Cyninja.2954

There could be an alternative to the system we have now, but that would cause just as many issues as it would solve. As mentioned by others, we had a group leader system when the game launched (this can be unrelated to the instance ownership which was also present at launch. A group leader dc could be handled in many ways today). It worked better in some cases, and worse in other cases. Suffice to say, it was abusable and was abused occasionally. Giving control over the group to 1 player means he can not only kick afk players, he can kick any one he wants. Raids require a far larger amount of organization, as such a central role or players being in charge makes sense. Fractals still have a majority vote system, which works in most scenarios except for fringe cases. Most other content is simply not difficult enough nor does it require this amount of organization to warrant handing over control to 1 player. That said, a friend of mine has already encounter a new type of trolling and this clearly shows what issues arise with "ownership" or control of 1 player over the party: A player who opened a dragon response mission disconnected at the very end (and given the current instance ownership, this results in every player getting removed from the instance). The player returned shortly after, very apolagetic about his disconnect and given he was very friendly the group decided to retry the DRM. Took 3 more "disconnects" at the boss for people to realize what a troll they had on their hands. Talk about a sad human being out to only make other players game experience worse.

> @"Cynz.9437" said: > > @"TrOtskY.5927" said: > > > @"Cynz.9437" said: > > > > @"Nephalem.8921" said: > > > > > @"Cynz.9437" said: > > > > > Yeah i miss pre-HoT runs. Fractals actually were fun imo, you could run builds based on encounter and not what snowcrows posted on golem benchmark and every sheep demands from you. > > > > > > > > Did you really play during those times? It was meta or gtfo. Except for necros. It was just gtfo for them. Everyone used berserker aswell or it was a kick. There was 0 experimenting in pugs past a certain level. > > > > What you did do was running builds based on encounter but you should still do that now. Its just that hfb outheals everything currently so you dont need the builds anymore unless you play without a healer. Guards who didnt use wor were kicked back then. Most guards now dont even know what the skill does or which bosses have reflectable attacks. > > > > > > > > "When I was leveling my Engineer on my alt account and did Mai Trin in a T2 group I was cleansing conditions like a madman with Healing Turret & Elixir Gun" back then this approach just wouldnt have worked. The damage was way too high. Its currently still not a great strategy to use more than healing turret as dps there. You are not supposed to get hit and loaded with condis in the first place. The hfb turned fractals into classic trinity facetank mode just without the tank mechanics. > > > > > > Yes, i did play. I meant i actually liked that you didn't need to have actual support to finish encounter. And i mean your average group. And no, it wasn't meta or gtfo. Yes, it wasn't so great for necro but i overall i don't recall such class (and especially spec) gating back then as it is now (and yes, i am fully aware of AP requirements bs that been going on back then). > > > > > > People used to ask for a full gear ping and if you weren't running full zerk you weren't joining the group. > > Not true. I still have accessories with valk stats from those times lying around and nobody cared. Sorry, but as someone who has been running fractals since 1.5 weeks after their initial release I have to agree with Nephalem.8921 and TrOtskY.5927 . High-end groups DID ask for gear pings constantly (I even got in trouble once for having the incorrect runes on my mesmer, funny enough from a guy who I had run with days before without issue). At least if you were doing level 30+ runs (later 45-50 runs). It was literally ping full zerker with correct runes or you are going the way of the Dodo for most groups. That said, life wasn't hard on necro. It was damn well impossible. A friend of mine had to re-roll guardian just to be able to do group content. Rangers were not far behind necros with actual LFG hate versus both. I was mesmer or guadian, depending on what I felt like. On any other class and with no guardian or mesmer, certain fractals were hell. Volcanic was a nightmare without reflects. I will give you that a lot more players at the top end knew how to play their class. Elementalists actually knew what Sandstorm was. It was more out of necessity and size of the community. The fractal community was tiny compared to now. It was not unusual to run into the same people over and over when puging. Today the crowd of players doing fractals is much larger. In part because the rewards were bumped multiple times compared to before, as well as way easier accessibility (personal fractal levels? offensive, defensive and omni infusions any one?) and due to the shift to a more similar play style compared to other MMORPGs (healers covering the dps butt). On the flip side, this obviously brings a lot of less skilled players with it.

