world. A new major story emerges, new lands open up, the are new side stories, new characters, expanded old characters, etc., etc. I would really like to get away from the episodic TV, event-driven model for evolving a LW because it simply fails to model an evolving world. I would much prefer a model where the content of an expansion is delivered over time. Epic storytelling would then be possible in the context of evolutionary change that would engender anticipation rather than burn-out.

Guhracie.3419:

Raine.1394:

Classical leveling is anachronistic and sets a bad precedent if you are going to try something modern like, oh, horizontal progression or something less tired than the classical gear grind. What you could have in its place is a tutorial that would prepare you gear, gameplay, and lore wise and then would launch you on to your adventures in the world of Tyria.

Again, the vertical grind of classical leveling sets an unnecessary and bad precedent in a game that is not about grinding. Prior to launch, at least, GW2 was not about grinding as Anet simply did not make grindy games.

Leveling cannot be old-fashioned while it is still the primary “fashion” around which games are designed. Further, GW2 was never promoted as a game that would not have leveling in it.

Vertical progression is old and tired, as are all the players forced to ride the power treadmill. Classical leveling is nothing other than VP. GW2 was marketed as a “new” kind of MMO that was not about grind. Removing old-fashioned leveling would have fit perfectly.

Edit: Buggy whips are currently the primary method of controlling a horse attached to buggy—a trip downtown in any major city will tell you that. And, yes, something can be dominant and primary and old-fashioned.

Classical leveling is anachronistic and sets a bad precedent if you are going to try something modern like, oh, horizontal progression or something less tired than the classical gear grind. What you could have in its place is a tutorial that would prepare you gear, gameplay, and lore wise and then would launch you on to your adventures in the world of Tyria.

Again, the vertical grind of classical leveling sets an unnecessary and bad precedent in a game that is not about grinding. Prior to launch, at least, GW2 was not supposed to be about grinding as Anet simply did not make grindy games. Removing classical leveling would have fit the game perfectly.

Condition damage? My condition specs are the only ones I don’t worry about ascended gear. I do PvE where everything is already capped—why on earth would I want to increase my condition damage?

No, right now, Ascended is about direct damage and I believe even Anet in the person of Mike O has thrown the 10% number increase around when dealing with what can be considered the initial year’s increase in power—if I recall correctly he was just talking trinkets. I would imagine that this would be a good indicator of what their low power curve will be: 10% per year or thereabouts.

Another plus to the ranger is that you can charm(tame) juvenile pets found in the open world. They have unique abilities, so you can focus on collecting them all as you explore the world.

Neither, as I would prefer a 3 month development cycle. My preference would be that they emulate delivering an expansion, but do it over time. This would mean a new main story arc, new territory opening up, expansion of old characters, new characters, etc. I really don’t want events at all.

I believe he referred to increased aggro twice and used armor and toughness as the magnet. Which, is what we have heard all along as the wiki on aggro suggests. It is significant that a developer has given credibility to the idea as many people don’t believe its true.

I will say from personal experience that aggro is unpredictable and all over the map across the game. But, it would seem confirmed that armor/toughness is a factor.

Please, no nerfs…seriously. I think the champ train is a design anomaly that will self-correct as other areas of the game become equally rewarding. Anet has rightly been focusing on increased reward for play over the last months. They’ve done a good job and I’d hate to see them derail on the champ train.

Well, at the very least he showed current best and most used weapons, utilities, traits, runes, etc. Therefore, it could be helpful to new or struggling rangers.

I really would have liked to see him address the ranged ranger and learn why the archetypal ranger is not really supported well in the game at this time

OP, you are the person they were addressing when they added vertical progression to the game last November. But, as I said then, the low power curve will be too much for those who understand it, and not enough to even notice for the true grinders looking for an endgame.

LanfearShadowflame.3189:

thehipone.6812:

I end up doing achievement related stuff that I don’t enjoy mainly because of the “never to be seen again” opportunity that exists with the 2 week release cycle and subsequent poofing of content. Want that quartz node? – better do it now because you can’t get it in a month.
Want that meta-achievement reward mini? – you’d rather play in a close WvW matchup this week instead of doing random Jps to find kites/caches? – too bad, do the JPs now or you can’t get the meta.

