Guild Wars 2

Batmang.5421:

What about adding a “What’s your favorite map?” poll?

Your wish is my command. I added it to the OP.

http://strawpoll.me/355783

Added a new one

What should the next game mode be?
http://strawpoll.me/355365

Added another
What is your major incentive to play PvP?
http://strawpoll.me/355414

Adding another one:

What is the most fun profession to you play (forget balance, only fun)?
http://strawpoll.me/355352

I have 3 monitors.

Middle Monitor – Guild wars 2

Left Monitor – Forums

Right Monitor – twitch.tv/guildwars2pvptv

Harrywinky.8632:

Do you even realize there are plenty of players who rarely check the forums?
:)

No, I thought every single player that has ever played PvP has 1 monitor open with the forums constantly refreshing.

So, I created a thread earlier that gave me an idea: most of the time, I suppose the vocal minority can skew the perception of things. I want to house a place where we can all vote on certain things.

Here are some of my ideas, if you have an idea for a poll, let me know below.

Should Skyhammer be in the solo q rotation? http://strawpoll.me/355256

What is your major incentive to play PvP?
http://strawpoll.me/355414

Should PvP skills be balanced only by PvP DEVs and PvE not enter into the discussion about balance changes? http://strawpoll.me/355265

What should the minimum games be to be on the leaderboards?
http://strawpoll.me/355272

How many professions should be allowed in each solo q?
http://strawpoll.me/355276

Should there be a tiered system for Solo Q Matchmaking? (Bronze, Silver, Gold, etc. where you work your way through each tier and only play people in your tier)
http://strawpoll.me/355281

How big of a deal is SYNC queuing?
http://strawpoll.me/355287

What is the most important thing for the DEVs to be working on right now?
http://strawpoll.me/355293

As a PvPer, do you care at all about PvE?
http://strawpoll.me/355302

Do you watch the twitch stream: guildwars2pvptv?
http://strawpoll.me/355308

What is the most fun profession to you (forget balance, only fun)?
http://strawpoll.me/355352

What should the next game mode be?
http://strawpoll.me/355365

What is your favorite PvP Map?
http://strawpoll.me/355783

Which Map(s) would you like to see removed from the Solo Q rotation?
http://strawpoll.me/355898

Again, please come up with your own polls and if they are worthy, I’ll add them to this list. Thanks!

Poll http://strawpoll.me/355233

Harrywinky.8632:

felivear.1536:

So, it’s 100% clear that a GIANT majority of the SPVP player-base doesn’t want skyhammer in the rotation, yet it is.

It can’t be harder than 10 seconds of work.

This is what KILLS me about ANET. The community doesn’t want it, it’s super easy to fix and yet IT STAYS IN.

Why?

That´s not true.
I love skyhammer.
Im top 200 solo Q right now and it is the only map i really enjoy and want to play often.

You saw where I said “A Giant Majority”, right?

I know people that like it, they are about 1 out of 10 of the people I know.

What? 15 char

Delete this thread.

Allie Murdock.8152:

Volrath.1473:

Allie Murdock.8152:

Firstly, we have no qualm or rivalry with Helseth.

That aside, I have some questions, and would like to address some other points made.

1. What exactly do you mean by allocating resources to eSports?
2. What exactly is your definition of fun? Fun is subjective, no?

While we definitely appreciate it when players are vocal and provide feedback, excessive hyperbole does not help us to understand the fundamental issue.

Some more points:
1. The current meta is not controlled by the PvP team. Yes, we monitor it closely as balance greatly affects PvP. However, no resources are being taken away from PvP development in order to do balance. So I’d like to just squash that misconception now.

2. Skill effect clutter – another thing not controlled by the PvP team. Another thing that we monitor and provide feedback to the teams that do control it.

3. Sending out in-game mail is not as easy as it sounds. Keep in mind that every message that is sent has to be edited and localized.

• This is, however, something we recognize as an area to be improved. We are investigating ways to provide in-game messaging for events.

