Guild Wars 2

Razor.9872:

zinkz.7045:

Razor.9872:

Yes dear, a build template system can be more or less complex depending on the structure of code with the game it is in. As for nature, I doubt you can find build templates in nature.

The way my post went right over your head is amusing.

The way you think your post went right over my head is amusing.

You see this bit – "Yes dear, a build template system can be more or less complex depending on the structure of code with the game it is in. " that is entirely incorrect, because of “a build template system is not complex in nature”, you don’t seem to understand what makes certain systems inherently complex and others not, what game it is in or the code of that game is irrelevant.

Razor.9872:

Yes dear, a build template system can be more or less complex depending on the structure of code with the game it is in. As for nature, I doubt you can find build templates in nature.

My post was apparently too complex for you to understand…

Razor.9872:

zinkz.7045:

Razor.9872:

zinkz.7045:

Ithir Darkleaf.7923:

It’s a really complex system to implement…

No it really isn’t.

Yes, it really is.

No dear, a build template system is a bog standard system in most games, that this game still does not have it after 4 years is well…

Yes dear, a build template system being a bog standard system in most games does not make it simple to implement in this game. Heck, it may have been complex to implement in the other games, but it was decided to be a priority there. Taking more than 4 years to implement is irrelevant. It simply means it was not a priority for the devs.

No dear, a build template system is not a complex system in any game, it is not complex in nature.

Razor.9872:

zinkz.7045:

Ithir Darkleaf.7923:

It’s a really complex system to implement…

No it really isn’t.

Yes, it really is.

No dear, a build template system is a bog standard system in most games, that this game still does not have it after 4 years is well…

Ithir Darkleaf.7923:

It’s a really complex system to implement…

No it really isn’t.

Swagger.1459:

You can find the dev quote below on increased populations since linking and reward tracks were introduced. Good luck.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/info/devtracker

LOL

Yasha.5963:

zinkz.7045:

It isn’t P2W because the reality is GW2 is not really a F2P game, it is much more like a very extended demo where you are expected to actually buy the game if you like the game enough to keep on playing.

So are the people who bought the base game playing a “very extended demo”?

The people that bought the base game, bought it at time when it was not marketed as “play for free”, it was strictly buy to play, if a buy to play game releases an expansion then I think the expectation is you pay for it and it is unlikely you will get it for free.

Swagger.1459:

Linking is a permanent feature here. Anet is not back tracking to intentionally create small match ups.

I never said they were, I was merely pointing out that the nature of the system of ESO does indeed accommodate different play-styles better than WvW does.

Swagger.1459:

Overall populations have increased since linking and rewards…

Where can I see these magic numbers or is this you simply making up “facts”?

Swagger.1459:

they are not going back to a failed system…

The old system was a failed system, the new system is a failed system, I have no expectation other than that they will simply continue to merge servers as WvW continues to die.

It isn’t P2W because the reality is GW2 is not really a F2P game, it is much more like a very extended demo where you are expected to actually buy the game if you like the game enough to keep on playing.

Swagger.1459:

Go to the ESO and CU boards and ask them to make small scale rvr accommodations for players… The developers and players would be laughing.

ESO accommodates different play-styles better, because it is not based on an outdated inflexible home server system, you choose a campaign to play in, so if you want low population you simply choose to play in a campaign with low population, if you want to blob it up you pick the high pop campaign, if you are a guild that wants to fight other guilds you go pick the campaign where guilds go, etc.

Choppy.4183:

Where did you get this notion that wvw shouldn’t get balanced at the small scale? Do you think the PU nerf, or the history of nerfs to thieves, was due to their massively OP contribution to zerg vs zerg combat?

Where did you get the notion that nerfs to thief were anything to do with small scale WvW, thief got nerfs because for pretty much the entire game pre-HoT they were meta in PvP.

The reality is they pretty much don’t balance for small scale WvW at all, they barely make any balance changes based on large scale WvW either, the class balance in WvW has been terrible whatever scale the whole game, they spent 3 years basically balancing around PvP, they now balance around PvE raids also, WvW large or small scale is pretty much neither here nor there when it comes to balancing.

sephiroth.4217:

It’s imbalanced because of player choice…

Looking at this mathematically:

6 Mesmers:
5 are playing boon share, 1 is playing boon strip. This alone naturally creates the illusion that there is an imbalance as there are 5 mesmers overproducing boons for 1 mesmer to handle stripping alone, it does make it feel like it’s not worth it because you’re over shadowed by boon share.

