Guild Wars 2

Like this one. +1. Its a nice touch and adds a little more zing to the WvW rank.

TheDaiBish.9735:

Playing the game?

Pretty much everything you do nets you XP:

• Killing stuff
• DE’s and Hearts
• Map Completion
• Crafting
• Gathering
• Daily and Monthly

Agree TheDaiBish, except killing things, I would replace with champs as found at any event around the maps. The normal mobs don’t pay have as well. And if you are trying to level fast make sure you use both food and utility buffs to get the extra XP from kills. Good hunting!

-1 here. Seen a lot of games pass that data back to the client and from a bandwidth perspective it create latency in combat, it would especially impact WvW. You can alway compare notes with guildies if testing builds.

Meglobob.8620:

I played EoTM a lot when it first came out but not at all since, because you don’t score points for your server on that map, which puts me off and I always go to a points scoring map instead, especially with a tournament running.

Subquoting you here. This is a valid point. If scoring was reworked then the servers that win in the EoTM points should drop points into those servers weekly points on top of the supply drops. Anything to better tie these together would add meaning to playing in both with the predominate point maker being the borderlands.

WvW in the borderlands every day, but +1 from me for EoTM. I hope that if the regular maps get a face lift we see more of the EoTM fearures ported over. A good map should have both open fields and bottlenecks. Short cuts across areas should be faster but allow for bottlenecks. The multiple levels on the maps also create interesting situations since you know where the enemy is but you can’t get to them. The fact that you have to pay attention to where you and your opponent are compared to a potential fall adds more strategy to some fights. Terrain adds more to the fights versus just trees that are blocking your view because of camera repostions. Now don’t get me wrong, it has its zerg’s just like the borderlands but all the nooks have allowed for more chances of finding smaller fights as people die and can’t be respawned. That to me is a good acid test on why not being able to rez the fully dead would allow zerg’s to be widdled away by havoc groups and might encourage smaller forces to attack larger ones. Weather is also another nice added effect. Cresting a hill and not being able to see a force right on the other side has been a lot of fun, even when you are ambushee.
Now I know some people don’t want harvestable items in the WvW areas, but in the Edge its at times created other points of contension. As people come to certain areas to farm its created hot spots of activities. Plus if there is nothing going on in the borderlands it has a good chance to find a fight. Both the borderlands and the Edge have the people looking to flip empty buildings, but between both you have a better chance to find fights if you are looking for them, or other activities based on your mood. Both maps suffer from the fact that taking is more rewarding then holding in a lot of peoples eyes though, but for another discussion. Good hunting.

Nothing wrong with posting issues with npcs mobs, but that title. Not so much. That’s where you will get people. ‘Really Matter first’. Just a bit subjective maybe? With this size of playerbase Anet has close to 0 chance to realise a patch that everyone would agree on, but they do pretty good on touching most areas of the game and try and hit a good amount of issues. Anyway keep reporting, but no, npcs wouldn’t be high on everyone’s lists. Good hunting!

+1, like the idea of blacking out most if not all of the screen once dead. I do like to be able to cheer on others but it is a big tactical advantage.

+1 here on the bug. Yet to find a pattern. Thought it was connection most of the time.

You encouraged me to ponder coverage when I should have been working but I didn’t want to highjack your thread, so created a new topic. Let me know your thoughts. I ran with your premise of how do you allow a side to recover some if disadvantaged from coverage.

Upgrades
Ok so why then would we want to upgrade objectives. Upgraded objectives benefit an attacker by allowing them a larger capture percentage. The defenders incentive is to help them to try and hold the objective longer. Considering the need to hold the objective the whole day though, that’s not enough encouragement. Upgraded objectives should also pay more per time tick. That would increase the immediate payout for owning and at the same time scale up the value of the objective. A T1 tower and a T3 tower over the same time should not be the same value after all. The more you put into something the more it should be worth. Now there is an advantage to a server that is stronger in one time zone over the other but the capture reward is also going to be higher to take that objective from them. The upgrades should apply to all objectives, and sentry points in the future.

