Cyninja.2954

> @"Cleopatra.4068" said: > I don’t understand the raiding community at all. They complain they never get new raids. Then they yell at anyone who wants to play raids that they are all too incompetent, lazy, casual, and suck at the game to play with them. So no one plays raids. So ArenaNet doesn’t make anymore raids. So raiders yell at all the people who they wouldn’t let play raids for not playing raids. It just goes around and around in a circle that somehow never seems to be the raiding communities fault. > > If you want people to play raids, stop insulting people who want to play them and let them play with you. Stop creating artificial barriers to growing the raiding community by placing ridiculous hoops for people to jump through in the way. > > Want to play raids with us? First, install a third party application, then spend hundreds of hours whacking a training golem until the third party application says your DPS perfectly matched our arbitrarily defined measure of competence. Sure....I’ll get right on that. Then, join a training guild and spend months running training runs once a week until you have obtained our arbitrarily defined measure of KP and LI that indicates you aren’t too noob to live. That doesn’t sound condescending, insulting, rude or overbearing at all. Who wouldn’t want to play with a community of condescending, insulting, rude, overbearing elitists like that? > > The hoops aren’t really even the problem. The problem is that only kitten want to play with kitten. GW2 apparently doesn’t have enough kitten playing to support the raiding community. Source? I mean besides the forum warriors here? Have you been to a training raid or discord? Have YOU personally actually participated in this content or tried to enter it, or are you regurgitating forum nonsense? Telling others that they are bad at something is not toxic (unless presented in a toxic way). I literally have to tell new raiders exactly what they are bad at, in order to be able to explain to them how to improve. That does not mean I scream or yell at them, feedback can be given in a direct yet constructive way. It's called a learning process. Is it a fact that the vast majority of open world players are incapable? YES. That's not being toxic. That's making a statement about the ability of the average player in this game. Literally supported by a developer quote that the average damage of players is 1/10th of that of experienced players. AVERAGE damage. Now anyone can take this information in any way they like. Some will take it as:"wow, I really need/want to improve." and then look for others to help them, or help themselves with guides and videos. Others will simply yell:"stop shaming me." and not change a single thing about their performance. Everyone gets to chose how they approach this.

> @"MattDu.7123" said: > > @"mindcircus.1506" said: > > The low-effort "open world pve" population in this game actively rebels against any content that has a fail condition. > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > Raids needed a bigger player base > > @"Asum.4960" said: > > But to blame people who simply want to play with other players of similar skill levels > > So, you need a bigger player base, but not the "open world pve" population and only those that already know how to do raids? Doesn't leave a lot of people to pick from, but sounds like a great plan. > > @"MattDu.7123" said: > > @"Pyriin.3291" said: > > The entry point itself is player motivation. > > What entry point are you talking about > The same entry point each and every single player who entered raids successfully after the first 2 weeks of HoT: - personal interest - motivation to learn - engagement to enter and succeed at the content. - going to the correct places and meeting the correct people to get into this content Don't pretend as though there is not a constant influx of new raiders, because there is. The main issue this content faces is that the loss of veteran raiders is higher than the new blood flooding in. There is different ways to approach this: - get more new players to raid (which can mean either forcing players into content they are not interested in, or diluting content to a level where it is not reflective of what it was, aka strikes) - produce more content as to keep veteran players interested longer > @"MattDu.7123" said: > > @"aspirine.6852" said: > > Why would I join only to get kicked because I never done it before.. > > > @"vicky.9751" said: > > Why do people need to join a discord, put an api key, and then get pinged endlessly for mostly **experiencd** groups or stuff that fills too fast? **this is not** a healthy way to get people to play these raids. I wish gw2 had a matched finder like other games, at least you would GET a party. > > > > Tomorrow make a brand new account, quickly get your guy to 80, ascended everything and pop on down to the dome. Lay it on thick that you have never done a raid before but have watched the videos and come on here the following day to tell us how you failed miserably to find a game and it completely put you off the whole experience, or you can lie. > My money say you will lie? > You could always knee jerk reply straight away and say things like join a training guild(but not your one), try strikes first, or a favourite of mine come back when you've gain experience. > > I don't want raids or strikes to die, it seems like it could be great end game content but if you don't meet the majority of the population half way, they will. and yet, thousands upon thousands of players manage to get into raids even now. A friend of mine literally made a new raid group 4 weeks ago to get some of his friends into raiding. I have covered 1 shift as commander clearing SH, River and CA. The group is safe on Wings 1-4 in 2h 30 min, then does a 2nd day per week to tackle wings 5-7. Now granted, this group has a 50% veteran player rate who are speeding up the process. Meanwhile other players are getting into raiding via slower means but in the end the same way: - get in touch with experienced players - learn what is expected and how raids work - start practicing both socializing and working as a team as well as class roles There is no entry or mid way entry point needed. Players who are cut out to be raiders WILL find the correct ways to enter this content. There is no need for handholding content. Raids are not that hard to begin with. For all those players which are standing in their own way (unable or unwilling to socialize, improve, commit enough time, etc.) this is not the correct content. > @"Blude.6812" said: > > @"radda.8920" said: > > > @"Blude.6812" said: > > > > @"Nephalem.8921" said: > > > > > @"Tyncale.1629" said: > > > > > Strikes are a bust, only a few hardcore peeps fell for them, and now they have been elitized, like mini-raids. ( Li-nonsense and exclusion of classes included) > > > > > > > > That happens because the majority of the playerbase is incredible bad at creating decent builds. There is a very high chance that someone without kp or li will do 3-4k dps while pretending to be dps. > > > > no class is excluded but most selfish builds are. those have no value in a grp. > > > > > > Not all. Players just don't like raids. Never should have been introduced to game to satisfy a small group of vocal players. > > > > So do you think arena should not try to satisfy all types of players in his community? in what honor? > > They should only do open world content with zerg bus spam 1, right? > > I've been playing guild wars since day 1 so it's been 16 years. I love the ''hard'' content and specifically the raids. Why shouldn't arena please regular players like me with differents tastes? > > > > this level of selfishness ... > > there were already elite zones on guild wars1, I don't see why there wouldn't be any on gw2 > > > > Maybe it's still a minority of players who do raids but in general from my personal experience, they are the most regular players in the game unlike casuals players. > > Which means that they are also likely to buy a lot of stuff from the cash shop and donate money to arena. They are therefore far from being negligible. > > Can't justify Raids to me in any way. "regular player unlike casuals" what ever that means.??? I play every day so I am casual?? or a regular player and play just about everything but PvP and Raids. AND I buy gems. And donate money?? Didn't know that Anet was a charitable organization and took donations. Learn something new every day. There is no 'Therefore' to your logic. The question thus becomes, how lucrative is the niche crowd which is highly engaged with the game versus the vast majority (and we know the vast majority of players does not spend money on the game, or else the revenue would be far higher. A common situation with F2Por B2P games). We can only speculate here, but the quarters past discontinuing raid content as well as no announcement for an expansion where by far the bleakest the company has had. This might have been a coincidence, or it holds true that more engaged players tend to spend more money. If you are as engaged in this game as you claim, you should be in favor of keeping other engaged players as interested as possible (this extends to Spvp and WvW btw, communities which have some of the most dedicated players on the least amount of content provided), even if you personally don't enjoy the content. That is IF the financial well being of this game is more important to you being right on the forums or getting to "shove it to those toxic elitist raiders".