Side note: There is plenty of boon strip roles, they produce less bags but there are option to play it if one doesn’t mind missing out on tagging more enemies and being mostly group support. It’s like playing the dedicated Water Elementalist, no bags but you know you’re being useful.

Even if you ARE the ONLY boon stripping person or boon corrupting person in your group, you can still be a royal pain by focusing the driver… Have you ever seen a driver go to push just as his stab was stripped?

Not really, there is simply vastly more boon spam in the game than boon strip.

Let’s start with the differences in skills, a lot of boon generation is AOE, where as really all you have for AOE boon strip is null field or well corruption, so generation > ripping in this respect.

Then you have that boon generation skills are far more common amongst the classes, outside of necro and mesmer you basically have nothing useful for boon strip (and even some of mesmer boon rip that can be used in PvP like the rip on shatter trait is useless in large scale WvW), where as every class has at least some easily available AOE boon generation.

Then you have the difference in application, take nullfield as you mention mesmers, it has a 32 sec cooldown, meanwhile revs for instance can pump out AOE boons every 3 secs, it isn’t even close, and let’s not forget you have each player’s personal boon spam on top of the AOE boon spam.

No one who isn’t terrible wants to focus fire the commander in a normal fight, it doesn’t make for a fun fight, well as fun as fights can be since HoT, also focusing one guy has no bearing on balance in large scale, that you have to single target to such an extent to make boon strip work, to overcome the ridiculous level of damage mitigation that is out there now, just shows how broken it is, and is also one of the reasons despite having a “melee” meta back that many wanted, players and guilds are still leaving the game, because if makes fights as boring as hell, it is basically the equivalent to the first season of PvP where bunkers bored everyone to death.

subversiontwo.7501:

Boon duration is directly countermanded by boon rips.

Wrong, because in WvW large scale there is massive imbalance between the amount of boon spam / boon duration available and the amount of boon rip, it wasn’t even balanced years ago when you had melee heavy meta when there was far less boon spam/duration which is why it was all about immobilize/chill back then.

SInce HoT boon spam/duration has gone through the roof, whilst boon strip has barely changed in comparison, so it is even less effective now.

Duellers are fine, smallscale is crap in WvW because the game mode is too structured, the vast majority of people on the map are in guild raids / blobs, as a playerbase WvW is the one of the least “PvP” you will find in a PvP game mode, that GW2 is cheesy as kitten already and even worse in WvW and that balance is beyond terrible for small scale, to take one aspect engage/disengage the disparity between classes / builds is horrifically bad to the point risk vs reward is completely broken, the result – very little smallscale and what there is, is generally kitten.

Olympia.5697:

Well yeah ! Good idea ! I have 2 children to take care off, a private teacher in my house for my oldest son,a plumber in my kitchen fixing stuff, and what else ? oh yeah im expecting a friend to come by so what do i do ? Lets open Gw2 and play ranked while i am waiting.. perfect !

You know.. why do you even seriously commit yourself in pvp and read pvp forums when it is perfectly fine by you for someone to go afk while playing ranked ?

If someone has a genuine reason to go AFK then yes it’s fine, if for example someone’s doorbell rings and they have to go answer the door, then yes I’m fine with that, because I’ve queued up solo for a game in GW2 and have realistic expectations in line with that, rather than delusional expectations you seem to have more in line with what you would expect if you were playing DOTA 2 at The International for a $1m.

Really if you can’t cope with other people behaving in a different manner to you, then the answer is in your hands and simply involves you taking responsibility for your preferences rather than expecting the world to behave how you want, so go find 4 other delusional people with the same views as you and queue with them.

Olympia.5697:

Don’t play ranked if u have a child around to deal with, when i play in general i have always a person to look after my 3 year old son

Either stick to solo games rather than GW2 or always queue as a premade if you can’t cope with people having to leave their keyboard at times.

People still trying to fix a chocolate teapot by widening the spout…

Blaqatak.1395:

There’s a reason he plays power Thief. It’s one of the few classes/specs that forces interesting choices. To your exact point: the player is required to manage resources, predict/react quickly to interrupt/evade, ..