Awarding Fights
Objectives should concentrate fights, but fights themselves should have value. Killing enemy players should always award war score. Not coming to a fight should not be valued as much as winning or at least trying to fight. Bloodlust can add to the value but there should be a base value for the fight. Now you don’t want to discourage fights either so there should be value to both sides, but the winner is paid more. Now this is actually a three way fight, which is why I am paying the loser. I would want to reward someone for trying to fight versus giving them the same reward for not even showing up. Now a simple payment scheme might be 2 to the winner and 1 to the loser’s side. Another might be 4 to the winner and 2 to the loser. The reason I throw this out there as the 4 to 2 mechanism is that you would then have room to adjust the payment of the loser if they are outnumbered. The odds are good that the side with the numbers will win, but you still want people to try. Not to mention a side with more numbers is more likely to have a bloodlust bonus and be rewarded more for their kills already. Now the adjustments should never allow more points on losing then winning though but they could pay the same if outnumbered enough. Note based on the points awarded for fights the points for holding objectives would need to be increased as stated above to ensure they help focus the fights. In addition I would up the loot drops and rewards from killing players since people should always be more encouraged to fight people over NPCs.

Defending
One thing to encourage is defending. The reason for this is that it increases the odds of a fight and discourages objective swapping. Now some people are for objective swapping since it is encouraged by people that want to karma farm in WvW, but I hope that’s a minority. I would prefer an enemy to crush me then be more encouraged to let me have something so that they can take it back. Individual Rewards for fighting at an objective should be increased, be that WvW points, coin, loot, karma, XP. Further increased based on the upgrade/rank of the objective. At the same time rewards for the final capture of an objective should be scaled down based on how long before the objective was recently flipped. Example: the objective should value up the longer it is owned until it returns to its full value once control of it has flipped. That way people are still rewarded for taking objectives but less if they are giving them up so that they can just retake them.

Weekly Resets
So how do you make the weak stronger and further encourage people to WvW? Grant chests based on the servers placement among the three servers. This would help fund WvW activity, replace gear, add more value to the weekly rankings and tempt more people into WvW.

First Place: 5 Tokens, 2 Coin Bags, 6 Loot Bags, WvW XP (Small)
Second Place: 3 Tokens, 4 Coin Bags, Arrow Cart, Ram, Catapult, 3 Loot Bags
Third Place: 1 Token, 6 Coin Bags, 2 Arrow Carts, Ram, Catapult, Trebuchet, 1 Loot Bag

Tokens could be used to convert into siege, coin, karma, xp, wvw xp, other currency.
Coin Bags would be random coin drop, loot bags random gear drops.
In this model the losers are paid higher in coin and siege so that they might then use in it WvW during the next matchup.

Ok thats enough rambling, appreciate it if you made this far. Thoughts? Good hunting!

Coverage seems to be one of the biggest issues for people. Second to that is the advantage of the larger side. Now granted I enjoy the current system, but it made me ponder other options. Below are some quick thoughts on still granting an advantage to the larger and better covered side but a boost to encourage a smaller side to fight on.

Objectives:
• All Time Zones = Equal Weight
• Award servers for holding objectives
• Award fights
• Encourage combat across the map
• Discourage swapping of objectives
• Encourage defending
• Award servers that fight and lose over those that don’t fight

Process:
• Keep PPT
• Add value over time points
• Add capture and defense points
• Change points for fights
• Reduce the value of swapping objectives

Any solution needs to work in the scenario where there is and is not coverage. If a server has better coverage it shouldn’t be penalized for that but it should be of more interest to be attacked.

Details

PPT Remains
PPT encourages a side to hold objectives. You want that because it creates value in that object and you need a reason to want it. If someone can hold it over time they should be rewarded for that. Just because no one is home doesn’t mean it doesn’t have value. What is needed is to change the points that are awarded for that objective.

Objectives Points
Why would someone want a tower in the middle of nowhere? It needs to have value. If our objectives actually were at bottlenecks they would have their own value, but they can all be bypassed. That’s good and bad. For now let’s leave that the same for this discussion. Objectives should continue to add points over time paid out in 15 minute blocks as they are. The longer that an objective is held though the more valuable it should become for an attacker to want to take it. Now based on other changes below the base value of objectives should be doubled per tick if not more. See awarding fights below.

Over Time Points
How to do this? At each tick a percentage of the same value that the objective was worth is added to a reserve of points. The reserve starts 30 minutes from the point the map resets or the control of an objective changes over a 24 hour period. If the objective is captured before the 24 hour mark the server capturing the objective is rewarded a portion of the reserve points in a capture bonus and the pool is emptied. Now the pool is emptied because, let’s face it how much value does something have after it’s been sacked? We don’t want to encourage flipping. More on why only a portion of the points in a bit. Now remember this is only a portion of the value awarded during each of the individual ticks. The total points that the original owner was paid over the entire time should always be higher because they rightly controlled the objective during that time. You want to reward a side for holding but there should be a bigger reward for taking items held longer. This concept helps mitigate a server controlling a time zone by allowing an offline side to regain some lost ground.

