Guild Wars 2

Did the last patch actually fix the issues with the NW tower gates? I know the notes mention fixing the ability to teleport through it, but what about leap skills doing the same, and golems being unable to hit the gate?

It’s good that they are finally looking at issues like that, but that has been a known problem since release or just shortly after. Exploits that allow the capture of intact towers/keeps should not be allowed to exist for 18 months.

Malediktus.9250:

King Amadaeus.8619:

I think it will get somewhat better around 4/4…

I see what you did there…

That’s probably what got at least one of those other topics trashed. Even though I’d still argue that it’s constructive, because it’s likely true. This is a terrible time to be sweeping wvw issues under the rug and pretending they don’t exist.

Kincaidia.3192:

No, I just got notified that multiple topics regarding lag have been moved to the trash.

I guess that’s one way to deal with the problem…

I’m sure at least one of those could have been cleaned up without losing more than a couple posts, but it’s not my/our opinion of what is constructive or not that matters in the end.

Dark Catalyst.1028:

Draknar.5748:

You can’t play the game casually (1-2hrs/day) yet be considered a hard-core player.

I was raiding the current raid within 48 hours of hitting 90 on a fresh character and it only takes a few hours a week to complete it. Looks like you’re WRONG again and you obviously have no idea what you’re talking about.

Hardcore is more a descriptor of playstyle than time spent playing. Min/maxing, placing a high priority on shaving a few seconds off a dungeon run time, a gvg team with finely tuned builds for each of the 25 members…it’s that type of preference in playstyle that defines hardcore. It doesn’t mean they put more hours into the game, or even that they are a more skilled player.

I definitely do not consider myself a hardcore player, but I’ve probably put in more hours than most that do. And I think I’m just as skilled as most of them. I’m certain I could easily and quickly adapt to the builds and playstyles used for speedruns or gvg, I just choose not to play that way. Not being a hardcore player doesn’t make you bad at the game any more than being a hardcore player makes you good at it.

I’ve always found the associate between “bad” and “casual” to be a silly one. Knowing the choreographed execution of a speedrun or being well-practiced at following the lead/orders of a gvg team leader does not make someone good at the game. Skill at the game is going to come from learning your profession(s) strengths/weaknesses, and learning to use that in a dynamic situation where your actions are not predetermined or orders from someone else.

To me, one mark of a “bad” player is the inability to create or kitten viable builds. The complete acceptance that what a wiki/guide/meta dictates is best/only way, and that nothing else is acceptable. And I’m talking about other games just as much as (or maybe even more than) GW2. GW2 does leave more room for variety and less ability to enforce this behavior. But I’ve seen so many self-described hardcore players insist on using a certain build for whatever the current task is, without any consideration that a different build could be just as effective, or have no impact on their success/failure. I’ve been kicked from parties for using a build that I had already used with other parties(ones using the same meta/guide builds), and proved to be better than the build they insisted I use.

Travis the Terrible.4739:

Xae Isareth.1364:

First of all, I don’t think you can compare any game managed by Nexon to basically any other game on the planet not managed by Nexon in terms of communication. Nexon is basically the very embodiment of not giving a kitten about your players.

Actually the nexon thing holds quite a bit of important. ANet is owned by NCSoft, NCsoft had 30%~ of their stock bought by nexon. Also I believe the person who heads up their gem store is also an ex-nexon employee.

It was just short of 15%, unless they’ve acquired more in a later purchase that I’ve not seen any mention of. 15% is still a decent chunk, and they are the largest shareholder. This was a private transaction, apparently directly from NCSoft’s chairman/CEO/founder.

And you are correct about their monetization producer, Crystin Cox. She is a former Nexon employ, actually the lead producer of Maplestory, as well as some other positions at Nexon. According to her LinkedIn profile, she also worked for NCSoft for a short time in 2007, before her over 3 years at Nexon. She came to Anet just a couple months before Nexon’s share purchase.

Inimicus.7162:

Now they are about to do the same to my assassin’s gear because they chose to nerf crit when the forums whine about “zerk” and instead of $70, its going to be about 500 gold in damages if i can’t select new stats for said pieces. And they have been totally silent about the Assassin’s gear thus far.

Berserker/assassin stats are still going to be the top DPS sets in the game. No other stat is going to become better for pure damage builds after this nerf. And the change will only be about 10% less damage for a pure zerker build. So everyone will still be using the same gear/builds, it will just take slightly longer to kill mobs.

It’s going to take a lot more than a 10% damage cut to reduce the viability of the current zerker meta and make other stats/mixes desirable. I hope they actually do more than just this change, because having 90% of the playerbase (I believe this was Anet’s own stated number) using a single stat out of the 20 available is a serious problem. If/when it comes to a point where pure DPS builds are not really viable, then the issue of having to replace existing gear is something that needs to be dealt with. But we are a long way from that being a reality.

And they’ve not actually been silent about this. The crit/ferocity change is global, so assassin with get the same reduction as zerker. Same with every other stat combo that has +crit damage as a minor stat. They even just specified how much ferocity (15) is equal to +1% crit damage, so you can figure out how much +crit your assassin gear will give you (your +Ferocity will be the same as your +Power)

Warkupo.1025:

Nage.1520:

Daddar.5971:

The thread title says it all. I really loved GW2… for a while. I’ll miss Tyria a little I guess, but I’m very excited about my move to Tamriel. Maybe I’ll see some familiar faces there.

