Guild Wars 2

Well… apparently there are several people that know about the regen thing. It’s become rampant. I’ve seen it in all 25 games I’ve played today. So… I guess I’m done with that mini game until it’s fixed.

I think eles should start each match dead. The rest of the team has to rez the ele and try to keep him/her alive for more than 30 seconds. If they can successfully do it, they automatically win the match.

Ethics.4519:

TChalla.7146:

If a CEO was losing money, he’d be fired regardless of what his intent was, especially if it happened over a long period of time. It’s not really the best analogy though. I’m sure you can see that.

Here’s the thing. If one feels that promises weren’t kept, one could always “fire” ANet and stop playing the game. It’s pretty simple when you get right down to it. I personally don’t think anything was promised. The word “intend” is not a promise. There’s no way I can read the two as equal. They had goals. They couldn’t meet those goals for whatever reason. There is nothing I’ve seen to make me think these things aren’t still in the works. I’m a patient person and can wait. It costs me nothing in the long run anyway.

Okay, so they intended to do something. That means they failed, since it wasn’t done. They can makes excuses, but that doesn’t really count for much. The true response should lie within the actions. They said they intended to do certain things by 2014, some of that was not done, which means they failed in doing what they intended (which is the point I was trying to make, instead of you focusing on one aspect instead of the big picture).

Somebody in the dungeon forums, much wiser than myself, said something along the lines of how they should be glad there are people voicing their concerns, such as this thread. It means that they still care about the game and want it to do well. If there weren’t threads like this, it means that everything is 100% fine, or those that did care left (like you said, ‘fired’ the company, and just left the game).

I’m just waiting on a certain game to come out, then you won’t hear any more complaining from me.

I’m not saying that people shouldn’t voice their complaints. That’s not what I said at all. I’m merely arguing the point that focusing on promises (again… see the title of this topic) that never existed is bad form.

If a CEO was losing money, he’d be fired regardless of what his intent was, especially if it happened over a long period of time. It’s not really the best analogy though. I’m sure you can see that.

Here’s the thing. If one feels that promises weren’t kept, one could always “fire” ANet and stop playing the game. It’s pretty simple when you get right down to it. I personally don’t think anything was promised. The word “intend” is not a promise. There’s no way I can read the two as equal. They had goals. They couldn’t meet those goals for whatever reason. There is nothing I’ve seen to make me think these things aren’t still in the works. I’m a patient person and can wait. It costs me nothing in the long run anyway.

“Happy 2013 everyone! I wanted to take the time to provide insight on some of the exciting features, events, and stories we intend to bring to Guild Wars 2 in the first half of the New Year.”

I copied this from one of the links at the bottom of the wiki that was linked in the first post. I’m assuming that this is what we’re all discussing right now.

I highlighted the word “intend.” To me, this wasn’t ANet saying “This IS what will be coming out in 2013.” Instead, I read it as “This is what we’re striving to accomplish in 2013.”

There is a big difference between the two. I see no promises being broken, since none were made.

By the way, I’m using the word “promise” here because it’s actually in the topic title.

I played a little-known MMORPG that had a rather complex housing system. It was geared towards community, since your house had to be built from the ground up, and crafters had to help with the construction. It was a pretty cool system overall… one I’d like to see utilized again. Perhaps new crafting skills could be added just for housing, and someone wanting to have their house built would either need to have the crafting skills needed to build the house or hire others to help with its construction.

I don’t necessarily want to see NPCs in the houses. However, being able to have access to crafting stations would be a good thing.

I suppose access to the Trading Post wouldn’t hurt either, since there really is no direct socialization going on at any Trading Post I’ve seen yet. It’s usually just a glob of players staying around quietly rummaging through the list of goods to be bought or sold.

Overall, I think player housing and guild halls would add quite a bit towards feelings of accomplishment for quite a few players, myself included.

Kamikazi.5380:

I play solo queue frequently to get Champion titles, currently working on Champ Shadow, but other than that I prefer WvW. I prefer a big open environment with different variables like what WvW provides rather than claustrophobic static arenas that are in sPvP.