If it's not guaranteed it certainly is not that seldom given the issue has not come up and for any player I know, including myself, this was not a severe milestone to overcome on the way to Ad Infinite. You might have had an unlucky streak. Once you haven't see a drop in 5-10 clears, I'd consider this an issue.

> @"Caitybee.3614" said: > > @"valhalahunter.9863" said: > > Is Anet going to do something about this BLATANT price fixing. This is making an unfair experience to everyone that doesn't have DEEP pockets. A few of the top, Pieces of unidentified gear, all three flavors and this one is beyond unacceptable... Mystic coins. I think you should put a cap on these prices, so they can't be sold higher(which is only fair since it is unfair right now) or find what guild or group of people doing this and suspend their accounts. I have never been on to complain, but come on, I just want an even playing field like everyone else. Mystic coins LOCKED at 2G-420073 ordered. This isn't a supply and demand issue. > > Best way to make this fair is to create an NPC that only sells Mystic Coins at 1g each. The value would never go higher. Define fair. This is beneficial to players who need Mystic Coins. It is disadvantages to players who sell Mystic Coins (and that does not include only traders). So, which side are you trying to be fair towards atm?

That was a guaranteed drop as far as I remember. Aka check your inventory if you have done the meta multiple times. Chances are high you have the item already but it's somewhere unexpected in your inventory.

