Guild Wars 2

Cross server cooperation, if it exist, is a natural product of 3 way pvp. Such alliances, whether long or short term, have existed in every human conflict in which more than two parties are involved. This is not the same as two competitors fixing a match, which could constitute an abuse of the system. I play on JQ, and I’d rather see diplomatic efforts to break up any alliances that exist or shrewd strategists preservering in the face of such alliances than accusing HoD and SI of violating some code of conduct.

That said, right now WvWvW does not adequately reward one side dominance. There should be a strong incentive for one side to dominate both other competitors, more than just a linear scaling. That way, you could form cross-server alliances if you want, but the material benefit of a guaranteed second place would be trivial. Even in that situation, you will have short term alliances of the losing sides trying to overthrow the winning one, but it might discourage players from settling for second place.

One reason why I don’t touch subscription based games with ten-foot clown pole is because I don’t believe in giving money for goods that may or may not be what I want and in fact may or may not even come. If ANet release additional content for free, I am all the more grateful, but if it’s good content, I’ll pay. In fact, I would prefer it if ANet sold really big expansions with new maps, new characters, new stories, new classes, and even more levels if they want (I don’t care either way). I am hoping for more CE that include additional statutte of famous characters, as long as it’s not Logan (maybe if it’s Logan+Jennah) or Trahearne (I’d much rather have one of Sieran), and with better digital items than the current DE.

I recognize that each active GW2 player incurs a maintenance cost for ANet/NCSoft, but hopefully the Gem Store generates sufficient income to offset that. I’ll entertain small content (non-cosmetic/non-convenience) updates made available through the Gem Store if it be good, but I prefer if ANet roll the cost into bigger releases. This sounds like a repeat of what Colin said. So yeah, I support the path ANet is on.

I just ran AC explore mode with a group and noticed no difference in reward from yesterday’s explore mode in CM. I then immediately ran AC story mode and found the reward decrease at the end to be reasonable. I got 13 silvers and 88k exp as opposed yesterday’s 26 silvers and 177k exp (I think) at L80. It looks like the nerf mainly harms farmers but have little material impact on non-farming players; I assume I would have gotten the same reward running CM one time. I consider the nerf unharmful and want to add my support for it.

A Zaishen Challenge Quest type reward may alleviate some of the fury over dungeon reward nerfs, perhaps one random dungeon a day or one completion of each dungeon per week (more flexibility). The reward in gold should be such that a player who does it consistently can expect to afford the current Tier 3 Cultural Armor by the release of the next set, while bearing in mind that due to stat differences many players will actually need two armor sets, one just for apperance. Actually, it doesn’t even have to be gold that goes toward Cultural Armor. It can be tokens that can be traded for specific rewards, ones can even change periodically.

This will encourage non-farmers to stay engaged with all dungeons by providing visible, consistent rewards even if they don’t care for dungeon-reward armor or weapons.

I think standing guard on a tower is perfectly reasonable, permitted you moved around regularly. I don’t see how standing in one spot looking in one direction all the time does anything for your side. As for skill level, I agree that non-PvPers should also be able to try WvW without too much hassle; however, if you die all the time without contributing significantly to the war effort, you are are dead weight to your server. Some like burei already suggested a more wholistic approach to measuring contribution. Maybe you’re a scout whose role isn’t easily tracked by the server, a mechanism (maybe player based) should be added to recognize that. You don’t have to rely solely on k:d ratio to stay in, but you have to do something. The game, although accessible to all, should reward competence. GW2, like life, should have equity, but not equality.

I think it’s a terrific idea, because the lack of strategic impact from attrition excessively favors fool’s courage, but it shouldn’t be implemented until a consistent strategic layer settles in WvW, whether that be having adequate alliance presence in WvW on most servers most of the time or a system where even without alliance organization there is a semblance of command and objective oriented gameplay.

That is a very important consideration whenever you increase the difficulty of “story” content. Can a PUG of 5 players doing CM for the first time be expected to complete it in a reasonable amount of time and without undue wipes, I’d say 30 min-1 hour and <2 deaths each?

Nerfing rewards alone is sufficient to discourage farming; it’s a step that I approve. Farming feels too much like busy work, and a game that requires busy work to be competitive (farming->gold+gear->material impact on WvW) is just sad. And definitely not GW.

However, don’t mix discourage farming with taking away the enjoyment of people who just want to experience the game. Difficulty adjustment can be easily rolled back, I want to add my comment for future reference.

I recently made a human thief but have run into leveling problems. I have completed the map of Queensdale and finished story quests past level 14. I have done DE as I ran into them, a total of 8-10 with all gold medals. Still I am only barely level 14. Without running around searching for more DE, farming mobs for exp, or resort to crafting, is it even possible to level to 16 so I can continue with my story quests? I suppose I can move to higher level maps, maybe 15-25, but will that just compound my problems leveling up at higher levels?