I don’t zerg much anymore, so my WvW time is spent roaming a lot and I love trekking the battlefield looking for fights. It’s unpredictable, random; you don’t know whom you’ll run into and what kind of battle you’ll be stepping into. It’s kind of its own adventure in a sense. A 1v1 can turn into a 2v1 then a 2v3 then a 0v0 when a zerg rolls in and everyone scatters. It’s exciting.

As for the trash talking rude players people mention a lot in this thread, yes it happens, in every video game it happens be it PvE or PvP. Most importantly, its healthy. That’s right, healthy. Smack talk induces competition and people mostly PvP in this game not for the rewards but for the thrill of the fight. There’s nothing more satisfying than being smack talked at or getting /laugh at in WvW, then dunking them and jumping on their body and watching as they send you rage whispers. It’s funny, hell if there was no smack talking PvP would be incredibly boring.

Funny… most of the negative comments I noticed came from my own team and not the enemy. It’s difficult to care to do well when all I see is one player from my team basically saying “I’m great, but we lost because of the rest of you.”

I actually tried my hand at the hot joins here the other day. Up until then, almost my entire experience with Guild Wars 2 had been PvE and just a touch of WvW (more on that later). I played five matches, and here’s what I found.

1) The maps are tiny. It was almost claustrophobic to try and play and be effective.

2) Lack of strategy. I know this was hot join, but the amount of strategy seemed next to nill… at least form the teams I was on. Nobody would hold a point. I tried. But I’m a necromancer that really doesn’t know what he’s doing, so as you can imagine, it wasn’t pretty, especially when I’d face 2 or 3 opponents at the same time. And when I joined in on a group, I felt as though I wasn’t playing correctly and I should be defending what little we already had. So frustration set in.

3) Confusing combat. I was having a difficult time figuring out what class I was fighting against at any given time. I’m sure that is all my fault, but if I actually took the time to look, I was dead by the time I figured it out. I fully admit I’m an inexperienced player. That could be the bulk of it. However, sitting there feeling completely ineffective isn’t fun.

I’m sure I could add about ten more things to the list of what I didn’t like about hot join PvP, but I’ll stop there for now. I did try SoloQ before, but I was basically told I wasn’t welcome there because I was a noob. Not exactly a good way of gaining new players from my way of thinking. And I did soloQ basically because I didn’t even know how to hotjoin at the time. While my ignorance was on me, the attitude of the players was not. I honestly don’t think the hotjoin system is a great place to learn. It’s too frustrating overall, and I suspect it’s probably why a lot more players don’t actually try sPvP.

Now, on to the little bit of WvW I have done. Here’s what I notice.

1) Much, much, much larger maps. This is almost the other extreme from sPvP. The maps are almost too big. However, it was much a much better experience.

2) Not sure if it was good strategy, but there was certainly a more strategic feel to it from what little I did.

3) I didn’t feel like dead weight in WvW. Even if I didn’t know what I was doing as a necromancer (which I certainly didn’t), I could always defend using the various defensive parts of the buildings I was defending. And at some point, I joined a zerg, and actually had a great time, even though I eventually died.

All in all, WvW was a much more enjoyable experience than sPvP, at least for me.

Note: I failed to mention that I’ve been playing a lot of the Snowball Mayhem PvP this past week, and I’ve been having a great time with it. If Guild Wars 2 had more games like this, I personally would be more open to sPvP as a whole.

I agree. This game has been a lot of fun and has been preventing me from leveling my main (currently at level 52). I can’t seem to stop playing it.

This game has been a ton of fun for me as well. I hadn’t noticed the regeneration, but I’ve noticed a couple of other things that leave me thinking “how is he doing that?”

Sorry to bring up this topic again, but I’ve been thinking about our “attrition” role (or lack thereof).

The term attrition isn’t just about making someone weaker. It can also be applied to items.

What would you all think of having a trait that, instead of weakening the opponent directly, would weaken the items the person was carrying. This would be armor and weapons at the very least. Something along the lines of:

Material Erosion:
All items on the target lose 10% of their effectiveness for 10 seconds.

I haven’t worked out the details, so 10 seconds might not be long enough, and 10% might not be strong enough. But the idea is there.

Just food for thought.

Necromancer… the true dead-end job.