> @"Captain Kuro.8937" said: > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > @"MattDu.7123" said: > > > > @"mindcircus.1506" said: > > > > > @"MattDu.7123" said: > > > > > Didn't the raid community want strikes as a way to encourage more people to raid, increase the player base so they could could justify needing more content. Seems that by making it a closed loop it will end up having the opposite effect. > > > > The raiding community did not ask for Strikes. > > > > They asked for more raids. > > > > > > I'll repeat it because obviously you must of missed it, in your haste to reply. Raids needed a bigger player base and an entry point to help it to grow, so they could could justify needing more content. If you don't have an easy way for new players to join then, your just cutting off your own nose. > > > > Raids needed a bigger player base because they were neglected for years at a time. In fact most players who raid disliked strikes from the get go, since those resources even in diminished form could have been used in new raids instead. You enjoy story and open world and are disheartened by the latest Icebrood Saga releases? Imagine having NO released content for over a year, regularly. That's what diminished raids. Raids were fine population wise before that. > > > > Some of us actively argued against this type of content (similar to the constant recurring "easy mode raids" demands), knowing that it would not work because having actually experienced the transition from baseline to challenging GW2 content and in some cases actively training the next generation of raiders gave us enough insight. Lo and behold, that turned out to be true. > > > > So again, no. Players who enjoy raiding did not "ask" for strikes. We hoped for the continued minimum developer resources be put into raids as in the past. The game got strikes instead. > > Ereyone got hurt at those 9 months, while they where making the expansion. > I don't see raiders in Wow, having the same issue with every expansion. > . > The simply do other stuff, than Raids in the meanwhile > > > > Edit: Maybe we should find a way to boycott the new solo-dungeons, they might put resources back into Strike. And then repeat, with the Goal of Raids :P I wish it was 9 months with raids or at least a one time thing. Let's check shall we? After the first 3 wings, which released 3-4 months apart: - Wing 3 released June 14, 2016, wing 4 released February 8, 2017 (**8 months**, raids were still fine given an entire set of new raids was to be relsaed) - Wing 4 released February 8, 2017, wing 5 released November 28, 2017 (**9 months**, raids were still but the increase in release schedule has cost players) - Wing 5 released November 28, 2017, wing 6 released September 18, 2018 (**9+months**, wing 6 was highly anticipated, the raid scene had already shrunk significantly) - Wing 6 September 18, 2018, wing 7 released June 11, 2019 (**9 months**, again highly anticipated. By now a lot of veteran raiders have taken breaks or entirely left GW2) Wing 7 released June 11, 2019, that's now **20 months ago**. It's amazing there even is a remaining raid scene at all, and that is mostly thanks to dedicated raiders encouraging, mentoring and actively promoting new blood to start raiding while battling the continued loss of more and more veteran players. Meanwhile Strikes were added where a part of this player-base is not even able to organize or band together to clear "raids light". In a MMORPG which should encourage interaction. While players who enjoy only open world and/or story content get a heart attack because some of the recent episodes were smaller than expected due to the upcoming expansion.

> @"MattDu.7123" said: > > @"mindcircus.1506" said: > > > @"MattDu.7123" said: > > > Didn't the raid community want strikes as a way to encourage more people to raid, increase the player base so they could could justify needing more content. Seems that by making it a closed loop it will end up having the opposite effect. > > The raiding community did not ask for Strikes. > > They asked for more raids. > > I'll repeat it because obviously you must of missed it, in your haste to reply. Raids needed a bigger player base and an entry point to help it to grow, so they could could justify needing more content. If you don't have an easy way for new players to join then, your just cutting off your own nose. Raids needed a bigger player base because they were neglected for years at a time. In fact most players who raid disliked strikes from the get go, since those resources even in diminished form could have been used in new raids instead. You enjoy story and open world and are disheartened by the latest Icebrood Saga releases? Imagine having NO released content for over a year, regularly. That's what diminished raids. Raids were fine population wise before that. Some of us actively argued against this type of content (similar to the constant recurring "easy mode raids" demands), knowing that it would not work because having actually experienced the transition from baseline to challenging GW2 content and in some cases actively training the next generation of raiders gave us enough insight. Lo and behold, that turned out to be true. So again, no. Players who enjoy raiding did not "ask" for strikes. We hoped for the continued minimum developer resources be put into raids as in the past. The game got strikes instead.

> @"lare.5129" said: > Hello, this is me > So at first we need understand that this is view not from person who start few weeks ago, but from who do some fractals and very rare check raids. > So ofc I have druid/hsg/dps/cpds/alac/hfb/bt/bttank/ ant others.. And arox 37k AP background give some experience "don't stand in red" No need, just link to your killproof.me account: https://killproof.me/proof/75VK/history#. It gives a way better representation of your experience with raid content.

