Guild Wars 2

Erasculio.2914:

Conclusion

Guild Wars 2 failed. By ArenaNet’s own definition of success, “Is it fun?”, the answer often is “no, it’s not”. Good for them that the community of grinders that fill this (and all other) MMO are not really interested in fun.

My advice is: play through the tutorial, and then go explore the world. Do all the interesting dynamic events you find, admire the beautifully crafted world, listen to all the ambient dialogues, dig through all the lore you can find; do that from the starting areas all the way to right before you enter Orr. Ignore hearts, the personal story, dungeons, and definitely ignore the “lesser” aspects of the game (trading, crafting, item acquisition, etc). Once you have explored everything other than Orr, leave the game and never look back.

I don’t understand. If the game is “failed” why are you advising people to play the game and have fun?

By your own conclusion you believe that the game was successful and that people should get it and play it.

Scarlet.1937:

If a WvW map has a hypothetical maximum number of players set at 100, can server A have 98 players while servers B and C have only one player each? Or do the queues favour those servers with fewer players inside? Thanks!

In your hypothetical Server A can have 98 players and will begin to queue once it goes to 100. Servers B and C will have one player each and will not experience a queue until the 100 limit is reached.

IE, Server A can have 100 players and 20 in queue.
Server B can have 100 players and 3 in queue.
Server C can have 2 players and no queue.

They won’t.

15chars

Shadowlancer, perhaps you should post this in the Black Lion Trading Co forum instead. There you should get some great responses and the main economist for Guild Wars 2 may even chime in as he sometimes does in discussions there.

If you are interested in the health of Guild Wars 2’s economy or even the gold to gem exchange then that is a great place to get information.

Drakh.3128:

I realize FA’s casual approach to the meta game annoys TC to no end but please realize that many of us don’t care for the mega zergs and long queues which are the necessary evil of getting to and “winning” T1 for a week.

This is something I don’t understand. I have never ever seen someone from TC complain about “FA’s casual approach to the meta game” let alone be annoyed by it. The only time it is brought up seems to be by people from FA after they’ve been losing for awhile.

Why would TC players be upset or annoyed by this? That doesn’t make sense.

So instead we just focus on good fights and having fun. I’m not meaning anything derogatory toward TC for focusing on the PPT aspect of the game, it is certainly your prerogative to do so. Stacking your server to avoid any coverage gaps is the key to advancing the meta game as everyone already knows and it will give you the best chance of advancing to T1. I wish TC luck in their quest for tier 1, but please stop the rhetoric on how FA “should be” playing the game. Many of us have either already been through that or already understand the toxic nature of that mentality. After all, this is just a game, have some fun.

The “rhetoric” usually (I can’t think of a single time when FA didn’t bring it up first but I don’t read -everything- here) initiates with FA players who talk about how great they are and how amazing they are and then they try to denigrate TC players for playing for points. If you want fights go to the outposts and the fights are there. That’s how TC plays. They attack and defend – it’s pretty easy to find them.

I don’t know how many TC players care about Tier 1. Some probably do and some don’t. Most people on TC play for fun and for fun’s sake. They follow the ‘rules’ of WvW in that they fight over contestable structures which, in turn, leads to points per tick.

FA can play WvW however they want that is not a problem and I don’t think anyone from any other server is suggesting otherwise. To think that people are trying to tell FA how to play the game is being very defensive and, really, why would you care anyway if they did? (which they aren’t)

If your goal is to have fun then have fun.

Doomdesire.9365:

For those who don’t know what a Thief is, he is someone who strikes, and can escape easily. What does a thief do in real life? Steal and then get the hell out of there. 7/11 robbers don’t stay there for the police to come, do they?

Strange, I thought thieves stole stuff and didn’t get involved in fighting… you know.. being a thief.

7/11 robbers don’t, typically, run in attack the shop keeper, beat them up and then run away. If anything they threaten and then run away.

I think the comparison you are looking for here is “assassin” in that it is someone who goes in, hits very hard (kills), and tries to escape.

If someone goes into WvW then they should expect to die.

I wouldn’t feel bad if someone killed me even if they killed me multiple times over. That’s my fault.

In your situation, I can understand how you would feel after the fact. Personally, if someone bows to me and I bow back (or dance) I won’t attack them. In jumping puzzles I don’t attack anyone unless attacked first as well.

But, that’s me and I don’t frown upon others doing it. This is, after all, the pvp environment where people go to, well, pvp.

Trismegistos.3046:

my point is that there should be big battles, just not blob vs blob.

What’s the difference in your mind?

Oh gosh! Video game history time.. yay!

Trade Wars back on the BBS days. Log in every day to play the turns

MUDs including Rivers of Mud (ROM) and then other weird ones: Armageddon MUD (a roleplaying only mud that still runs to this day), Pkmud (player kill mud – it was all about killing one another all the time), and oh gosh.. I can’t remember the other names. There were a few of them.

I played in the Ultima Online beta test even had my own little roleplaying bit for that game. I think I called it By the Fire?

WoW beta as well.

I passed on Everquest and on Meridian.

In terms of this match-up, I think that anyone who complains about another side being “pretentious” or doing 2v1s or zerging or whatever and then turns around and tries to claim we only play for the fights is being disingenuous at best.

