Guild Wars 2

Yamiga.7863:

And for the last part: I’m not deciding how other people should gather APs, I’m proposing to balance my playstyle. If my system is implemented I’ll be one of the firsts to hit the cap.

Oh please. It isn’t your playstyle you want to “balance.” It’s the playstyle of those around you. If you just wanted to affect your playstyle, then you would just do the dailies you wanted to do. No, it’s not that you just don’t want to do all of the dailies. You don’t want anyone to be able to do them.

@Awe:

Set a different goal. Problem solved.

azizul.8469:

AP Leaderboard should not even be there in the first place.

It only introduce a lot of grieves.

The leaderboard suggests competition, and competition in a game is a good thing. It gives people something to do, something to strive for. The problem is that in its current incarnation, the leaderboard is uncompetitive.

Flash.6912:

I gave up on Leaderboards when they added 500 AP for HOM……

Yea… having to get a whole different game to attain those points is kind of… odd.

Zet.9130:

Subdue.5479:

Unless you’re talking about a few copper here and there, this is largely untrue. The market adjusts fairly quickly to reduce the profitability of buying items for their expected salvage results.

We disagree. The market changes and different items spike in value. A good current example is an level 24 Acolyte Coat worth 20c is selling at the spread of 5s 88c to 6s. there is over 100 pieces of that armor on order at 5s 88c. Someone is buying, salvaging and making a profit. It’s not flipping Legionaries but it’s more that a few coppers.

Things change and then they change again. I think that there will always be profit in salvaging the correct items. LOL I’ve hijacked my own thread. It will be interesting to see if Anet comes up w/ a use for the Essences.

That Acolyte Coat salvages into 1-3 Wool Scraps. Each Wool Scrap sells for between 2.27s and 2.82s. If you assume you get on average 2 Wool Scraps each salvage, and sell what you get at the seller’s price, that’s on average 5.64s per salvage, which is just a few copper off from the price of the Acolyte Coat.

No thanks. Soulbinding keeps the value of items from deteriorating to dung.

Vox Hollow.2736:

The PvE Leaderboard is dysfunctional. It’s not because of lack investment because they don’t have opportunities to compete, but because it’s AP based. You’re just recording grind, smaller increments of grind aren’t anymore meaningful.

I’d recommend trying to qualify skill more directly, but….

Well, Real Talk, here, guys.
PvE alternates between a cheesy cheatfest or a brainless zergfest. How can you have a meaningful PvE Leaderboard when there’s nothing in PvE worth admiring, much less recording?

Whether or not you want to compete on an AP Leaderboard is up to you, but you should be able to make that choice. It shouldn’t be decided for you based on when you first started playing.

Also, I agree. There should be a bigger skill component involved.

Zet.9130:

kokiman.2364:

At this point you could just sell your greens/blues.

There are drops that are worth more as salvage. I expect that situation will remain static. So selling them to merchant or other players would be unwise.

Unless you’re talking about a few copper here and there, this is largely untrue. The market adjusts fairly quickly to reduce the profitability of buying items for their expected salvage results.

luke kavanagh.5937:

I command consistently with about 40-50 people and I’ve NEVER been suppressed. If you’re spamming ‘Back, back back back’ or something equivalent then it’s understandable that you did get suppressed.

He’s talking about commanding at the new boss events, where often times you’re explaining the encounter and what to do to people who’ve never done it before. In those situations, the more detail you can include, the better, so that they’ll understand what to do, when, and why. It’s different from WvW where you can pretty much get by with "back, “incoming,” “push,” and so on, and everyone understands what you mean.

Chewablesleeptablet.3185:

Even if you reset the leaderboards in intervals it would still only put whoever plays the most on top.

Actually, the system I propose would work on that in a number of ways. First, by including varying degrees of difficulty within the achievements, level of skill becomes a factor. Two players who spend the same amount of time playing for points won’t necessarily complete the same number of achievements, if one is more skilled than the other. Second, by scaling points to the difficulty of the achievement, the gap between the skilled and the unskilled widens, and makes those more difficult achievements worthwhile. Finally, by including far more potential achievements than anyone can possibly do in the given time period, the game changes from “reach X points” to “outplay your competitors and/or exhibit greater endurance.”

Will someone who plays 4 hours a day have an advantage on the leaderboard over someone who plays for 1 hour a day? Sure. There’s nothing inherently wrong with that. It’s not the same as someone having played at the start being permanently ahead of someone who started 4 months ago.

Eh, there are pros and cons to removing the suppress feature. For one, there is no way to tell if someone is really trying to communicate, or intentionally disrupting the chat with spam. I’d be hesitant to remove the suppress feature for map chat, or even for /say.

That said, the cap on squad size should be removed, and commanders should never be suppressed while typing in their own squad chat.