> @"Gwaihir.1745" said: > > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > > @"Gwaihir.1745" said: > > > Downstate should go. You lost the fight, spawn and get back to it. Also removes enemies bleeding you out. > > But you didnt loose the fight yet. > > > > Its the same as saying *"the enemy is below 30% hp thats it I won."*. Have you won? > > > Pretty sure you lost when you hit downstate in any scenario where your buddy isnt carrying you in a 2v1. Whos going to win? The guy who can spike you or your piddly downstate dps? You're just dragging it out hoping someone will pick you up. > The fact that there are situations where you can recover from a downstate disprove your point or claim. So I see no way of how one can argue the fight was over. The fact that going downstate is a **near** defeat does not mean it is a guaranteed defeat. As such Dawdler is right, TC had not lost yet. He was in a very desperate situation yes, but the fight isn't over until you see those wxp numbers tick. In this case, with some luck and situational awareness, and a ton of mistakes on his opponents part, who was probably employing the same assumption of "I have this in the bag", TC came out victorious.

> @"Vayne.8563" said: > Okay I've seen a lot of people in this thread saying killing mobs isn't a particularly fast way to level. My own experience is that I can get a level, with my buffs which are quite high, about every five minutes, just by killing. Mind you I don't recommend that as the best way to level, but it's definitely a way to level. > Assuming you are getting 0.5% mob experience per kill (and that is a very high assumption because it assumes max bonus experience and nearly all bonus experience buffs). You would have to kill 200 enemies in 5 minutes. That's 40 enemies per minute, at max bonus experience (aka 1 enemy killed every 1.5 seconds). There is no respawn that fast in this game, nor any route you can consistently run where you will get this amount of reliable enemies with max bonus experience. Even at 30 enemies, thus 0.66% per kill, you'd be hard pressed to find enough enemies. My guess is your 5 minute estimate is highly subjective "remembering" of how "fast" you leveled. I doubt you used a timer or did not get any other source of experience. Yes, grinding enemies CAN be fast, because it cuts out all the downtime which naturally occurs (which can be avoided to some extent IF one focuses on leveling asap). It is a terrible suggestion on its own given that it is even highly inefficient compared to say crafting, which can yield levels a lot faster if one desires to skip ahead. The time saved more than makes up for the couple of gold required (cooking is 2.5 gold to 400, jewelcrafting 7.5 gold). That is why the suggestions made are: kill enemies when you can, but make sure to take as much of the available other experience along the way, most of it yielding a lot more than the process of killing the mobs.

Yeah probably an oversight or not intended to get added. The important part is the trait seems to be fine, so don't worry about it and feel free to use it. :+1:

> @"Fatalis.4368" said: > I'm going to play with a whole new mindset now. I wanted to level as fast as I can because usually mmos only get good at the end but this is like playing a console game. That's the spirit. Just as a small addendum: I once level a character initially with the goal of not killing enemies and see as far as I could get, though I would tag events I ran past. I got to level 17 or 18 from just running around, unlocking POIs, Vistas, Waypoints, Hero Points and uncovering the map (no heart quests done). I think around close to level 19 I ran into the issue of having to transition to areas where enemies where a couple of level higher so I eventually leveled normally on (or used tomes can't remember, this was like character number 20+ or so). Here you can literally just run around and explore and enjoy the world, at most often no loss but rather a gain to experience acquired. The best approach, if efficiency is an issue, is to always keep enemies and the area at around 1-2 levels at or above your own, get new gear every 5 levels (for blue, every 10 levels for green) and supplement certain level gaps with crafting. Have fun.