Not really, that some people think power thief is an example of “high skill” just shows how clueless the GW2 playerbase is, take interrupting as you mention that, look at steal, it is low skilled cheese that the game largely plays for you, you don’t need to aim because like many skills in GW2 it is autotargeted, then you add it is instant, then you have that it is long ranged, it is about as low skilled as you can get, typical GW2.

DeceiverX.8361:

I immediately associate condition builds with people who suck too much to play the game built power and can let their crutches give them free wins.

Erm, the game is full of crutches both power and condi, or you think auto targeted skills, basically no resource management, relatively undemanding level of mechanical ability, etc make this game skillful, if you want skillful gaming why are you even playing GW2 or an MMORPG?

Sarrs.4831:

zinkz.7045:

Do you have any evidence to show that the polls included only WvW player votes, included no troll votes, included every WvW player that played on HoT release and that the statement by a dev on Reddit that more maps would be unlikely if the DBL got voted out, had no effect on the votes?

Tu quoque fallacy. Out out out.

I realise logic isn’t your strength, but it is basically the point you attempted to make, in reverse, so what is sauce for the goose..

Sarrs.4831:

So it’s a pretty basic tautological problem you’ve got here. You’re assuming that someone who has completely cut ties with the game such that they are paying no attention to any of their news releases or even the emails that ANet are sending them can still be considered a member of the ‘WvW community’.

Maybe you should read things properly, maybe if you try hard you’ll work out why the above is not relevant to what I wrote.

Sarrs.4831:

Considering they aren’t server merges and they’ve explicitly stated what the intent of world linking is- to provide you with more variation in opponents and allies- this statement seems bizarre.

They are effectively server merges and they would not have been possible for many of the servers when the game was in a healthier state, as you apparently missed it, the number of full/very high servers reached an all-time-low in the months after HoT, WvW hemorrhaged players, but please keep making excuses it is funny.

Sarrs.4831:

If you have so little faith in ANet, it begs the question of why you’re even here. Lazy emotional arguments aren’t going to win you much progress with anyone.

If you can’t cope with opposing views then why are you are even here, as for lazy arguments, the irony & hypocrisy is strong with you.

When it comes to “making progress” it is an internet forum on a gaming site with white knights, etc, you must be new if you think I have the slightest inclination, delusion or care about “making progress” here, and really there is no “progress” to be made, nothing written on this subforum will influence Anet on anything major, the only sort of thing that will do that are things like their lowest ever quarterly results for the game that NCSoft reported recently.

IndigoSundown.5419:

As to “self-selecting sample,” how would you suggest polling players who are no longer active and have no interest in keeping current? I get that you think there were issues with the polling. How would you fix it?

I don’t suggest that they poll players who are no longer active, the point is when people make claims like the poll shows what “the WvW community” really thought about the DBL they are talking nonsense because “the community” back when we had 150 man queues on EB when we had 3 desert borderlands is not the same as now, the poll was also open to everyone in the game not merely WvW players, there were threats from devs about future content if the poll did not go a certain way, etc.

Either they are so slow on the uptake that they did not notice FSP was the new bandwagon server, or conversely they are quick on the uptake and noticed FSP are the new bandwagon server so provided two linked servers so there is plenty of room for people to buy gems and transfer, take your pick.

Do you have any evidence to indicate that what you suggest happened actually happened?

Do you have any evidence to show that the polls included only WvW player votes, included no troll votes, included every WvW player that played on HoT release and that the statement by a dev on Reddit that more maps would be unlikely if the DBL got voted out, had no effect on the votes?

Sloppy strawman. Out out out.

Not really, just the reality of the situation, WvW since HoT has not been a success, now I am sure that is not all down to the DBL, there are many factors, point is claiming some hopelessly flawed poll is representative of what the “WvW community” wanted in this game is laughable when so much of the WvW community has left the game in that time before the poll was made.

There is a reason WvW is down to server merges and probably the least healthy state it has ever been in, and isn’t because they provided what the community wanted.

Sarrs.4831:

There’s something really moronic that’s also going on here; a lot of people are speaking for people who are perfectly capable of speaking for themselves.

If DBL returning were such an issue, they would speak about it, they would’ve voted on the polls. Emails were sent out detailing them.

But no, people are really happy to just make assertions and then, when contradicted by direct polling data, claim that the people polled “are not the real wvw population”.

Maybe read the whole conversation then you’ll have a clue.