I’m sure you’ll see familiar faces. People expecting too much, outraged and horribly disappointed. That’s what you’ll see. It may take a month two, but I doubt it.

Anet’s silence isn’t worse than most company’s silence.

qft.

is that still a thing people do?

WoW is dying guys. Guys, it really is. Guys?

Any game that has hit its peak of sales/active players is technically dying. Just like every second we live, is one second closer to our death. What really matters is how rapid that decline is, and how close it will get to an actual point where it can be called dead.

I do think, from what I’ve seen ingame, that GW2 is in a decline, but it’s nowhere near being dead. And there is definitely opportunity for Anet to reverse that decline. I just don’t see enough good decisions coming from them to actually make that happen. In my opinion, the bad decisions are significantly outweighing the good ones.

Becka Williams.4978:

It’s possible it costs 200 tickets AND 250 badges. We won’t know till the vendor comes out.

I think it will take tickets and badges.

This is to allow players who don’t have enough tickets after 1 tournament to purchase a weapon and upgrade it after a subsequent tournament.

That gave me the impression that they don’t intend for the lower placing servers to be able to buy Mistforged weapons after this tournament.

I don’t think anyone would straight up buy a weapon for 300 tickets, when you could spend 100 tickets + 250 easy to get badges, and some other easy to get materials.

They didn’t actually specify what currency will be used, but I’d guess it’s either gold or skill points. Perhaps the WvW skill trainer will accept badges.

tigirius.9014:

It’s happened in every game I’ve played, they’ve had to hire a community group to handle announcements and keep the players informed. When these other titles have done just that (these people communicate directly with the devs btw) the community calms down because they know what to expect.

They’ve had a community management team all along. Some of them have been around since GW1 days, years before GW2’s release.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Category:Community_coordinators

The team that decided to “nerf” crit damage must have forgot to send that memo to the teams that made the zerker DPS test Knight events and this new trait update.

The see the words saying “fix the current zerker/heavy meta”, but I’m not seeing the actions that will actually do that. I see one token nerf that effects zerker and non-zerker alike, and content that reinforces the need for zerker along with a new trait that ensures warriors won’t actually lose DPS.

Ethics.4519:

Edit: Not to mention it seems they have only accounced the trait changes so far. 10% increase to wars dual wielding? Lol. As if axe/mace needed a buff.

Just giving them back the damage they will lose in the crit/ferocity nerf.

Make it look like you’re changing the zerker/heavy meta with one change, and slip the zerker wars’ “lost DPS” back into the game in another form.

Straegen.2938:

One of two things is true. Anet sets up a system that makes them money and then the purposefully subject us to said system or they are oblivious to the balance issues between server matches.

I have to say only an idiot creates an unbalanced competition then rewards participants based on said unbalanced competition. So either ANet is completely idiotic in this regard or diabolical. Hate to say it but I am leaning toward the idiotic side. As a developer I have cut them a tremendous amount of slack in the past but the first season of leagues was a horrible implementation and the second looks worse.

I really wish I liked ESO.

I’m leaning the other way. I could buy incompetence for season one, but to repeat the same mistakes again for the spring tournament takes an entirely new degree of incompetence. And this tournament even has new bad ideas on top of the old ones, that make it even worse…yet more profitable.

Incompetence just doesn’t explain it at this point. I see malice. They’ve acknowledged the balance/population/coverage issues, and claim to want to fix them. But their actions are doing the opposite.

Palador.2170:

Given that, I think there will not be a real rush to do most of these events, because all existing characters will already have those things unlocked. Only the events for the new Grandmaster traits will be locked for exisiting characters, and only those events will get rushed.

Adept and Master trait events, as well as ones for currently existing Grandmaster traits, will stay as ignored as they currently are, until some new characters reach a level to need to take them on.

Good point. While I think the decision for traits being unlocked via gameplay is a good one, they might have failed to consider the fact that this update won’t create enough interest in these events for them to actually be viable means of unlocking…even in the short term after the update.

Beldin.5498:

The question is, what exactly you have to do for that .. fine if it is all soloable, but would be bad if in the end you have to “buy” these skills maybe later from other players because you need to kill champs or do things in Dungeons that nobody else does anymore.

One of the screenshots in the announcement/article shows a trait that is unlocked by defeating the High Wizard guarding the entrance to Arah. I’m sure there will be a surge of players doing all these events for unlocks shortly after the update hits. But good luck getting that later on.

The only time many events like that are done on my server is with the post-reset world boss train. Which is nothing but a mess of lag and overflows that I have no desire to participate in.

The ‘option’ to buy the unlocks from an NPC will likely end up being the only option for many of us to get some of the new traits.

This is actually a pretty severe nerf to low levels. Looking at a level 20 alt in mostly green gear (a couple blue pieces), the total attribute points the character has is under 900 (base stats+gear+traitlines). That’s adding up power, precision, vitality, toughness, condition damage, and healing power. There is no investment in +crit, or boon/condi duration, so no need to calculate their point values.

After the upcoming changes to traits, this character will lose 200 of those attribute points (each traitline boosts 2 stats by 10 points per point spent). That’s over 20% loss of attributes/effectiveness, which is the about the same difference as using white gear vs blue gear.

Olvendred.3027:

Speaking of new players… no traits at all until level 30? Sounds like early levelling just got worse.