4. Lastly, I want to thank you for promoting the guildwars2pvptv channel. I always see a few people on the team with the stream always going on their 2nd/3rd monitors. Once PAX has past, we’ll be looking to better promote streamers from all areas of the game. So keep it up!!

ok so basically everything that is wrong with the game is not your fault. There is nothing at all under “control” you simply “monitor” thats cute!

I guess it is ours then! this meta is the worse EVER and i believe we all agree on that but it is ofc the players fault for playing the extremely OP professions that YOU made.

This is the excessive hyperbole that I mentioned in my post. You have every right to complain, but we can’t really understand your problem unless you actually provide some constructive feedback.

Or, sometimes you are told exact examples and you reply with “Sounds….random”.

Knote.2904:

Imagine if they worked on fostering a casual pvp playerbase THEN slowly turned the game into an esports instead of the other way around.

Yep. Make a super fun game, then once you have a crazy amount of dedicated players, turn it into a competitive scene.

Morderger.6298:

A world, where Anet spent as much effort on pvp related things as they do on living world content.

Oh what a magical world that would be.

If they pulled their living world team for 1 month to come to PvP, then PvP would be a great place.

Unfortunately, we have a skeleton crew implementing changes that get limited testing by their small QA team and they hit the live servers. Then that same small dev team then spends their time fixing the bugs of the last patch instead of creating new content, because so much stuff is broken.

Vicious cycle.

In reality, I just wish the PvP portion got as much attention as a free game like LoL puts toward their game.

Jon Peters said during the guildwars PvP stream on twitch (in chat) that the patch after PAX should expect some balance and then the one after that should be the BIG one…. man…how many times I’ve heard that the next one or the one after that is going to be the BIG patch

The problem with glory at this point is that it’s been trivialized by hotjoin. Since hotjoin is BY FAR the most glory per minute, you can’t really use rank as any type of measuring stick. I know people that are rank 45 that have never ran a tournament.

So, I don’t care if losing team gets 0 and winner gets 0. Solo q should be about the win and your shot at leaderboard (once leaderboard actually gets ironed out, cause just like hotjoins, it also has been trivialized).

Also, like I’ve said for the longest time (I had a post about it in September 2012). Hotjoin, if it’s meant to be the stepping stone for new players has to have the incentives changes in order to coach new players on the way to WIN in conquest. But that’s neither here nor there, because after 1 year, no changes (SUCH A SIMPLE CHANGE TOO), I have lost all hope in that.

Please disable Glory in Solo Q and give the loser 75 glory and winner 150. there is absolutely 0 resason to have it on during the match and just has hotjoin heroes playing their same zerg gameplay.

If I hear “you suck I got top stat” one more time when we lose I’ll throw something.

Hello.

I’m just starting the game for the day and when I tried to join solo q, this is the message I’m getting.

I completely exited the game and restarted and now I have the same message. Anyone else?

i was just coming on to make a similar post. Please remove this map from the rotation while you fix it. And please, once you remove it, don’t fix it.

Curae.1837:

I am glad to have these points when working on map completion; however when I first enter a map I lose all interest in the minimap since there’s so much more to see. So many things going on and so many places to discover.
The first times completing a map was rather a ‘oh, I have discovered everything except those 3 poi’s. Which I ran past without coming close enough.’

I gues putting everything on the map can be a curse for some people; but for me personally it doesn’t ruin exploring; and is a blessing when I get to map completion.

EDIT: If you open your worldmap you can click on the eye in the bottom-left corner. Just start unchecking the boxes, your minimap will just show gathering nodes, waypoints and (I think) events.

I guess that’s one of the things that bothered me: map completion. Again, I feel it’s just a way to cheapen a world because essential you “beat a zone”. That’s not what MMOs and exploration are to me.

I’m just curious if the decision to add all of the icons on the mini map to point the players to every single thing is something that Anet regrets. Obviously, even if they did, they never would admit it here.