> @"Sobx.1758" said: > > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > > > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > > > > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > > > > > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > > > > > I'm not "assuming" any more than you are -average player being bad is a fact. Downstate as a great safety net for bad players is a fact (which doesn't mean it's limited to strictly this reasoning for every player that wants to keep the downstate, in case you think I'm somehow trying to insult you here or w/e). Actually if we use *what you did* as a proof for anything (polls), then *most players/average player* wants the downstate to remain unchanged: > > > > > > > https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/97040/new-balance-patch-time-to-change-downstate > > > > > > > https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/75626/no-downstate-poll-please-read-post-first/p1 > > > > > > It's not an opt in. Skill is irrelevant, downstate is always there. I'd love to know how many times the absolute best players in WvW has been ressed. But maybe they are secretly bad. > > > > > > > > > > Of course it's not. Of course anyone uses it *beacuse they have no choice* and if you get that soft cushon to fall on then why would you not use it while others do? But that still doesn't change anything about what I've said and what I said was never anything like "good players don't use it", which you seem to be answering to for some reason. > > > > > > > > > > > Also for those votes, want to bet that *almost all* of the unchanged voters would still agree to a compromise if you argued with them? > > > > > > > > > > It doesn't matter what you "want to bet on". You were talking about polls as a proof for *whatever claim*, now that the poll shows against what you've said, you suddenly don't care about what they show, but instead *want to bet*. Cool. But you're also doing exactly what I said -these limited polls are only relevant when they show what I (in this case: *you*) want them to show. So it's clear what and why you're doing right now. Again, your "bets" don't change anything about what I've said in my previous posts, but they sure show that you'll try to use double standards when taking those ""undeniable proofs"" as actual proofs based pretty much solely on the fact whether or not they confirm *your opinion*. > > > > > > > > > > >Leaving it unchanged is probably mostly a knee-jerk reaction to delete being in the poll. > > > > > > > > > > Nope. > > > > > > > > > > > > No, these things are not equivalent -not even close. > > > > > > Oh but they are eqvivalent and they are close. Just like when people say "well downstate is a little OP" and the knee-jerk reaction is "dElEtE DowNsTaTe!1!!", so has pretty much any argument with thief and its... lets just say liberal use of... stealth been. Delete the thief. Problem solved. If you consider deleting downstate a valid point then there are no ifs or buts. I can **easily** argue that combat stealth gameplay has no place in competitive PvP. So delete thief, it's a crutch for bad players that is a fact. Because *obviously*. Other classes have it too, true. Delete them too then. Its not possible to go *too* far, is it. > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course that would be stupid. Because despite what "problems" it has, the thief is a part of the game and it offers a unique playstyle unlike any other class because, well its the thief. I'm sure many people love playing the thief. > > > > > > > > > > > > Downed state is a core gameplay element of GW2 and offers a unique playstyle unlike most other games, it's one of the reasons many people like playing GW2. It adds another tactical element to combat - sometimes for good, sometimes for bad - and plays on the human emotions of wanting to help people in need and if you can help them, they may return the favor and help you when you need it. Just what a true MMO should do rather than just skill clicking muscle memory to kill the enemy dead with boomboom and pewpew. > > > > > > > > > > Nope, not even close to being equivalent and I (as well as many other people) don't even "say *well downstate is a little OP*". Really, that it NOT what many people, including me said, so not sure why would I even read the rest when your initial claim about what I say is straight up false. And no, for me it's not a "knee jerk reaction", no matter how many times you'll try to claim it is just because it's an "easy out" for you. Just like before literally the only reason you try to claim it surely is a "kNeE jErK rEaCtIoN!1!!!" is because you want to claim that the average people have the same opinion like you, which is as baseless as it was above. > > > > > > > > > > tl;dr of your key points from 2 last responses to me: > > > > > Someone has an opinion that's different than mine? WELL, THEY ARE *JUST MAKING UP OPPOSING ARGUMENT* AND *IT WAS A KNEE JERK REACTION*! > > > > > [yup, actual quotes] > > > > Something something people willing to compromise trying to argue with people that will never compromise. > > > > > > You're not *willing to compromise*, you're literally just repeating your opinion and sticking to it while picking and choosing when the same argument is relevant or not based solely on the fact whether or not it supports your opinion ("*according to polls/majority/average player I'm correct*" ..."*well, if the polls show I'm not correct, then it means that the voters didn't understand what they vote for and now my unchanged opinion is a compromise*"). This is not what a "compromise" is and nobody says there always needs to be one. > > > > > > Nice try at pretending you're taking into consideration anything that anyone else says though. > > What does deleting downstate compromise with those that want to keep it? > > How is your long-held opinion suddenly a compromise with anything else? It's not, it's unchanged since the beginning. > > > But yeah I admit defeat. It's pointless unless you can answer that question. > > It's pointless when you're pretending you're going for a compromise, when you're clearly not, but it's an easy out for you to disregard anything that was written before, including the obvious double standards about accepting "proof" for anything based on whether or not it shows what you want it to show. > Yet, he is going for a compromise. The suggestions given are a compromise between the IS state which we have now, and a complete removal. If we assume removal is the ultimate "nerf" or final 0 output performance change. You might not agree or like the compromise given, but that does not change the fact that it IS a compromise. Unlike the strait removal. > @"Sobx.1758" said: > And again: I'm not sure where that idea that everything needs/should end in a compromise came from, but it's not a general truth and not some kind of *the best solution for any case*. Compromise is used to find common ground between mutual exclusive positions and every position in-between. Even the polls you provided suggest that given the wide spread diverging favors on this issue, not all parties could ever be satisfied. Thus while a compromise CAN result in a majority of players being offended/displeased, no compromise is nearly GUARANTEED to result in that. Finally, downstate is a crutch for weaker players. Yet it also adds an entire element to this games combat. Those 2 points can, but should not be approached separately. One thing I find mostly lacking from players arguing for the removal of downstate. Mostly I assume because it would be to much effort to actually engage with the idea that combat depth is achieved via a mechanic they disagree with (speculation on my part). Meanwhile, unless this mode is supposed to turn even more niche, going for what the majority of this games players might enjoy thus not high performance players, assuming a normal gauss distribution, makes the most sense.