Malediktus.9250:

It never resets because it doesnt make sense to reset, since achievement points are something permanent which dont degrade over time. Your suggestion makes all permanent achievements meaningless.

It’s fine for achievement points as they relate to rewards to be permanent, which they will be under the system I propose. What isn’t fine is for a leaderboard to be uncompetitive.

Dictionary

lead·er board
noun
noun: leaderboard
1.
a scoreboard showing the names and current scores of the leading competitors, esp. in a golf tournament.

By definition, a leaderboard only makes sense in the presence of competition, and right now, there is none.

Yamiga.7863:

Subdue.5479:

Malediktus.9250:

Horrible suggestion, even worse than the current one. We need more skill involved and not more time consumption per day.

And “More skill involved” means what? Certainly not the 1000 Ooze kills that has you sitting at the top of the leaderboard.

What is allowing people to “sit a the top of the leaderboards” is a bazillion APs from dailies. Killing 1000 ooze awards way less APs than a full daily

Actually what allows them to sit at the top of the leaderboard, if we’re really being logical, is that the leaderboard never resets. Incumbency is the biggest factor in any player’s position in the leaderboard. Anyone who wasn’t around at the start has no chance of catching up unless the people before him leave. That’s an inherently HUGE flaw in the current system, which doesn’t exist in the one I’ve proposed.

Malediktus.9250:

Killing 1000 oozes happens naturally as you play, for example ascalon catacombs. I think I had that one month after release already without specifically hunting them.

So not skill based then, which is what I was implying…

Malediktus.9250:

Horrible suggestion, even worse than the current one. We need more skill involved and not more time consumption per day.

And “More skill involved” means what? Certainly not the 1000 Ooze kills that has you sitting at the top of the leaderboard.

Ashen.2907:

I don’t think that the proposed changes would be significantly, “more representative of of a player’s overall proficiency in GW2.”

I do think that the OP’s suggestion would make the AP leader board more interesting and an active piece of content for the game by increasing competition for a position on the board.

That claim was derived from the suggestions to include an impossible to complete array of daily achievements combined with a mixture of difficulties, all weighted by the difficulties. The more difficult content would take said players deep into difficult dungeons, fractals, through difficult jumping puzzles. It could have guilds really striving to unlock and complete guild missions (which as a side note I think really need a revamp, as the requirements for unlocking that content are wholly unfair to smaller guilds), and so on.

Besides, right now the majority of the dailies can be completed without ever leaving Queensdale. Anything added that moves people around the map would be “more representative of proficiency in GW2.”

@Awe.1096

Everything you’ve said just points to a glaring flaw in the current system that is not solved by the cap you propose: There is no progression, no competition. It is impossible to move up unless people at the top quit. That’s why the system I propose here https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/The-AP-Leaderboard-Sucks-Let-s-Fix-It is much more effective as an achievement leader board.

Lishtenbird.2814:

Instead of an indication of how much you’ve been playing since the game launch, it will be an indication of how much you’ve been playing since the monthly reset. How is it different?

And with only dailies/monthlies/LS to count too many people will have those maxed out pretty quick. No, even being a fairly new player, I’d prefer the global achievement list just to look at the veterans.

Like I said, the idea would be to increase the number of potential achievements to the point where it would be impossible to do them all. That was pretty key in the suggestion. Furthermore, I called for more difficult dailies mixed in with the easy ones, so that those at the very top of the boards will have demonstrated not just how much they play, but how well they play in many facets of the game.

Vayne.8563:

Subdue.5479:

Ayrilana.1396:

You do realize that your suggested changes will make them exactly like how the fractal leader-boards would be if they were made publicly available?

I didn’t even know such a thing existed, but if it does, and this is how it’s implemented, hooray for proper implementations!

IndigoSundown.5419:

The challenge missions in GW had categories for day, week, month, and all time. Maybe something like that could work?

I didn’t play GW1 so I don’t really know how those worked. Please explain.

What Indigo is talking about is the challenge missions that appeared in Factions. There were several different missions and each had it’s own leaderboard.

You could go to an NPC in game and he’d show you the actual leaderboard. There were lifetime scores there in one column, but then a different column for monthly high scores and daily high scores. So each day the daily reset, but the monthly didn’t reset till the end of the month and the all time high scores never reset, they could only be beat.

It wouldn’t be much different having a monthly leaderboard and leaving the old leaderboard in place like I suggested.

The one thing I don’t think Anet can afford to do is reset a leaderboard that people have killed themselves to keep up with.

Do you remember the kittenstorm that happened when Anet reset people’s Fractal levels to 30? Just imagine what the forums would be like.

The thing is it won’t even be on the same scale as the rest of the leaderboard. It’ll just be a near meaningless, obsolete value. Rather than keeping it as an active part of the board, A.Net would be better off recognizing their accomplishments via some sort of reward, even if just giving them some unique title, recognizing their names somewhere, etc, and then removing that leaderboard.