This is sort of exactly what I was talking about. The only person pressuring you to get those things is you. The world is not going to end if you don’t get the node (also want to point out that they never said there wouldn’t be another chance to earn one), or if you’re missing a few minis in your collection.

Yes, I understand, you have the completionist bug. I know that feeling, I had it too. It can be beaten, but the only person that can the make the choice to play any other way is you.

You don’t want to play any other way? You want to get everything, you want to be a completionist, you say? Well, then that is your choice too. Buckle down and slog on.

How you play, what you choose to do are all choices made solely by you. You can choose to slog through content you don’t like for a useless shiny, or you can choose to ignore it because it’s not to your taste. No one else can make that decision for you. Not even Anet, they can entice you, but they cannot make you.

The pressure may be felt by the player, but it doesn’t originate with the player. Why? It is an effect of game design. Temporary content (here the achievements) with a time gate is grindy—by design. It can be thought of as providing an incentive for continued play. There are many elements of game design with a similar calculation such as vertical progression. One of it’s effects is to provide an incentive for continued play.

If you understand anything about gaming, you’ll be reluctant to blame the player for things like this. Game companies are masters of motivation. But, it can backfire when it is noticed as it is actually disrespectful of players. It burns goodwill.

If true, it would be a huge mistake and disappointment. They simply need to fix it as every other game has done and make all damage, whether direct or over time, by player.

There are definitely people who play content they don’t enjoy just for the achievements/reward. The Anet thread on the LW has some consistent themes about problems in the game and grindy temporary content is one of them. Anet has said many times recently that they hear the community. They’ve also said that it takes them a while to turn the ship around. We’ll have to wait to see what that all actually means.

I believe they need to move to permanent content, which I’m suggesting would best be delivered like an expansion, but over time—and not this episodic TV show model that goes nowhere. Permanent achievements are less grindy than temporary ones. Also, it’s new player/casual player friendly. Anyone can jump in anywhere and participate in the same main story arc. They need to be able to tell a story well (they can, cf. GW1), and, of course, there needs to be a sense of reward for play in the game.

My thought is that they began making bad decisions on 11/15/2012. The game that launched was the best MMO that I had ever played. I believe Anet’s weakness is in managing greatness over time.

No specific love for the trinity here. However, the game lacks meaningful combat roles. I think this is a problem given that humans generally approach objectives, in groups, through roles.

Will the Ranger ever be viable in an archetypal “ranged” build. I’m actually happy when I have a GS-S/W equipped, but not a LB, SB, or an axe. I’d recommend just describing “ranged” as it would just take too long to kill anything that way in the livestream.

Ranger: Viable ranged option.

I remember one release where the champs in Orr were instagibing for 20k+. With several of them up at one time that’s instant defeat out of the particle blur. This has been a problem in the game since forever and does not make for interesting, skilled combat. I would really like them to change the way they understand challenge. I consider a challenging encounter to be one where, if you die, you can do a post-mortem, understand why you died, and learn from it. In GW2, too often your only mistake was entering combat.

chemiclord.3978:

Well, here’s the problem. You’ve told the “developers” (let’s assume a dev is reading this right now) that you’re bored and you’re going to quit.

So I guess the question is; what is it you’re looking for? What would keep it interesting for you? The cry of “new PERMANENT content” is all well and good, but it’s a battle cry that is so vague that it really doesn’t say anything.

Yeah, new permanent content might be vague. One idea is to think about content releases as actually releasing an expansion…over time. What do you normally get in an expansion? Usually a broad new main story arc, multiple side stories, new territory, expanded old and new characters, new permanent achievements, etc. Let’s say the expansion level is a mission to rescue Cantha from a fate worse than death. Well, there are lands to cross, bad guys to defeat along the way, etc. That is what you deliver in installments which all tie back into the main story. Knowing the destination and purpose from the beginning makes it an epic journey that builds anticipation with each release.

What I mean by permanent content is an evolving living world that is, under the covers, simply an expansion delivered over time. But, I believe the context of an evolving living world is a better way to tell the story.