> @"vicky.9751" said: > This gives a mastery point for icebrood saga. I have a druid with ascended healing armour and meta build, waited more than 30min in lfg and nobody joined in the end. I short, you have never actually done this fight. Having a meta build and ascended armor means nothing if you can't play the build. The actual issue you are encountering though is not understanding/knowing how players behave when using the LFG, which in turn signals most experienced players to stay away from your LFG (more on that below). > @"vicky.9751" said: > _Something needs to be done about group content in this game._ > Why do people need to join a discord, put an api key, and then get pinged endlessly for mostly **experiencd** groups or stuff that fills too fast? **this is not** a healthy way to get people to play these raids. So on the one hand you are complaining about groups filling to fast, meanwhile also complaining about groups not filling at all. Take a moment to consider why this might be the case: - players often avoid joining "empty" squads. Reason is simple: why be one of the players who waits for the squad to fill up, when you can just join a nearly full squad? - WoJ and Boneskinner are considered more difficult strikes. Unless one of these strikes is daily, many players will only run them as part of a full run while also getting the daily So in short: either run WoJ when it is daily, or make a full clear group. Alternatively befriend other players as to be able to not start at 1/10 squad size and just fill up or join a already formed group. This is group content after all, in a MMORPG. > @"vicky.9751" said: > I wish gw2 had a matched finder like other games, at least you would GET a party. The irony here: strikes HAVE am auto grouping tool (it's called joining a public strike instead of private). No one uses it DUE to the disastrous results those party/player setups provide. That should make you stop and think for a moment. Also strikes are not raids.

Define "signets build". Is it 1 signet, 2, all signets? Condi or Power? The way you make it sound is that players are running 4-5 signets and doing high damage with that.

> @"Svez Poizon XD.5268" said: > All i am saying is that i do up to 50k to 200k damage with quick combo, moving back for reset then going in again with range setup whitin 5 to 10 seconds. > Sorry to burst your bubble, but any player who eats a meteor shower in WvW, no matter which range the elementalist is at when he started/finished casting, is a scrub. Works great against attackers trying to get into a tower which do not move or clear ledges, but that's about it. Also damage means nothing, because while you do those amazing 50-200k on a spot, I am healing all of that away with my heal scrapper, unless it comes focused by multiple characters, in which case all the squad does is take a step to the side, then ignore all staff elementalists for 30 seconds. As mentioned by Infusion.7149, the current meta setups have superspeed, massive cleanse and stability, as well as resurrection utilities. There is a reason why power weaver/elementalist has fallen out of meta, and the reason is: it's just not tanky enough and to stationary in its damage. Revenants and Scourges as well as power DH/core guardians and reapers are all decent at range as well as melee while having innate more sustain and better damage skills on the move. Here is what is going to happen to a squad full of power elementalists: they get run down open field, or denied line of sight at objectives and if careless provide a ton of immediate downstates from those rev spikes. There is nothing nicer than targeting an enemy elementalist and knowing that he will face plant from not even a full damage combo of any other meta power dps. Oh that is obviously only the case if the enemy group does not INTENTIONALLY sustain against your meteor shower and let you die to retaliation, which you can do literally nothing against.

> @"MiniMe.1960" said: > Will the upgrades i have purchased, like bag slots, build template expansion, equipment template expansion be lost or still on the character slot? Yes, all character specific upgrades would be lost.

> @"Weerus.3701" said: > > @"lare.5129" said: > > 2 days ago cms+t4 was done with setup: pwr holo, pwr thief wiht staff, hfb, alac(me), cfb(on100), and swaped on power slb for rest. Chill, solid run. > > 1 day ago: hfb alac(me) bs(cfb on100), cfb (weaver rest), cfb (power guard rest) - awful toxic long run. > > both setup 8kufe+250kp > > You mean HFB quickness? There is no HFB quickness. There is HFB, which is expected to also give quickness. Period. Any "pure" HFB build which does not give quickness is a meme build and will get kicked on sight in any experienced or even regular group. I am really unsure where this nonsense "pure" healer Firebrand builds are sprouting from, but given going harrier or if need be minstrel AND provide quickness comes with no disadvantages to the "pure" healer build, it's a no brainer which should be run. I am going to repeat that: If anyone is running a non quickness giving heal Firebrand build, you will get kicked! A lot! Not only from "pro" or "elitist" groups.

> @"realviizz.4982" said: > To those people saying that there is no such thing as "price manipulation" as it's a player driven market: There is over 400k buy offers placed for mystic coins at exactly 2g. 200k+ at 2g 5c and over 80k at 2g10c to simply prevent them from dropping below those points at any time. If it was not meant to keep prices above those threshholds, why would every other price point above and below feature a max of 500 orders? > Edit: I saw someone else mentioned that exact problem before :) Just that there is now an extra 200k buy offers at the 2g5c threshhold. and? What you fail to address is how the current exchange rates at the current prices are still equal. In fact, as mentioned by others, stacks of Mystic Coins are getting sold out nearly instantly even at 2g10s and above. If they were not, those walls would melt. In fact, as long as enough demand is present and players willing to pay the price for Mystic Coins, the market is working. If someone pushed the price to 3g right now, and the price remained there with equal exchanges, then the MC were to cheap. Being unhappy and unwilling to purchase something are NOT the same thing. Being unhappy yet still purchasing a commodity tells the market that you were still willing to purchase at that price. Being unwilling actually tells the market that the commodity is overpriced to you. Learn to spot the difference. Simply put: There are players, likely even in this thread, who are unhappy with the current price, yet still purchase Mystic Coins. Market working as intended. While at it, consider the pro's and con's of a wall which is fixed at 1 price, versus driving price up. Those orders could easily have been used to drive MC prices to 3 gold or above, and I'm pretty sure there would still have been enough demand to not make the price fall.

