Mungo Zen.9364

There is no best profession for soloing as it comes down to personal preference most of the time. The general recommendation is to try a couple professions you are interested in, and see if the playstyle suits you. Once you find one you are enjoying, go through the leveling process with it to explore how the profession works. If you provide more details as to what you want to do in game (PvP, WvW, PvE OW, PvE Instanced) I am sure you will get some specific recommendations from players preferred professions.

Post started yesterday on the same topic. Perhaps an answer to your question is within. https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/121939/any-news-on-balance-patches#latest

It depends on the character race I am playing I think. I like super oversized great swords on Asuran but prefer more median GS on Sylvari. I don’t care about daggers on Asuran but will go with larger scaled daggers on Sylvari (as they are actually easier to see). That said, I do not display my weapons outside of combat. I found holstered weapons tend to clip like mad and ruin the rest of my appearance. I also didn’t select a choice as option 4: no preference would be my choice.

Just jump into T1/T2 and get the feet wet, then move up the difficulty as you fee more confident. There may be some new fractals since you last played, so hitting those up at T1/T2 to learn may also be of benefit. I am betting though that after a few runs you will have the flow back and be ready for the high end.

> @"Luthan.5236" said: > Yeah. But with the level you actually knew if someone had at least the appropiate level for the map/region. (Back then in the low level regions.) If you have to ask for the masteries first ... then this does not convey any useful information. They could remove the mastery number. (I don't think there is an option in the menu to manually disable so you can hide yours from others or decide to not get it displayed at others.) > > Making it customizable would not force/ask players to change it depending on the region - if it was just something to show off ... but customizable. AP actually are much harder to earn. If we consider the highest AP players are in the 5 digits regions now ... and the current mastery numbers are 3 digits ... they could as well decide to show the AP divided by 100. > > And I actually would prefer ot show these off next to the name. When you have players with 200 or 300 mastery points spend but only less than 10k or even 5k AP they probably played less than someone with less mastery points spend but more than 20k AP (if he played chronologically in release order ... this might happen). I really don't put much value in Mastery or AP numbers so my comments are without a preference for change or keeping the same. Overall, what purpose does a change like this serve? Why does displaying Mastery or AP in a different way matter? What benefit would players get from this, or what problem exists that could be improved upon by this type of change? As AP already give titles based upon the level of AP, players have an existing choice for displaying that level of accomplishment. I don't believe Raw AP is a good value as it combines Daily rewarded AP (10 per day you complete dailies on) and all other AP. It might be interesting to see AP without Daily AP awards as a shared value. Regarding Mastery, I agree that until someone gets over 300 MP you really have no idea what they have experience with or what Masteries they may have. Again I don't believe this info is necessary except for a handful of situations. That said, it might be interesting to have Mastery displayed by Region. This way in Core zones you see Core Mastery level, HoT MP in HoT zones etc etc.

In general, I really like JP. I have completed all JP as intended multiple times, most before mounts came to be a thing (but I keep going back for fun). My comments below are thinking of future JP, not changing existing ones. I am thinking of the Siren's Landing JP and Draconis Mons JP as being challenging JP that do have recall mechanics via checkpoints. These appear to be examples of Anet learning from prior JP like Ember Bay. However, those three JP have a higher challenge than most JP available before them and I would anticipate them being difficult for players regardless of the checkpoints; they require a certain level of skill to accomplish. While the suggestions the OP presented do have merit, the skill level of the player in using the terrain and character physics is where the focus should be. What is the difference between a player dying and running back at Not So Secret JP or them falling and resetting on the JP closer than a WP? They save time but they still have to repeat part or all of the JP. It does give them the opportunity to learn more about the JP and JP skill in general but I question if it is a learning tool or a crutch. The common complaints are JP are too hard, as OP pointed out "pixel perfect" is how hard some claim they are. What would these proposed changes do for changing the mentality of players trying the JP? A hard jump is a hard jump regardless. If I jump, fall and reset to the beginning of the puzzle or some arbitrary checkpoint, I still have to make that next jump and cannot proceed until I do. In short, I believe that the OP suggestions promote repeated learning attempts at a single JP, while they do not change the difficulty of the JP, and that I approve of. However, as the difficulty doesn't change, that means that there will be a portion of the player base asking for nerfs to JP to match their skill level. What is a way that the game could promote learning how to manipulate the physics of player and terrain, to increase player skill level in this area, and get better at the JP?