> @"wilku.9764" said: > I read the wiki. I know how it is SUPPOSED to work. > > I just can't see it work, and I still don't know the difference betwen an upkeep skill and a herald skill. I **guess **that a "Herald" skill is Glint's facet. > In any case, it doesn't work, or the bonus is somehow hidden. I didn't notice any dmg increase either with or from any upkeep skills. > > PLUS: a sample of "brilliant" support explanation: > "Forceful Persistence is a skill that increases character damage, and is buffed further with active upkeep skills. As it has no icon, it will not show above your skill bar. Additionally, as you are able to see here: https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Forceful_Persistence, **it does not work when the character is channeling Glint**. As Facets are all related to Glint, you will not receive buffs, or any additional damage, when using a Facet." Test on golem just now: Golem - 1 million HP, average size Boons Self (as to prevent contamination via facet provided boons): 25 Might, Fury, Swiftness Class Specific Combat Enhancements and Food+Utility (as to get as close to 100% to prevent crit luck contamination): - Spotter - Banner of Discipline - 100 Power, 70 Precision - Potent Sharpening Stone Final crit: 99,76% Only auto-attack from the front of the golem until golem death. Stats were the same across all testing. Damage Test Results: No Facet Active: **7,649 DPS** 131s combat time 1 Facet Active: **7,932 DPS** (7932/7649 = 1.**03**69) 126s combat time 2 Facet Active: **8,096 DPS** (8906/7649= 1.**05**84) 124s combat time 3 Facet Active: **8,370 DPS** (8370/7649= 1.**09**42) 120s combat time 4 Facet Active: **8,670 DPS** (8670/7649= 1.**13**34) 116s combat time Shiro Impossible Odds, no FP: **11,941 DPS** 84s combat time Shiro Impossible Odds, with FP: **13,282 DPS** (13282/11941= 1.**11**23) 75s combat time If we assume some RNG on the remaining 0.24% crit and damage ranged on weapon swings and slight desynchronization on vulnerability uptime (I forgot to add the condition and didn't feel like rerunning the test since it seemed conclusive enough) and the golem dying with different amount of overkill damage done (aka sometimes the damage done above 1 million HP was more, sometimes less), I'd say the trait works as advertised. Not sure what test you ran.

Not sure which guides you were watching, but none of them should have recommended killing enemies. You kill enemies while on the way from point A to point B is useful, but it certainly is not the way you should be leveling (aka staying in 1 spot and killing enemies over and over). While looking for some guides to link I was amazed what nonsense some people put as good advice on youtube. Here is the experience wiki: https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Experience Take a note of the experience gained from killing an enemy: 0.125% of the foe's level + bonus (aka around 0.25% to maybe 0.3%) Now compare that to: Completing an event: 5-7% Uncovering a new area:~1.05% of area level Uncovering a Waypoint:~2.625% of area level etc. You are literally getting 5 to 10 to 20 times the amount of experience from just running around and uncovering things and doing small events as you would from just killing enemies. If you want to level fast: - get your experience bonus buffs - kill enemies in sight - while you run around and uncover the map doing events and heart quests Absolutely do not stay in 1 place and grind or farm away at enemies.

> **Upkeep** > Certain revenant skills can be activated indefinitely, but, while active, **they have an upkeep cost** which acts as a negative modifier to the energy regeneration rate. If a skill would cause you to have more than -10 upkeep (-5 total regen), it cannot be activated. If energy reaches 0%, even if total regen is positive, all upkeep skills will end and go on recharge for 5 seconds. - https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Energy This is denoted both in-game and on the wiki with a -[number] modifier which tells a player the exact amount of upkeep cost the skill consumes. Knowing these revenant basics, and looking at the trait: > Deal increased damage with active upkeep skills. > Herald upkeep skills grant less damage but can be stacked. > Damage increase 13% > Herald Skill Damage Increase 4% - https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Forceful_Persistence We now know that using ANY upkeep skill will provide one with a 13% damage increase. With the exception of Herald, where the trait clearly states that those will give less damage increase, but will be able to get stacked. Hence using multiple facets will stack the bonus granting 4% at 1 facet, 8% at 2, 12% at 3, 16% at 4 and 20% at 5. Not sure how this is confusing. Yes the trait works. If you were not seeing any difference you were running a sloppy test with some errors in your methodology.