If good fights are all that matter then nothing else would matter. But for most of the people who claim good fights are all they want they do so after complaining (whining) about something else first.

I’m all for good fights but I’m also all for competition. For better or worse, points are the measuring stick of competition in WvW. Unfortunately, points don’t take into account any population imbalances so that leads to weirdness in point values but it is what it is.

I believe that there are some FA players who truly only care about the fights but history points out that most of the FA players who try that claim on the forums do so after whining about something else first. Plus the chest thumping about being the best and elite pvpers.. sure.. okay. No worries there. Good for you to be so amazing.

Anyway, old games! What fun I’m tempted to track down my screenshots from those days just ’cause and then bask in the memories.

Ratto.1572:

tell me when you collect 55k ores…

And I say that compensated

The amount of Ore needed to “break even” with the pick purchase is a false economy.

People who buy it for looks of ‘cool’ factor don’t need to have it “pay for itself” but even if you are trying to justify the purchase in terms of an “investment” or as a “cost savings” you can’t pin it to the value of gold.

Instead, you need to look at the amount of time being saved by having it. With a single unending pick you don’t ever have to buy new picks. Buying new picks takes time. Owning an unending pick will save you time over the long run. If you have ever run out of picks while mining and had to go to a merchant or summon a merchant to buy more you have you know that having a never-ending pick is hugely worthwhile.

Even if you always manage your picks perfectly you are still spending your time in the game purchasing them when you could be doing other activities that make gold that would pay for the purchase of the pick.

Anyway, the whole idea of trying to tie the value of the gems to gold and then claiming it takes 4000 or 5000 uses to have it “pay for itself” doesn’t work. What if gems cost more tomorrow? Or less?

I think the pick is great value for what it is. Plus it has awesome cool factor!!

Conner.4702:

Using a flawed analogy doesn’t really help your case. Try this one.

You are driving on a road and see a shortcut that will shorten your trip by 10 minutes but that road is blocked off except for a hole just big enough for you to pass. Does that mean you can make use of it? It is there ready for use so from your point of view you would be okay with it.

I thought Fyrebrand’s analogy was pretty spot on. What you are suggesting, Conner, is the use of a bug and that is also considered exploiting but the definition of exploiting also involves using in-game mechanics to do something that the game designer didn’t want and somehow the player is supposed to know that.

Mirta agrees with the analogy even though they are attempting to quibble with the value. 600 or 60 it doesn’t matter as the end result is the same the person is simply following the rules in good faith only to discover that following the rules was wrong and, somehow, their own fault for doing so.

I believe Mirta is attempting to suggest that the magnitude of the speed limit differential from others should make it obvious that something weird is up with this particular road. As in, if all the speed limits for 1 lane roads is 60 km/h everywhere else but this one is 600 km/h then we should probably be wondering why that is.

This is definitely a fair point but the responsibility okittennowledging the mistake and rectifying it resides with the road designer who put up the 600 km/h limit not with the driver. So, if the police officer were to stop Freybrand the conversation should go more like:

Freybrand: Good day Officer, what seems to be the problem?
Officer: A good day to you as well kind sir. I hope you are well (after all, this is a -Canadian- police officer) today. I was wondering, do you know how fast you were going?
Freybrand: I believe I was traveling at 500 km/h?
Officer: That is what I have you clocked at. Going somewhere in a rush is it?
Freybrand: Why yes! Hockey Night in Canada starts in 15 minutes.
Officer: Goodness! You’re right eh? Well, the speed limit sign is incorrect so please slow down. The correct limit is 60 km/h.
Freybrand: I was wondering about that so thanks for the heads up Officer!
Officer: My pleasure. I hope our team wins tonight eh?
Freybrand: You betcha.
Officer: Have a pleasant evening and please watch your speed.
Freybrand: And you Officer. Thanks for letting me know and being great at your job.
Officer: You are welcome! Now get out of here and watch the Senator’s reach the playoffs.
Freybrand: Yes sir Officer! I’ll drink a beer for you.

And off Freybrand drives while the police Officer goes back to his cruiser and pulls out his steaming hot cup of Timmie’s coffee.

Vayne.8563:

Kasama.8941:

I don’t farm nearly enough to make the price of this worth it. I can get 25 Orichalcum Mining Picks for 1 gold, that’s 2,500 uses. More then enough to last me a long time. Also, drawing more attention to yourself in WvW while you’re gathering a node, is a bad idea.

Unless you have a bunch of friends stealthed nearby and use it as a lure.

That’s the wrong way to look at it. Look at it this way: How LONG does it take you to resupply your picks? Do you ever run out of picks while mining? Do you have to go back to a vendor because you forgot to pick up picks? Even if you include pick buying as part of your routine in a town it still takes time to go to the vendor and buy the pick.

Buying the gem mining pick is just a matter of convenience and will save you TIME. How much is your time worth to you? How much gold do you make in the game per hour?

The problem with these calculations is that they are using a variable that is constantly in motion in their calculation for return on investment.

You cannot do that in this situation.