> @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > > > @"Sleepwalker.1398" said: > > > > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > > > > > @"Svarty.8019" said: > > > > > > > The situation that the OP is describing is where the sides have a similar number of players, but one is inside the building and the other is attacking, I think. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This. > > > > > > > > > > > > I find it hilarious how people are claiming that at even numbers defenders are not advantaged. > > > > > > > > > > > At even numbers, what generally does happen during defending is you get double teamed with 3rd server hitting another structure. > > > > > So either you risk losing 1 or both structures. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You assume that the third server will hit your structure. > > > And you assume they dont. > > > > > > Fact remains one server will always be outnumbered two to one. > > > > Which has nothing to do with any side being advantaged... > > > > In fact I assume nothing. I am saying that one side being 2on1ed is no argument for or against defenders or attackers advantage. I even proceeded to explain how even in this 50-50 scenario, the defenders are better off. > > > > Feel free to disagree and actually give viable advantages attackers have at even numbers. Besides the choice of objective. Which is in part negated by scouting or white swords. Everything past that initial advantage is in favor of the defender, from upgrades, to objective access, to siege, etc. > If the defenders have 50 people and push into 50 enemies and the defender commander get moad, pulled into the enemy and instantly killed, would this be considered advantage for the enemy? If yes then there you go, the advantage of being defenders meant exactly nothing. An advantage that doesnt actually give you an advantage isnt that good an advantage. I'm really not sure if you are trolling or not at this point. Everything you wrote applies to the aggressor as well. Advantages are things which are given to one side which the other side does no have access to. Aka, better positioning, availability of better siege possibility, movement advantages, stats bonuses, etc. Everything else which is based around players skill is NOT an advantage. That is player skill.

> @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > @"Sleepwalker.1398" said: > > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > > > @"Svarty.8019" said: > > > > > The situation that the OP is describing is where the sides have a similar number of players, but one is inside the building and the other is attacking, I think. > > > > > > > > > > > > > This. > > > > > > > > I find it hilarious how people are claiming that at even numbers defenders are not advantaged. > > > > > > > At even numbers, what generally does happen during defending is you get double teamed with 3rd server hitting another structure. > > > So either you risk losing 1 or both structures. > > > > > > > > > > You assume that the third server will hit your structure. > And you assume they dont. > > Fact remains one server will always be outnumbered two to one. Which has nothing to do with any side being advantaged... In fact I assume nothing. I am saying that one side being 2on1ed is no argument for or against defenders or attackers advantage. I even proceeded to explain how even in this 50-50 scenario, the defenders are better off. Feel free to disagree and actually give viable advantages attackers have at even numbers. Besides the choice of objective. Which is in part negated by scouting or white swords. Everything past that initial advantage is in favor of the defender, from upgrades, to objective access, to siege, etc.

**This is a necroed thread. The earnings this thread refers to are from Q3 and Q4 2019, not of 2020.**

> @"Sleepwalker.1398" said: > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > @"Svarty.8019" said: > > > The situation that the OP is describing is where the sides have a similar number of players, but one is inside the building and the other is attacking, I think. > > > > > > > This. > > > > I find it hilarious how people are claiming that at even numbers defenders are not advantaged. > > > At even numbers, what generally does happen during defending is you get double teamed with 3rd server hitting another structure. > So either you risk losing 1 or both structures. > > You assume that the third server will hit your structure. Who says they won't go for the attackers structure? They are just as committed to taking the objective as you are defending it. Both sides can disengage, in fact the defending side with range and numbers advantage from siege (1 player per siege can keep multiple in fight) is at an advantage IF they decide to disengage or get to snack off disengaging attackers. Again, defenders advantage. Really don't get this. It's almost as though half the people in this thread don't even play WvW actively and are just guessing. Stuff like this happens constantly on fuller servers on EU. Both having to go defend as well as cancel a siege because an important objective is being assaulted. Maybe this is a NA thing with less population? I don't know.