> @"lare.5129" said: > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > What does this suggestion have to do with the lore and possible reasoning behind why raids are harder in comparison to say story missions? > it make raid valid content some time, and people can hold vision on it and extent in in any direction. > > > Again, this topic deals with how it can be explained lore wise. > author say that impossible touch that content as lore, and feel it. So it is my vision ho to make it accelerate for lore players. > > Please reread what the topic creator wrote. You clearly misunderstood. This topic is NOT about difficulty of raids as in completion but rather as how it relates to lore. No one in this thread at any point discussed a change in difficulty. That would in fact make any explanation or tie in with lore inconsistent. Not every topic needs someone reminding us that some players are unable to complete raids, especially when it is unrelated to the discussion.

> @"lare.5129" said: > by this idea we can have raid event whit 50%-75% less boss hp in all modes .. (I still can;t complete some CM from start) > And scroll that event all year. > nerved wing 1 - two week, some break, 2 weeks break, nerfed wing 2 - 2 weeeks .. break 2 weeks . .wing 3 .. break wing 8 .. break wing 1 .. What does this suggestion have to do with the lore and possible reasoning behind why raids are harder in comparison to say story missions? Again, this topic deals with how it can be explained lore wise. it has absolutely NOTHING to do with difficulty or change thereof. Please don't go off topic and keep difficulty suggestions and easy mode suggestions to their respective topics.

You need the Significant Otter achievement unlocked to be able to use the Memory of Otter. The wiki mentions that: > Only obtainable after unlocking the Significant Otter achievement. - https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Memory_of_Otter Which held true at least when I did the achievement and meta. My assumption here is: you probably salvaged a Charged/Volcanic Stormcaller Weapon and the 10 Memories are guaranteed salvage reward. Thus giving you 10 MoO without yet having unlocked the corresponding achievement.

> @"Sir Alymer.3406" said: > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > While I wouldn't put my foot or hand down as to this being set in stone, the design decision behind raids being harder due to us not being the commander, it does work nicely as explanation. > > > > My personal view on this matter has been: > > - when playing the personal story or story content, the player is the commander. If we assume there is only 1 commander, this does not conflict with each player assuming his role when on their own (and it even works when being with multiple players in the instance since only the instance owner is addressed as commander in case of story content. Even going so far that in some dual scenarios say against the Manifestation of Self-Doubt in _One Path Ends_ not allowing other players to interfere in the fight) > > - when taking on content on a larger scale, be it meta events, raids, dungeons, fractals, etc. we are part of the pact or individual unit and not the commander. > > > > This in essence mirrors the living world season 2 story where we in part play as Caith and relive her story. In a way, we are living the commanders story in the living world. > > > > I'm sure there are minor inconsistencies here and there, but overall this work rather well narrative wise. > > This isn't quite right. There are multiple points throughout raids where one character is referred to as 'commander'. Hence why I said: > I'm sure there are minor inconsistencies here and there, but overall this work rather well narrative wise. In a raid squad 1 person is the commander, the other 9 are not. Given this shifts constantly, every one is and every is not the commander at the same time.

> @"TheAgedGnome.7520" said: > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > The potions are sell-able for 50s each. You can sell any which you do not require and keep those you deem useful. > > If it were a random mob drop, that would be great; but for a BL chest item, its weaksauce. Sure, but isn't it in line value wise with past special BLC rewards? Aka this is just another special guaranteed reward which has an additional function of granting mastery experience.

The potions are sell-able for 50s each. You can sell any which you do not require and keep those you deem useful.

Entering the Spvp or WvW area will automatically set the build to the last used build in either game mode. That is by design given how there was demand for automatic build switching (and custom builds) in the past. It makes 0 sense to keep the currently in use pve build given there are rarely (aka near none) similarities between pve builds and either of the other game modes. They could add some additional options to allow customized use of the system, until then it is advisable that players make themselves knowledgeable of how the build/template system works and behaves.