It is such a beautiful world. Insanely beautiful really and to have all of that diminished by removing the need to actually explore it, is a shame. I mean, even the vistas and points of interest are ON THE MAP…..

In GW2, you can gather everything you need from your minimap and the entire thing becomes just check-listing.

Ceraldor.3160:

felivear.1536:

I’m a huge fan of Helseth’s viewpoints. He is spot on. I remember when he got banned for speaking the truth when so many “pros” were playing apologists.

He got banned because he said he would be armed when going to the pax final.

Haha really?

I’m a huge fan of Helseth’s viewpoints. He is spot on. I remember when he got banned for speaking the truth when so many “pros” were playing apologists.

I think that is the most frustrating thing about this game, there is SO much potential and promise, and so many little things that keep it from getting there.

Allie Murdock.8152:

Alright, after more people posted that they were having this same issue, I checked in with the team and they let me know that there is a bug causing Temple to pop more than other maps.

Our programmers have already found a fix for it, we just need to get it tested and it should be out soon.

Appreciate those of you that remained constructive.

my original post (which was before your response)was deleted earlier because it said I wasn’t being constructive so I will reword it. These are the types of things that are frustrating about the way ArenaNet handles issues. We are almost always met with opposition from developers or community leaders when we call out things that are wrong. The initial response is usually something like this, but, especially with arenanet’s track record of being wrong, it should instead be ,“thank you all for your input on this I will check with a member of the development team to see if this is in fact in issue or just a product of the nature of randomness.”
I just get frustrated with the responses sometimes because they are coming from a place of “we never do wrong” or " we release when its ready", although the evidence shows that it is quite the contrary.

Having said that, thank you for looking into it and reporting back.

This is the same thing I am wondering. There should be a few things.

1) Higher minimum game play requirement
2) MUCH Faster Decay
3) The MMR should go off of your opponents CURRENT MMR every hour when it’s configured, not the MMR they had at the time you played them.

Mammoth.1975:

It’s due to glicko. The first few games you play will have a bigger impact on your rating, so if you win them all, your rating will be huge. Basically, you should just ignore anyone under 50 games. By next month, you should be ignoring anyone with under 100. After 100 games played, the majority have been against strong opponents if you have a high rating, luck is less of a factor since the games where you have 4 or they have 4 are starting to balance each other out, and you’ve played the great majority of your games with the minimum rating deviation.

TBH, I think that in a few weeks they should raise the number of games required to appear on the leaderboards. 50 might be too high this early, not everyone has enough time to play an average of 2 games every single day, but eventually. The ratings just aren’t as accurate as they should be when very few games have been played. The standard glicko rating deviation seems too high.

Alternatively, instead of decay, just raise the minimum games required by 5 each month after you first appear on the leaderboards. 1 game required seems too few, it could take several years before you’ve played enough games to get an accurate read. Even 5 won’t give an accurate rating for several months, but it’s better than 1.

I appreciate your response. I think your solution is a great one. I understand the downfalls of the glicko system, and people so far in the thread have been stating what I already know.

It’s like if I was asking what the best way to remove a wine stain from a carpet and the responses I get are:

Wine is red, and it is difficult to get up. You should try to remove it.
Why did you spill wine.
You are complaining about a stain when you shouldn’t be drinking wine on carpet.

evilapprentice.6379:

Could be I’m misunderstanding all this, so take this with a grain of salt, but here’s what I believe people are trying to explain to you.

When symbolic beat those players, they were all “Higher ranked” – they weren’t better, they didn’t earn that rank, they were just at the “base rank” for soloq, since there was no way to measure how good players were (Seeing as soloq just came out). The players you beat had already lowered themselves in the ranking system – your players had played enough games to have a rank actually reflective of their skill, and you earned points based on those wins.

See my above addition to my previous quote. The problem here isn’t that I’m playing against players that lowered themselves in the ranks. It’s that the players that HE beat have SINCE lowered themselves in the rank. How does the MMR not take into affect the rank of the people you beat during each time MMR is configured (hourly).