> @"sorudo.9054" said: > > @"Teratus.2859" said: > > > @"MarkVonPlay.7391" said: > > > GW1 and GW2 are two completely different games. I think both games can exist co-existent. > > > It would be nice to see Guild Wars with modern DirectX 12 and Raytracing. It also would be great to see a new campaign. There is so much landscape, that isn't explored > > > > > They already do co-exist as both games are still alive and well, Gw1 is just over and finished as a project and is no longer supported in terms of new content etc. > > > > > I'm sad to see, that World of Warcraft is still in development and get new campaigns and GW1 not. Please Arenanet: Give GW1 new life. > > > > The difference here is there is no World of Warcraft 2.. > > If Blizzard decided to make a new and better sequel MMO then WoW would not longer get any new content once that sequel is released.. just like Gw1. > > yet they made WoW classic..... I am sure Anet/NCSoft would consider rebuilding GW1/2 if they had a subscriber base of millions paying monthly subs. WoW has already had multiple upgrades to the game to the point one could argue modern WoW is so far removed from original WoW (even classic is fairly different) that it is a new/different game. That is the power of having subs and the cash flow it brings.

> @"namelesswc.9217" said: > > The point I wanted to make with this post is that being able to experiment with different builds should be a basic feature of a MMO. Because builds are useless with wrong stats, people can't experiment. Instead you have to follow meta builds to not waste money on equipment which is not ideal. > Why should it be a basic feature? Perhaps I am missing something but I don’t recall having free stat swaps in other MMO I played. I appreciate your desire to theory crafting and wanting easier access to that but I would contend that most players don’t care. Many players use meta builds because understanding the stats and mechanics of GW2 is fairly different from other games and there are so many unique variables from other games. Likewise I doubt most players farming legendaries are doing it to theory craft, but rather to have flexibility to switch between meta builds in different game types. Overall, yes, it would be lovely to have access to stat swapping more readily. Your suggested implementations however devalue existing legendaries to satisfy your wants. In your proposed idea here, where do legendaries fit in? Do they get cost reduced as well? What would be the draw to getting legendary armor?

I appreciate that there is a cost to the flexibility of changing gearing and stats. I do not think this is a prohibitive cost however. If you are running T3/T4 fractals you can make how much gold per day? Would I like it cheaper or easier to access, sure thing but, your suggestion negates the legendary grind. If I don’t need legendary to change stats why would I ever invest in it? A full set of legendary armor is not that hard to attain if you are happy to grind WvW which also throws a lot of other gear at you along the way. If you are planning on playing this game in a year you can easily grind out a legendary set in that time, likely much less.

> @"Astralporing.1957" said: > "Chill learning run" done by a group of 10 new players is usually an equivalent of saying "we're completely chill with fact that we _won't_ learn anything today". If you actually want to learn anything in such a group setup, it _will_ be stressful, there's no avoiding that. Learning raid encounters when you're all new to the content is an extremely painful process. Sure, some players actually enjoy that, but that doesn't make it any less of a hard and highly demanding work. > > I am also speaking from the point of the person that often _did_ the organizing of such groups. And, trust me, it never was chill _for me_. > Learning (or leading) doesn't have to be stressful. If you decide to allow it to be stressful, then that is on you. Having been a raid lead/team lead and recruiter for clans and guilds in FPS and MMO I have thousands of hours in Group Content in many, many games. The number one thing my groups always strived for was group cohesion through excellent communication and expectation setting. We would actively groom players joining our groups with the expectations we had; "We might not be successful, you might not get loot (or even in the raid) but we are going to try and set ourselves up for the best possible results and appreciate your help in being part of this teams success." So using your example above, I would suggest if the person leading such a group knows that the bar for success is learning the encounter and sets that same expectation with the group then it can absolutely be chill, and downright fun too!

Y’all talking about being chill? Chill?? If I join a group it is up to me to find my own inner chill regardless of any other factors. If I am learning, I gotta be chill. If I am leading, I gotta be chill. If I am failing, I gotta be chill, if I am succeeding, hey, still chill. Some people have a tendency to equate failure with an excuse to be negative, angry, upset, whatever. Being chill when failing is pretty important otherwise you become that person who is freaking out whenever something new and challenging comes along. Failure is an opportunity to learn, hey that’s chill. Being a chill leader means helping your group keep chill. It means setting the standard for which the people who join you should follow. That does not mean it is hard work or challenging, or not chill. So as a leader or a grunt, grouped or alone, it is up to me to be chill. If I am in a place where my chill is busted, that is on me. That said, if I am grouped with players who are busting my chill, it is okay to leave and....be chill. Say chill again, please.