The price of gems in terms of in game gold constantly changes. If I buy a pick with gems I bought back in September I’d be spending a total of what? 6 gold? If I buy the pick next week and 100 gems cost me 50 gold.. what then?

The only way to determine a return on investment is via a relative value based on TIME. How much time does it take to buy new picks? How much time is used to travel to a merchant and back to mining?

If it takes 24 gold to buy the pick how much time does that take? Is there an average gold per hour valuation that can be used? If you generate 5 gold per hour that’s just under 5 hours to pay for the pick. The assumption would be that if it cost 100 gold to buy the pick then the gold per hour rate has possibly increased to 20g per hour.. IF the price of gold holds steady to in-game inflation and I don’t think that it does.

But, hey, we’re all making up numbers anyway so why not?

Five hours of game time (or no hours if you buy directly with gems with real money) would take how long to “make back” from regular mining without having to spend time replacing picks.

If it takes a minute to buy new picks and equip them (I think a minute is reasonable but this assumes that you don’t have to go out of your way to buy new picks ‘cause you forgot to and ran out in the middle of nowhere) then that’s 5*60 = 300 pick purchases to recover the time.

That’s half the value that toxmocker posted.

But, the reality is that someone might buy two or three sets of picks at a time. Or maybe they forget to buy some picks and have to spend five to ten minutes trekking back to a vendor and back. Or maybe they summon a vendor (that has an opportunity cost as well) to buy the picks or… whatever.

At the end of the day, the value of the pick cannot be determined by a return on investment calculation based on the current gold price for 800 gems. Instead, each person needs to decide for themselves if the convenience of having the pick is worth the price to purchase it.

And this is why the definition of what is an exploit is needed when initiating a discussion like this. Everyone has a different view of what an exploit is and what isn’t.

Usually the definition of a game exploit goes along the lines of using a bug or game mechanic in a manner that was not intended by the game designers. Of course, there is one huge problem with this definition: how can we, as players, know what the game designer intended?

My personal views:

Moving into a position that an NPC cannot get to and cannot damage you while being able to damage it:

that’s an exploit.

I happen to agree with this since it appears to be doing something that prevents game mechanics from functioning properly. But, I can also understand why someone would not think that this is an exploit after all the game not only allows for it but in some locations the design of the environment almost seems to encourage it. In some games doing stuff like this is part of the game design on purpose. So, is this an exploit? How do we know? I believe that it is since I don’t think that the area designers intended it to happen BUT how do I know? Maybe they decided to put an unreachable by NPC spot in just to allow for this? Since I don’t know I wouldn’t call someone out for doing it even though I wouldn’t do it myself.

Theoldman.6483:

If there is a Mesmer on top of the water falls in lions arch that is teleporting other players so they can get to the jumping puzzle chest without do the jumping puzzle is that an exploit?

Mirta.5029:

exploit. Both the player using it and the mesmer doing it.

For me this isn’t an exploit since it is clearly “fair use” of the portal skill. If the game designers didn’t want for it to happen they would have made the jumping puzzle a no-portal zone. But, I can also see the reasoning into thinking that it could be considered an exploit.

For every example listed I can see the reasoning either way to consider it an exploit or not one. The only entity that can give us the definitive answer is ArenaNet since they are the only ones who know how a particular situation was designed to be.

Is speed clearing dungeons an exploit? I have no idea. Did the designers of the dungeon mean to design into the level an optimal path? Or did they mean for people to clear the entire dungeon each time? I tend to believe speed clearing is an exploit at a general level since, usually, dungeons are not designed to have most of their “context” by-passed but in some dungeons the intent could very well be just that so.. who knows? I don’t.

As players we can’t decide what is an exploit or isn’t. Some things may seem obvious to be an exploit like using a clear bug (glitching through a wall for example) but most things aren’t. How is someone to know that a bottle isn’t meant to be infinite? It could be the dungeon reward. What about a cheap weapon? Maybe a game designer put it there one purpose.. we just don’t know.

I would like to see a list of things that ArenaNet has decided are exploits in an easily accessible place but that’s my preference. I’m a believer in open communication.

Crazylegsmurphy.6430:

Perhaps I wasn’t clear enough. MY fault.

What I was suggesting is, would you pay for additional one-on-one support for gems/money?

So, for example you were having game crashes and couldn’t sort them out. You could pay ANet for a “Second Tier” customer service. Because you’re paying for it, you get a dedicated customer service rep, with more power to do things than the standard rep.

For the standard problems, customers would still have access to the current “free” customer service.

Still No.

That still provides an incentive to ArenaNet to introduce bugs into their releases to fish for the “one on one” service offering. Further, it provides incentive to ArenaNet to reduce the number of resources made available to the “free” option of support in favour of more resources available for the paid “premium” support option.

Edited to add: When has a business unit EVER thought logically about the impact of decisions made in a bubble? Short term revenue = money in. Long term revenue = potential money that may or may not happen. What looks better in a report?

“We were able to increase revenue 302% this quarter due to our premium service offering.”

Or

“We are projecting a possible increase in revenue over the next four quarters. Our forecasts suggest that this increase may be within the vicinity of 302%.”

I think the market speaks when it comes to whether or not Guild Wars 2 has more “stickiness” with gamers over Guild Wars 1.