So, lets say player A beats player B, C, D, and E. but doesn’t play F-Z.

Let’s then say because he beat them all in succession, he is rank 1. Let’s say player B later on continues to climb in the ranks as well, but player C, D, E fall dramatically to where they are now determined to be at the bottom end of the scale.

Why would the ranking system not be a living rating, where each time it is configured, they adjust your MMR based on the CURRENT rank of past opponents. My guess is, if they did that alone, the person who is ranked 1 would be way down the list because he was playing against bad competition, but at the right time.

And I guess that is all I am asking. Remove from your head player names, my own ranking and all. How does the situation that I just mention, make sense for a rating system? You can start 11-0 playing against players that are undetermined, but later determined. You then play no games for a long period and stay on top, meanwhile there are other people on the boards (not me) that are consistently beating players that are KNOWN to be good.

prozon.3561:

Lupa allready explained it…

You just had a bad start in the Game… if you had won your first 12 games you will be probably the 1st in the LB…. You lost of unlucky reassons and need to climb up again. (Will takes alot of 11-0 series…) until you are getting matched with even non ranked guys…

OK. Let’s remove me from the equation since that is becoming a barrier discussion.

Does this make sense to you, and if so can you please explain it:

Symbolic: 11-0 Rank 1
stunningstyles: 115-32 Rank 19

I would also like to know the collective rank of all the players that Symbolic has played because I am pretty certain that because of the lack of integrity of the values at the start of MMR, he was playing many scrubs, as well as competent players.

It would be like in college football.

Imagine if Anet College played their supposedly difficult schedule at the start of the season. Let’s say they went 6-0 playing against Alabama, Tennessee and Oregon and other teams

let’s say that as the college football season went on, you found that Alabama, Tennessee and Oregon were all in super down years and ended up being dropped from the ranks completely because they were determined, this year, they were terrible.

How would Anet college still be able to stay number 1 in the polls, while other people around them were playing and beating, and sometimes losing, to teams that are now 100% determined to be good.

Lupanic.6502:

he won against player with better raiting. You won against player with rating 20%, he won at the very first day as all had the same rating (100%). Wait some weeks and everything will be fine.

Why do you care about his rating?
We got the soloQ and now all I see is hate hate hate.

Oh boy. I prefaced and closed to clarify just so this type of response wasn’t given, and yet it was the first one I received. Alright here we go:

There is NO way that in the first day or 2 of solo q that he was playing against people with better skill, because it was pure chaos. He was playing against the same people, some worse people, and some better people. It was a mixed bag of people because of the extreme volatility of MMR, especially at an MMR wipe.

Also, the part about why do I care about him: would you like me to remove his name and say “there is a human being at rank 1 that is 11-0.” Would this make you feel better? Now, if anyone out there can actually answer or discuss the question:

How does 11-0 at the start of MMR, when it’s pure chaos, get you rank 1, then 11-0 when things finally settle in get you 30% boost.

So, I suppose I have to preface this by saying that:
A) I know I’m not the best GW2 player in the world. I also know that many people claiming to be good are often bads.
B) Yes, I know leaderboards are just a vanity board to flex. It shouldn’t be what anyone is striving for.

Ok, now that I’ve got that out of the way, here is my question:

How does Symbolic being 11-0 make any sense? So, Symbolic won 11 games in a row and is number 1. He’s played no more games since, and is still number 1.

Does this make sense to you, and if so can you please explain it:
Symbolic: 11-0 Rank 1
stunningstyles: 115-32 Rank 19

I started off in the MMR basement and had to fight through game after game after game with level 1-10’s, AFKers, or no shows (for the first few days of Yolo Q I was a bit above .500) . Lately, I finally began getting competent players on BOTH sides (Kaypud, etc), and I am now winning way more often than losing.