Yeah, I feel bad for anyone leveling under this system. Some professions are really lacking till you get into the master traits, which are now backed off till level 60. And having zero access to traits, and the extra attribute points they bring, up till level 30 might actually be worse.

Peetee.9406:

Retsuko.2035:

It still motivates players to move over to the more stacked servers right now, simply because they don’t want to get the weapon after the 3rd tournament, but want it now.

That’s the point.

They want you to stack. They want you to transfer. They want your money.

If it was about building a better game, we’d have account bound WXP by now. But we don’t have it because it doesn’t make them money. Money money money money money…..

That is exactly the problem. This tournament reward system and the decision to have this special pre-tournament pricing (800 gem cheap ticket into max rewards in bronze league) only reinforces my opinion that wvw is viewed as a vehicle to encourage gem sales through world transfers.

They claim to want to balance population/coverage, and are even adjusting the pricing on transfers to a better system (after the tournament starts). But the server-based rewards, pre-tournament sale, and ability to change server during the tournament causes many times more damage than that single good move fixes. I just can’t believe that they do really want to fix the problems, when all they will do is offer a token “fix” along side so many decisions that are obviously bad for wvw.

Seven Star Stalker.1740:

And also, perhaps more serious posts outside the CDI and less joke posts or posts that are just generally pointless.

This is something I’ve seen quite a bit of. Posts in threads that are just praise, silly discussions, or minor/visual bugs, while there are very active threads on serious issues that go without a dev response for weeks. Even something as simple as “We’re aware of this, and looking into it” is many times better than no response at all.

If you’re going to take the time to post silly things, which shows that you are reading the forums, then at least acknowledge the real issues being brought up. The message I get from that particular silence is that they don’t want to acknowledge the problem, because that gives the expectation of them actually fixing it. We know they read the forums, we know they see the threads, so there is no reason to pretend they don’t know about the issues. Acting like the problem doesn’t exist is just unprofessional in my opinion.

Mossy Gargoyle.3274:

But what is even more disturbing is that a patch that crashes the client for almost all Mac users was even released. Surely basic testing would have caught this.

There are a disturbing amount of bugs that make it into the live version of the game, period. Gamebreaking/progress blocking bugs that should have been obvious had even a single testing playthrough been done.

Calae.1738:

Now I can clearly see a sharp decline in interest in the game.

Not really, the Escape from LA video has even more views than the previous two living story trailers (Edge of the Mists and Origins of Madness). The low view count on Battle for LA is likely due to fact that it was a continuation of the LA invasion story arc, while the Escape From LA video was announcing the start of the chapter. There are more factors to the number views than interest (or lack of it) in the game.

Calae.1738:

The last Guild Wars 2 living story trailer had about 6000 views. 6000. For an MMO that’s quite sad. The community doesn’t care about the story or the game.

I think it reflects how much the developers care about their own game.

Not sure what trailer you’re referring to, but the latest LS-releated trailer on their official Youtube channel (Battle for LA, 3 weeks ago) has over 40,000 views. But it is a sharp decline from the trailer before that (Escape from LA), which has over 130,00 views.

Ethics.4519:

All that’s left are people’s feelings and anecdotes, so that’s what is mainly being described.

My own observations are that many areas have definitely seen a decline in players. On my server Queensdale champ trains are often only a few players, or non-existent. World bosses like the Frozen Maw or Jungle Wurm (Caledon) sit untriggered for an hour or more, at times when there were previously at least 15-20 people around to complete them. I’ve seen Claw of Jormag or Shatterer fail many times in the afternoon (EST) because there were simply too few people around to complete it within the time limit.

I would like to be able to explain that by saying that everyone was in LA, but even LA was nowhere near overflow during these times, either. I don’t know where these players have gone, but they are surely not where you would have found them just a month or two ago.

uknortherner.2670:

Jamais vu.5284:

uknortherner.2670:

Anets’ biggest mistake it seems was creating these forums in the first place. Those people enjoying the game will probably never bother posting here, so all that’s left is a lot of noise from people who think the devs should cater solely to the conspiracy nuts, gankheads and the so-called “hardcore”.

That would fix the actual problems the game has how? Or was your post just some fanboy venting?

Ah, yes, the usual conspiracy nut standby – the “fanboy” scapegoat. If my answer is not to your liking, or vaguely appears to support the game wholeheartedly, then I must be a fanboy.

Or is it the fanboy standby – the “conspiracy nut” scapegoat? (/sarcasm) We could go in circles over that, but it would get us nowhere.

There are players that are perfectly happy with the game, and never post.
There are players that are very unhappy, and never post.
There are players that continue playing till their unhappiness get to the point where they stop playing, and never post.
There are players that are happy, and do post.
There are players that are unhappy, and do post.
There are players that have already stopped playing, yet still post.

The only factor really coming into play on whether or not someone posts, is how much they actually care about the game and how strongly they feel about their opinion of it.

I attribute the silence partly to Anet just having no idea what they are doing in many cases. There have been too many complete reversals in direction, and there doesn’t seem to be any unified course for the future of the game. Defending the decision for WvW ranks to be important character-based progression for so many months, then suddenly deciding that it was against their design philosophy. Rebalancing a dungeon’s bosses to make it easier, then only a couple months later totally redesigning the boss encounters to make them more difficult. Announcing changes to promote build diversity and deviation from a zerker-only meta, then adding new content that is explicitly designed as a zerker-only DPS test. Just pick a design direction and stick with it. Flip-flopping around in a feeble attempt to appease everyone at once only results in everyone being displeased.