> @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > This isn't about a blob knocking at the door and 3 people not being able to defend. At even numbers and skill, defenders will win due to advantages. There is not even any discussion about it. > Skill and numbers are **never** even. Because thats not how WvW works. Defenders always fight **twice** the enemies if we assume the 3 sides have perfectly equal numbers. And on top of that having the advantage doesnt automatically mean a win because thats not how GW2 combat works. > > Wait I wasnt allowed to discuss it. kitten, forgot so fast. True, and a more skilled, less manned defending force can hold an objective. So does a less skilled, more manned force. Thus the advantage is always with the defender. Now is this advantage sufficient? That's a very subjective interpretation. That's not what is being claimed though. The claim is that defenders are not advantaged, which is simply untrue. Even more in times where both sides might have map queues.

> @"Svarty.8019" said: > The situation that the OP is describing is where the sides have a similar number of players, but one is inside the building and the other is attacking, I think. > This. I find it hilarious how people are claiming that at even numbers defenders are not advantaged. This isn't about a blob knocking at the door and 3 people not being able to defend. At even numbers and skill, defenders will win due to advantages. There is not even any discussion about it. Now was this advantage bigger in the past, which allowed defending groups of half the size of the attacking force or significantly weaker player skill to defend an objective? Sure. That still did not make it balanced back then. It merely allowed for easier defending than now. As to the topic at hand, multiple reasons for why less and less commanders tag up. The 2 big ones I would mention: - as the player base shrinks, similar skilled and similar minded players band together. Often in guilds. Why tag up when you can run as guild squad and on voice? - the notion of "I play what I want when I want" has crept it's way into WvW from PvE, especially among newer players. Just not that fun running that thief, ranger, mesmer squad into the brick wall that is the enemy blob full of guardians, engineers and necromancers (pick appropriate elite specializations as desired, it matters not).

This reminds me a lot of the World of Warcraft Proving Grounds during Mists of Pandaria. > Proving Grounds introduces the player to the Proving Grounds, a special solo scenario challenge that allows players to both learn and demonstrate the core skills associated with a given role or class. - https://wow.gamepedia.com/Proving_Grounds_(Pandaria) Not only that but a certain success was required to sign up for specific content as a specific role requiring players complete the content with am minimum amount of class/role understanding. Now proving grounds were removed with Legion, officially due to the requirement of premade groups for Mythic+ dungeons. Still personally I found the concept fun and challenging and some players really enjoyed pushing the limits, especially on endless waves and such. Maybe something similar to this could be implemented as possibility for players to practice but without making them requirements. Unfortunately any titles or achievements going along such content would immediately be used as gating mechanisms (which in turn would assure most players confront the mechanics, but in turn creates again more barriers to overcome).

> @"ludwigma.2385" said: > > @"ludwigma.2385" said: > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > > @"ludwigma.2385" said: > > > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > > > > @"ludwigma.2385" said: > > > > > > i understand the point that a challenge should be a challenge. but i tried several times with a few Frac T4 Parties and i did it only once . i miss mostly for 30sec to 1 minute of time. thats it. no one was dying. alac and quickness was there, good dps was there. people dodged aoe very good. so i dont get it. im only speaking for me but im not enjoying something like that... and why are the other drm cm´s a piece of cake when it should be a challenge. > > > > > > > > > > We usually end with 2-3 minutes on the timer as 5 man party (and we ran the CM more than 5 times because of alternating players). The party consistes of players who run raids and fractal CMs regularly though but we don't try hard. Usually just play dps we feel like and just make sure boons are provided and cc is given. So this is not even about running specific dps classes (though one should be adept at the class and know basic damage rotations). > > > > > > > > > > The timer is tight for "regular" T4 fractal performance groups. Simply because the challenge of regular T4s is low and the performance gap even among successful players is very large. My guess is: the T4 fractal party you actually succeeded with had more adept players versus those were you ran out of time. > > > > > > > > > > I doubt dps was "good", or else you would have made the timer. Unless you were wasting a lot of time on the pre boss parts of the instance. In which case, try to cut the pre boss fight stages as short as possible. > > > > > > > > > > Other advice: install arcdps, make sure boon uptime is actually good, break the cc bar, try to have some boon removal to remove protection, and make sure everyone is pulling their weight performance wise. That at least should give you and overview of which issues need ironing out. > > > > > > > > 2-3 mins on the timer ? invite me and show me ! sure, those players are always on the lfg lol > > > > why is something hard like this needed in story content achievs ? it would fit better in the raid aka elitism section for the people with the spare time for that > > > > maybe i will just never do it .... very motivating > > > > > > I never said those players where on the LFG for normal T4 fractals. I specifically mentioned the experience level of the group as to not create confusion. > > > > > > Yes, this CM is more difficult than the others. It is not impossible. Again, if you run T4 regularly, get arcdps, track the performance of the group, then consider running this DRM. > > > > > > Or, join a guild and do this instance as organized group. > > > > > > Or solo it. There are multiple youtube videos of players soloing this DRM on different classes with varying degrees of time left on the timer. Which is more than possible given the scaling this mission has. (edit: here a video of a solo Reaper with 2:30 minutes on the timer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCnCL-Nz6CA. Obviously scaled to 1 player, but no 25 might, no alacrity, no 100% quickness uptime, no fury. Imagine if you had a group which actually had all those boons.) > > > > > > How is it motivating when each and every CM is easy as cake? Some have to be harder as to encourage players to actually become better at the game. That's the meaning of challenge: to overcome something, not breeze through and get free loot. > > > > i dont want it "easy as cake"....but story related stuff after tons of tries kills of my personal motivation for it ...thats it > > > i dont need to imagiine what boons are in a group, you dont know me > > can close this useless dicsussion You quoted yourself m8. Wrong account? EDIT: Ah got what you meant, probably can't edit post. The reason I mentioned the boons is simple: a full set of offensive boons doubles the damage output of a class. That solo Reaper had nearly none of them and had no issue with the timer. If you lack the boons, you are nearly halving the damage you will do (insufficient boon uptime is literally one of the main reasons for weak dps). If you do have a high boon uptime and are still struggling, then that is some serious class performance issues. In case of Snowden CM, as mentioned, boon removal is also very helpful. That protection boon that Ryland reapplies so often will cut damage by 33%. In this specific case also a huge reason as to why the timer is not beaten.