If the objective is not captured before 24 hours is passed then a portion of the pool of points is awarded to the controller of the objective and that value is deducted from the total pool. Once again there should be a reason to defend and upgrade an objective. The owners are therefore encouraged to keep what they own since they can also benefit the longer they hold. The pool is not emptied in this case because the longer it is held the more it should be worth. The number of hours before defenders are paid can be changed but should represent as much as full game day cycle as possible to not favor a time zone over another.

Now why did we talk about a percentage of the pool of points versus the full pool. By using a percentage we can encourage other activities and reward for those that are measured as favorable. Example: for each successful defense (measured by number of attackers to defenders with minimums for each size of objective to avoid people playing the system) the percentage of defense points rewarded on successfully holding the objective is increased. Capture point percentages are increased based on objective upgrades made by the defender, and if the keep was defended at the time of capture (once again hidden metric to prevent people playing the system). Paying the attacker more for a capture of a defended keep is offset by paying the defender more for defending a keep. Once again we want to encourage fights. Other measurable actions could likewise influence the percentage of points, but should never reach 100%. First thoughts are max at 60-70%. Why? Simple, owning the keep the entire time should pay more and encourage people to defend. The capture points likewise encourage a side that is disadvantaged to keep trying since they can reclaim some of what was lost.

more…

Working on another topic and I admit I don’t know what the main encouragement for people to WvW is. I like it because its fun and fighting peeps is more interesting then NPCs and its something to win at the end of the week. So factors that add on top of that might be WvW rank, karma, bags aka loot, crafting mats, xp. So what else for everyone and how would you rank them?

To me it’s ranked : Fights, Objectives, WvW rank, bags, weekly ranking, mats, karma.

Good hunting!

Dislike this change.

I am not in the camp that has reached max I will admit. Have only been in game 5-6 months now and only gotten to 5.4K so far. Typically knock out 8-14 a day on top of other activities. But I have really enjoyed the dailies and monthlies as they were. Would love to have seen weeklies. It made an addictive fun side game of doing things I might already do and it pushed me to do that much more versus logging. To me that encouraged variety. I saw dailies as a way for Anet to encourage people to try other activities. Now agree that the majority in the middle won’t care about this change. Another group will still do them for the other rewards, but only as many as needed. It’s the ones that want caps versus those that don’t. To me caps limit a game and once you hit limits you start to wander off into what’s next. Not having dailies will not encourage me to go seek others, it will just devalue APs in general. These AP were optional so if people didn’t like going for them, they could just skip them already. If people were feeling they ‘had’ to do them, that’s the player’s issue. Its a game, you should only be doing things you enjoy, but you shouldn’t have limited other peoples activities. I don’t run dungeons, but am not calling out for dungeons to be closed, I just don’t do them most of the time. It’s also the concept of caps. GW2 has vast objectives to reach, the more that you give people that they can stop and say, there done, never again, the sooner people say I did all that, time to move on. I enjoy the concept that there are thousands of WvW levels. Don’t care if I ever hit the end, I have further to go. It’s about the journey to some. It is what it is and you can’t make everyone happy, but since this is feedback this was a -1 vote for this change. Good hunting.

The above address shows up on the forums policy page and in forum messaging. Trying to email that address though returns undeliverable. Has it been changed and not updated on the webpage and auto-messaging system? Or …? Thanks!

Straegen.2938:

How about no more rally from killing something. The only way to get up is for an ally to bring you up or do it yourself.

Really simple change that would make a lot of less experienced players more welcome when running with experienced players.

This. One of the things I like about EoTM is that it allows new concepts to be tested. That map would make an excellent testing ground for this concept and potentailly the no rezing of the fully dead. That way the larger force either needs to tend their wounded before they are fully dead or risk thnning their numbers. It would really increase role of skirmishers who try and thin out a larger force. Today if a side wins they are quickly back to 100 strength as long as their side didn’t release. There should be a price to pay if you won the fight but lost half your troops doing it.