> @"SunTzu.4513" said: >She likes the Druid theme pretty much. She plays the Naturemage/Druid Archetype in every solo RPG if the class is avaible. >But from my point of view thats maybe not the best choice because Druid seems not that strong DPS wise for OW and Story also she liked Staff and Traps no idea how to make this work together. I would encourage her to play what she is enjoying. There are no best choices here. The suggestions above might be ‘easy’ but also might not be ‘fun’ for your friend. Your viewpoint comes with a lot of experience. Sometimes with experience we forget the basics of playing the game, what it is like to have an overwhelming number of choices. If your friend wants to try something, help them with doing what they want, not with what your experience tells you. Sometimes players need to have their own learning experiences with professions to understand why some choices are more effective than others. But given that open world is fairly easy you could help them make a viable build that they enjoy and still be successful, just in a different way than a seasoned player may approach it.

> @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > @"Mungo Zen.9364" said: > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > I have plenty of data to support the idea that players play content they don't enjoy, it's in what you quoted above. Notice how all of those were over-populated (even Anet said so) and once their rewards were gone, so did their popularity. I guess it just happened for thousands of players to lose interest in those activities at the same time when their rewards were nerfed, it was just a coincidence. > > > > I do understand the correlation you are trying to make here, that players do not like specific content once it had it's rewards nerfed. Or that players will play content with better rewards even if they don't necessarily enjoy it. > > > > I agree that in some cases players will engage content that they don't like as much as other content (hello Gift of Battle and Exploration) but that typically is a stepping stone to get to something they do enjoy, be it owning a legendary or new skins, AP, or whatever. > > > > You noted a large number of nerfed farms, but I do not think players taking advantage of one system means they were not enjoying the content. What one could deduce is that a large number of players will go to the most efficient content to farm. The fact that the content that was farmed is still being played daily (at least in NA) let's us know that the content is enjoyable enough without the rewards. > > > > Have a look at Drizzlewood, this was a farm built by Anet, and it has generally speaking, been very successful. Loads of players have gone there and still do, the rewards are pretty good, and they have slowly nerfed the challenge and made collecting rewards easier. > > > > I anticipate over time that less players will go to DW even though it is technically getting easier. At some point new content will appear and draw players towards it, regardless of what happens to DW or other existing content. This doesn't mean that DW was bad or that players didn't enjoy it, anymore than AB is bad or unenjoyable. > > > > What it means is there are a great many variables that affect player engagement with content and replay-ability, rewards are just one piece of this. > > > > Of course there are many variables, the question is about what to use to base future content development on. Although the nerfed content is still being played (some of it at least, some are officially dead) it's a far cry from how popular it used to be. Which is why I gave the examples in the first place, if Anet based future development on the inflated versions they would be over-represented. Well, yes and no.... If you look at Auric Basin as an example, there wasn't a nerf to the rewards, there was a fix to how players interacted with the map instances. Of course Anet cannot rely on numbers from a broken mechanic like this which was being abused by players. I again lean on Drizzlewood as it is new and well done. It points to the lessons learned from previous content additions. Did you engage in (or even know) about the Otter multi-loot that they removed a short while after DW North was released? Just as with AB, you could log multiple toons to loot the same chests, in this case to farm the Otter items (completely unintended, just as with AB). Did that reduce the number of people playing in DW when it was fixed? Perhaps but, with the positive changes (such as moving all the chests to the end of DW North) they have maintained what I would call good player engagement since. Now compare that to Winterberry farming, which has always (as far as I know) allowed multiple toons to loot the nodes. This is something that doesn't apply to all LS currency nodes. It strikes me as very deliberate and again, reflects on lessons learned by Anet and how to provide content for players. I would surmise that while Anet might do some questionable things (hello DRM) that overall they do understand what the player base engages in, and how that reflects the revenues they generate. What we cannot see though, is how Anet assess revenue generation and its correlation to creating new game content or changing existing content.