I get it. Players come to the forums, complain about game related stuff. Complain about balance. It makes sense. I mean sure, we could lay the blame with Arenanet. Why isn't GW2 more successful as to warrant a larger studio and more developers? That would have maybe allowed multi OS development. We could lay the blame with players and the way this game is monetized. Why is GW2 one of the least expensive MMORPGs to play? Why are players not willing or forced to spend more as to increase revenue? More revenue again might have lead to more developers, a bigger studio and maybe the ability to manage multi OS development. In this case though, sorry but the blame lies neither with Arenanet, nor with the players. **The blame lies completely with Apple.**

> @"snoow.1694" said: > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > @"snoow.1694" said: > > > > @"TrOtskY.5927" said: > > > > People are justly paranoid about this, because there are a lot of bots. If the botting problem was actually taken care of, this thread complaining about complaining, could never have even come into existence. > > > > > > > > So maybe think about that before victim blaming next time? Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > „Botting problem“ is what you say without having any numbers - most players that place higher than Bronze won‘t probably ever encounter bots, that is the first flaw in your argument. It has also nothing to do with victim blaming - but addressing toxic players that flame in chat and wrongly accuse their team mates and opponents just to feel a little bit better about themselves after a loss - most cases are exactly that > > > > Woodenpotatoes literally made a video a few weeks ago with actual footage of hacking players, and he most certainly is not in bronze. > > > > Sorry I get that people want to defend Arenanet here, but a closed and blind eye approach is not the way. > > > > There are players using hacks, certainly not as often as every makes it out to be, but far above it being a non issue. The same goes for bots, some of which are happily doing their 3k+ games per season which would be humanly impossible or would require very didcated account sharing. > > > > Are there a ton of salty players? Sure. That does not mean that valid concerns are all discredited. > > > > This thread kind of reminds me of the initial Cyberpunk 2077 reviews, especially the ones which magically managed to not find a single bug. Just like some people are over paranoid, others are oblivious. Perception bias works both ways here. > > Woodenpotatoes made a video about the hacking warriors I was talking about - it was in Automated Turnaments, not ranked. Yes, does that matter though? Do you seriously want to claim that players who hack in mat will not hack in ranked? > @"snoow.1694" said: > Also they were hackers and no bots. Fact is out of the screenshots that flooded the forum for close to a year, ALL bots had played around 1000 matches during season season with a loss ratio of over 60% - there is NO possibility that a bot with such a winrate can place better than silver. > Sure and bot efficiency certainly fluctuates between seasons. Most notably after mirage was nerfed multiple times. We all know that bots predominately sit in lower ranks. No one made any claim that each and every plat game sees bots. That does not mean accepting bots in lower ranks is in any way okay. What, a player is not that good and now he should suffer playing against bots? What will the slogan be:"get gud or play against bots"? That's without even any knowledge of 5v5 bot games in bronze, which I am sure are happening constantly. The game has a bot problem and a hacker problem. > @"snoow.1694" said: > I don‘t know if there are differences between EU and US, but I doubt that I had a bot during one of by 5v5 ranked matches up in Plat over all the seasons I have played - in fact there is no chance considering how tough matches get most of the time There is a difference between EU and NA. Not only in meta but most notable also player and accounts which participate. This is true across all game modes where US is currently vastly smaller than EU.