I’m leveling a new alt I started yesterday and have been playing in Qdale. On my server there is at least one player whose sole reasion for playing the zone is to derail the train. He makes no bones about it. I don’t know if it’s simply opportunistic trolling or whether he’s out to save the world from champ trains—same difference. I’ve personally felt like yelling at him and I was just there doing map completion.

The whole train dynamic is a bizarre game design anomaly. Can you imagine someone creating it as a playstyle? Still, it’s a way to realize some reward in the game and even I do it occasionally for the monthly or simply some gold.

I don’t want to see it nerfed or stopped. I would much prefer that reward is introduced across the game in such a way that a variety of playstyles will realize a similar level of reward. The champ train is an anomaly that will die a natural death once reasonable alternatives are introduced.

The larger MMO’s haven’t had a narrowly defined target audience for years. By their very nature they are able, if well designed, to appeal to a large audience and a wildly diverse player base in terms of skill level and interest. It really wouldn’t make sense to talk about niches unless you were talking about aspects of the game designed especially for them.

It’s really odd as I had shelved my Ranger months ago. I dusted her off recently and tried a melee build S/F-GS and I just destroy stuff. I mean faster than with my warrior. It was quite a surprise. I really would prefer a LB and ranged ranger, but it just feels weak and the melee build seems to be in a fairly good place.

Phenn.5167:

timmyf.1490:

We’re not talking much to each other here. I’d like to ask everybody a question of my own:

What if Living Story steps didn’t have “conclusions” at all? What if something just happens and we’re left to deal with it indefinitely? Would you enjoy playing the content even if you don’t get to “win” or “defeat” somebody during a patch cycle? Or is some sort of conclusion, even just a mini-conclusion, a necessary piece for you to enjoy content?

In effect you’d either 1) be adding to what already exists in the game (persistent content that has to be “dealt with” whenever you come across it) or 2) you’d introduce the kind of real-life tedium that makes people want to get away into books or movies or video games.

A good example of this is Scarlet’s invasions. Even on SoR we don’t see organized attempts to complete them, and when they pop in an area I’m presently trying to run around in, it’s more of an annoyance than an interesting twist.

What makes stories so compelling to humans is the concept of beginning and ending. Idefiniteness is both uncomfortable and unappealing. Conclusions in the LS don’t have to be hard conclusions, but there has to be some resolution to one part or another to convince players that the LS is worth doing.

That’s as I understand it.

Now, if you’re meaning a consistent addition of Heart-like events, or new and evolving dynamic events added throughout, I think that’d certainly be interesting. It’d create more value in exploring old areas. BUT it wouldn’t advance a LS. The DEs as they stand hardly do anything to tell as story, other than “someone screwed up, must fix it, fixed, wait for them to re-screw up.”

There’s potential there, but it’d have to be done very, very well.

In college, before I realized I would eventually have to make a living, I was an English major. I remember analyzing works simply from beginnings and endings—as you say it’s actually quite important to story. As you move through a story you are always in relationship to beginnings and endings.

One of the things i liked about your idea of emulating expansions in a previous post is that it would allow incremental arcs to be told in the context of a broader story. In my example, the expansion level involved a march to Cantha for some reason. That reason would drive us forward through various beginnings and endings (all having overall purpose and meaning). It just would be really cool if we had some expansion level mission to inform and guide our steps through the story segments. I’m actually getting excited just thinking about it. It has the potential for a very rich telling of the story.

I saw the “emulate expansions” in the epic post above. I believe this captures my take on evolving a LW/LS. In an expansion you typically have new territory, an expansion of characters new and old, perhaps a complete story told. Evolving a LW should do this step-wise. You could do this step-wise in GW by marching slowly to Cantha, opening up new territory, participating in new story that built on old story, with beginnings and endings, rescue a queen, slay a dragon, whatever.

I like the idea of emulating an expansion in a step-wise manner much more than emulating an episodic TV show. (Like I said above, if we’re talking Breaking Bad, I’m flexible.) What this would require, I believe, is to lose the value proposition of a two week dev cycle and move to a longer cycle that would allow for reasonable steps in delivering an expansion over time. It might be a safer model than simply telling a story, epic or otherwise.