Since I know there are people that enjoy tracking stats on things, has anyone noticed a pattern on when keys are placed on sale? I understand that its more a choice of some business unit to make versus a regular pattern but I thought I would check any way. The gamblers out there did appreciate the last sale and hopefully the business managers noticed an increased purchase rate of the discounted 5 packs if that truely was a sales test on different pricing versus a posting error. Good hunting!

I am renaming my bear tonight to MrCuddlesFearMe.

King Amadaeus.8619

I try to hide from ranger in zerg, but I am 8ft tall norn and fat. Ranger pet always stalking,

See right there that’s your problem! Everyone knows that the ranger pets target the tall fat targets first, more to eat. Re-roll an Asuran and you will be fine.

lol <3 this thread. Nice way to take a quick break. Good hunting! Oops maybe that doesn’t fit in this one. Carry-on!

Sony Online already did an MMO like this years ago, Pirates of the Burnings Sea. Sadly it faded years later but the rights were passed to another company to rebuild. It had a vast crafting system and a majority of the items in game were all player made. Building a ship for a player to use required a team of people since the crafting started at raw materials to be refined and combined from there. Ships were hundred of components and thousands of mats. All the crafitng professions were more like cooking in GW2 styles. The navel battles factored in winds, sail position, damage. Differing types of cannons and cannon shot types came into play as well as crew that could be killed of. Boarding action was possible if you were able to close and graple an enemy ship. It was a lot of fun. Didn’t stick with a lot of players though and each new MMO pulled people out of game as all MMOs go. It was amazing to keep finding people that thought the game movement was bugged at times though until you asked them if they were sure they weren’t sailing diectly into the wind. And then their response was what did the wind have to do with anything. <facepalm>

Long story short, good idea but it would take a vast amount of coding since it has been a whole seperate game itself in the past unless you want a boiled down version thats more watch then play. Good hunting!

Never saw the first thread that was deleted but I would assume there is a difference in theory-crafting versus releasing details from an inside source. This assuming that the actually deleted thread had said details.

Should start a poll, what’s worse:

1. A release out after you log out for night.
2. A release in the middle of your time to game.
3. A bugged release.

Not sure anyone minds a release before you log in, but considering the 24 hour clock thats not going to happen to someone.

On a side note, it good that people have passion for the game. But, I would hate to see people react to other companies software updates. Unless its delayed by half year we are still on track.

Isn’t that the point of PvP arenas? Don’t care about the gear differences, that’s the spot for duels else have ANet create an area for it. The issue with dueling on an open map is all the assumptions, which means in the long run you will make a bad call. Red is dead.
Isn’t that why they don’t show us enemy names since it’s suppose to be about one side versus another? Just saying. But sorry OP, will not derail further.

Note sure why this thread is in this section but…that said. It would be nice to have an auto-loot option. Auto-loot via a key is not auto-loot. Auto-loot is it goes into your bags until they are full and then it tells you that your bag is full and not allow more till you make space. Not a game breaker, but considering all the things they have done right, this one was a check box that somebody marked off their list of things to do via changing a label to auto-loot. Is it an improvement from clicking on bodies, yes, but its not an auto-loot. 2 cents. Good hunting!

So will share a counter point from someone new to the game as of a couple of months. Love the fact that you need only 5 to finish the daily and then have all these extra achievements that also still be done. At first I was only doing the WvW/PvEs and then realized I could also do the PvPs, which was all the better. It made some things more intertesting and also challanged me to do a variety of things which keeps things fresh in a sense. I think capping them would be a mistake and would encourage an expansion and/or the creation of a weekly goal as well. With Weeklies you could then add specialized ones into the daily and have those build in the weeklies. An example chaneg in the daily would be find and hunt down Champion ‘x’ to encourage people to hunt down things they maye not see often or that isn’t getting as much visits. Weekly then could be Kill ‘x’ Champions on Map ‘y’ as we see in dailies. You could also add in the larger bosses once in a while to create more movement through those maps. The achievements are a fun game in a game that I wouldn’t mind seeing expanded further. Good hunting!

New to game as of 2 months but I think you are on to it. Sometimes to save a thing, you must destroy a thing.

BoogerSammich.7189:

skullmount.1758:

Except we shouldn’t be punished for having a small/low player count server. These events shouldn’t require dedicated guilds on only certain servers. These events (Teq/Wurm) should scale to the number of players participating. And what about the players that do want to do it, but play at a time when there’s hardly anyone on?