From my perspective, I agree there will be a fair bit of kitten storm, but just like the fractals thing it’ll blow over, and we’ll be left with a system that’s better for many more people.

Shockwave.1230:

Why not rethink how AP points are categorized. There’s HoM (Hall of Monuments), there’s LS(Living Story), theres Daily/Monthly, and there’s Core (Always there achievements).

I’d like to see a breakdown of these achievement point types and have sub-categories of the AP leaderboard.

Seems more fair imo

“Fair?” What is the point of having a leaderboard for some of that stuff? I mean, kills with a dagger? Skelk killed? And basically any HoM achievement? There’s nothing noteworthy about any of these, other than that the player has been playing for a long time. They are completely uncompetitive, and competition is the exact sort of thing leaderboards are supposed to measure.

Ayrilana.1396:

You do realize that your suggested changes will make them exactly like how the fractal leader-boards would be if they were made publicly available?

I didn’t even know such a thing existed, but if it does, and this is how it’s implemented, hooray for proper implementations!

IndigoSundown.5419:

The challenge missions in GW had categories for day, week, month, and all time. Maybe something like that could work?

I didn’t play GW1 so I don’t really know how those worked. Please explain.

Eh, I had a different but related thing happen. One of the players on our team was relying on his greatsword to meet the AR requirement for level 49. He was fine and dandy until we got to the fourth fractal, the Molten duo. We realized right away what was going on. He’d switch to his bow and would basically be insta-downed by any agony attack. Three of us were fine with it, since he was actually useful for the first 3 fractals. The fourth guy was spamming kick votes the entirety of the boss fight, even when it was already clear that we were going to win. It got to the point where we kicked that guy instead to get him to stop.

Xista.7391:

Vayne.8563:

I think you couldn’t change it now without kittening off people who have been working very hard to stay on that leaderboard. I think there needs to be a second leaderboard with all that stuff removed.

I mean, think about it, if you’ve been doing every single day, every single day for a year just to stay on that leaderboard, how would you react if suddenly all those points were removed?

It’s not fair to people who do every daily every day for all that time. It’s also true it’s not fair to new players for that to count.

The only fair solution is to make another/different leaderboard but leave that one untouched.

This. I’ve seen people b**** about them adding more PvP dailies. Just imagine if you took away their progress on the leaderboards. You’ll kitten more people off than it will do good.

This is wholly untrue. The number of people actively competing for a spot on the leaderboard right now is very very small relative to the total population, and it can’t ever grow because it’s impossible for new players and older players that didn’t start right away to even get close to those who did. The system I propose has benefits for everyone, even those actively competing in the current system.

Besides, the leaderboard right now is much less an actual leaderboard and much more a player roster arranged by join date anyway.

Vayne.8563:

I think you couldn’t change it now without kittening off people who have been working very hard to stay on that leaderboard. I think there needs to be a second leaderboard with all that stuff removed.

I mean, think about it, if you’ve been doing every single day, every single day for a year just to stay on that leaderboard, how would you react if suddenly all those points were removed?

It’s not fair to people who do every daily every day for all that time. It’s also true it’s not fair to new players for that to count.

The only fair solution is to make another/different leaderboard but leave that one untouched.

Eh, in implementation I’d imagine it would be treated as the same way seasons are treated. Season 1 lasted a year, congratulations guys, here’s your prize. Heck, even memorialize them in some sort of hall of fame. Now let’s start season 2. Of course, the total tally would still be on their account, they’d still have all of the skins and other rewards from all the achievement chests they unlocked, etc. It’s not like they’d be walking away from it all empty handed.

That said, I do see your point. There are indeed expectations there, and some people would indeed be upset. Most people, and the game itself, however, I believe would benefit from a revamped system, and having the revamped system along side of instead of in place the current system might slow and hinder its acceptance.

Taygus.4571:

Agree. I play another game that does this.

If leaderboards were monthly basis, it would give everyone a shot at it.

however, I don’t agree with this "The AP reward for each daily should be weighted by the difficulty of attaining it. Killing 30 ambients may be worth 1 AP, while completing a level 40 Fractal Run may be worth 10 AP. "
As thats forcing people to play an aspect of the game they may not like, or they’re not “good enough” basically.

I think the way AP is counted atm, is fine. but it should be within a time frame.

Please keep in mind that I don’t propose any changes to the acquisition of daily bonuses. Casual players who have no interest in the competing on the leader board would have plenty of quick, easy dailies to do. Remember what we want the leaderboard to represent: proficiency and mastery over GW2. Shouldn’t the players at the top of the leaderboard exemplify that?

Malediktus.9250:

Subdue.5479:

Malediktus.9250:

Subdue.5479:

Hellmasker.1649:

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

No longer in signature. Well, that’s interesting.