> @"snoow.1694" said: > > @"TrOtskY.5927" said: > > People are justly paranoid about this, because there are a lot of bots. If the botting problem was actually taken care of, this thread complaining about complaining, could never have even come into existence. > > > > So maybe think about that before victim blaming next time? Thanks. > > > > „Botting problem“ is what you say without having any numbers - most players that place higher than Bronze won‘t probably ever encounter bots, that is the first flaw in your argument. It has also nothing to do with victim blaming - but addressing toxic players that flame in chat and wrongly accuse their team mates and opponents just to feel a little bit better about themselves after a loss - most cases are exactly that Woodenpotatoes literally made a video a few weeks ago with actual footage of hacking players, and he most certainly is not in bronze. Sorry I get that people want to defend Arenanet here, but a closed and blind eye approach is not the way. There are players using hacks, certainly not as often as every makes it out to be, but far above it being a non issue. The same goes for bots, some of which are happily doing their 3k+ games per season which would be humanly impossible or would require very didcated account sharing. Are there a ton of salty players? Sure. That does not mean that valid concerns are all discredited. This thread kind of reminds me of the initial Cyberpunk 2077 reviews, especially the ones which magically managed to not find a single bug. Just like some people are over paranoid, others are oblivious. Perception bias works both ways here.

> @"wilykcat.5864" said: > Ok I just discovered why I keep on getting kicked from fractal groups when I'm doing the reccomended fractal fir my fractal level. I cant get fractal gear with infusion slots because I am broke on gold and on special currency for buying medium gear. Also I cant get agony resistance because I'm broke on that stuff too which just annoys me. > Fractals are not the exclusive way to get gear with slots for infusions. In fact, there are tons of easier and better ways to get ascended gear on the side outside of fractals (and there are tons of guides out there on how to get that gear). Please do some basic google searches. The reason you are getting removed is very likely not only the lack of agony resistance but general lack of understanding and knowledge. I'd suggest a short session and read up on ascended gear, agony resistance and basic fractal guides. > @"wilykcat.5864" said: > I'm starting to remember 2 years ago before I started playing guild wars 2 a similar event happened to me on world of warcraft with the mythic plus dungeons and an artificial player-made scoring system. I got into a mythic dungeon level recommended for my skill and gear which was mythic plus 17 but then a player discovered that my "score" wasnt high enough and then kicked me. > Sorry, all I am getting from this is you just trying to access content in a different game for which you were not ready. The difference being that in case of agony resistance you actually need a specific amount to avoid unnecessary additional damage. > @"wilykcat.5864" said: > The incidents I'm having with fractal groups is similar to what I went through before. I really dont want to have a bad experience here on guild wars 2 and I'm still new to the game. I really dont want to pay to play fractals either. But soon I may have to stop doing fractals all together and go back to easy story mode beginner dungeons. Then don't play the content or change your approach (aka join a guild and have others help you understand, spend some time online and watch 1 or 2 guides, ask in map chat, etc.). T1 and T2 fractals are in general the areas where new players who are clueless practice. Obviously one needs the appropriate agony resistance for T2.

Firebrand on any build: - free aegis as dps - tons of utility skills (one could argue more useful utility skills than any other class) - tomes with even more utility skills Condi Firebrand specific: - highest burst condition with burning - insanely easy to get burning condition duration, which allows for more condition damage and power stacking - easy to medium rotation The reason condi Firebrand is requested for 100CM is due to: - condi burning is very bursty compared to other condis - extra aegis and tome utility skills are useful - Renewed Focus allows one to stay middle and ignore her aoe while at the same time providing a reset for one of the main damage skills (F1) - insane amounts of easy to place range CC (Sanctuary does 750 defiance bar damage at range, 2 condi FB clear a Sorrow without every moving 1 step which again allows more damage uptime mid) - using scepter 3 on a dying sorrow resets F1, even more damage What is not to like? EDIT: and remember, the golem rotation does NOT include resets of F1 which are available on certain fights