In under a year, Guild Wars 2 has generated over 3 million sales (as of last official count in January).

Guild Wars 1 had 1 million sales in the same timeframe.

That means that Guild Wars 2 has been 3x more popular than Guild Wars which also means that Guild Wars 2 has resonated better with gamers than Guild Wars.

Guild Wars 2 continues to sell at a solid pace which is good since it means more development time for Guild Wars 2 to continue to sell the game.

By the end of 2009 the Guild Wars “franchise” had sold 6 million “units.” I find it very interesting that NCSoft releases the sales figures like that for Guild Wars since it implies that they are counting each “expansion” of the game as another sale of the game. Guild Wars: Prophecies sold 1 million units by September 22, 2005. After that, NCSoft starts including expansions as additional sales to their figures. So, by June 19, 2006 there had been 2 million units solid of the Guild Wars franchise (by this point Guild Wars had released Prophecies and Factions).

So, basically, this means that Guild Wars 2 is definitely far more popular than Guild Wars was and, as such, ArenaNet has got to be doing something right. While I don’t think that the game is perfect as such it is a lot of fun and a good romp.

I am happy I bought the game and would continue to recommend it to people.

Edited to add some sourcing: http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/NCsoft

One thing that I really like about Guild Wars 2 is that each class has its own flavour and style of gameplay while leveling up.

Personally, I had more difficulty leveling a warrior over a thief. I really did not “click” with the warrior playstyle. Amusingly enough, I found that playing a necromancer was awesomely fun and “easier” to me.

Further, I had an easier time with an elementalist than I did with a warrior. The Guild Wars 2 warrior and I just didn’t jive and that’s okay with me. :p

As such, I don’t agree with the original poster’s premise nor do I think this thread really has much to do with the original claim of general class imbalance but, instead, is an attempt at a buff thief thread. tsk!

Since a comparison was made with WoW – for the life of me I had a hard time leveling a mage in WoW. My warrior in WoW was soooo much easier. I even wound up being a raid leader on my warrior in WoW. In WoW different classes definitely had different play styles and because of that some were easier to level than others for different people. My rogue in WoW was awesome for me but a friend of mine wasn’t able to bring a rogue past level 20 without huge frustration.

awe extender.1908:

I know that hacked accounts are used to run bots and exploits, but I simply don’t understand why some (regular) players risk their own account by doing exploits?

Anet can easily track your moves and hits really hard with no mercy (perma bann), which I strongly support. We all remember the snow-flake bann avalanche.

But why risk a perma bann for an account that you have invested hundreds of fun playing hours?
If you are going to ask why people do something you need to define the something.

What do you consider an exploit in Guild Wars 2?

Ps. Don’t exploit! The Unmerciful Hammer of Bann hits hard!

If you are going to ask about something that doesn’t have a common definition you need to define that something.

What do you consider to be an exploit in Guild Wars 2?

No way.

As pointed out, paying for support in a business model like Guild Wars 2 would mean that the incentive for ArenaNet would be to include bugs in releases.

Terrible idea.

darkwombat.3695:

Dan Mathews strikes again. All he does is post about how this game sucks. I have seen this over and over.

He is obsessed with this game even though he does not play.

Why would you hang around a message board of a game you don’t like? That’s almost WORSE than playing a game you don’t like…lol

I dunno, there can be entertainment had through posting on forums and if that is fun for him then he is having fun with the game.

What an awesome necro!

The brilliant thing about it – this is still the same situation as it was when the post was originally made.

Guild Wars 2 will constantly “lose” people. Happily, Guild Wars 2 will constantly “gain” people as well. Plus people who “left” will come back on a semi-periodic basis.

Kudos to Devata.6589 for the necro.

salluks.6017:

I think Anet still doesn’t realise the potential of WvW.

Look at any MMO site forums and u will see Camelot Unchained and TESO constantly in the news,

Anet had a a great opportunity at launch to get people into WvW and it was really fun that time as most of the servers were full and had ques all day and night,

i wonder if we will ever see such days again.

I don’t think it’s that. WvW is clearly very popular and drives a lot of the retention of players for Guild Wars 2 as a whole. The more people who are retained via WvW means more guilds retaining members in PvE as well. WvW is like an “end game” for Guild Wars 2 and has a great impact for player retention.

But, I don’t think that ArenaNet knows how to monetize WvW. For ArenaNet to spend resources on enhancing / developing WvW they need to figure out a way to monetize it in a matter that does not destroy or ruin WvW. That’s a tricky thing to do.

Until WvW starts providing a significant income stream for ArenaNet it will not change significantly. There won’t be any large updates or any kind. There -might- be tweaks but that’s about it.

The design lead for WvW has done a really bad job at championing WvW to the execs and for figuring out how to make money off of WvW.

The way that WvW plays out is actually not bad – after all it’s still going strong since release and many of the servers have queues just to get into matches. That’s a great accomplishment for the original team that designed WvW. They made some choices that I don’t fully agree with but I can’t argue with success – it works.

Until ArenaNet figures out a way to make money from WvW it will not change in any significant manner. WvW will always remain on the “back burner” and it will be a secondary (or tertiary) priority for ArenaNet.