If there wouldn’t be less choice, then there would be the same amount (if not more) Achievement points and their related tasks offered each day. Great! We are on the same page. =)

Choice is always a good thing!

I didn’t want it sending the wrong message, and obviously it was.

Subdue.5479:

Malediktus.9250:

So the laurels, exp and chance for black lion items like the salvage kit is not good enough for doing some dailies?

If they were, you wouldn’t be doing more than 5 a day, would you?

If a hard cap were introduced I would absolutely be able to slow down, as any points I miss or would miss could be “made up” in a sense. Surely even new players would appreciate that, right? I probably would just do 5 on some days, and after I hit the cap, I would do 5 for the item rewards.

There’s nothing stopping you from doing that even without a hard cap, except, you know, people might start catching up to you on the leaderboard, which is what you’re trying to avoid.

Really though, the leaderboard in it’s current incarnation is worthless, a metric not of any player’s proficiency in the game, but rather, of how long they’ve been playing. What’s the point of a leaderboard where incumbency is by far the biggest predictor of placement?

If anything, the leaderboard should be reset at set time intervals, should include only temporary achievements (living story, daily, monthly). Daily and Monthly achievements should have more options than any player can reasonably complete, with a good number of fast, easy achievements (kill 30 ambients), as well as a number of long, difficult achievements (Complete a level 40+ Fractal run), all of course weighted by the difficulty of attaining the daily achievement (30 ambients = 1AP, 40+ Fractal Run = 10).

And of course, with a more dynamic leaderboard, there’s greater room for rewards for placing in the top 100, 1000, etc on the leaderboard. In its current incarnation, such a reward system would be impossible, as it would just be a giant screw-you to everyone who wasn’t here from the start.

Your system would reward people who spend most hours per day instead of veterancy or skillful play. I dont see any improvement. Yes, you can optimize your time to get more dailies done per day, must most achievement hunters already perfected it.

I love how you quoted my post and then responded as if you hadn’t read it. I’ll respond to each point in yours, with a simple explanation derived from the the text you quoted, just to prove this point.

Malediktus

Your system would reward people who spend most hours per day instead of veterancy or skillful play.

Subdue

Really though, the leaderboard in it’s current incarnation is worthless, a metric not of any player’s proficiency in the game, but rather, of how long they’ve been playing.

Subdue

as well as a number of long, difficult achievements (Complete a level 40+ Fractal run), all of course weighted by the difficulty of attaining the daily achievement (30 ambients = 1AP, 40+ Fractal Run = 10).

Malediktus

Yes, you can optimize your time to get more dailies done per day, must most achievement hunters already perfected it.

Subdue

Daily and Monthly achievements should have more options than any player can reasonably complete

And there you have it. Everything in your response to my post, already addressed in my post, which you were supposed to have been responding to. Post-ception.

Reasonably complete stops at 4 hours per day for me. Everything more is unreasonable, even if you want to compete in leaderboards. What about the people who can play 10h+ a day? You want to add as many temp achieves so not even them can do everything? Even if you add more than you can complete in 24 hours I dont see the sense of this.
The current system is terrible enough and yours would be even worse.

Please list for me the competitions you can think of where in the players who spend more time training, more time competing, don’t garner some sort of advantage.

The Problem

The leaderboard in it’s current incarnation is worthless, a metric not of any player’s proficiency in the game, but rather, of how long they’ve been playing. What’s the point of a leaderboard where incumbency is by far the biggest predictor of placement?

The Solution

The leaderboard should be reset at set time intervals. These intervals can be monthly, attached to the start/end of each living story, made to encompass multiple living stories, etc. Regardless of how the resets are set, they must exist, so that as new players enter the game, they have an opportunity to compete. Right now, if a player was not playing at launch and doing every achievement since then, they have no chance what-so-ever of ever getting on the board.

Since the leaderboard will be resetting at set time intervals, it should include only temporary achievements (living story, daily, monthly). Since permanent achievements are limited, including them on the leaderboard would adversely affect veteran players who have fewer easy permanent achievement points to rack up (like jumping puzzles).

Daily and Monthly achievements should have far far more options than any player can complete, with a good number of fast, easy achievements, such as killing 30 ambients, as well as a number of long, difficult achievement, such as completing a level 40 Fractal run.

The AP reward for each daily should be weighted by the difficulty of attaining it. Killing 30 ambients may be worth 1 AP, while completing a level 40 Fractal Run may be worth 10 AP. By increasing the number of potential dailies and appropriately matching AP to expected completion rate and difficulty, players wishing to compete on the leaderboard will be forced to develop a strategy for maximizing their points, rather than just doing everything. Furthermore, players wishing to compete will be led to various facets of the game that they otherwise may not touch, making the leaderboard that much more representative of of a player’s overall proficiency in GW2.