Caedmon.6798:

Rym.1469:

Warrior would not be Overpowered if it did require more skill and had more advanced class mechanics to achieve these results

They do require skill,stop telling yourself otherwise to make yourself feel better.The amount of warriors i see who i steamroll with my own warrior is stupid,most are copy paste builds who got no clue what theyre doing.Also warrior is anything but overpowered,and if so its only because you people arn’t able to handle berserk or healsig..wich means waiting 8 sec before blasting condis away or making sure you can do enough to outdmg 400hp/sec….But that requires a brain and not spamming all your skills away without having to look.

This argument holds no validity. You can’t argue the point that a class is overpowered by testing it against the same class. If that new warrior can faceroll against any other class with a veteran behind the keyboard playing it, the warrior is overpowered. Simple.

I have to say this puzzle was frustrating… at first. However, the more I did it the better I got. I won’t lie… it took me a looooong time to get comfortable with it overall. But it did become so much easier after attempting it over and over. I don’t regret sticking it out. I will say my wife would start laughing at the profanity coming out of my mouth when I’d fail.

My suggestion is to just keep on trying. But then again, I’m a glutton for punishment.

I’m a newer player, and I’m running a necromancer as my main. In other games I’ve played, using the mouse to move around was by far the better choice. However, I’m wondering if I’m doing it wrong this way due to the number of AoE target abilities the necromancer has at their disposal.

So I’m putting the question out there. Should I be using the mouse to maneuver in combat, or is it actually better to move via keyboard and use the mouse to use skills and target AoE?

Might seem like a stupid question, but I don’t want to be a hindrance when playing in groups, etc.

I guess I’m in the minority. I’ve always liked crafting in the MMORPGs I’ve played (and I’ve played quite a few).

Honestly, I wish they would make it possible for crafters to make the ascended gear for those that don’t want to craft.

Death Sacrifice:

Upon death, you are instantly healed for one half of your total hit points and three conditions are removed from you. Nearest three allies die.

Arganthium.5638:

Zoid.2568:

TChalla.7146:

I am now extremely tempted to create a guild named All is Vain [NoGF]. I hope someone else creates it before I decide to do it.

I’ll do it!

All is Vain was already in use.

Edit: Was able to create All Is Vain I

Edit2: did another I All Is Vain I
looks better.

If the tag is [NoGF], please invi me

I want full credit for the [NoGF] tag. LOL

I am now extremely tempted to create a guild named All is Vain [NoGF]. I hope someone else creates it before I decide to do it.

Ludus Rex.1562:

Aza.2105:

A initial step is to change it so 4v5 does not count against your rating.

I’m not sure you’ve thought this through. If a 4v5 can’t count against your rating, then can a 5v4 (in your favor) count for your rating? To discount any matches where one of your teammates bails, you have to discount any matches where an opponent’s teammate bails. How would you stop people from trolling by quitting a match where your team took an early lead? If someone bails 1.5 minutes in, and it becomes a 5v4 in your favor, should you not get credit for the win? How do you propose to give credit to the winners in this system, without having it count against the losers?

Again, your team should be LESS vulnerable to 4v5 situations than your opponent’s team, assuming that you never AFK.

Again, if nobody ever went AFK, it would make games more competitive (which I’m for), but if you never AFK, this would actually decrease your long term advantage in this regard (resulting in greater losses).

This doesn’t even take into consideration the fact that if I was in a 4 vs. 5 situation and actually won, I’d be pretty ticked off that it didn’t count.

Since necromancers are masters of death:

All skills and utilities work as they are, but necromancer then dies due to using said skills/utilities.

Since necromancers prefer death, resurrecting a necromancer is not a working game function. The necromancer, once dead, must stay in the spirit world and haunt the other players by spamming “OoooOooooo” on their screen.

Thedenofsin.7340:

Ludus Rex.1562:

Additionally, some of the initial complains were about losses caused by relatively new players, and I was just pointing out that if you are very good player (well above average), then tightening up the skill range in the match making system will result in more losses, not fewer.