If players stopped playing the game after HoT and the DBL, then they weren’t here to vote 7 months later, hence the poll is a self selecting sample, then when you add troll votes from PvE players, the effect of threats there would be no more maps if DBL got voted out, etc, well.

No but you are right, WvW since HoT has been a massive success and exactly what WvW players wanted, which is why the population collapsed to the point you’ve had what are effectively server merges. /sarcasm

Jeknar.6184:

zinkz.7045:

Not really, the vote was open to everyone whether they play WvW or not, whether they play WvW 2 hours a week or 40 hours, and really by the time we had the votes it was something of a self selecting sample, a lot of players that disliked the DBL stopped playing back when they were stuck with DBL, so a lot of the players who kicked up a fuss about it 10 months ago didn’t vote because they stopped playing or barely play, hence a self selecting sample.

If they stopped playing they have no say in how the game should go on.

The point being what the “WvW community” thinks now on the DBL and what they thought 10 months are two different things, because they are not the same community.

Furthermore it also looks pretty moronic when people defend it on that basis, when we are talking about a game mode that absolutely hemorrhaged players after HoT to the point you’ve had what are effectively server merges, and still the game (at least on EU) is far less active (comparing gold league), especially outside primeitime, even after those merges, so people standing there with their pants down saying ‘look this is what the community wanted’, just come across as ridiculous given the state WvW has deteriorated to.

PyrateSilly.4710:

This was a majority vote to have and keep BOTH maps still in play. I prefer DBL and don’t like Alpine as much, I still played on it thou.
So who voted for it? A majority of the GW2 WvW population.

Not really, the vote was open to everyone whether they play WvW or not, whether they play WvW 2 hours a week or 40 hours, and really by the time we had the votes it was something of a self selecting sample, a lot of players that disliked the DBL stopped playing back when they were stuck with DBL, so a lot of the players who kicked up a fuss about it 10 months ago didn’t vote because they stopped playing or barely play, hence a self selecting sample.

You also had rather suspect influences on the vote such as a dev stating on Reddit that they would be unlikely to work on a new map if DBL died.

Jayne.9251:

Your proposition for alliance restrictions can be easily employed to the existing server system, without alienating the existing playerbase.

Not really.

Jayne.9251:

Change for change sake is never a good idea.

Quite, however change because a game mode is poorly designed and the game mode is moribund, is an entirely different matter.

Jayne.9251:

What you are proposing STILL doesn’t resolve the core issue: stacking.

Erm, the second system does indeed resolve stacking and the first greatly reduces the issue it causes, hence both are superior to the broken WvW system.

Jayne.9251:

In any event, this debate is academic, at best. A poll would best determine results.

Nearly everything on this forum is academic, especially when it comes to actually fixing fundamental issues, WvW still has the same basic flaws it had at launch that caused many of the big guilds that came here to play WvW specifically to quit within the first year.

Anet are terrible at addressing the real issues, which is why WvW is in the state it is in, even with what are in effect server merges (destroying your beloved concept of server identity, at least for some servers) the game is a pale shadow of what it was, especially outside prime. (at least on EU).

I have no delusions that Anet will make major changes, they will just come out with band-aid fixes as usual and continue to try and milk what is left of the playerbase.

P.S – I play ESO and Overwatch for that matter far more than GW2 now, which now mainly consists of me logging in, then logging out. (adn no ESO is not perfect, but in terms of an RvR system it is superior)

P.P.S – Server identity has been a joke in this game ever since they effectively removed servers as far as most of the playerbase is concerned.

Jayne.9251:

Any time I hear someone reference EVE, I recall long, drama-filled stories about people manipulating the system to their own benefit and not caring about anyone else but themselves or their immediate circle.

Which is nice, but irrelevant, and doesn’t alter that games like EVE that don’t have individual servers can have stronger communities than games like this with separate worlds/servers, and therefore the idea there is no community/identity without being attached to a world/server is utter nonsense.

zinkz.7045:

What? Do WoW or EQ franchises not use servers?

Which part of a “myriad of reasons” rather than specifically down to server based worlds are you are having difficulty with?

zinkz.7045:

Ok, how are you going to prevent faction bandwagonning/stacking? How will factions prevent people from doing exactly what they’ve been doing with the server system?

If you cannot prevent stacking, then what’s the point of factions? It’ll result in the same situation, just with different lipstick.

Under some systems you don’t need balanced populations as much, because those systems can handle the negative effects on the gameplay much better.