Finally, with a more dynamic leaderboard, there’s greater room for rewards for placing in the top 100, 1000, etc on the leaderboard. In its current incarnation, such a reward system would be impossible, as it would just be a giant screw-you to everyone who wasn’t around at the start. A reward system would entice more players to compete, making the leaderboard that much more worthwhile, whereas currently a handful of players control it, and the only hope of anyone new getting on it is if those people stop playing.

Awe.1096:

Mireles Lore.5942:

I never said everyone agrees with me. I just said your idea does nothing to improve the game for anyone…. it just puts limits on everyone so one type of player can be satisfied in their mentality. It is never okay to limit others even if they wont notice that limit strictly to make a play-style less taxing to maintain.

You just did it again. First of all. Putting a cap would improve the game for me. That is one. One is greater from noone. But I would bet all my virtues that there are more than just me. In fact there are some even in this thread. You say at “limit” as if it is something innately bad. For me limit is not a constraint. Its an improvement. Its like adding the finish line (with champaign and cookies) to a marathon race. For me that limit is a feature I would love to see.

Actually, putting a cap doesn’t improve the game for you, at least, not in any way that putting your own personal cap to it doesn’t also accomplish. What putting a cap DOES do, however, is reduce competition in an already very uncompetitive field, which is why the leaderboard itself needs a massive makeover.

Malediktus.9250:

Subdue.5479:

Hellmasker.1649:

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

No longer in signature. Well, that’s interesting.

If there wouldn’t be less choice, then there would be the same amount (if not more) Achievement points and their related tasks offered each day. Great! We are on the same page. =)

Choice is always a good thing!

I didn’t want it sending the wrong message, and obviously it was.

Subdue.5479:

Malediktus.9250:

So the laurels, exp and chance for black lion items like the salvage kit is not good enough for doing some dailies?

If they were, you wouldn’t be doing more than 5 a day, would you?

If a hard cap were introduced I would absolutely be able to slow down, as any points I miss or would miss could be “made up” in a sense. Surely even new players would appreciate that, right? I probably would just do 5 on some days, and after I hit the cap, I would do 5 for the item rewards.

There’s nothing stopping you from doing that even without a hard cap, except, you know, people might start catching up to you on the leaderboard, which is what you’re trying to avoid.

Really though, the leaderboard in it’s current incarnation is worthless, a metric not of any player’s proficiency in the game, but rather, of how long they’ve been playing. What’s the point of a leaderboard where incumbency is by far the biggest predictor of placement?

If anything, the leaderboard should be reset at set time intervals, should include only temporary achievements (living story, daily, monthly). Daily and Monthly achievements should have more options than any player can reasonably complete, with a good number of fast, easy achievements (kill 30 ambients), as well as a number of long, difficult achievements (Complete a level 40+ Fractal run), all of course weighted by the difficulty of attaining the daily achievement (30 ambients = 1AP, 40+ Fractal Run = 10).

And of course, with a more dynamic leaderboard, there’s greater room for rewards for placing in the top 100, 1000, etc on the leaderboard. In its current incarnation, such a reward system would be impossible, as it would just be a giant screw-you to everyone who wasn’t here from the start.

Your system would reward people who spend most hours per day instead of veterancy or skillful play. I dont see any improvement. Yes, you can optimize your time to get more dailies done per day, must most achievement hunters already perfected it.

I love how you quoted my post and then responded as if you hadn’t read it. I’ll respond to each point in yours, with a simple explanation derived from the the text you quoted, just to prove this point.

Malediktus

Your system would reward people who spend most hours per day instead of veterancy or skillful play.

Subdue

Really though, the leaderboard in it’s current incarnation is worthless, a metric not of any player’s proficiency in the game, but rather, of how long they’ve been playing.

Subdue

as well as a number of long, difficult achievements (Complete a level 40+ Fractal run), all of course weighted by the difficulty of attaining the daily achievement (30 ambients = 1AP, 40+ Fractal Run = 10).

Malediktus

Yes, you can optimize your time to get more dailies done per day, must most achievement hunters already perfected it.

Subdue

Daily and Monthly achievements should have more options than any player can reasonably complete

And there you have it. Everything in your response to my post, already addressed in my post, which you were supposed to have been responding to. Post-ception.

You know, if you don’t like the Queensdale train, there are 4 other starter zones you could level in.

Hellmasker.1649:

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

No longer in signature. Well, that’s interesting.

If there wouldn’t be less choice, then there would be the same amount (if not more) Achievement points and their related tasks offered each day. Great! We are on the same page. =)

Choice is always a good thing!

I didn’t want it sending the wrong message, and obviously it was.

Subdue.5479:

Malediktus.9250:

So the laurels, exp and chance for black lion items like the salvage kit is not good enough for doing some dailies?

If they were, you wouldn’t be doing more than 5 a day, would you?