> @"ludwigma.2385" said: > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > @"ludwigma.2385" said: > > > i understand the point that a challenge should be a challenge. but i tried several times with a few Frac T4 Parties and i did it only once . i miss mostly for 30sec to 1 minute of time. thats it. no one was dying. alac and quickness was there, good dps was there. people dodged aoe very good. so i dont get it. im only speaking for me but im not enjoying something like that... and why are the other drm cm´s a piece of cake when it should be a challenge. > > > > We usually end with 2-3 minutes on the timer as 5 man party (and we ran the CM more than 5 times because of alternating players). The party consistes of players who run raids and fractal CMs regularly though but we don't try hard. Usually just play dps we feel like and just make sure boons are provided and cc is given. So this is not even about running specific dps classes (though one should be adept at the class and know basic damage rotations). > > > > The timer is tight for "regular" T4 fractal performance groups. Simply because the challenge of regular T4s is low and the performance gap even among successful players is very large. My guess is: the T4 fractal party you actually succeeded with had more adept players versus those were you ran out of time. > > > > I doubt dps was "good", or else you would have made the timer. Unless you were wasting a lot of time on the pre boss parts of the instance. In which case, try to cut the pre boss fight stages as short as possible. > > > > Other advice: install arcdps, make sure boon uptime is actually good, break the cc bar, try to have some boon removal to remove protection, and make sure everyone is pulling their weight performance wise. That at least should give you and overview of which issues need ironing out. > > 2-3 mins on the timer ? invite me and show me ! sure, those players are always on the lfg lol > why is something hard like this needed in story content achievs ? it would fit better in the raid aka elitism section for the people with the spare time for that > maybe i will just never do it .... very motivating I never said those players where on the LFG for normal T4 fractals. I specifically mentioned the experience level of the group as to not create confusion. Yes, this CM is more difficult than the others. It is not impossible. Again, if you run T4 regularly, get arcdps, track the performance of the group, then consider running this DRM. Or, join a guild and do this instance as organized group. Or solo it. There are multiple youtube videos of players soloing this DRM on different classes with varying degrees of time left on the timer. Which is more than possible given the scaling this mission has. (edit: here a video of a solo Reaper with 2:30 minutes on the timer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCnCL-Nz6CA. Obviously scaled to 1 player, but no 25 might, no alacrity, no 100% quickness uptime, no fury. Imagine if you had a group which actually had all those boons.) How is it motivating when each and every CM is easy as cake? Some have to be harder as to encourage players to actually become better at the game. That's the meaning of challenge: to overcome something, not breeze through and get free loot.

> @"ludwigma.2385" said: > i understand the point that a challenge should be a challenge. but i tried several times with a few Frac T4 Parties and i did it only once . i miss mostly for 30sec to 1 minute of time. thats it. no one was dying. alac and quickness was there, good dps was there. people dodged aoe very good. so i dont get it. im only speaking for me but im not enjoying something like that... and why are the other drm cm´s a piece of cake when it should be a challenge. We usually end with 2-3 minutes on the timer as 5 man party (and we ran the CM more than 5 times because of alternating players). The party consistes of players who run raids and fractal CMs regularly though but we don't try hard. Usually just play dps we feel like and just make sure boons are provided and cc is given. So this is not even about running specific dps classes (though one should be adept at the class and know basic damage rotations). The timer is tight for "regular" T4 fractal performance groups. Simply because the challenge of regular T4s is low and the performance gap even among successful players is very large. My guess is: the T4 fractal party you actually succeeded with had more adept players versus those were you ran out of time. I doubt dps was "good", or else you would have made the timer. Unless you were wasting a lot of time on the pre boss parts of the instance. In which case, try to cut the pre boss fight stages as short as possible. Other advice: install arcdps, make sure boon uptime is actually good, break the cc bar, try to have some boon removal to remove protection, and make sure everyone is pulling their weight performance wise. That at least should give you and overview of which issues need ironing out.