In terms of how to monetize WvW: this has to be done on a consumable level (I’m thinking WvW only chests and WvW only keys to said chests that contain WvW only outfits, weapons, and dyes) that encourages players to pay money for things that DO NOT impact the WvW combat. In other words, skins and cosmetic items = good while boosts to hp, damage, timers, etc = bad.

I’d love to see more focus on WvW from ArenaNet but I don’t think it will happen until ArenaNet figures out how to generate income directly from WvW.

I think that it is fun when I play.

I don’t play that often so it isn’t a “grind” to me.

Over the years my play style has changed. I no longer care about getting the best best best best best best best best items if I have to “grind” for them. I -only- play for fun. If I am not having fun playing a game then I’m doing something wrong.

There is nothing wrong with using periods in chat.

What drives me nuts is when people don’t capitalize or use “shortforms” for words like you (typed as “u” – gosh, really, you saved about a second by not typing the y and o)… goodness gracious that drives me bonkers.

I think the comment is indicative of culture though. I got used to having a period put in automatically at the end of a one sentence emote from MUDs that I played on. That, in turn, slowly led me to stop putting periods at the end of my first sentence in a chat.

Funnily enough, when I type two sentences then both have periods. Every time.

As it is now, sometimes my first sentence will have a period and sometimes it won’t.

But, does a period at the end impart a sense of arrogance? Perhaps to those who don’t do it and feel threatened by someone who uses “proper grammar” online.

Israel, thank you for updating this thread. I, for one, was curious as to what would happen. I’m glad that it worked out!

Haldunius.7864:

I just honestly don’t believe this about TC. KN has some good guilds and have provided some good GvG’s. TC barely GvG’s. The few times they have it has gone very poorly. These are times when numbers are even. You can’t hide behind walls or show up with twice the numbers and brag about steam rolling a few guys. It’s about who’s “better” because the baddies die. If you are genuinely curious and believe a certain group is “competent”, then put it to the test.

It doesn’t really matter what you believe about TC. This is a statistical reality.

Average players make up the majority of a population group. Most players are average. Average players will make up 68.2% of the population. How do I know that? This is standard deviation. If you have 100 people 68 of them will be varying degrees of average. What this means is that within this group of players some will be better than others and some worse but, as a grouping, they make up the largest number of the population and, well, they aren’t spectacular one way or another.

13.6% of people will be above average and 13.6% of them will be below average. The 13.6% of players could be defined as ‘good’ players.

Above the good and the bads come the greats and the terribles. These players make up 2.1% of the population respectively. So, out of 100 players 2 of them will be great and 2 of them will be terrible. Yes, it’s fun to call everyone terrible but the reality is that most players of anything are average at it and only a few are terrible.

Then, beyond this group come the ultra-elite players. And this group makes up… 01%. Yep, in 100 players there may be ONE who is super-duper-amazing.

I can understand “server pride” but one server is about the same as another server when it comes to player skill. There are definitely differences in culture but in terms of skill one is about the same as another. There might be a very -small- difference in overall server skill but in WvW I haven’t seen it. The most differentiating factor between the servers is morale (which directly impacts population in WvW) and culture (which directly impacts morale).

The biggest thing when it comes to server ranking is population. Servers need 24/7 coverage to be a tier 1, they need 18-20 hour / 7 days coverage for tier 2, and it drops steadily after that.

Culture does have some impact on results when all is equal as does the ability of the commanders to lead the average players but we’re not discussing this. We’re discussing small groups of “elite” players.

But, I know this won’t change your mind. You’ve already decided to believe that TC players are all bads and that you have elites. That’s okay It’s your own personal belief and that’s cool. You can continue to believe yourself to be awesome and I’m sure that you are. As long as you’re having fun along the way then keep at it!

Hero thief! 15c

Bursts.1540:

Those players consider winning as wiping the other server. From judging your post you play for ppt and coverage am I right? Just differences of opinion. See you out there in your zerg ball.

I like posts like these. They make me laugh.

Lots of people on FA run around in a ‘zerg ball.’ Lots of people on TC run around in a ‘zerg ball.’ Lots of people on KN run around in a ‘zerg ball.’

So what?

There are crews on TC that specialize in small-scale pvp that ‘wipe’ FA zergs. There are KN groups that specialize in small-scale pvp that ‘wipe’ FA zergs.

There are groups on FA that specialize in small-scale pvp that ‘wipe’ TC zergs. And, you know what? There are groups on TC that specialize in small-scale pvp that ‘wipe’ KN zergs.

At the end of the week there is one metric that matters: was it fun?

All of the chest thumping, whining, and revealing of conspiracy theories that is done just makes one side look sore. Sore loser, sore winner…. it doesn’t matter. Just sore.

To me, it looks like the week went awesomely well. One server FA started out strong and petered out while another TC battled it out and overtook the lead. KN had a quiet week but that’s to be expected (in my view) after a few strong weeks. WvW burn-out is a real thing.

I always find it interesting to watch the general “feel” of a server as the match progresses and how their morale holds up.

Jayne.9251:

As for the second part .. lol I don’t RP and have been on TC since launch. So far I still have my TC residency card.

Shh! Everyone on TC roleplays. It is known.