For example if you have a game like ESO with 3 factions that uses a campaign system, where players/guilds choose one campaign of several to join for the duration of the matchup, then if say the red faction overall has the least players, it can still get fun competitive matchups by stacking a couple of campaigns and have the same numbers in those campaigns as the more populous factions.

It also has other advantages, in that guilds that like to fight can all join a certain campaign, those that like to do the equivalent of PPT can join a certain campaign, those that like a sparsely populated type of gameplay can go join a low population campaign, etc, all things WvW struggles with due to its rigid system.

Now if you want a system that produces better population balance, one example is you can use an alliance system of guilds, you prevent stacking by limiting the max numbers in a guild, solo players can get assigned to a general alliance guild based on their friendlist, etc, this way you are dealing with much smaller units and can dynamically assign players/guilds to an alliance for each matchup, to provide a more balanced match, obviously in a system like that identity/community is built around guilds, much in the way it is in WvW for a lot of players whose “loyalty” is to their guild, not whichever server they happen to be on at that time.

Aezyr.5304:

EVE online isn’t “population” balanced.

I didn’t say it was, I was using it as an example in response to the notion that you can’t have community or identity in other systems that don’t use individual servers.

Jayne.9251:

Factions will reduce identity. Loss of identity means less attachment to game. Less attachment to game means players fairweather to other games,

Without community, identity, population balance becomes moot. Because there will be no players.

Not really, for example EVE Online is based on player made alliances and has a far stronger, far deeper community than the rather superficial WvW communities will ever have, and as for WvW “communities” please, you are in the minority, most veteran WvW players (those that have not quit) have swapped servers multiple times. (including a fair number of “loyalists” that make up your little community)

Jayne.9251:

There’s a reason games like WoW and EQ franchises are still chugging along with paid monthly subs after 10-plus years.

As does EVE Online, and in all 3 games there are a myriad of reasons why they are still chugging along, claiming that it is down to using an individual server based system in two of them is laughable.

Jayne.9251:

Couple that with the fact that ANY rework of faction/server is useless without resolving bandwaggoning (aka community building/attachment), will result in the same scenario we are in today. Factions in no way will magically fix anything. It will only serve to alienate the loyalists and drive them away.

To quote a pointy eared chap ‘the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few’.

If you think the only way to have “community” in a game is fixed servers, you are misguided, if your “community” is any sort of “community” worthy of the word then it would cope fine with adapting to another system. (not that you need worry, this Anet, they only do band-aids, not actual fixes, which is why WvW is in the state it is in)

And yes factions / alliances of guilds, etc do fix things, because they more flexible systems, you can create balanced matchups far more easily because you are dealing with smaller units, or even if factions are imbalanced you can deal with it better by doing things like campaigns so even the weakest faction can stack a campaign or two and play on an equal footing in those, unlike the joke that is WvW where for most matchups over the course of this game they have been foregone conclusions over by Monday morning simply due to imbalanced numbers or where players have to take a week off because they are in a dead matchup.

Jayne.9251:

Population balance is on the players. You can’t put this on Anet. Players have created this issue.

Not really, putting aside any real incentive/disincentive for the bandwagoning aspect, population balance has been an issue at all tiers and goes way beyond “bandwagonning”, in fact imbalances have often been far worse in mid/lower tiers where “bandwagonning” was not really an issue.

The simple fact is server vs server is a bad design for RvR type game mode, factions / alliances are far better because they are far more flexible at producing balanced populations, but also at handling imbalanced populations to give better gameplay, server vs server is literally the worst most inflexible design you can have.

DeceiverX.8361:

…less than a power scrapper will … every profession except the ele can burst just as quickly with the same or more damage

Thanks for the laugh, power scrapper has crappy burst, that is slow as hell and has probably the worst damage application in the game when you aren’t forced to fight on a point, if you can’t burst someone better on thief than a scrapper you should reroll.

Dayra.7405:

There is and will never be balance with server anymore.

There has never been balance.

See – https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/We-will-have-to-roll-back

Ceesa.1350:

If you want to generate more PvE interest in WvW…

Why would you want PvE interest in WvW, sure there will be a small percentage who actually find they enjoy WvW, but on the whole PvE players are just kitten.

Aeolus.3615:

WVW is useless for most classes builds…

Not really, most classes have a place, the only classes that really lack (to varying degrees) in zergs & guild raids are the medium armour classes.