ColinJohanson.2394:

So a fun question to ask to help direct the conversation a bit: What aspects of your favorite television shows would you think would be cool to see reflected in a game medium?

At first blush, I see episodic TV, as a whole, as a poor model for evolving a living world. Generally in a series the characters “reset” each week and just have a different adventure each week. This is akin to the temporary content we have been seeing so far in the LS. It comes and goes and we pretty much stay the same.

One show that broke this mold was Breaking Bad. There we saw a character move from point ‘A’ to ‘Z’ over the course of 5 seasons. What I liked best about it was witnessing true character progression based upon choices made. The choices Walt made affected himself and those with whom he was associated. Hell, airplanes fell out of the sky and stuff landed in his pool because of choices he made. Interesting character development, deep interrelated story, and lot’s of interesting intelligent associations like Walter White/Walt Whitman. I think if you used Breaking Bad, loosely, as a model, I’m OK with it.

But, episodic TV is still risky as a model. You could end up with a world that comes and goes in weekly installments and that’s pretty much what we currently have.

Xae Isareth.1364:

TooBz.3065:

Xae Isareth.1364:

TooBz.3065:

Vayne.8563:

TooBz.3065:

Yaki.9563:

The weapon doesn’t make that much difference. The only reason you “need” one is for fractals, but they haven’t even opened 50+ yet.

We don’t Almost no one plays this game to feel mediocre. Everyone Almost everyone wants BiS gear. If they didn’t there would be no reason to add this stuff.

Edited: edit to avoid stupid pedantic arguments.

Stupid pedantic argument incoming. lol

I don’t disagree that no one plays this game to feel mediocre. I do disagree that most people feel mediocre if they don’t have an ascended weapon.

I don’t even think BIS gear is on most people’s radar. Most people are still trying to figure out how to dodge. lol

Ha. Just the person I edited to avoid (bait??? Sometimes I don’t know my own motivations). However, in this case, I don’t think that was either stupid or pedantic. Stupid and pedantic is “I like being mediocre, you don’t speak for all of us.”

You’re point, in contrast, is rather thought provoking. It’s possible that ascended gear is really only a problem for those of us who walk the line between casual and hardcore. Casual in time available but hardcore in drive. (As far as I can tell you are the opposite, hardcore in time casual in drive) Combine that with being an altoholic and you have even a smaller subset of people. most people would just play one character and stick with it.

Nevertheless I will continue to advocate for my particular brand of idiocy.

See, the problem is that by the same argument, no one plays this game to look bland. almost everyone wants expensive skins.

So, does that mean we should all get free Legendaries?

I said this a couple of weeks ago, but what the kitten, if people what to re-open an argument I will.

To me, stats are fundamentally different than skins. This is for a couple of reasons (probably all related, but I see them as a little different)

a. Skins aren’t functional, stats are.,
b. You can have a skin that’s “good enough”, for many people the only good enough gear is “BIS”.
c. Skins aren’t time gated. If you gots the money you can buys the skin. However, if you want an ascended amulet you need to grind at least 20 laurels. Yes, I know dungeon tokens are time gated, but the gating isn’t that long.
d. Good looking skins are subjective, numerical stats are objective.
e. No one will kick you from a dungeon run for having ugly armor.

That’s probably enough for now. I realize that I’m overlapping and repeating myself.

a. Functionality of a stat only matters when it makes a materialistic and noticeable difference. In other games having higher tiers of gear allowed me to stomp players in PvP and destroy mobs like paper in PvE, I feel vastly more powerful. In Gw2 having Ascebded gear gives me no actual noticeable difference in in power.

then tell me, why isn’t exotics ‘good enough’? You can do everything just five with it, and see above comment. If you’re talking about personal satisfaction, I’m not satisfied until I get every Legendary in the game and enough gold for me to buy the entire TP. Greed is part if human nature, there is no satisfaction.

c. They aren’t time gated but often the ‘best’ skins are a lot harder to get than Ascended stuff. Would you want to switch the process of making Mjnor and the Ascended hammer around? Something which doesn’t have a time gate but requires you to grind for days on end to get enough cash to make is still effectively time gated.

d. I don’t see why this matters.

e. no one would kick you for not having ascended gear. Unless they’re that desperate to shave 1 min off a run.