The games would be closer, and more competitive, which I would certainly welcome, but for problems like people raging because they lost 8 in a row? Well, there’d actually be more of that (for high skilled players) not less. Any proposal to limit the amount of time that you (presumably a good player) have to spend playing with n00bs, will not help you in any way, shape, or form, for what you’re calling “the now”. Do you have an alternate proposal?

This is simply untrue. Stop spreading misinformation. Stop and think before you post.

It’s not misinformation. If you were playing with and against other players with the exact same skill level as you, your win/loss ratio would be 50/50. On top of that, the probability of losing 8 in a row increases as you get to the same skill level. It’s simple mathematics. The fact that you can’t see that doesn’t make it wrong.

Aza.2105:

Ludus Rex.1562:

Aza.2105:

I’m not talking about the math. I’m talking about practical results that provide in the now.

Doesn’t it seem at all hypocritical to you to make one claim (that all Solo Q sPvP results are random) and provide absolutely zero evidence to support your claim, but then to cry foul when another person makes a claim, which then becomes much more widely accepted (only upvoted post in this thread), on the basis that even though they explained the mathematical truths that make their claim true (more than you have ever provided), that the claim is invalid because they haven’t provided specific case evidence (I don’t know how you could obtain this, any game records of any players would have to be substantiated by verifying the quality of the player’s skill level through peer reviews)?

You make one claim, and provide no evidence. Someone else makes another claim, widely agreed with by people who understand the math behind it, and you say that a claim is invalid without specific case evidence. Do you not find this hypocritical?

Once again, I recommend personal responsibility. If you do not agree with this, and stick to your claim that Solo Q sPvP results are totally random, why don’t you provide some specific evidence supporting your claim?

You are mistaken, I’m not crying foul about anything. Neither is it hypocritical since I never specifically stated my experience applied to everyone in soloq nor did I completely negate your perspective. You on the other hand dismissed the OP’s perspective entirely and shifted it around to the make it seem that his problem with arena is solely his “personal responsibility”. When even Anet confirmed that what he was complaining about was indeed a problem.

I’ve told you earlier on that your thought process in regards to the matter was very linear. Straight line thinking, this equals that, that equals this, so this equals that and this why this happens. The problem with this is things never move in such a straight line, since there are so many outside influences that will cause deviations. Meaning your statistics will end up different than how you initially imagined them.

Regardless, the only thing that matters is the now, not in the “long haul” but in the “now”. None of what you said can be applied practically in the now.

Anet admitted there was a skill gap issue for the whole random queue. However, this problem lies with every team, so in essence, it’s still a matter of probability, and the only constant is you.

The thought process is a linear one because the problem itself is linear.

If any PvPer is looking for instant gratification, they’re in for a let down. Your PvP ranking is based on wins over time. Asking for a “here and now” response is like looking at a 30 year monetary investment you made yesterday and panicking because it dropped in value today.

1. Necromancer
2. Mesmer
3. Thief
4. Elementalist
5. Warrior

The guild should be All Is Vain [NoGF].

Well… I suppose I could keep coming back and explaining my view on whether or not this is a “pay to win” game or not, but it appears to be going nowhere fast.

For PvE, the idea of pay to win is silly anyway, and why should anyone care if someone spends real money to buy everything and not play the game? How does it negatively affect you overall in PvE? The only person I can see it affecting negatively is the person that actually spent the money, got everything they wanted, and then sat back and thought “hmmm… now what?”

To each his/her own.

BeoErgon.9107:

VOLKON.1290:

Concise, well worded, and wrong.

Pay to be equal a little more quickly is not pay to win.

Don’t forget something essential:
Pay to be equal a little more quickly AND without any need to play the game.
Makes a really big difference.
Get the same things as players that played the game but without playing it and quicker. If you are ok with this and don’t consider that you are buying the endgame then fine.
PVE is not about beating someone else, it is about beating the game( grinding it to death if necessary – and God knows I hate it) . Bypass this with money and you have a P2W.

That’s not pay to win either. That is more of a “pay to bypass the reason for buying the game in the first place.”