Starting 2 days ago, I was 24-21 and at around 20%. Over the last few days in my limited play time, I went 11-0. I am now 35-21, and I’m at 55%.

So, how does him winning 11 games in row and me winning 11 in a row have THAT big of a difference. Should I be number 1 for my 11 game streak? No. Should I be top 100? No. But should I be higher than 55%? Yes. Should he be lower than 1? Yes.

How is there no weight in games played? It seems like this system is more apt to reward you for playing LESS than playing more and also reward you for playing against players with a inaccurate MMR, instead of rewarding players for beating players with a determined MMR.

Why would the ranking system not be a living rating, where each time it is configured, they adjust your MMR based on the CURRENT rank of past opponents. My guess is, if they did that alone, the person who is ranked 1 would be way down the list because he was playing against bad competition, but at the right time.
And I guess that is all I am asking. Remove from your head player names, my own ranking and all. How does the situation that I just mention, make sense for a rating system? You can start 11-0 playing against players that are undetermined, but later determined. You then play no games for a long period and stay on top, meanwhile there are other people on the boards (not me) that are consistently beating players that are KNOWN to be good.

EDIT: I added some of my responses from below to the OP to help clarify what I am asking.

Silentshoes.1805:

Everyone was initially at a middle point, as I understand it.

Ya, that could have been the case. Either way, having a starting point where all of the high ranks are mixed with the low ranks is an odd way to do things because of the extreme luck that goes into getting good matchups at the bottom

Similar to ELO Hell in LoL. Except, really, you start off in ELO Hell in this game.

When Solo Q came out, everyone was at the same MMR. At this point, the best and the worst were mixed up together until the cream rose to the top (hypothetically). What ends up happening though, is some of the cream doesn’t rise because it’s getting stuck in the revolving door that is the bottom ranks.

So, what should have happened in my opinion is there should have been an MMR floor. At the start, every player that is 25 or higher gets partied together and based on their rank alone, have started at the “real” MMR floor. 25 is a good place where you can judge that someone at least understands how to play the game.

You then have the people that are under 25. They have a separate “starter” MMR. They then play each other until they’ve risen out of that crop, and thus hit the real MMR floor, which all rank 25s already started out at.

I just think winning a game where it’s a good match up, only to be thrust into a game where you have multiple people under 10 is no fun at all.

Are the people on the top of the leaderboards all good? Probably. Is every good player that should be on the leaderboards, on the leaderboards? Probably not (because of the luck variation in getting competent teammates at the start of fresh MMR rankings).

EDIT: OR you could scratch all of that and just have Tiers that are called “rabbit, Dolyak, etc” You start in that tier based on your glory rank. If you are not as good as your rank, you’ll get dropped down to the teir below, likewise if you are a rabbit but keep stomping rabbits. You then only play the people that are in, or near, your tier.

Thank you

From the leaderboards
*TheWalkingDead.7298 Got Might 17 1 94.44% Isle of Janthir*

Also, I get partied with level 1s. We lose terribly, next game I get partied with decent players then we win. Rinse/repeat.

I’m above .500 but how in the name of all that is holy can someone be 17-1?

Also, how do you crawl out of ELO Hell if you get stuck in this cycle?

I’m just curious if Anet is pleased with the amount of gimmicky builds?

Archer Henchman.2534:

ITT no one has had to stomp out a mes while people are rotating towards you and you’re at 800 hp.

In the last one that happened to me, and the reason I posted this, I was in a 1×1 with a ranger and downed him and I had less than 1k health left. I was out of initiative and had to stomp, and stay alive. I stomped him, and the point stayed in their control for 7 seconds before I could even start unticking it. Frustrating

It seems pretty standard to be able to remove buffs in MMOs, not sure why it’s absent here.

Quickfoot Katana.8642:

Dont stomp in shadow refugee LOL

Every good thief weapon/utility kit can stomp safely without wasting our precious shadow refugee

Awesome answer! Now, let’s see if you are able to answer the actual question that I asked instead of spewing your word vomit.