I’m not sure how they can communicate anything to us when they can’t even decide on a general design direction or philosophy among themselves. Their statements are contradicted by their actions, and their actions contradict their other actions. I don’t know what is going on within Anet, and I’m not going to start throwing around wild theories or conspiracies. It doesn’t really matter (to us players) what the source of the issue is, just that it needs to stop because it only damages the game and the company’s reputation.

Alice.8694:

mrstealth.6701:

Alice.8694:

Hybarf Tics.2048:

I’m not leaving but these days I have a hard time staying online more than half an hour.
My main grief as I call it is ANet’s law of silence. I remember the days before launch when ANet needed a player base, there was a multitude of articles, blogs, pictures and videos.

Yup and then players took everything written there as gospel and started demanding that they adhere to their demands.

This is why we cannot have nice things.

You can’t place all the blame on the players, when there were many things stated, then Anet later did the complete opposite. I think account-bound to character-bound dyes is one of the best examples of this. Other changes in design have had very split opinions among players, but account-based dyes was a popular idea that I think most liked.

I certainly can and I will… You cannot have an open development discussion with players if your ideas are going to be interpreted by the players as ABSOLUTELY SET IN STONE. Not to mention all the people who had no interest in GW2’s future and instead used these buzz topics to try and create negativity around the game.

The very nature of game development means that what you planned won’t always turn out exactly how you intended it to be. Arenanet’s dev blog was full of romanticizing language and when making a game your ideas either translate or they do not.

There is quite a difference between something getting changed to not be exactly how it was stated, and something being changed into the complete opposite of what was stated. There has been some undue rage from the players over some instances of the former, but the latter falls back on Anet for making statements about game mechanics that were still open to such drastic changes.

And there reason for the change was pretty much the same as their reasoning for keeping WXP/WvW ranks character-based. They defended and explained that decision for many months, yet still decided to go ahead and change that to an account-based system sometime in the future. Players have generally been happy with that decision to change WXP/ranks, despite it being a complete 180 on previous statements. How players feel about the mechanics is very relevant to what should, or shouldn’t, be changed.

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

I’m not sure the disadvantages that came with the previous Account-wide dye implementation would really be so engaging to the community.

Those disadvantages could have been changed, and would likely been much more accepted by players than the decision to make them character-bound. That is the type of change I was referring to above. The point stated in that blog post that stuck with players the most was the idea of account-based dye unlocking. Anet would have been better off to work on altering and tweaking the other aspects, and maintain that key feature.

They might have been making a decision that they thought was good for the game, but in the end what is good for the game (and for business) are decisions that keep your customers happy. The entire controversy could have been avoided, and players kept happier, if the dye system was as it is now, but with a lower drop rate and the unlocking being done account-wide. They would also be likely to sell more dyes in the gem store had they kept that idea.

Alice.8694:

Hybarf Tics.2048:

I’m not leaving but these days I have a hard time staying online more than half an hour.
My main grief as I call it is ANet’s law of silence. I remember the days before launch when ANet needed a player base, there was a multitude of articles, blogs, pictures and videos.

Yup and then players took everything written there as gospel and started demanding that they adhere to their demands.

This is why we cannot have nice things.

You can’t place all the blame on the players, when there were many things stated, then Anet later did the complete opposite. I think account-bound to character-bound dyes is one of the best examples of this. Other changes in design have had very split opinions among players, but account-based dyes was a popular idea that I think most liked.

If you’re hyping up an aspect of the game enough to dedicate an entire blog post to it, you should expect players to be upset when one of the key points of that blog ends being completely false at release or some point after. I know that games change over the course of development, and even after in the case of MMOs, but making changes that contradict previous statements and views on game design need to come with very good reasoning and explanation for the changes. I don’t think the dye change explanation did much to ease the players’ dislike of the change.

Sometimes the changes come from a more business/profit-oriented viewpoint, which does make the entire situation more difficult for Anet to explain, and the players to accept. If you are trading in your word (or your credibility/honesty, whatever you want to call it) for what you (or someone else) considers a good business decision, then you are probably going to anger customers. The problem is that even though the decision might seem good for business/profits, angering your customers is a bad business decision. It creates an environment where it’s simply easier to say nothing, and keep making business-minded decisions instead of making promises you’ll be expected to uphold.

I would like to see this change, so we can return to a situation where they can make statements about their upcoming changes and decisions, but we aren’t dealing with that Anet anymore. I expect the trend of silent business-minded decisions to continue to prevail over promises of popular decisions. It’s just so much easier to defend/damage control a silent change, than to regain the trust after a broken promise.

King Amadaeus.8619:

TESO….

D3:RoS as well, but ESO will be the one that retains more players over time. D3 has improved a lot, but it’s still not an MMO. ESO might also be tempting for wvw players, since it’s faction-based alliance war should offer a better balance than wvw.

Jski.6180:

KarlusDavius.1024:

Does hacking still exist?

Then seasons are always a bad idea as they will never be fair.

So all online games even some offline games are a bad ideal then? Because there haxing in them and they will never be fair because of that.

Your right though nothing will ever be fair so why play any thing with any type of real competition other then the fact that its fun.

There is certainly a lot of room for improvement in their efficiency at removing those using hacks/exploits. The same goes for fixing terrain/structure glitches or exploits that have been known and reported for months. Fixing these problems should be a higher priority than releasing a competitive tournament that will only lead to more abuse.