If a hard cap were introduced I would absolutely be able to slow down, as any points I miss or would miss could be “made up” in a sense. Surely even new players would appreciate that, right? I probably would just do 5 on some days, and after I hit the cap, I would do 5 for the item rewards.

There’s nothing stopping you from doing that even without a hard cap, except, you know, people might start catching up to you on the leaderboard, which is what you’re trying to avoid.

Really though, the leaderboard in it’s current incarnation is worthless, a metric not of any player’s proficiency in the game, but rather, of how long they’ve been playing. What’s the point of a leaderboard where incumbency is by far the biggest predictor of placement?

If anything, the leaderboard should be reset at set time intervals, should include only temporary achievements (living story, daily, monthly). Daily and Monthly achievements should have more options than any player can reasonably complete, with a good number of fast, easy achievements (kill 30 ambients), as well as a number of long, difficult achievements (Complete a level 40+ Fractal run), all of course weighted by the difficulty of attaining the daily achievement (30 ambients = 1AP, 40+ Fractal Run = 10).

And of course, with a more dynamic leaderboard, there’s greater room for rewards for placing in the top 100, 1000, etc on the leaderboard. In its current incarnation, such a reward system would be impossible, as it would just be a giant screw-you to everyone who wasn’t here from the start.

Malediktus.9250:

So the laurels, exp and chance for black lion items like the salvage kit is not good enough for doing some dailies?

If they were, you wouldn’t be doing more than 5 a day, would you?

Malediktus.9250:

@Chrispy.5641: Noone got 10k daily AP, the max should be around 8200 currently. I got 7663 atm and I am top 30. Yes, I missed some because a day only has 24 hours. If people think 10k is too low we could set it to 15k or whatever, but there should be a cap so we have some kind of “finish line”.

There’s not supposed to be a finish line. Dailies are meant to keep people logging in and playing. That’s why they’re dailies.

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

I have to say I’m confused. If wanting less daily achievements has nothing to do with the Leaderboard, why would someone who didn’t care about the Leaderboard place their Leaderboard ranking in their signature?

Still, let’s say it does have nothing to do with keeping one’s rank on the Leaderboard. Why should their be less choices for everyone because some do not want to do all the achievements? Why can’t some people just not choose to do everything on offer? If some people do not care for PvP, they can choose not to play that part of the game, even though it is offered. If some people find it tiresome to do Jumping Puzzles, they can choose not to complete them…even though the game offers that content. Why should Daily or Monthly Achievements be any different?

It seems to me that more choice is always a good thing. But, that’s just me.

Nah, it’s not just you. All of us “trolls” that make up 99% of the player base feel the same way.

Hellmasker.1649:

JustTrogdor.7892:

Why would a completionist spend more in the gem store? There is no reason for them to do so because they are just there for points that you can get without spending a single penny beyond box price.

You clearly don’t understand. We don’t play this game solely for achievement points. We play this game because it has so much potential to be fun, when we’re not grinding dailies. We’re not here “just for points,” to assume that is simply ignorant and destructive. We want to complete everything we can along the way.
At first it was easy. There were FOUR dailies. Not 25. And they were simple and could be finished in 20 minutes. That’s why it was so easy to start the completionist hunt. Then it turned into 9. Then 13 with PvPs. Then that short ~month of requiring tourney win PvPs. Then WvW dailies. That brought us to 15. Then LS and +1 more WvW. Then it was 18. Then a second LS daily. 19. Still doable. Arena wins are really what broke this particular camel’s back. 15-19 + 8 PvPs is so excessive.

Yea… your statements completely contradict themselves. You may not be here “just for points”, but points are certainly what you’re arguing about. The “potential for fun”, doesn’t change no matter how many dailies they add. You know what does change? The potential for points.

Simply put, you don’t want to work for those points, which is perfectly fine. I don’t want to work for those points either. I typically skip the last 2 pvp dailies, and most of the WvW dailies. What’s not fine is that you’ve decided because you don’t want to do them, other people shouldn’t be allowed to benefit from them either. That’s the problem we have against your position.

JustTrogdor.7892:

Hellmasker.1649:

JustTrogdor.7892:

Why would a completionist spend more in the gem store? There is no reason for them to do so because they are just there for points that you can get without spending a single penny beyond box price.

You clearly don’t understand. We don’t play this game solely for achievement points. We play this game because it has so much potential to be fun, when we’re not grinding dailies.

Way to bold one part of one of my posts so I’ll do the same by sectioning off this part of your post.

Why don’t you just play to have fun then if it isn’t such a big deal? Answer that directly please.

I laughed.

Hellmasker.1649:

Tyrantis.8640:

Hi Anet Achievement team.

I wanted to chime in and say I actually love dailies and it doesn’t seem like too much to me (also a completionist)

My guild loves them as does my brother.

Can you do me a favor? Keep up the good work.