Jayne, are those cookies good? I’m tempted to try out that recipe this weekend!

Thanks!

Oh, and Ren, I hope your transfers to TC are willing to roleplay. TC needs to retain its unOfficial roleplaying server status after all.

sPvP is easier, in theory, to monetize than WvW. They have those tournament ticket thingies of whatever they are.

The sPvP system was designed from the get go to be an income generator plus eSPORT!! ESPORT!! OMG!! ESPORT!!!!!!

Seriously, someone over at ArenaNet / NCSoft has a thing for eSports and sPvP was supposed to be an incredible eSport offering. I have no idea how that has turned out or not. Somehow it seems to me that this is more of a NOT then a success. However, it’s clear that was the thinking.

WvW is incredible, it works as it is, and it isn’t well monetized. So, from a business perspective over at ArenaNet there is little to no reason to dedicate any resources to it. Resources cost money. WvW as it is doesn’t bring in money.

Therefore, put the resources where money is made – PvE.

I wish that ArenaNet would figure out how to monetize WvW in a manner that would not destroy or fundamentally alter WvW. I -want- to see Guilds having a greater function in WvW (guild halls off of SM perhaps) just… something more. But, until ArenaNet figures out how to generate a significant income stream from WvW it will be ignored since it works as it is so why mess with it?

Seriously, since the game’s release WvW has remained popular. Of course, I think it could be sooooooooooooo much better but that’s me and they haven’t asked me for my opinion or thoughts on how to improve it.

Here are the priorities I would pursue as lead:

Monetize WvW: Create a focus group amongst the testers (I’m assuming that there are internal testers) and figure out a way to start monetizing WvW in a manner that does not break it or cause any harm to the authenticity of the experience.

I, personally, believe that WvW is a fundamental element of the Guild Wars 2 experience and needs to be constantly updated / expanded upon. But, to do that, it needs to be a primary money making channel for the company otherwise it isn’t worth doing unless the argument can be made as a loss leader.

I would work on increasing the functionality of current regions in the game. I would expand the random encounters in the different zones for max level characters and see about improving level scaling so all characters could potentially be involved.

I would increase the Guild aspect of the game: Guild Halls – yes; Guild Wars – yes; Guild Contests – yes; more Guild Communication options – yes.

I would investigate how difficult / viable it would be to introduce new dye options to the Trading Post that provide glow or particle affects to items. I would increase the range of hair styles available in the Trading Post. Basically, I would expand the trading post options significantly.

Finally, I would get the ‘end game’ zones in the game to expand and become more dynamic with more random events and quests. More is good. These quests / events would lead to other zones (existing zones) which then links to the above priority of continuing to increase the use of existing assets.

Armour skins are significantly more time consuming then weapons.

With weapons they do one and it’s done. A new greatsword is a new greatsword.

For armour if they do, as an example, a light armour now they have multiple equipment parts to do plus race specific designs then gender specific designs.

So, new armour stuff takes a ton of time which is why I suspect we’ll only see new armour skins show up in the trading post where the cost to design said items can be recovered or in new expansions where the cost to design the armour skins is covered by new purchases or returning players who decide to buy stuff from the trading post.

Still, I’d love to see more. More is good. More options to express individuality in an MMO is always good.

You may as well be asking why there are asura or any of the races in the game. Or why is there science in the game? Or magic systems? Or political systems?

Religion in the game is just part of the back story. It provides depth, context, and ‘flesh’ to the game world. All cultures on earth have developed some kind of religion so it makes sense that cultures in another world would develop religion as well.

Ruprect.7260:

You are delusional if you think people will suddenly break up into small groups if AoE limits are removed. If you think that by removing the limit that a small group would have a better chance against the zerg you are so wrong and you should feel bad. The small group would never get close enough to the zerg to hit them. The zerg is here to stay, if you want small group PvP go sPvP.

I don’t think removing the cap to AoEs and doing -nothing- else would be a viable option. If caps were removed from AoEs then a new set of counters should be added to the game. Skills / spells that limit the effectiveness of incoming AoE damage so that a zerg could, if there were enough people doing it, counter incoming AoE damage.

This would option up tactical options. Do you negate AoE damage? In doing so you are not doing damage yourself. Do you try to kill the AoE damage dealers? Do you try to out-DPS them? Do you move?

Why can’t necros REMOVE circles on the ground? Why can’t templars have a shield bubble that reduces incoming AoE damage by 10%? With enough templars, you could negate the incoming damage or, at the very least, reduce it to manageable levels. Rogues could provide some sort of counter measure as well. Basically, each class that can do AoE damage would also have a counter AoE ability.

This type of counter would add another layer of complexity (skill) to zerg battles. But, it’s way easier just to cap AoEs and be done instead of trying to figure out how to provide counters without making one set more powerful than another.

I agree with the zerg being there to stay. Regardless of what mechanics are introduced people will group up to form zergs. The only way to avoid this is a hard population cap. But, why would you? zergs warfare isn’t a bad thing unto itself. The issue with it is that there aren’t enough options for players within a zerg to feel like they are doing something other than attacking.