The seasons/tournaments just create instability across the board. Too many people being temporarily lured into wvw for rewards/achievement points, and too much moving around between servers. There needs to be time to balance populations and design a tournament that won’t encourage bandwagoning.

For every server players stack because it’s likely to do well in the tournament, even more servers suffer losses of players or entire guilds. Servers are then locked into a league they are either too strong or too weak to compete in. After the tournament, we’re left with servers rising and falling through the tiers, creating even more unbalanced matchups.

If we want any sort of stability in wvw, what is needed are reward systems that do not encourage changing servers. Rewards that you can’t just get by moving to a server that will do well in their league. Server placement based rewards, and sales designed to encourage transfers do the opposite.

The new server transfer pricing setup looks like it might help balance populations, but not in a tournament where moving to a lower-placing server within a league means getting lesser rewards. And this pre-tournament sale is just encouraging the bandwagoning of bronze league servers, with the cheap ticket into the top end or possibility to freely stack a bottom tier server. One good decision is being totally countered with two very bad ones.

What should have happened was changing the transfer prices a month ago, throwing out this transfer sale, and reworking the rewards to be based on personal achievement instead of server placement. But creating a system like that doesn’t encourage people to pay Anet cash to move server.

KarlaGrey.5903:

mrstealth.6701:

I think GW1 just had a better looking weapons in general.

Actually, pretty much everything on GW1 is better looking – weaponry, armor and also the characters have style and are recognizable – far more thought was given to the design, so you don’t ever come across a blob of random fluff slapped on top of what is actually a rather lacklustre basic design.
And don’t even get me started on the sheer amount of recycled armor skins, in particular helmets (easiest to notice in pvp).

One big part of the style in GW1, and this is a huge factor in pvp that GW2 and many other MMOs lack, is class identification. Every profession had their own sets of armor, but beyond the individual sets was an overall style that made each profession identifiable, even if you had never seen that particular set of armor before. In GW2, it can be difficult to tell a profession from appearances alone. Unless you see skill effects or recognize a weapon set that is unique among an armor class (light armor with greatsword can only be mesmer), you need to target the player and look at an icon or active effects on them. It’s also worth noting that the profession icons were not shown on enemy players in wvw for quite a long time.

There are even situations where it is difficult to determine what class of armor someone is wearing. This is most likely with the tiny asuras, simply because it’s much harder to notice the differences in an armor style when the whole character is so small.

Repeating that concept of unique identifiers in GW2 would have been much more difficult, though. With each of 5 races, 2 genders, and 8 professions getting a set, every new armor added would require a lot more unique artwork/models/textures. I was going to multiply that out, and say 80 sets. But human and sylvari armors are the same, and norn and human females share a lot as well. Males different between human and norn because norn males have a very different physical structure.

I think Anet wanted profession to not matter as much. They thought they had made a game where you could take 5 necromancers into a dungeon, and have a similar experience (similar challenge, difficulty, etc) as a party of 5 warriors. A game where it didn’t really matter what the profession of someone you were about to attack in wvw was. It’s pretty obvious that the game did not work out to actually be like that. Profession certainly does matter quite a bit, and ease of identification in a pvp situation (primarily wvw because of numbers) is an important factor that is lacking in GW2.

KarlaGrey.5903:

mrstealth.6701:

It’s not that I see something wrong with it, just an interesting bit of gamer psychology. As long as the owner gets some form of enjoyment/satisfaction from their item, its serving its purpose.

That is not really game-specific.

I didn’t mean that as something specific to GW or GW2. I know it happens in plenty of other MMOs (I’d guess nearly all of them) and even games outside the MMO genre. Any game where rare items can be obtained and shown off to others in some way.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Psychol.5783:

About skins, I think GW1 had more pleasant weapon looks, in GW2 weapons are too fluffy. Dragon Bone Staff, Frog Scepter, BO Staff, Voltaic, Obsidian Edge, Eternal Blade – these were my favourite

I hated most of those skins though . . . of course, I don’t like much of the Gem Store skins either. Except for Dragon’s Jade and Tormented, I haven’t really felt a burning need for any.

I didn’t like most of those, either. Actually, I hated quite a few of the really rare weapons in GW, but there were a lot of other nice looking skins. Eternal Blade was ok, and the Obsidian Edge was decent but too 2d/flat looking. But there were some really great looking weapons available, even if they were more common. I think GW1 just had a better looking weapons in general. I’ve had a hard time finding even a single skin I like for some weapon types in GW2.

Strangely enough, I really do like the GW2 version of the Voltaic Spear (Al’ir’aska) despite never liking the GW1 version. Maybe it’s just because it’s an underwater/melee weapon instead of a thrown land/ranged weapon. Or holding position makes its odd size/balance seem more normal.

I’m not sure if this is really related to the topic, but I think it could be something that Anet realizes and uses to make their skins more desirable. I noticed more than a couple times in GW1, and I’m sure this happens in other similar games, that some skins were wanted simply for the fact that they are rare/valuable. Weapons that were very rare, and had a very high demand, then due to updates/changes/new content releases became more common/less valuable and were suddenly unwanted. A weapon that could easily be sold for 500k+, then in just a few weeks can’t even be sold at 5k and is usually called “ugly” by the majority of players.