P.S. Add weeklys too!

:)

You’ve got ~5100 AP right now. It’s fine if you don’t agree with our ideas but please don’t troll us.

He can only be a completionist if he started playing at release?

Yak’s Bend! Yak’s Bend!

There’s a lot of ways to make money in the trading post, but the gem/gold exchange is intentionally not one of those ways.

You know, if your guild has the numbers for it, it’d be just as easy to have your guild guest to a low-population server and do your thing there.

Malediktus.9250:

Filling a daily task list each and every day is not an achievement, its a 2nd job. The WvW achievements and rank achievements in PvP will be nerfed to realistic levels in a future patch, its already announced. So I dont see why there cant be an adjustment to the way daily/monthly achievements work.
I wouldnt even mind some sort of ingame time machine to retroactively complete living story achievements. Its a fantasy game so it should be doable for Anet.

I hate to shatter your bubble, but very few of the achievements are actually achievements. Killing X number of enemies, X number of monsters, using a weapon X number of times, those aren’t “achievements,” just measurements of how long you’ve been playing the game. Don’t even get me started on Hall of Monuments achievements. Really the only true “achievements” by any definition of the word the one time completion things like jumping puzzles, some of the things in the explorer tabs, the first pass through each dungeon. Of course, anyone who really wants to can complete all that stuff can likely do it all in under a month.

Also, since you brought it up, your current AP is 18845, of which you mentioned almost 8000 of which is from dailies, and I’m guessing another 2000+ of which is from monthlies. I’m currently sitting sitting at about 9500 AP, but I’ve only got about 2000 points from dailies, and only about 800 from monthlies, and I’m guessing A LOT of players are just like me. If there were no dailies, that massive lead you’re showing off and making a big deal of would be much much smaller.

Malediktus.9250:

If the daily/monthly/repeatable achievement stuff wont be changed many achievement hunters will move to TESO. Similar achievement point system to GW2 but no dailies or other repeatable crap. Exactly what a true achievement hunter desires.

Enjoy your new game then! A lot of people benefit from the dailies and the “repeatable crap.”

elainom.2918:

Just like the topic of Ewon from the old suggestions forum, non-completionnist people like some who posted here already dont understand the problem and think we, ap hunters, want to stay at the top without efforts. That is not the problem here, the suggestions that have been brought to make it better for everyone, dont even affect non-completionnists and reduce the very grindy aspect of hunting for AP. How is that affect you folks ?

It’s a simple fact that it requires way too much time to complete all. When you go for those extra achievement points, you dont have much time left to actually play contents that you would like to do. The problem of the daily gradually increased as they added more dailies, then dailies for each new living stories to complete the related meta achievements, but still, it was doable in decent amount of time. The really big troubles came with the december update and the new pvp dailies which triple/quadrupled the amount of time required to complete all the dailies related to the pvp. How is that normal to have to spend more time to do 1 full pvp daily than a monthly pvp ?

So please, dont just turn down the completionnists with simple WRONG ideas like we want to stay forever on the leaderboard or we should play even more to keep our position, that is not the problem here.

Any changes to the achievement point system affects completionists and non-completionists. A.Net has been expanding the available dailies so that regardless of what you like to do, you can get your dailies in, get your AP up, and have a good time doing it, without having to feel like you’re working through content that you don’t want to do. The greater number of available dailies and the associated AP with them allows players, especially those who started later, to push for a few more AP a day, while shooting for various goals, such as that next 500 point mark for a skin, or perhaps to gain some ground on the leaderboard.

Anything that reduces the number of dailies that count towards AP, or that are even available inevitably reduces competition on the leaderboard. What would benefit the game, and people who actually want a competitive leaderboard, is MORE options for the dailies, so many more than it would be impossible to do them all in one day. That way it becomes not only who wants to work harder, but who is able to plan more strategically and accomplish the most within a limited amount of time.

Malediktus.9250:

Thing is we want a leaderboard less depending on daily and monthly crap and more focus on permanent achievements, preferable even of Liadri or higher difficulty. More dailies will just make it a competition who can bear it the longest without burning out.

That doesn’t make for a competitive leaderboard. As it is, anyone who was around for earlier content is already heavily advantaged. If anything, an active, meaningful leaderboard would be better served by a periodic reset (like say, at the living story changes), and inclusion of only temporarily available achievement points, and of course, like I said before, the inclusion of way more achievement points than could realistically be attained in the given time period.

The less room there is for people to excel and move up, the less meaningful the leaderboard itself is. Anyone who actually wants the leaderboard to be meaningful should want MORE dailies, more achieveable points than any person could reasonably run through in the allotted time. That way, it becomes about who wants to work harder for it, who takes the most strategic approach to it, rather than just who’s been playing the longest.