Aza.2105:

TChalla.7146:

Aza.2105:

TChalla.7146:

Aza.2105:

Freeelancer.2860:

KarlaGrey.5903:

Moreover, does your understanding of ‘player skill’ also include movement and tactical decision-making, or just ‘skill’ as in executing one’s build better than their opponent (i.e. winning most of one’s 1v1s)? Because it by far doesn’t boil down to individual skill alone, and a random team with better player synergy (i.e. good rotations/colapses/prediction) can still beat an opponent who is better skilled, but has worse rotations. I’d see teams in spvp/tpvp lose the game even though they were wiping the floor with their opponents, score-wise.

As Ludus tried to explain time and time again, everything apart from what you yourself bring in the game is completely irrelevant, and that includes distinction between combat skill and situational awareness of other players, their build choices or what they ate for breakfast.
Given a big enough sample, in a random composition of soloque, all of the parameters even out eventually, with only you being the controlling factor. Leavers, individual combat skill, tactical prowess, r0 pvp newbies or r60 pro players etc… None of it matters and it all evens out eventually. What you are left with is what you bring to the game, and while it may take a while to get yourself to where you belong eventually you will get there.

There is zero practicality in any of this. There is no result, in fact no one supporting these mathematical assertions can even tell at what point in time a result would show itself. The only thing that is given is a vague “long haul”, “eventually get there” and so forth. Meaning you can use any time in the future to try to justify this theory.

There’s no theory to it. It pure math and statistics. The fact that someone is expecting to win the vast majority of randomized 5-man pvp tournaments is being short-sighted. You’ll never have a 100% win ratio because of the randomization of it and the fact that your skill only contributes to 20% of your total team.

I’m really disheartened at the fact that so many people just don’t understand how statistics work.

Show the results.

I posted the math behind it earlier on this page.

I’m not talking about the math. I’m talking about practical results that provide in the now.

What you’re asking for is impossible for the here and now, apart from the fact that as a player, you can expect a win between 40% to 60% based on your skill alone.

(edited because I cannot believe I typed "hear instead of “here.”)

Aza.2105:

TChalla.7146:

Aza.2105:

Freeelancer.2860:

KarlaGrey.5903:

Moreover, does your understanding of ‘player skill’ also include movement and tactical decision-making, or just ‘skill’ as in executing one’s build better than their opponent (i.e. winning most of one’s 1v1s)? Because it by far doesn’t boil down to individual skill alone, and a random team with better player synergy (i.e. good rotations/colapses/prediction) can still beat an opponent who is better skilled, but has worse rotations. I’d see teams in spvp/tpvp lose the game even though they were wiping the floor with their opponents, score-wise.

As Ludus tried to explain time and time again, everything apart from what you yourself bring in the game is completely irrelevant, and that includes distinction between combat skill and situational awareness of other players, their build choices or what they ate for breakfast.
Given a big enough sample, in a random composition of soloque, all of the parameters even out eventually, with only you being the controlling factor. Leavers, individual combat skill, tactical prowess, r0 pvp newbies or r60 pro players etc… None of it matters and it all evens out eventually. What you are left with is what you bring to the game, and while it may take a while to get yourself to where you belong eventually you will get there.

There is zero practicality in any of this. There is no result, in fact no one supporting these mathematical assertions can even tell at what point in time a result would show itself. The only thing that is given is a vague “long haul”, “eventually get there” and so forth. Meaning you can use any time in the future to try to justify this theory.

There’s no theory to it. It pure math and statistics. The fact that someone is expecting to win the vast majority of randomized 5-man pvp tournaments is being short-sighted. You’ll never have a 100% win ratio because of the randomization of it and the fact that your skill only contributes to 20% of your total team.

I’m really disheartened at the fact that so many people just don’t understand how statistics work.

Show the results.

I posted the math behind it earlier on this page.

Aza.2105:

Freeelancer.2860:

KarlaGrey.5903:

Moreover, does your understanding of ‘player skill’ also include movement and tactical decision-making, or just ‘skill’ as in executing one’s build better than their opponent (i.e. winning most of one’s 1v1s)? Because it by far doesn’t boil down to individual skill alone, and a random team with better player synergy (i.e. good rotations/colapses/prediction) can still beat an opponent who is better skilled, but has worse rotations. I’d see teams in spvp/tpvp lose the game even though they were wiping the floor with their opponents, score-wise.