It just makes me wonder how many people are walking around in MMOs with weapons/armor they don’t even like, just because it’s worth a lot of money (whether that’s ‘fake’ video game money or real-world cash). I don’t really understand that way of seeing things, if I don’t like something I don’t buy it, especially if it’s very expensive. I’m happier with the variety of cheaper (and in my opinion, better looking) weapons/armors that I have now, than I would be with a couple legendary weapons.

I do see how developers could use that segment of the playerbase that holds high value/prestige over looks to their advantage. It would be easier to engineer a weapon to be rare, than to design one that is liked by wide range of people. It’s not that I see something wrong with it, just an interesting bit of gamer psychology. As long as the owner gets some form of enjoyment/satisfaction from their item, its serving its purpose.

Lydell.8713:

Brutal Arts.6307:

The audience for GW1 isn’t the audience for GW2. This game is aimed at the people that would spend hundreds of dollars on farmville or other casual facebook games.

So, you spend hundreds of dollars on farmville or other casual facebook games?

There are clearly a lot of people that do spend money on games like this. The top grossing apps list on Google’s Play store is full of free games. At least some of which are games that put a pointless time barrier in front of you, then offer you the chance to pay and get around it. For example, playing a level spends some of a slowly regenerating “energy” bar, and once that is empty you have to stop playing and wait for it it fill back up, or pay real money for an instant refill. Other games are selling cosmetic items or other shiny digital trinkets.

I can definitely see the similarities in these games’ business models and GW2’s business model. Selling cosmetic items is exactly the same, and even before release Anet was describing the gemstore as offering “time-saving convenience items” (Mike O’Brien’s own description). The time-saving items offered by the gemstore (cash/gem>gold trade, XP/karma boosters, etc) aren’t nearly as extreme as the common mobile game tactic of ‘wait or pay’, but the core concept is similar; you can hand over cash in order to progress faster.

These mobile/Facebook games do have a lot more leeway in ‘getting away with’ these business strategies because the games themselves are generally free. Games that require an upfront purchase are usually, and rightfully in my opinion, held to a different, higher standard. I would say GW2 is definitely above the standard of many of those games, but I believe there are still some questionable aspects to the business model.

I think both GW2 and free mobile/Facebook/casual games do rely on the same type of gamer. Not necessarily the ones that are willing to throw large amounts of money at the game, but the gamers that are willing to pay for the chance to progress faster, or to just skip ahead. This is essentially paying money for absolutely nothing, or even paying to intentionally shorten/reduce the amount of gameplay time you get out of a game. Comparatively, ingame/digital items do seem more reasonable in many cases because you do get ‘something’, but the prices attached to those can quite often be absurd.

Another week, and we have a couple new items in the gemstore. A relatively small addition, $10 for a couple new armor skin pieces. But exactly what you get for this price takes me back to something I did mention earlier in this thread, the value Anet places on gemstore items. $10 sounds comparable to other skins that have been added in the past, but that is also the same price as full sets of armor.

I support Anet’s right, and need, to make money with the gemstore. Creating new content and items costs money, and selling some of those items is a good way to make money back. But I do have to question the value they associate with some of these items. The real cash cost of Black Lion weapon skins is one thing I feel is way beyond acceptable, but you can at least get those via key farming. With these new glove/shoulder skins, it’s a gem-only purchase of 2 pieces of armor, for the same price of a full 6 piece set.

It’s not the random chance/lottery price attached to weapon skins, it’s an absolute “we feel these 2 pieces are worth as much as 6 other piece sets.” Looking at this from the standpoint of a consumer getting value for their money, it just doesn’t seem right at all. From the preview in the gemstore they don’t really look like anything special, just another armor skin. So why do these 2 pieces cost as much as 15 other sets in the store?

I see it as a bit of both trying to help balance(free moves to low ranks), but still having a tempting cash grab sale (800 gems for T6).

Getting a bit back more on topic, it is nice to see new weapon skins that are gained through actual gameplay rather than being purely gemstore items. It’s just a shame that for many players getting those requires either coughing up gems to transfer, or waiting till the next season comes around to earn enough tickets to actually get them.

I’ve been idle in DR for a bit this morning, and one of the same ranger bots I saw yesterday is back. It’s moved around a bit between the guild banker, and standing just outside the banker room. The odd thing is that it’s represented a couple different bot-name guilds in the time that I’ve been here.

I’m almost hesitant to report for botting, because it’s not actually doing anything. But the behavior is definitely suspicious.

A guild moving to Blackgate (or anything in T1) won’t have much impact or help that server do better, because they already have 24/7 player coverage/queues.

Moving to a T6 server where queues are less common and coverage gaps exist, a single wvw focused guild, or even just decent amount of individuals, can have quite an impact. Plus these servers are already clearly the top of bronze league, while SBI was on the lower end of silver league before their transfer surge happened for season one.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

I think that’s wrong. I think I know why the pricing is that way – to encourage people to move for free to “less populated” servers to try to even it up. Same reason they don’t mind huge queue times on top-tier servers – they want people to spread out through the other servers rather than cluster in the top three.

That’s the one part of the deal that I think is good, but the tournament rewards incentives work against it. You can go there for free and get away from queue times or massive zergs, but that means getting less reward from the tournament.