But anyway, the point is it is not “another story” for scrappers in WvW, they are actually far worse in that game mode than PvP, where their kittenty damage application is mitigated to a large extent because so much is about fighting over capture points.

Aeolus.3615:

mov.1246, scrapper on WvW it is another story…

The “story” in WvW is that scrapper is one of the most useless classes – for guild raids some guilds take 1, maybe 2 (others take zero), where as every single guild takes guards, revs, necro, etc (and in greater numbers), for zergs they are totally surplus to requirements, for roaming they are medicore in a group and solo they are trash becasue scrapper damage application is literally the worst in the game (which got even worse with the nerfs to things like hammer 5).

SpellOfIniquity.1780:

I agree that the linking failed and I agree that servers need to be balanced better but this isn’t strictly a GW2 problem. It happens in other games with similar systems and much of the fault is placed squarely on us, the players, for manipulating that system.

Server based systems fail in every game, they always become imbalanced, it is literally the worst option for an RvR type game, alliances are better like in EVE Online, even a faction system like in ESO is much better as even when factions get imbalanced, the weakest faction can still stack a campaign have fun it that, you also get the benefits that you can play campaigns suited to how each player wants to play – e.g one campaign is often stacked with guilds, another zergs, etc.

vesica tempestas.1563:

interesting. However this thread is about now not the past and in the elementalist forum, and has nothing to do with chips on shoulder or problems the other classes have, that’s why those classes have dedicated forums too to talk about their issues.

Nonsense on three fronts, firstly much of the complaining is about aspects that have been there for years (just as issues for other classes have been), secondly that other classes have forums is irrelevant it is this thread making absurd claims about needing a dedicated dev or showing a massive amount of ignorance about the actual reality of the “tragic” state of ele in comparison to other classes and thirdly despite the self pitying chip on the shoulder attitude ele is still overall in a better state than several other classes, it is still extremely strong in PvE, is still wanted in WvW, and still decent in PvP – go see – https://www.reddit.com/r/gw2esports/comments/4xyipw/competitive_class_tier_list/ .

So yes, the overwhelming theme of this thread is self pitying, ignorance.

vesica tempestas.1563:

The thread boils down to…

This thread boils down to a load of ignorance from people who apparently have no clue about this game and think ele is somehow hard done by, which is laughable when you look at the last 4 years across 3 game modes, ele is probably the most overprivileged class in the game, it has been permanently good (much of the time the best) class for PvE, in WvW it has been perma meta and in PvP it has veered between UP and OP, overall across the game it has fared better than every other class except maybe guard.

Compare that to say necros in PvE who were the worst class for pretty much 3 years, or WvW where rangers/engy/thief/mes are basically between surplus to requirements or had 1 or 2 niche spots on a raid for 4 years, or even PvP where lots of classes have experienced months out the meta just like ele, some a lot longer than ele like ranger between spirit ranger nerf and HoT launch.

Oh yes, and this crying about bad skills like conjures, etc, really how ignorant do you have to be to not know that is the case for nearly every class, you think spirit weapons are good, gadgets, etc.

People crying about how hard done by ele is or how the special snowflake needs its own developer is just pathetic.

Madman.6912:

zinkz.7045:

Zintrothen.1056:

Maybe if they put a tiny bit of thought into what PvP means, they wouldn’t have added PvE. It’s kind of one reason I don’t like Legacy. It has PvE… Same thing with Forest. Temple is great because it has other objectives that don’t involve any PvE at all.

Maybe if you put a tiny a bit of thought into things you wouldn’t make nonsensical statements like the above, hint – there is no PvE in any of the PvP maps.

of course there is, you are fighting NPCs instead of PCs, that’s called pve

Erm, no, if you think when you are killing lord it is about “fighting” the lord, rather than competing against the other team (them trying to stop you) then well…

The ‘v’ in PvP stands for versus, which means competing against not specifically ‘fighting’, none of the “PvE” in the conquest maps is about beating the “PvE” it is about completing an objective whilst the other team try and stop you, that is PvP.

Zintrothen.1056:

Maybe if they put a tiny bit of thought into what PvP means, they wouldn’t have added PvE. It’s kind of one reason I don’t like Legacy. It has PvE… Same thing with Forest. Temple is great because it has other objectives that don’t involve any PvE at all.

Maybe if you put a tiny a bit of thought into things you wouldn’t make nonsensical statements like the above, hint – there is no PvE in any of the PvP maps.