> @"maddoctor.2738" said: > I have plenty of data to support the idea that players play content they don't enjoy, it's in what you quoted above. Notice how all of those were over-populated (even Anet said so) and once their rewards were gone, so did their popularity. I guess it just happened for thousands of players to lose interest in those activities at the same time when their rewards were nerfed, it was just a coincidence. I do understand the correlation you are trying to make here, that players do not like specific content once it had it's rewards nerfed. Or that players will play content with better rewards even if they don't necessarily enjoy it. I agree that in some cases players will engage content that they don't like as much as other content (hello Gift of Battle and Exploration) but that typically is a stepping stone to get to something they do enjoy, be it owning a legendary or new skins, AP, or whatever. You noted a large number of nerfed farms, but I do not think players taking advantage of one system means they were not enjoying the content. What one could deduce is that a large number of players will go to the most efficient content to farm. The fact that the content that was farmed is still being played daily (at least in NA) let's us know that the content is enjoyable enough without the rewards. Have a look at Drizzlewood, this was a farm built by Anet, and it has generally speaking, been very successful. Loads of players have gone there and still do, the rewards are pretty good, and they have slowly nerfed the challenge and made collecting rewards easier. I anticipate over time that less players will go to DW even though it is technically getting easier. At some point new content will appear and draw players towards it, regardless of what happens to DW or other existing content. This doesn't mean that DW was bad or that players didn't enjoy it, anymore than AB is bad or unenjoyable. What it means is there are a great many variables that affect player engagement with content and replay-ability, rewards are just one piece of this.

> @"anduriell.6280" said: > I suggest to log out the user and flag the account so the user CAN log back in and keep playing . If multiple of those flags happen then that account can be investigated by a game moderator. > > This will get rid of the bots efficiently as soon as they start hacking they will be logged off. If they log in automatically they will generate many flags in a short span. If a false positive happens worst case the player is logged out and if it keeps happening the player can report the issue in the bugs subforum or using the ingame system. And reduce the false positives to a minimum. > @"anduriell.6280" said: > You would contact support before coming to that because you would keep being logged out. So they could investigate the bug and you would be safe. > The amount of flags would be up to Anet to decide. > Anet could implement an automatic account lock out for the most egregious cases anyway. Anet stated: Every report of hacking and cheating is seen and reviewed by a member of our Guild Wars 2 Operations Team. Your suggestions for **identifying** hackers and cheats are fine, but the suggestion to automatically kick them is terrible. This type of action punishes players/accounts who are not trying to hack or cheat. Do you think players will understand why they are being kicked from the game? What do you say to someone who has just been kicked? What do you say when they cannot rejoin the activity they were enjoying and have to restart? Does Anet really want to create a bunch of extra work by creating an environment where more players are trying to get support due to a feature like this? Like I said, the detection ideas are fine, but leave it GW2 Ops Team to manually action the accounts in question.

I voted no but, overall think the design space doesn't _have_ to be changed but could be used differently. eSpec idea: 1 permanent Clone Illusion that copies your weapon skills and target, but not your Utilities. F1-F4 are replaced with F1-F3 Clone specific Utilities (Power, Condi, CC most likely combo). You Illusion skills now do not create clones, but rather power up a 6-8 pip power bar that is drained by using Clone Utilities. Consider it a pseudo hybrid of Ranger Pet with Guardian Firebrand Tome pips. The intent is to create the flow of charging up your Clone Utilities and then using the Clone Utilities either in rotation or as required.

> @"Infusion.7149" said: > > @"Mungo Zen.9364" said: > > If the DRM continue as they currently are then I will do the minimum required to get through the story and base achievements. I would suggest the following changes: > > > > 1 - Make Squad Sized DRM, scaling mob count and difficulty > > I fail to understand the intent of limiting DRM to 5 players. As such, I feel that making DRM work in groups larger than 5 and up to 50 would benefit the overall playability. > > > > 2 - In Squad Sized DRM, bake CM into 'pre-events' where completing the pre unlocks the CM > > If the group can pull of the pre-events, then they can likely pull off the CM, scale rewards accordingly > > > > 3 - Give each Squad Sized DRM a set start time once every 1 hour (expanding to every 2 hours assuming additional DRM are released) > > By having a focused start time every 20-30 minutes, players will have a target time to engage the DRM they want to play. > > > > 4 - Retain DRM for 1-5 players as 'on demand' content, but also as the primary way of engaging with the story elements. > > In the above Squad size DRM, the story elements could be toned down, for example all the dialogue during the escort in Metrica. > > > > There is an argument for giving DRM farmable value similar to other content currently available. However I would be far more likely to do DRM dailies if Squad Sized DRM was an option, regardless of the net value. > > > The content is designed for 5 man and scaling downward, see the interviews regarding DRMs' rationale on massivelyop. > > Many skills don't scale past 5 players anyway and fractals are largely successful along with Living Story : those are all 5 man. I tried searching for developer reasoning for making DRM and the only thing I can find is reference to them finding the scaling of 10 player content down to 1 player was harder than scaling down from 5. As story instances have been 'generally' available to groups of players that 'generally' can all engage with the story, why did DRM require so much additional tech? Why does this selection of stories need a new hybrid instanced content type? If anyone can link directly to developer information about why they built DRM (as opposed to existing methods), what they were meant to accomplish, please do. Having worked in software development, we term this type of release MVP or Minimum Viable Product. An MVP release will technically hit the goals of the release, but rarely do so in an elegant or logical fashion. In this case, Anet can state 'We released new instanced content, we released new story content, we added new skins and rewards, we added new currency, we added overworld events" and perhaps more. But while we can't argue that they did these things, we can argue that they did so in a successful, logical, or meaningful way. An MVP release usually is the result of rushing out a project whose goals were not clearly defined. I can of course give a pass for this past year, but would argue that DRM were half baked from the start and need more attention at the design table to meet a better standard as a new form of instanced group content.