0 gems and get the smallest reward vs 800 gems (or about 65g) to get the biggest reward. Having a near guaranteed chance at an ascended weapon (I’m assuming the “Mistforged” are ascended) helps make that a bit more worth the gold.

zen.6091:

However, I really doubt that many players are going to pay 800 gems to hopefully get more reward tickets if they otherwise don’t want to be on that server after the league ends. It’s a stupid weapon skin that tons of people are going to get whether it’s bought straight with tickets or forged with less, and you probably won’t care about it one month after you get it. The other stuff is junk many players already have too much of and regularly destroy as an annoyance drop.

The real advantage one of these free transfer servers might get is if there’s a mass organized transfer down to build up a server at zero cost for the league and beyond.

Well, the previous season saw people paying more to swap server for less rewards. And we’ve already seen population shifts since the announcement of the spring tournament. I don’t really understand it, and it’s not something I would do(been on YB since Nov 2012), but there are a good number of people that will.

I suppose it does seem a bit easier to understand, and a more reasonable choice, when you look at the fact that 800 gems can be bought for around 65g. If that transfers nets you one of the Mistforged weapons (which I’m assuming are ascended tier), you’ve saved 40g+ in materials by not having to craft an ascended weapon.

I would like to see the bottom servers end up getting a good bit of transfers, but I just see the tournament reward incentives outweighing that. Sometimes people seem willing to jump ship just by hearing the word “rewards”, even if the reward isn’t much of anything. Or maybe even thinking they can get achievements easier plays a role in the decision…I just don’t get people sometimes

insanemaniac.2456:

this thread pretty much says youre opinion is the minority. there is no wrong time to start the population balancing process. youre just in the wrong place at the wrong time, reaping the advantages of a broken system and having those advantages taken from you.

so get bent out of shape all you want, but please understand that the progress you want to stand in the way of is better for the game than the status quo you want to uphold. id recommend reading the thread a bit if you want to further understand the problem.

I don’t want to uphold the status quo at all, but the tournament will do a great job of upholding it. The 2nd pricing scheme that goes into effect once the tournament starts could actually help with population balance. This special pre-tournament sale is just promoting over-stacking the top end of bronze league. The reward system for the tournament encourages stacking the top of each tier to get the maximum number of tickets. You’ve got one good change, with two horribly bad ideas that will undo any progress it could have made.

What is standing in the way of progress is the reward system that encourages server stacking instead of rewarding personal participation/accomplishment, combined with a sale that gives the opportunity to cheaply swap and stack the top bronze league server. There is actually a good chance that this could cause one of the bronze servers to climb all the up to T2, leaving another over-stacked server at the top end till it collapses. So which T6 server is going to be the next Kaineng that climbs to near the top only to collapse back to T8 when the next tournament rolls around? SBI had a nice climb before/during Season One, and they’ve already fallen apart for the Spring Tournament.

youre just in the wrong place at the wrong time, reaping the advantages of a broken system and having those advantages taken from you.

I’m not sure what you’re implying, or what you think my intentions are. But I have no interest in reaping the advantages of this. If I wanted to do that, I would be swapping to a T6 server for 800gems instead of staying on YB. I also don’t see what advantage I’ve had taken away from me, as I have no intentions of participating in this tournament primarily because of it’s reward system that rewards high population/stacking/server swapping instead of actual participation or achievement.

If there is going to be any balance in server population, it has to begin with not rewarding players based on server ranking/placement. No matter what else you do, people are going to flock to where the rewards are the best/easiest. It’s great that they are offering transfers to tier 5, 7, and 8 for free. But who wants to actually take that offer when it means getting less Tournament Tickets?

CoffeeMakesMeSmile.8172:

The event has been changed now from what I saw on the breach maker – the fight up there is delayed so you have a couple of mins from the death of the last knight till the hologram event starts. There is even a cutscene at the start (which I guess no one saw before the patch). Should be ample time for you to load in. We even had food trays set out :-)

Ah, well that’s good to know. Nice to see they’ve improved the start, other than just the added attack.

style.6173:

@OP:

I disagree. T1 AND T2 do not need more people. This is a good way to get people to go to lower tier servers.

This is one of the best decision recently by ANET

While I do agree that encouraging transfers to lower tier servers is good, this change does come along with a tournament that encourages stacking onto servers that are already in positions to win their league.

There is also no good reason for 5-6th place in Silver League (R11-12) to have a same transfer cost as 1st-2nd place in Gold/Silver league. YB(r11) could definitely use some transfers, but who would move here when the same price gets you onto #1 spot in Silver? Or even better, you can pay 800 gems to get on the top spot in Bronze.

Encouraging stacking onto the R16-17 servers isn’t any better than stacking T1-2 even more. Those servers will simply dominate Bronze, and have a post-tournament rampage across the next couple tiers above them.

This pre-tournament special pricing needs to be thrown out, so we can just have the much better tournament/post-tournament pricing scheme right now.

It’s good that they are actively taking steps to discourage leeching, but I can’t help but think about the times I got hit by laser attacks right as I loaded into that fight. I usually don’t have long load times, and that was going into the portal very soon, along side may others. It was just really bad luck, but it’s rather discouraging to have an achievement ruined before you even get started. Those incidents alone were enough to make me not want to even attempt the achievement.

For someone that does tend to have longer load times, this change could mean a guaranteed strike at the load-in area instead of just a chance of that happening. I think this new attack should be delayed a bit longer, and repeat a few times throughout the fight. It would accomplish the same goal, with reduced chance of failing the achievement for someone that wasn’t even leeching.