I think that ArenaNet should focus on expanding the things that a zerg can do. As more players form up provide systems for structuring the zerg (perhaps introduce role designations, sub commanders, group bonuses, group defenses, etc etc) instead of trying to remove something that will never go away. Still, all of that is development time and costs so why would ArenaNet bother doing it?

WvW doesn’t pay the bills. They’d need to find a way to better monetize WvW to justify doing this sort of thing and so far they haven’t displayed any imagination or desire for doing that. Monetizing WvW is tricky because if it is done wrong it would destroy WvW. WvW as it is now is popular, it works, and it’s easy for ArenaNet.

They really don’t have much incentive to mess with it or to devote resources to improving it.

Ruprect.7260:

I think it is pretty clear what unique means. The above post makes it very clear. 3 of the biggest MMO’s out there clearly use unique equip as the ability to only have or use one of that item. What is the problem.

If the game needs to babysit everyone we are going to have a lot of annoying warnings in game and when that happens everyone just mindlessly skips them and they no longer serve their purpose.

I made the unique equip mistake in Rift, once, then never again. Unfortunately it is the best way to learn a lesson.

The problem is that unique in Guild Wars 2 isn’t unique. If you can have multiple in your possession why would you think that unique means the same as another MMO? In most other MMOs you would be PREVENTED from buying a second unique item.

Because the game treats unique differently it opens up the situation that the Original Poster got into: making a purchase in good faith based on what the feedback that the game environment provided.

Since unique items are not unique (you can have multiple) how do you know, at this point, that unique doesn’t mean what it did in Diablo? In that you could equip multiple of them? You don’t.

There is no way in the game to figure that out prior to trying to equip a second of the same “unique” item. Sure, we can say, “but it’s obvious” except that it isn’t. In Guild Wars 1 the term meant something else as well. So, how is it obvious when the most common behaviour of a unique item isn’t what happens in Guild Wars 2?

The limit on AoEs is something I’ve never fully understood.

I think it’s because of how sieges work in WvW – with everyone, more or less, forced to cluster around the gate the defenders would have a huge advantage if AoEs did not have a limit.

That is the only logic I can think of and I don’t agree with it.

A better solution to AoE damage would be counter AoE abilities to protect groups from AoEs (reducing or even, potentially, limiting damage for short periods of time) but I suppose it was easier just to put a cap on AoE and move on.

Maybe there was a PvE reason behind the original decision? Like, to prevent someone from gathering up 20 NPCs and then AoEing them down? Hmm.. could be.

I still don’t like the decision.

A lot of posters have claimed that the term “unique” has some sort of de facto meaning – in that the use of it is consistent across MMOs.

Well, I decided to check this and here are the results from the most common MMOs:

WoW – Unique: You can only have one copy of a unique item in all of your inventory, including what you have in the bank. If you have an opportunity to acquire another of the same item then you will be unable to.

Note: You can ONLY have one. Period.

Aion: Doesn’t make use of the term Unique.

SWTOR: Doesn’t seem to have unique items. At least according to their manual.

Lord of the Rings Online: Unique Items

There are some items that are so rare, so special, that you can only have one of them. These are known as “unique” items. If an item is listed as unique in its description, you will not be able to own a second one on your character.

Rift appears to use the terminology: Unique Equip

EVE Online doesn’t have unique items.

Those are the -major- MMOs and the term is -not- used consistently across them. Even WoW the most popular MMO uses the term Unique differently.

As such, anyone who is arguing that one should just “know” what the term means because it is used everywhere… well, you’re wrong. There is no standard definition for the term in MMOs.

Unique in Guild Wars 2 needs to be defined clearly within the context of the game. Having to leave the game to find out what it means is bad design. Using the /wiki command (seriously? who really makes use of this command?) to find out what unique means is NOT an adequate mechanism. Why would anyone who sees the term unique think to themselves: oh, I should check the wiki to see what this means.

At the end of the day this is an issue of bad game design on Guild Wars 2’s part and, as such, the OP should get their purchase refunded. I think additional information in the purchase confirmation regarding unique would be advantageous – at least the game would be trying to inform the user about what it means and if the user decides to ignore it then, yes, it would then be the user’s fault. As it is now it is Guild Wars 2’s fault.

Another option would be to have a buy-back feature although that does not solve the underlying issue of a lack of clarity within the game itself.

Perhaps a contextual tutorial or information screen upon acquiring one’s first unique item is another option. “Congratulations you have just acquired your first unique item! You can only wear one of a unique item.” Or whatever.

There should definitely be a warning.

If the item is “unique” then why is it that a second one can be created while the person is in possession of the unique item?

The onus and responsibility in this case rests squarely upon the shoulders of the game designers. If one can only wear one of something then that information should be made available clearly and obviously.

The user should not be required to use esoteric commands that they’ve probably never used with weird syntax that isn’t clearly laid out in the first place. I don’t go around checking the wiki for every item I pick up nor do I think I -should- have to do that.

If there is an item with an unusual property I expect the game to let me know. This is good game design and good UI design. Hiding information or forcing the user to go out of their way to find something out is not good game design.

I would even consider buying a makeover kit just for access to more asura hairstyles.

Please please please please please please please please do this.

Dozens more!

Thanks.