If the DRM continue as they currently are then I will do the minimum required to get through the story and base achievements. I would suggest the following changes: 1 - Make Squad Sized DRM, scaling mob count and difficulty I fail to understand the intent of limiting DRM to 5 players. As such, I feel that making DRM work in groups larger than 5 and up to 50 would benefit the overall playability. 2 - In Squad Sized DRM, bake CM into 'pre-events' where completing the pre unlocks the CM If the group can pull of the pre-events, then they can likely pull off the CM, scale rewards accordingly 3 - Give each Squad Sized DRM a set start time once every 1 hour (expanding to every 2 hours assuming additional DRM are released) By having a focused start time every 20-30 minutes, players will have a target time to engage the DRM they want to play. 4 - Retain DRM for 1-5 players as 'on demand' content, but also as the primary way of engaging with the story elements. In the above Squad size DRM, the story elements could be toned down, for example all the dialogue during the escort in Metrica. There is an argument for giving DRM farmable value similar to other content currently available. However I would be far more likely to do DRM dailies if Squad Sized DRM was an option, regardless of the net value.

> @"Fueki.4753" said: > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > @"Fueki.4753" said: > > > Given us back Fall damage reduction would also help a lot on many Jump Puzzles. > > > If not in traits, Arenanet should reduce is baseline for everyone. > > > > I don't see anything wrong with being able to fail some of the content. In fact it would be weird for me if you couldn't and it seems that's exactly what some people here want? Nobody just *deserves* succeeding for simply showing up. Not only that, but the rewards for jps are usually pretty low, nothing about most of them is mandatory, so if it's so hard/unenjoyable for someone then... just don't do them? > > Did you ever try out the Griffon Rook Jump Puzzle **without the bomb,** after Arenanet took fall damage reduction away? > Some of the jumps are taking away over 90% of your health and you land immediately next to griffons. > That's hardly fair. > > And "Not so secret" already was impossible for many (maybe even most) players **with** the fall damage reduction. > I can't imagine the nightmare it is now. > > Just because falling damage would be reduced doesn't mean people automatically "succeed for simply showing up". > If one can't do the jumps, that player will still fail them. > And if getting rewards "for simply showing up" was a problem, Arenanet could always disable portals. > > Having less falling damage means less people die, thus less time is wasted by waypoint'ing and running back. > There may even be less players giving up on Jump Puzzles, since they are no longer getting frustrated due to dying over and over and over again. Part of being successful in jumping puzzles is managing all the variables they throw at you, including certain death falls, traps, mobs etc. There are a great many JP which are very easy, and there are a handful which are fairly hard, but all the JP can be accomplished on any character with the tools given in the game. What I keep seeing with this game is players complaining about the skill ceiling being higher than they like. All these JP can be accomplished with no additional skills or traits, and always could be. The hardest ones require more player engagement to figure out the best paths, and can take many attempts to complete. However, JP are usually a one and done type thing where a player goes, does it and never comes back. As such, players don't always get to enjoy the rhythm or flow of a JP by mastering it, rather they do just enough to finish it and move on, usually not gaining much skill or experience in the process. Looking specifically at Mad King Tower and Wintersday JP, both of these JP are 'relatively easy' if you try doing them dozens and dozens of times. They are hard to learn, hard to master but, once you get the flow, it is really a lot easier than it appears. As these are farmable JP, one is likely to try many times to complete these and slowly master each step of the JP. Unfortunately, there are few incentives in other challenging JP to promote players farming them, and if there is, someone is parked there for a TP or Port, removing the need to learn how to do that JP.