Amins.3710:

Fact: Server Population does not Equate to Skill Lvl.
Fact: Just because you place 1st in Top Tier, does note equate to being more skilled, but rather just that you have more transfers.

Population /=/ Skill /=/ Rank Reward.

This is why the Tournament Ticket rewards are totally pointless, and only serve to promote server transfers. These rewards need to be based on your personal level of participation, not the fact that you happen to be on, or recently paid to be on, a server with good wvw coverage. Make the achievements harder to get, and tier the rewards based on how many you complete. The people that deserve the most exclusive wvw tournament rewards are the players that put the most effort into wvw. Not the players that abandoned their server/community to get an easy win.

But promoting staying where you are, and putting in effort, doesn’t sell gems. Having a sweet deal on a ticket into the #1 slot of Bronze league does sell them.

Snowreap.5174:

I don’t get the impression that Arenanet is trying to encourage people to go to lower servers, so much as they’re simply raising the price on transfers to the desirable servers. the idea here isn’t to encourage people to move down, it’s simply to discourage them from moving up.

There are still people that will pay the 2400 gems to get to the top of Gold or Silver league. And even if they buy those gems with gold, that still works to push up the gem demand/value, and give further incentive to exchange cash-bought gems for gold. So either way, the increased price gets them more money.

But the really smart server movers will be going for that 800 gems to get into the top of Bronze. That’s a tempting offer that will get them a large amount of sales.

This is a wvw-related thing, but it’s also related to how Anet has changed, and how cashgrabs can be damaging to a game and its communities.

There is a special pricing system in place for the week before the upcoming wvw tournament. The top half of Gold League has the same transfer cost (2400 gems) as the bottom half of Gold League(servers that have no chance of beating the top half).

The top 2/3 of Silver League also has the same 2400 gem cost. The bottom 1/3 of Silver is free.

Bronze league’s top 4 positions have a cost of 800 gems, the rest of Bronze is free.

The situation is that it will cost you 2400 gems to get top rewards in Gold/Silver, still cost you 2400 gems to get mediocre rewards in Gold/Silver, or 800 gems to get top rewards in Bronze. You can also move to a 5-6th place server in Bronze for free, and get the same mediocre rewards as someone paying 2400 gems to get into a 5-6th place in Gold/Silver server.

The really funny part is that once the tournament starts the pricing actually moves to a much better system. Within each league places 1-3 are 2400 gems, 4-6 are 1400 gems, and 7-9 are 1000 gems.

So what’s the deal with the totally different pre-tournament pricing? My guess is that they are banking on a lot of people taking that offer of 800 gems for an easy win and maximum rewards. Throwing away the integrity of the tournament (what little wvw has left) for the sake of making a quick buck on transfer sales.

Bronze league is very likely to end up with 1-2 servers that will dominate that league during the tournament. Then after the tournament they will curbstomp their way up though a couple other tiers, till they hit a point of stability. By the time the next season/tournament comes around, they’ll likey crash back down below where they started from if they didn’t stabilize into an easy win position.

This is why I stopped doing wvw. Horrible decisions like this have done too much damage to too many servers.

insanemaniac.2456:

mrstealth.6701:

insanemaniac.2456:

t2 is guaranteed no less than a 6th place finish. the top 5 servers in each league get 300+ tickets — enough for a mistforged weapon.

whats your problem with the most stacked servers being shoo-ins for the most interesting reward?

They might be getting a pass on the bad luck of 7-9 rewards, but they still have 0 chance of actually getting 1-3 rewards, yet have the same transfer cost. Who is going to pay 2400 gems to get 5-6th place rewards when you can pay 800 gems for an easy 1st-2nd place?

are you actually suggesting t2 needs to get transfers?

For the normal course of wvw, no.

But for a tournament with placement-based rewards where they are stuck in a league with the T1 beast servers…yes. They do need transfers to have any chance of standing up to those servers.

They are being put into a situation where they have no chance at winning, and then having their only means of trying to improve that situation (getting transfers) crippled.

If the transfer pricing during/after the tournament has T2 in a cheaper price bracket, why does the special “pre-tournament sale” have them at the same cost as T1?

insanemaniac.2456:

t2 is guaranteed no less than a 6th place finish. the top 5 servers in each league get 300+ tickets — enough for a mistforged weapon.

whats your problem with the most stacked servers being shoo-ins for the most interesting reward?

They might be getting a pass on the bad luck of 7-9 rewards, but they still have 0 chance of actually getting 1-3 rewards, yet have the same transfer cost. Who is going to pay 2400 gems to get 5-6th place rewards when you can pay 800 gems for an easy 1st-2nd place?

Yeah, they’ve kept a pretty good hold on the bot situation for a while now. There have been times were it was kinda bad, but it’s been good for a long time. I’ve seen a bit of a resurgence in gold PM bots lately, though. But even that has already began to decline once again.

The pricing for the duration of the tournament makes sense, and looks like a good change. But the pre-tournament pricing is a trainwreck.

For NA, it costs 2400 gems to move to the rank 12 server and get totally shafted for rewards in Silver League. But only 800 gems move to rank 16 for an easy win in Bronze League.

I’m sure Anet is banking on people realizing that they’ve got a sweet deal going to get an easy win. They’ll be making a lot of gem sale money from people moving to those 800 gem rank 16-18 servers. Just a shame that 4-6 and 10-12 are getting completely screwed over so they can make a quick buck.