As Ludus tried to explain time and time again, everything apart from what you yourself bring in the game is completely irrelevant, and that includes distinction between combat skill and situational awareness of other players, their build choices or what they ate for breakfast.
Given a big enough sample, in a random composition of soloque, all of the parameters even out eventually, with only you being the controlling factor. Leavers, individual combat skill, tactical prowess, r0 pvp newbies or r60 pro players etc… None of it matters and it all evens out eventually. What you are left with is what you bring to the game, and while it may take a while to get yourself to where you belong eventually you will get there.

There is zero practicality in any of this. There is no result, in fact no one supporting these mathematical assertions can even tell at what point in time a result would show itself. The only thing that is given is a vague “long haul”, “eventually get there” and so forth. Meaning you can use any time in the future to try to justify this theory.

There’s no theory to it. It pure math and statistics. The fact that someone is expecting to win the vast majority of randomized 5-man pvp tournaments is being short-sighted. You’ll never have a 100% win ratio because of the randomization of it and the fact that your skill only contributes to 20% of your total team.

I’m really disheartened at the fact that so many people just don’t understand how statistics work.

Aeonblade.8709:

TChalla.7146:

ZudetGambeous.9573:

Ashen.2907:

You don’t need to pay money to get any of the things you mention. If you don’t have to pay for the item it is not pay to win. If I could not reasonably get those items without spending real world currency you would be right.

By your logic low level basic white gear is pay to win because I can choose to buy gems, convert to gold, and buy said gear if I wanted to, even though I can get it through game play.

It’s like i’m a wizard or something… I point out how the game is P2W and how people will justify it by any means possible and then this happens.

Based on this definition GW2 can never be P2W, even Anet can’t make their own game P2W with this definition as long as gold->gems is in the game.

Even if they put armor in the gem store that gives +1,000,000,000 stats it still isn’t P2W because hey… “GOLD TO GEMS I DON”T NEED THE GEM STORE"

Just keep moving that line…

There was no line to move. It cannot be considered pay to win if the same results can be had by other means. Is it taking an easier route? Yes. Are they paying to win? Nope.

Uh, what you said is fundamentally pay to win. If they can get items that increase their power quicker than someone actually playing the game normally would, that is P2W. I won’t bother saying google the definition because it’s been said already.

Call it Pay 2 Shortcut or whatever you need to call it to make you feel warm and fuzzy, the bottom line is they are paying, and they are winning, faster than a normal player would.

Here, I’ll go one step further on why this is not a pay to win game.

Who actually has the advantage?

1. The person that buys everything he needs/wants under the false pretense that he/she has some advantage over another

2. The person that actually goes out and earns gold to turn into gems so he/she can get what he/she wants/needs, all the while learning to play the game as he/she progresses towards the monetary goal

The vast majority of items in the gem store are either vanity items or convenience items. The rest can be had with in-game gold.

This is not a pay to win game.

fin

(Edited for grammatical errors and special effects only)

ZudetGambeous.9573:

Ashen.2907:

You don’t need to pay money to get any of the things you mention. If you don’t have to pay for the item it is not pay to win. If I could not reasonably get those items without spending real world currency you would be right.

By your logic low level basic white gear is pay to win because I can choose to buy gems, convert to gold, and buy said gear if I wanted to, even though I can get it through game play.

It’s like i’m a wizard or something… I point out how the game is P2W and how people will justify it by any means possible and then this happens.

Based on this definition GW2 can never be P2W, even Anet can’t make their own game P2W with this definition as long as gold->gems is in the game.

Even if they put armor in the gem store that gives +1,000,000,000 stats it still isn’t P2W because hey… “GOLD TO GEMS I DON”T NEED THE GEM STORE"

Just keep moving that line…

There was no line to move. It cannot be considered pay to win if the same results can be had by other means. Is it taking an easier route? Yes. Are they paying to win? Nope.

I’ve seen the “P2W” tag thrown around so much, and I’m still trying to figure out how anyone can say this is a “pay to win” game. I can guarantee you that I could have anything the gem store sells without spending a dime of my own money. I’d have to put forth some effort, but I can do it. So there is not one person that pays real money for items in the gem store who has an advantage over me in anything I can do in game just because they spent cash. In otherwords, they didn’t win just because they got out their credit card and I didn’t.