Decrypter.1785:

Ah well looks like its more raid content i wont finish like TEQ because i cant get into my own server because of guests , also why no reply on this anet ? its really kittening me off

Why don’t you guest to a lower population server then?

TRON.1085:

Subdue.5479:

This is such a selfish view to take. You lucked out and ended up on a high population server. I guarantee the vast majority of players on Desolation didn’t plan it that way, it just happened. If you think waiting is so tough, why don’t YOU guest to a low pop server? Oh wait, because low pop servers are already disadvantaged.

It’s not selfish at all. Also it is not just on desolation, black gate and other servers have the same problem. Being blocked from doing content on your own server is a complete and utter joke.

What is selfish is how other servers can’t be bothered to work together on their own server to complete the content and instead decide to server hop and exploit the guesting system to leech off other servers that try to work together but can’t because they are stuck in overflows on their home servers 24/7 being blocked from doing any of the content.

As usual Anet did not think this through, less open world content and more instanced content please and fix the overflow and guesting so they can’t be mass abused like this.

This was not the intended use of the guesting system.

Your server doesn’t “try to work together” any more so than any other server. The difference is that your server just has more people. If you think otherwise, I’d like to see you try to organize a tequatl run every day for a week on a low population server, and see if you can get it to happen even once. There’s just not enough people on those servers to do it.

Lpfan.3578:

Subdue.5479:

Lpfan.3578:

Decrypter.1785:

How does the Overflow system work exactly ?

Based on my experiences, this is how it works. If you have your home server set to a popular one, like Black Gate (I do), then you don’t get to do popular events like Living Story on your home server unless you sit in overflow of that map for at least a few hours first.
Instead, you should pick an unpopular server for your home world so you can guest to whatever popular one you want… every single time you want to do a big event.

I almost feel like if I want to do Living Story IN Black Gate, I have to transfer my home server to somewhere OUT of Black Gate.

This doesn’t even make sense.

You’re right, it doesn’t make sense.
My point is, my home world is Black Gate and I never get to do Living Story in Black Gate because I always end up in overflow. Then there are people who guest to Black Gate from other worlds and get to do the Living Story in Black Gate. It makes me feel like I should set my home world to something besides Black Gate, so I can guest to Black Gate and actually play there.

No, you misunderstand. Your statement is 100% misinformed. That is not how guesting works.

Lpfan.3578:

Decrypter.1785:

How does the Overflow system work exactly ?

Based on my experiences, this is how it works. If you have your home server set to a popular one, like Black Gate (I do), then you don’t get to do popular events like Living Story on your home server unless you sit in overflow of that map for at least a few hours first.
Instead, you should pick an unpopular server for your home world so you can guest to whatever popular one you want… every single time you want to do a big event.

I almost feel like if I want to do Living Story IN Black Gate, I have to transfer my home server to somewhere OUT of Black Gate.

This doesn’t even make sense.

Quiggle.4215:

Subdue.5479:

This is not a great idea. It creates greater disparity where there is currently less. Why should Player B be entitled to an unbuffed drop on Champion X just because Player A happened by it 20 minutes earlier?

If you really want something like this in the game, a better approach would be a personal timer on each champion, where-in any champion that you haven’t personally killed in the last 72 hours will drop a token, some number of which can be used to purchase exotic level 80 items, skins, or something.

That would give people a reason to venture without hurting the players that just want to farm champions, and wouldn’t create a disparity between players based on when they play. Also, the token system is inherently better for something like this than modifications to the RNG.

I really don’t understand what you are talking about. Games are about chance, and exploration and fun —- not treating champions like vending machines. It’s not about anyone entitled to anything, its about the same concept as the exploration XP bonus, just adding more incentive — doesnt even have to be the same type of loot or anything.

A quick search for “RNG” on this forum will show you how the majority of players feel about “chance.”

This is not a great idea. It creates greater disparity where there is currently less. Why should Player B be entitled to an unbuffed drop on Champion X just because Player A happened by it 20 minutes earlier?

If you really want something like this in the game, a better approach would be a personal timer on each champion, where-in any champion that you haven’t personally killed in the last 72 hours will drop a token, some number of which can be used to purchase exotic level 80 items, skins, or something.

That would give people a reason to venture without hurting the players that just want to farm champions, and wouldn’t create a disparity between players based on when they play. Also, the token system is inherently better for something like this than modifications to the RNG.

imsoenthused.1634:

Subdue is just a software agent set to auto defend against any posts critical of the game, pay not attention. You’re correct, it’s horrible, and doesn’t look like it will be getting any better.

Sure, let’s result to ad hominem attacks. Quite frankly, people on the forum will complain about everything. Queen’s Gauntlet came out, how many people were whining that it was too effective for farming, that people who didn’t want to do it were getting left behind? This event comes out, and it’s light on loot, and we have someone complaining that they’re still getting left behind?

Geez, how is A.Net supposed to win.