Can you cancel a buff?

Just wondering if there is a way to cancel your own buffs?

There is not too many things more annoying than needing to stomp in shadow refuge, then unable to cap the point for 7 more seconds because you’re standing there in stealth unable to cancel it.

Dirame.8521:

I thought Team Queues allowed for Duos to queue as well… ?

They do, I guess what I mean is where solo and duo queue get placed into the same pool, similar to other games instead of 2 people getting matched up against 5 people.

Hello all,

I have a quick question for the community. This is not a plea to get it implemented or even a complaint that it is not in. I’m just curious what is everyone’s thoughts on a duo queue. When I say duo queue, I mean one that would be paired up with solo queuers as well.

I think it would be great for me and a buddy to play in, but I also understand there could be drawbacks.

So, would you like to see it one day, and if not, what are the reasons?

Thanks!

I used to be so active in this game. I played TPvP exclusively for hundreds upon hundreds of hours. I have been monitoring casually the last 4 months (since I quit) just to see the addition of a simple Solo Q. Anet would have you believe it’s the most difficult thing in the world to implement (and people take the bait); however, all of these other games that I am playing now don’t have near the gameplay polish of this one, and yet they LAUNCH with solo queue.

When I see Guild Wars on gaming sites instead of feeling that rush of excitement I had at the start, I feel disgusted. So much potential means that greater of a fail.

Anyway, I’ll go back to lurking for the next year while they implement basic features.

butch.8136:

They will not have an expansion any time soon. Go look around on the pve-forums.

We do agree, that one day, eventually, before the end of the world, there will be an expansion?

On that day, based on your experiences up to this point, will you purchase it.

Just a simple question: When Anet releases their expansion, based on your previous dealings with the PvP portion of this game, will you purchase it?

Well, I am sure this post will draw the ire of many, but I feel I must post my swan song. After months of wrestling between what is, and what should be, I have officially uninstalled. I think it has been the result of 2 things: 1) The complete lack of transparency of the developer team and 2) Seeing other games coming right out of the gate with features that this game touted as its main selling points, yet are still glaring omissions in this game.

Oddly enough, the game that has really caused me to question GW2 has been a game under the same NCSOFT umbrella: Wildstar. Having followed them since an early announcement, I have come to truly appreciate a developer that is open, honest, and quickly willing to rethink its goals based on player feedback. Will that game be the great MMO we have all been waiting for? I’m not sure, but I know they are starting exactly where they should, by creating a loyal fan-base with their open lines of communication.

Anyway, I won’t 100 blades this dead horse anymore, but I will end by saying that I really enjoyed the community here. I found the PvP community to be some of the most dedicated I’ve seen. Those who stuck around and who still stick around really see the massive potential this game has; however, I can no longer look through the desert and pray that the spot in the distance is a shimmering pool.

Good luck to all of you and good luck to the developers; I hope you truly develop this game into the game it should have been all along. I just can’t wait any longer for this to happen.

This game is like eating lobster and drinking fine wine but doing it on paper plates and in paper cups.

You got the hardest part right. The food taste delicious. How could you mess up the delivery part…

A very simple answer to a simple question: Last time that a solo queue was discussed Peters said “We don’t have the infrastructure currently to do that.” I don’t want that answer, I want to know if you PLAN on adding it and if it is your vision for the game.

Currently me and many others just want a solo/duo queue with premade groups separate and ranking for each. Are you going to do that? I don’t want to know why it would be difficult, I want to know if you are willing to do it and if it is in the cards. I genuinely hate my solo-play experience in this game.

Hello, I see that the leaderboards are no longer a myth and I decided to play some games to get my name on the wall of fame. I haven’t really played since February. I jumped in today and got in a few games. I went 3-1 (solo Queue) then decided to hit 1 more before the refresh of the leaderboards.

Does this count as a straight up loss and hit on my ranking or does the game factor in the fact that I was shafted? Legitimate question, no QQ.