Arganthium.5638:

Before you write a long post and put it up, please consider the following:

- Is this an angry rant? Is this post a “ragezone”?
- Will people be able to understand what you’re writing through your Internet dialect?
- Do you use a Fox News-level number of capital letters on your words?
- Do you put in a bunch of letters and symbols right next to each other in an incomprehensible and meaningless “sentence”?
- Are you consistent with your usage of grammar?
- Do you say “u” and “ur” instead of “you” and “your”?
- Finally, do all of the words in your post just mash together into some large clusterkitten that is difficult to understand?

Please use some common sense next time you write a post.

Sincerely,
Your Local Pseudo-Moderator

This post was unnecessary for two reasons.

1) While the grammar wasn’t perfect, it was written well enough for people to understand. It actually had some cohesive structure. Given the fact this is not a classroom and is, in fact, a message board for a video game, I think it was written well enough to get the point across. No need to put the grammar hammer down.

2) Your post did nothing to comment either positively or negatively about the topic of the original post. This makes you come off as a troll.

Now, to the original poster, I have to completely agree. The use of “noob” or “terribad” is used way more than necessary. There is always going to be someone better than you, and there will always be a class that can take you down, regardless of your skill. It’s part of the typical MMORPG game design.

The focus of the complaints would most likely shift from “noob players r bad” to “combo of X, X, Y, Z, Z is OP.”

In other words, there are those that complain just to complain.

Qaelyn.7612:

Ludus Rex.1562:

My posts are based on math. All other things being equal, the other team will be assigned 5 random players who (coin toss) let’s say are “good” or “bad”. Your team will be assigned 4 (coin toss) players who are “good” or “bad”, plus you.

The problem with this analysis is that the more variability there is in the skill levels of the players, the less impact one individual can have on the outcome. And right now, there are a lot of very poor players flowing into PvP, and a lot who could be good but only care about gold or achievements.

And so while you are technically correct “in the long run”, that can be a very, VERY long run.

Since both teams have the exact same chance of having poor players or ones that are only after gold or achievements, the math still holds up over the long haul. Now, you have to take into consideration that by long haul, we’re talking about hundreds or even thousands of matches. But the math still holds up. And I do so love math for that very reason.

Warning: Geek Alert!

Here’s some math for you. It’s oversimplified, but it should be relatively accurate.

Let’s say we can rank each and every single PvPer on a scale from 0 to 10. (I’m using 0 to 10 rather than 1 to 10 both to account for someone that logs out right before the match starts, as well as making the math easier, since the average between 0 and 10 is 5 and the average from 1 to 10 is 5.5.)

Now, each team has five random players with an average rank of 5 per player. That would mean that an average team would have a total ranking of 25. I’ll use ‘W’ for the win percentage of a single battle:

W = 25 (average team rank)/50 (total points possible in a given group)
W = 0.5 or a 50% chance, which makes perfect sense in a random fight between two groups.

Now, we add the single player into the equation. It’s no longer completely random, since your skill now factors into it. We’ll use the letter ‘X’ to represent a single player. The equation now looks like this:

W = (X+20)/50

Now we can plug numbers in for your skill to determine what your chances of winning based on your skill alone. We already know that on average, your skill should be 5. We’ll go to the high end of the spectrum now.

W = (10+20)/50
W = 30/50
W = .6 or 60% chance of winning each battle.

Now for the low end:

W = (0+20)/50
W = 20/50
W = 0.4 or a 40% chance of winning each battle.
As you can see, there is a 20% swing between being a top player and an afker/logout. This makes sense, since you are only one fifth of the team makeup.

Over the course of time, a solo PvPer in a 5-man PUG should not have a winning percentage lower than 40% or higher than 60%. The rest is completely random.

The following is just an opinion, so take it at that value and nothing more.

I believe that the problem with PvP (or in the view of some… PvE) is that Guild Wars 2 is yet another game that is trying to please both side of the game and having a difficult time doing it. Every change to a class that benefits PvP has a repercussion in PvE and vice versa. I’ve read it in every board section here that I’ve read.