I realize I’m not TooBz, but I seldom can resist such an invitation. Why does it matter? Because stats matter. As a recent thread with the math suggests, the first year of VP in the game has left us at around +10% to date. Is it significant? Of course +10% is significant, but even if you think not, consider this, vertical progression does not progress by stopping. A power curve describes a positive relationship between power and time. As time progresses, the power level of the game will increase.

I don’t know the intended nature of our low power curve, but let’s assume the first years increase describes the curve, i.e., 10% per year. In 5 years we’ll be at +50%. Five years is not a long time in the life of a successful MMO. Is +50% significant?

This is the problem with arguing about the significance of point 1 & point 2 on a power curve. It’s a curve. It will progress. If it’s not significant today, it will be tomorrow. This is why it matters.

The note referenced in the OP was:

“No additional tiers are planned after Ascended, and future progression will be based on earning newly introduced skills.”

Currently, the statement has been edited to:

“No additional tiers are planned after Ascended, but there are plans to enhance or gain items within the existing rarity design whose properties continue on a shallow power curve. Future progression will also be based on earning newly introduced skills.”

And, appropriate citations were given. The initial note was clearly inaccurate and misleading. I believe the edit now accurately reflects what we know from actual Anet statements on the subject. I thank the OP for bringing this to the communities attention.

Edit: @eisberg, the misleading part was indicating that in the future progression would be scaling only horizontally. That’s what the original note said. In actual fact, Anet said that we would have vertical progression in the game going forward on a low power curve. To the best of our knowledge from actual statements, the game will scale vertically and horizontally in the future.

I remember an Anet interview where the interviewer referred to the “debacle” of Ascended gear. That’s never a good indicator of success.

While I’m not one who believes it was purely a problem of implementation (it’s rather a problem of direction in game scaling), the implementation has been a problem from the inception with Ascended only found in one dungeon. Now we have crafting extended to 500 without even a thin veneer of this being anything to do with crafting. It’s how you obtain an Ascended weapon; you can’t even sell the main items you’ve extended your crafting to craft. It just makes no sense on the face of it. They really haven’t been able to get ahead of the debacle and frankly I don’t see any reason for hope around this topic in the future.

You are right, it’s not an economic decision. As far as I am concerned, the only reason to buy one is convenience. It means never having to manage inventory for that slot. Yes, it would be cool if they all harvested faster, but that wasn’t the reason I bought them.

However, I would like to join the chorus that they should be account bound. Right now, they contribute too much to a sense of being nickel and dimed to death. Making them account bound, like the salvage-o-matic thing would generate a lot of goodwill.

The LW and its evolution needs a model and I would suggest our IRL world as a starting point. I’m not suggesting a 1:1 correspondence, just pick up the important points. While our world is in a state of constant change there is a sense of permanence. Our life doesn’t come and go in two week increments. Evolve the world at a slower pace with expansion of territory, deeper story, and some character impact as a design goal but don’t get too hung up here. Basically, slow down, think it through, and role out permanent content at a slower, more natural pace.

The biggest problem with achievements is that they are time gated by temporary content. If they were permanent the game wouldn’t feel so grindy.

Always design content with a view towards a vibrant, living world which begins with having it populated. Never design encounters that will serve to empty the living world as it is counter-productive. The new Teq is an example of an encounter at odds with LW design goals.

The open world in a living world should be designed for the playerbase you find there. You should not be thinking hardcore or casual, you should be thinking about a diversity of players in terms of skills and interests. You can always consider niche groups in terms of instances, not living world as in open world PvE.

Make it a design goal to have all areas of the game be equally rewarding for a variety of playstyles. Was it really necessary to create champ trains and kill DE chains? Why not focus on making the game generally rewarding for a wide diversity of playstyles. I actually thought the DE chains were more interesting than the champ trains.