> @"Eric The Dangerous.6209" said: > Both games should be supported, at least when you have an issue they help in gw2. They do nothing in guild wars 1 to help players in anyway. If you want the servers up and the game running so people buy it then you should respect the still very active player base by supporting it for hacking, botting, etc. It is not "backwards" thinking to want a company to support a game when the servers are still up and you have tons of people still playing. I am not saying do not support guild wars 2, just dont forget about the loyal players that have supported them for 15 almost 16 years. We buy storage panes, bring friends to buy the game. Anet could easily profit from both gw1 and gw2 if they made the effort and supported both games fully like everyone seems to want. The way you change things is by speaking up, if you stay silent things will continue down the same path or potentially get even worse. This thread is for those in support of this idea and who want to show it. How much money have you spent on GW1 in the last 10 years? How much money do you thing GW1 has generated in the last 10 years? The answers to those questions will give you the probability of more support or development for the game. As is right now, GW1 continues to exist due to the good graces of Arenanet and NCSoft and the fact it costs very little to keep the servers running with nearly no additional support. I am not against more development for GW1, on the contrary. In order for that to even remotely become a possibility, the question of how that money is going to return with interest needs to be answered. That's where I personally draw a blank for a 15 year old game which has existed thanks to cross funding of its newer brother for the majority of its life cycle.

> @"Lan Deathrider.5910" said: > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > @"Loosmaster.8263" said: > > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > > @"levelmakerguru.7210" > > > > > > > > > @"Lan Deathrider.5910" said: > > > > > Its a guild based endeavor. Stop doing it alone and get guild mates involved. > > > > > > > > > > > > > This. > > > > > > > > Alternatively use the following steps: > > > > - google "Silverwaste shovel value" > > > > - do some basic research > > > > - create an LFG where you offer silver/gold for shovels > > > > - .... > > > > - profit > > > > > > > > There are solutions to most perceived problems or at the least practical workarounds, one just has to think just slightly outside the box. > > > > > > https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/349/policy-looking-for-group-lfg-tool > > > > > > Read the part about forming an LFG to sell in game items. > > > > Yes, you form a group. That group can be formed for any reason. If you form a group in order to invite players to your guild and for them to provide you with resources which you desire, is that not forming a group with a common goal? > > > > Have you been keeping track of what and how the LFG tool has been used since the beginning of the game? > > > > Even then should be assume that suddenly the developers change their approach here, which they haven't in over 8 years given things like shovels, decorations, etc. have been sold about this long, replace step 3 and LFG with any trade forum post and the approach remains the same. > > "Players may use the tool to sell a spot in a group—because that can be part of the group formation process—but they may not use it for the sales or trades of items, nor for any other purpose." > > From the link. I have amended my original response.

> @"Fuchslein.8639" said: > I am not someone who plays for efficiency. I play to have fun and that is often inefficient for me as long as I can please others or myself. > Which is great for you, but how does this HELP someone else? You are giving advice and hopefully giving advice which will help the other party in a meaningful way. Telling them to grind, which they were complaining about, or to hope that others give them stuff for free, which is basically begging unless people magically know what you want from them, is not economically sound advice (and might even get you blocked by some overzealous players who hate begging in game). > @"Fuchslein.8639" said: > If I had the shovels I would give them to him immediately. But as I said, I have already given away all the ones I still had. And since I think that I'm not the only person in the game who thinks like me, I gave this advice. Yes, I too have given guilds I am in shovels. I did so of my own free will. I would never EXPECT others to give their shovels to me for free. Obviously I could ask others to give me their unused shovels at no return, which is akin to a price of 0. If one was limited by time constraints, which approach do you think would yield results faster? An economic exchange of shovels for something in return, or one where I hope others give me their stuff for free? > @"Fuchslein.8639" said: > Isn't that the great thing about different opinions. You can approach things differently ^^. There is a difference between economically sound advice, and economically unsound advice. Notice how I am not demanding you change your opinion. I am commenting on the inefficiencies in it so others can make up their own mind which advice makes more sense to them.

> @"Fuchslein.8639" said: > As I wrote I have given away far more shovels for free and have seen others do the same. > Therefore, I advised him not to buy shovels. Of course he can still do that if there is absolutely no other way for him. > > That was just my advice about it, just like you gave yours. If you don't like it, that's not my problem ^^. Which is perfectly fine. I am just calling your advice inefficient. Then again, I am sure TC has by now either given up, or found a solution to his issue given enough time has passed.