MaXi.3642:

felivear.1536:

if you left in October the only real changes that have happened are a few balance changes.

we are obviously playing another game…

main change is that tournaments were changed to only 1 round, no more waiting to the death…

second is we have some kind of invisible rating and tournament matches are no longer purely random, so at least my games are mainly balanced…

invisibile leaderboard is a point of interest too, but question is, how working it really is? because only thing we have got is information that it is in the background and not visible for now, nothing else…

and 2 new maps

I posted this in January. So, everything you said was not correct at the time.

The QQ in this forum is unjustified? The most hyped PvP MMO ever started off by selling 3 million plus copies and touting itself as “the fastest selling mmo of all time” now has less than 5 active PvP teams and they had to shut down 8 team tournaments because they wouldn’t pop.

These “armchair devs” told them from the start that paid tournaments for tokens and 8 teams needed for each tournament to start and having solo querers and pre-mades lumped together was a terrible idea. They later realized it, albeit way to late. So if only the real devs would have listened to the armchair variety.

Also, I’m telling you now that custom arenas as currently being developed will not work and will be a total flop. There is nothing custom about them and they expect us to pay for the right to password protect a private lobby with almost 0 customization? That would have worked within the first month when interest was high from outside sponsors. They would have held tournaments for prizes. There are currently no interested sponsors so who pays for them? I’ll give you a hint, it rhymes with nobody.

JonathanSharp.7094:

So with the Thief, we feel like their straight burst with some sets is too good as it is (Mug/C &D/BS/heartseeker), but a lot of other things are weak in comparison, which is bad.

The goal is to allow them to punish boons (something we also want to try with the Warrior) while also improving their mobility with all weapon sets (since Shortbow is already strong at that, but it overpowers other options).

As Allie said, we want to be careful to balance their WvW/PvE potential against their PvP potential, and then inside of PvP, we have to be careful to watch how they perform at high ranks vs. low ranks.

When the game was in development it was stated that a great feature was that PvP was segregated in such a way that you could easily split moves between PvE and PvP. You then, after the game was released, said that you didn’t want to do that because it would hurt the experience for PvE players who already had an expectation of what the abilities did. Why create PvP in this game at all? It’s clear that PvP was used to hype the game pre-release and then it was abandoned after release. You told me PvE was not a factor and to not worry about it affecting my experience in PvP. Then I bought the game and now I’m hearing this garbage. Is PvP balance terrible? No. Build diversity however is. People are pigeoned holed into builds because many viable builds work well for PvE but have no PvP application.

I bought a PvP game that also had a PvE side for those that wanted it but was told it wouldn’t affect me. I ended up with a PvE game that has an abandoned PvP mode. This is my first Anet product. It is also almost assuredly my last.

Anet has created a PvE game that is extremely casual-friendly. It’s a game that, by their own admission, is a game that is meant to be played, put down, and picked back up later. That has caused many people to flock to the PvE and burn through it. The lack of a gear treadmill or any type of content that can only be completed by “the hardcore” promotes a game that will fizzle quickly. To remedy this they must pour finite resources into PvE to constantly create content. They create new stories, events, etc. to keep them in the game, in direct proximity to the cash shop. The problem is, with no real progression system in place, they will eventually leave. So, what is the direct remedy for that? PvP. PvP by its very nature is dynamic. It is an ever it changing environment because the people that play it are ever changing. We are evolving and creating new obstacles for the players. In PVE the developers must create content on a constant basis to placate the masses that reside there. In PvP the developers only have to give the players the tools necessary for them to create the content. When I say that I don’t mean literally creating content because PvP is about the competition and about the self improvement that comes along with it; so, if you give players a playground that provides a fun and varied experience the players evolve a “meta-game” which essentially becomes content.

This post is me just wondering out loud if the developers see that they are pumping morphine into a dying soldier instead of using it to get another through surgery that will save his life. I think PvP in this game has limitless potential if only the tools were in place to allow us to help it to its summit.