This should have a movie made about it. And I’m not talking a YouTube video. I’m talking about a blockbuster hit. Get Francis Ford Coppola or Martin Scorsese to direct it. Can’t you just see the Oscar potential?

Being the noob that I am, I went into WvW for the very first time yesterday. I run a minion mancer out in the big world and I didn’t respec when I started WvW. Once I got inside, I started doing stuff and then joined a zerg. It was then that I realized that having minions while trying to take over a fort is about worthless. The minions have no way of scaling the walls to get to whomever I’m attacking anyway. I faceplanted and left.

Next time I go in, I’ll have a condition build ready. Sheesh.

Well… my main so far is a necromancer. Without knowing a great deal about the game, I have made the assumption that my use of AoE and conditions would actually play a pretty fair part in defending whatever it is I am defending. I certainly would hope I’m not the only defender out there.

Well this is rather disheartening to read.

I’m new to the game, and my interest in getting into WvW is pretty high. I would certainly prefer playing a more defensive role. However, after what I’m seeing here, I now fear that playing defense isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.

Pity.

As a new player, I have to say the following:

I was leveling my very first character, and I happened to be in the troll cave killing slugs. As I killed away (and died once or twice), I noticed that a crowd was moving into the cave, so I watched. One player whispered to me to tell me I should join in, so I did. I managed to hit the troll a few times, and I got to loot it. Nobody cared. Nobody gave me grief. It actually seemed like they were having a great time.

I think the train is just fine as it is. People are having fun, and that’s what the game should be about.

Factotum.2093:

TChalla.7146:

the last game I played had a max stack size of 20.

And how many items, in that game, required over 700 units of any reagent to craft?

None as far as I know. My point still stands. I have a bank size around the same as what I had in the last game. The resources had to be placed into that very limited space. As far as I can tell, the bank space I have now is much larger than what was in the game for which I paid a monthly sub.

If I decide that the resource area is not sufficient to suit my needs, I might even spend money to beef it up. It will still be cheaper than the monthly sub.

I still fail to see the issue.

Being a newer player and coming from games where my bank slots were always filled with nothing but materials, I fail to see the issue here. Just the fact that the GW2 banks have designated slots for materials is good enough for me. I’ll gladly give up a bank slot for any materials I have over 250. In fact, now that I think of it, the last game I played had a max stack size of 20. And I paid a monthly subscription for the last game. I’m content with how things are.

RuneCrimson.7380:

TChalla want to know why? I do not trust others….people I do not know in games usually use me for bait or treat me like crap specially in PvP situations so I do not bother playing games with others I do not know if they are helpful thats one thing but I will not go to people.

If your biggest issue is trust, then I don’t know what to tell you. If I had trust issues, I personally would stay away from social-type games and play single player RPGs or FPS games. The very premise of this game is that there are other players playing either against you or right beside you. Finding players you can trust is rather important for a game like this.

I play necromancer because I have always had a fascination with the living dead, and the necromancer fits that nicely. It’s as simple as that. I’ve started up a thief, and I enjoy the slinkier side of that class as well.

My wife thinks it humorous that I find these two classes the most fun, since, in real life, I come across as a paladin.

RuneCrimson.7380:

A challenge yes an impossibility No….and for two people its an impossibility…..cause I am sure we would be on our own either way.

I’m curious as to why you don’t find other like-minded people to go in as a group and fulfill the achievement. When I get to that portion of the game, I fully expect to have to rally some people together to get it done. I’m not nearly there, since I’m a newer player, but I fully expect to have to get help. This is, afterall, a community-style game. I play it for the social aspect of it as much as anything else.

I think a lot of people who have responded are missing the point of the OP. As far as I can tell, the original post was basically a complaint about why we should be forced into a PvP situation to fulfill an achievement that, by and large, is a PvE achievement.

On some level, I can actually agree with the OPs assessment. However, since the WvW environment is its own separate part of the world, it makes sense that part of the World Explorer achievement be bound to that area. On top of this, part of the WvW experience is PvE in nature, so it also makes sense to have it as a PvE achievement.

I never once thought that this particular achievement would be easy (easy being a relative term). Having a portion of it in the WvW environment makes it a challenge… and it should be a challenge.