These are actually pretty good points and I agree on some levels. While i don’t feel like anyone is being “punished” per say, I will definitely admit that you need a LOT of players to finish this stuff. This has pro and cons of course. I feel like all of the issues you mentioned are somewhat related and could be addressed with some sort of tweak on the open world idea. I don’t necessarily want to drop the “instance” bomb. But maybe open instancing? Maybe something where you could see instance queues in looking for group. When your queue fills up, the encounter starts. It could even use the overflow system that’s already in place, just with another layer that allows a level of control over it. Heck, taking it even further they could possibly allow guilds like TTS or whatever to start private instance queues so they can funnel large numbers of guild members in etc. Then even allow the option to turn the queue public once they get all of their members in.
IMHO the content is a LOT of fun. But a better system of implementation i fell would go a long way towards making it a better experience for everyone.

Ok, I needed to login and give you a +1 here. Model these after the PvP model where all the servers can mix for instances. That way high pop, low pop, doesn’t matter. If you want to do the content you can. I understand you can guest but for things like this it makes sense for an instance. Then you can also adjust timers as needed. Good hunting!

BioScientist.7895:

Here’s the flamethrower build that I’ve been rocking for a few days now: Flamethrower Tank

The main idea of this build is to get protection, remain in protection boons, and just face tank everything. To keep yourself getting booted from groups, make sure to use all of your skills, don’t just stand there and flame jet for hours on end. Also, don’t push enemies away from the party stacking either. Utilize fire fields from flame turret F2, fire fields from flamethrower, blinds from flamethrower #5 and smoke field from flame turret. The Elite Supplies trait can be changed for Power Shoes, Energized Armor, or Stabilizing Armor depending on your needs. Also, the rocket turret can be changed too, but I really enjoy the F2 rocket for a nice burst to the face. Try the build out, you might be impressed with the tanginess! Above all else, make ’em burn!

I’ll be trying this in WvW soon. Since I suck at pvp, there’s a chance that I won’t do too well. I’m always open to constructive criticism.

Have to disagree here. Its a 24 hour fight. Prime time is all the time. If a server doesn’t have coverage its their own fault. 2 AM, 2PM, same importance. To penalize people because they play at different times then you is ludicrous.

You can still find them to harvest in Kessex Hills and from toxic bosses in those areas. Toxic events are also still out there and in Queensdale.

Just in game 5 weeks and have arrived here from a PvP/WvW game that is closing. Started WvW right before the season began. Found it a little odd to be rewarded for things I was going to do anyway. Now that the seaon is over not much changes, the other servers have stuff they shouldn’t, that needs to change. Taking those things back from them and preventing them from having them in the first place is the reward, course could be that was the goal in the other game and I am biased but. … 2 cents.

Season 1 to a new comer was more about bragging rights. If you make it about Elite rewards and gear, you will have mass transfers to servers before the start of a new season which will also in the long term create a gap between server balance.

Hats off to the winners, makes them more interesting targets in the upcoming fights. Good hunting!

rhodoc.2381:

0.5 Mbit is enough for WvW. I never get more than 400Kbit/s download speed during heaviest fights.

Agreed, forced into playing on a 3G cell connection at times and the game runs rather well. Video lag is more caused via your video card then game data trans missions. If you are getting screen lag its pobably more that then your connection. I get 60-70 fps because my laptop has good hardware versus my crappy internet connection. And thats playing in T1 server fights against all 3 sides zergs at one time. The faster the connection the better but you can play on only .5 MB.

Khayoss.2019:

I don’t think there’s anything you can do, unless you are also recruiting those people into a guild that makes TS mandatory. Best bet is to assign 1 or 2 assistants to relay everything important into /t chant and relay what is said there back to you so that you don’t miss it. Active fighting of GW2 doesn’t lend itself to typing and fighting, really… But the stubborn ones or very casual gamers will never be convinced or care enough for it to make a difference.

This. Don’t ever expect everyone to use voice chat until a game comes out that forces the issue. If you assume you need this to win you already lost because you are not adapting to the situation. If you feel that strong about it you need to have a couple of people that will re-issue instructions in chat and have those same people keep you informed of chat information. Is voice faster, for the most part yes, but its still not a fail safe. Its better to plan not to have it then to have it act as a crutch. Good hunting.

So what is the high end of damage that people have run into using heartseeker or being used against them?