As of today, 100 gems costs 2 g 36 s 80 c to buy.

Gem prices are interesting to look at.

Out of curiosity what is the current gold to gem exchange ratio?

Why try to penalize grouping up in larger groups?

Why not provide new things that zergs can do? Provide mechanics that allow zergs to structure themselves more efficiently and add more interaction that zerg vs zerg vs zerg warfare can do.

People will zerg. This is a natural human desire.

Winning a melee fight is all about who has the greater numbers combined with technology. In WvW everyone has the same tech so combat becomes who has the most numbers.

Adding penalties to zerging will only negatively impact WvW. Instead, go the other route, and add tactical and strategic decision making to WvW. Give people in a zerg MORE things to do so it becomes more enjoyable.

They need to add stuff to the Black Lion Trading thingie that has WvW requirements so WvWers will buy them.

Anet makes its money from purchases through black trading thing so until they figure out how to monetize WvW better WvW will be understaffed and low priority.

There are a lot of players who engage in WvW which is great but that doesn’t pay the bills since the Trading post doesn’t cater to WvW very well.

I think that there should be a kit to allow the enemy to see your title. This could be sold for X gems. Maybe some sort of kit that allows the enemy to see your gear in its proper colour (and outlines the player in team coded glow instead?).

I don’t like the idea of consumables for WvW but… perhaps WvW Chests that can be opened via WvW Keys that contain WvW-centric items.

Keys seem to be a fairly significant income generator.

Anyway, until Anet comes up with some ideas on how to monetize WvW without destroying WvW don’t expect any serious updates. The fear is that if they try to fully monetize WvW then they will make it pay to win and, therefore, destroy the whole experience.

While I appreciate the OP’s enthusiasm I have doubts as to the results of the proposed changes.

I would think, instead, that the larger a group becomes the slower it becomes. This would encourage very large groups to split up to move more quickly.

The thing is, you’ll never eliminate zerging. Numbers matter in battles. The more troops one side has the better for them.

The way to counter the zerg would be to increase the AoE limit to groups. Allow AoEs to impact 40 people – that’ll spread people out.

You could provide incentives to smaller groups and more penalties for being in a big group but… why?

What exactly are you looking to do with this? Are zergs really an issue as such or is it just something that you are bored with?

The reality of people is that they group up. The larger the group the more people join in. We do this in our every day life all the time – if a shop is empty no one wants to be the first to go in but if a shop is full there is a human desire to check it out as well.

Street performers do everything they can to get a ‘seed’ audience so they can grow it knowing that the larger the gathered audience the more likely more people will join it without even knowing what’s going on.

Zerging (crowding together) is a human thing. I don’t think you’ll ever ‘code’ it out of a game. Instead, I think the focus should be on being able to provide more organization for a zerg and some sort of mechanism to make being in a zerg more interesting.

OP, if you are still having trouble with a password why not go this route:

mypasswordisweak:(
?

You still fulfill all your criteria of an easy to remember password and, chances are, it isn’t on the commonly-used-passwords list.

Any variation of that will work just fine.

Do you mean this glow?

If so, that’s from the necro starting mask thing.

For the OP and a few others who made comments in this thread:

When presenting a theory or a hypothesis the onus is on you, as the originator of that proposal, to, at the very least, make the case for it.

You will not ‘win’ or convince anyone if you are unable to lay out a clear and concise reasoning as to why you believe something to be happening.

Asking someone who asked you ‘why’ or ‘prove this to me’ to make a proof that proves otherwise just shows that you have no reasoning or reason for your original claim.

This whole thread is silly because of this. There was no logic or reasoning to support any claim of market manipulation. If you are unable to support your position then you shouldn’t be going public with it since you will do your claim more harm than good. People won’t believe you and even if it was actually happening they won’t believe it since you were unable to make the case for it to be happening in the first place.

tldr: fail post by OP is fail post.

WvW players don’t pay the bills at ArenaNet. They’ve done a bad job at monetizing WvW. Unfortunately for ArenaNet they need to avoid “pay to win” scenarios but they haven’t figured out what WvW players would purchase on an on-going basis.

So, instead, they put their resources where they get real money from that resource investment.

I still don’t understand the structured PvP thing but I suspect it is because some fella over at ArenaNet still dreams of making it a “professional gaming league” type environment. And, somehow, they figure they will be able to monetize off of that or, at the very least, it’ll be marketing.

I’d like to see WvW get far more attention. It would bring me back to the game but it is clear to me that WvW won’t get any real attention since ArenaNet doesn’t know what to do with it. I suspect that WvW was more popular than they thought it would be but, more than that, they didn’t have any plans in place on how to make it a self-sustaining business element in the overall revenue stream of Guild Wars 2.

I can think of a lot of ways to implement gem-store desireables for WvW that wouldn’t turn it into pay-to-win but that’s me. It doesn’t appear that the folk over at ArenaNet have any imagination when it comes to making money off of WvW without completely kitten off the playerbase.

Well, that’s disappointing. There’s no reason for me to return to Guild Wars 2.

I was hoping that ArenaNet would do -something- with WvWvW… but I guess it really isn’t a priority for them. That’s okay, the rest of the game was fun for a once through so I did get my money’s worth.