Thanks for sharing the video. I dropped my average time down 10 seconds and got a best time of 1:28:840

> @"Andrej.4293" said: > thank you all for the comments, I was just wondering however, since you can get only 1 key from level 10 story per week, does the timer reset 7 days from receiving the key or on a monday or something. It resets about 12:30 AM PST Monday’s

> @"Lily.1935" said: >At some point they do need to be pushed into multiplayer content. Sooner than later is better. I disagree with this sentiment. There is absolutely no reason for players to be pushed into multiplayer content, specifically raids or fractals etc. What benefit do you see from promoting this path?

+1 for a solid idea

> @"ugrakarma.9416" said: > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > @"ugrakarma.9416" said: > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > I've never got the whole PoF maps are too difficult complaint in this thread and the other active one on the general forum page. I was about to run low level alts doing all but the hearts and hero points which required fighting without any issues. I've not seen any issues with the aggro range of mobs either. It's clearly a learn to play issue with some players wanting the map to be like Queensdale. Fighting mobs is a part of the game. Expecting to traverse across the maps as a pacifist is absurd. > > > > > > i do play very well thanks, thats why i take grypphon and fly over trying skipp map much as possible. bad map design with 1500+ aggro range and mobs overlapping every other all time inst a player issue, but bad design. > > > > Interesting, seeing how many players don't have this problem. I'd still say in many -maybe most- cases it's just positioning issue of the player. Sure, there are areas designed to be especially tight/crowded with mobs, but if someone claims it's the issue universally true for whole pof maps then based on my experience that's just false, which to me points at it not being "bad design", but rather a "playstyle/player issue". > > > > Also "taking griffon to skip everything" (while fun and definitely a viable/solid solution, don't get me wrong ;p) doesn't do anything to support the claim about someone being a good player with sufficient/high combat mechanics understanding, just saying. > > being a good player is being able to use the tools to avoid annoyances. > > the map are designed to use mounts, the problem is that once u are unlocky guy that are dismounted, u have to clear entire zone to get out of combat and mount again. > > they should rethink this... > > the mines zone entrance near quartz crystal in crystal oasis, is clear example of this. i know the "shortcuts" to skip combat there, but over-skill from my part just confirm bad design. to aggro overlap here is so huge, that i have memorized "hotspots" to use with griphon to avoid being hit. ... i wonder how the poor noobs perform here against the spam of veterans forged lolz. I wanted to make sure the areas you were talking about so I looked it up on the Wiki and went there in person. Just for reference, here is what the Wiki says: _The Forged Foothold is an area in the eastern Crystal Oasis. It acts as the local headquarters as well as the staging grounds for raids for the Forged forces located in the oasis._ This is the headquarters for an enemy faction, of course it has a lot of mobs. These aren't just static mobs, they path, they are in groups, they are positioned to be layered in there to attack any intruders. Does it not stand to reason that these resource nodes (Quartz Crystal Formations in this case) were deliberately put in a more challenging area to farm? What do you want? A free pass to anywhere on the map because you have a griffon? As I said in my first post, some areas are designed to challenge the player, some are designed for group play, while others are very very easy. As an aside, while you still lean on the new player experience, a new player might not decide to farm the same nodes you have issue with given that the resource you pointed out, Quartz Crystal, is readily available through many sources and it is likely faster to farm gold and buy it on the TP.

What solution would you recommend? It sounds like you want an easier path to attaining your goals, and are leaning on the new player experience as validation for your desires. Some parts of the game are designed for group play. Some parts of the game are designed to challenge the player. Likewise some are designed to be easier more accessible. A choya at a vista, a hydra at a HP, that’s part of the game. I still know of many vista and HP you can walk up to and commune without having any combat. You talk about doing map completion and I would say you should expect to see a full range of difficulty when exploring a whole map. You are setting out to do something by it’s nature challenging, by exploring the full map! And again on new player experience, talk it through a minute. New player buys EoD Levels in core to 80 Goes to EoD for story and fresh content This might be an area of interest in the decay of population in PoF. New players may not get PoF when they get EoD. It might not be a bundle, they may not want the extra cost, whatever. I would assume most new players will decide if they want to invest in HoT or PoF after playing through EoD or at least core. I also expect new players to join current content as it is where everyone else will be playing. I would anticipate that those who enjoy EoD so much they want to keep playing older content will be prepared to play outdated and low pop maps. Because we know the most vocal voices in the community tend to point out the shortcomings of old content. I am fine if Anet never touches PoF again and invests all their resources into new content. Hopefully they can accommodate the desires and worries that have been raised regarding old content with new better content.