Zelulose.8695:

Wrong LoL offers 1 vs 1, 2 vs 2, 3 vs3, 4 vs 4, 5 vs 5, 6 vs 6 with 3 vs 3 and 5 vs 5 being official.

Different team sizes aren’t different game modes, different game modes would be classic & dominion (which got dropped because barely anyone played it, like I said LOL got big on basically one game mode, and even largely one map).

Arguing about skillcap in GW2 is like arguing about who will come top of the special needs class.

Yes game needs even more powercreep and needs even more of skilless mechanics like unblockable….

Zelulose.8695:

This needs to happen for the game to grow.

It’s a four year old MMO that isn’t WoW or EVE Online, it isn’t going to grow, regardless of what they change it will remain in the same overall trend of decline like 99% of MMOs do at this stage.

Zelulose.8695:

Limited game modes attract a limited player base.

You mean like the 65 million active players in LoL that for the most part have played the same game mode, even the same map…

Jeknar.6184:

Ranger is problably the profession with most bad players per capita (Some of them don’t even know they have a weapon other than Longbow)

Most WvW players can’t even dodge pin down, most WvW players regardless of profession are just varying degrees of bad, and that’s in a game where the playerbase is already way below average as a whole…

Dawdler.8521:

zinkz.7045:

Like the odd guy playing ranger matters, 99% of the time a zerg wipes it will be down to things like the commander making bad decisions or the 5 melee that die on the first push because like most WvW players they basically can’t play the game (and in a game where the level of the playerbase is as terrible as GW2 and the game is fairly low skill, that is saying something…), etc, it isn’t going to be the three guys on rangers, that are the issue.

Thats not really the argument against them though.

To take your 5 dead melee/3 rangers example, people (especially commanders) would argue that if it had been 8 guardian instead in melee on the commander, they wouldnt have died. And those 3 rangers didnt matter because you had no use for them with 8 unkillable guards instead.

The five dead melee in my example are useless rallybots that keep dying when they shouldn’t, regardless, or think they are in a focus party 2500 units from the commander stomping someone when they should be on the tag, the point was it is players like that or simply fact the commander is bad, which decides what happens in 99% of cases, rather than 3 guys out of 50 playing ranger.

As for having three guards instead of 3 rangers, that is only an issue in terms of squad when the squad gets full, in which case fine kick the rangers (though normally if the squad is full you have someone start a ranged tag to make room in squad anyway), it’s not like the rangers are normally going to switch to guard, you are not magically goign to acquire 3 guards instead of rangers in your blob, most people playing ranger, engy, thief, etc already know they are less effective than other classes for zergs, but they are playing them because that is what they like and they are playing in a casual blob in WvW that is a competitive joke, not DOTA 2 for a $1m at The International.

Dawdler.8521:

In the end, commanders will choose the path of least resistance.

I agree, but there is a difference between kicking some guy on ranger on sight, and doing it when the squad is full, and like I said in most cases if your blob is losing fights, then the reason is the quality of your blob overall or the commander isn’t up to it, and 3 rangers either way will not change the outcome in 99% of cases.

Like the odd guy playing ranger matters, 99% of the time a zerg wipes it will be down to things like the commander making bad decisions or the 5 melee that die on the first push because like most WvW players they basically can’t play the game (and in a game where the level of the playerbase is as terrible as GW2 and the game is fairly low skill, that is saying something…), etc, it isn’t going to be the three guys on rangers, that are the issue.

XTR.9604:

…but WvW is a competitive game mode..

Thanks for the laugh, 10/10.

bigmonto.4215:

I don’t know why people say GW2 is dying, it is consistently being the top 2 or 3 most played MMO in the US.

As for PvP, there are actually more people playing it then any time before due to the league system. Of course the more people played the more complain you are going to get, so it feel like the world is going to end.

So Anet have published stats, can you share them with all of us? (pls tell me you are not naive enough to be talking about an 8 (?) month old PR quote made shortly after the expansion launched, F2P was added and leagues were introduced)

bigmonto.4215:

I don’t know why people say GW2 is dying, it is consistently being the top 2 or 3 most played MMO in the US.

Given the vast majority of MMOs including this one don’t give out stats, for the obvious reason they are all in long term decline and the industry is still so amateurish transparency has not become a thing, how do you come to that conclusion?