MarshallLaw.9260

> @"Swagger.1459" said:

> I have a feeling players would welcome a change that gets rid of resource generating and gating mechanics, that are forced on only certain professions and specializations, and create "stances" in their place. Think we can consider this?

From what I understand, this would be a _huge_ change which in some cases would tear apart the core mechanics of a class or elite spec. I mean, I can't even imagine currently what would happen to Rev.

With all due respect, the idea is both massively game-changing and also rather shallow and vague.

In doing this, devs would be ripping apart established classes and functionality to rebuild it into something that may or may not work and currently sounds a bit more bland.

"Other" option not available but would be interested in expanding normal conquest to 10v10 across 5 nodes perhaps. Definitely in favor of more modes being implemented (like stronghold but better), tough to decide which would be best.

Plenty of great ideas out there, I'm frankly astounded that 25% voted for "We don't need any more".

> @"BareManny.7190" said:

> I've noticed of late players who have the mounts are quite unforgiving of those who do not in the starting area, using the mount attack skill to obliterate groups of mobs needed for hearts and such. While this is a great skill in higher levels I feel that it's quite unfair on people just starting the game. I can see they are great advertisement for Path of Fire, but it's at the expense of those players just starting the game. The majority of mount riders are also quite rude when you ask them to please don't kill everything in one fell swoop. I don't see why mounts can't be used to run around starting area's but I really think their combat skill, in the starting area's, should be disabled. That way new players can level normally without having to stop and wait for mob re spawns all the time, players with mounts can get around the map fast if they wish and Arenanet gets to advertise why getting PoF is a good thing.

>

> And to be clear, I have Path of Fire, and all the mounts. I don't use combat skill in Starting Area's, just use them for quick transport. So I've experienced first hand the effect they have on starting area's. I like to level the old fashioned way.

On the whole this topic is blown completely out of proportion.

Does the "engage" skill need some adjusting so it scales better in low-level zones? - perhaps.

Do we need to bring up that new players are "disadvantaged" ? -Probably not.

Vet players want to have an advantage for having completed more of the game. Everyone with a mount has finished the basic mount quest and leveled their mastery to enable them to use the "engage" skills. New players are welcome to do just that also.

As for people with mounts "being mean" - most will finish wiping mobs and move on within minute or so, mobs will respawn quickly, the impact is barely noticeable. If I'm running map completion, I'm not going to want to slow down my progress drastically just because another player thinks I'm "stealing" their mobs for 30 seconds.

On the whole, there are no massive swarms of raptor riders who are preventing anyone leveling for hours - there are a few when dailies happen to be in that area, but again they won't stick around for long.

Just reminds me of Helen Lovejoy.

"Think of the ~~children~~ new players!" - ~~Helen Lovejoy~~ BareManny.7190

Nerf order:

1- Core Rev

Class(es) i Main:

1- Core Rev

Why does it have to be such a **_BEAST_**?!?

> @"Blocki.4931" said:

> I just got my fourth star! I got it after my 65th "Helpful". I also have 563 upvotes over 603 (now 604) comments. I think it's safe to assume that it involves some kind of post to rating ratio that may or may not also change depending on time.

>

> For the record I am camping that page on my second monitor whenever I get bored. I got the message right as I got that 65th helpful, I don't think that was a coincidence

Fairly sure there's more to it. I was under the impression that 6 months was the 4th star but can't be certain since mine's on 3 star but 1st post date was Nov 2017.

Just to clarify one topic repeated earlier -

To be able to complete the POF specialization collections requires crafting a weapon of that type and therefore having a minimum of lvl400 in that craft(discipline).

as an example:

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Silence_of_a_Thousand_Years_(achievement)

Mordant Slicer- Craft with recipes purchased in The Desolation or the Domain of Vabbi.

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Mordant_Slicer

Since the item is account bound, you cannot purchase from TP either.

Good luck.

> @"starlinvf.1358" said:

> The collections are usually more expensive then crafting them. Though the POF ones a bit cheaper because named awakened weapons are pretty cheap compared to making a machined weapon for the HOT collections

Personally I found the Machined Weapons relatively cheap, it's the Mystic Weapons which are more expensive IMO. They all cost around 33g to craft and use 30 Mystic coins.

> @"VanWilder.6923" said:

> OP must be one of the investor/Trading post players who complains when price drops but will anonymously laughing in front of his PC when prices hit sky rocket.

On a completely unrelated note, I am _really_ worried about the price of sticks of butter. Not that I heavily invested in butter and have 10 banks slots stacked full of the dairy goodness. Just concerned about **the market** and really think people should buy ~~my butter~~ the butter on TP and raise the price back to the normal 10g per stick like it should be.

> @"starlinvf.1358" said:

> > @"MarshallLaw.9260" said:

> > > @"RedShark.9548" said:

> > > i just said that, because i think warrior is not supposed to whittle down their opponents with conditions, it just doesnt fit the theme imo

> >

> > Pretty much every prof has a condi and power build. With all due respect, how you think a class should be played is your preference and doesn't mean others choices are less valid.

> >

> > It's not unreasonable to request to have both condi and power options on aquatic weapons. At present only 1 warrior aquatic skill (https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Split_Shot) out of 10 inflicts a condition - and it is a pathetic 5s 1stack bleed.

>

> Its easy to dismiss that notion, until you realize each class only has 2 (or even 1) underwater weapon..... and those options also have to roll up Ranged vs Melee. The only solution the Devs can provide without addressing the higher level problem of weapon distribution is going to be half assed at best.... and thats making them all Hybrid weapons. And if you haven't noticed... hybrid weapons aren't good for stacking damage to either extreme power or conditions.

I agree that having so few weapons limits the possibilities, but having 1-2 power, 1-2 condi and 1 cc skill on each aquatic weapon doesn't seem too complicated (perhaps). We're not looking to have insane buffs, just so that your stats are relevant.

Rev has the advantage of having different effects when using a certain legend with Trident, Ele has 4 elements to play with, I don't play Engi so I don't know. Guard has 3 condi, 3-4 power skills, some heals and CCs (on trident and spear).

Regarding warrior Spear/Harpoon:

Perhaps scale back the power coefficient on 1 or 2 skills and add a condi. Only having 1 out of 10 skills with a condi application(and a weak one at that) seems insufficient.

> @"RedShark.9548" said:

> i just said that, because i think warrior is not supposed to whittle down their opponents with conditions, it just doesnt fit the theme imo

Pretty much every prof has a condi and power build. With all due respect, how you think a class should be played is your preference and doesn't mean others choices are less valid.

It's not unreasonable to request to have both condi and power options on aquatic weapons. At present only 1 warrior aquatic skill (https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Split_Shot) out of 10 inflicts a condition - and it is a pathetic 5s 1stack bleed.

> @"flog.3485" said:

> Why would Gw2 support the World Cup with an in-game related item? The US team isn’t even qualified for the World Cup.

Sounds like USA is in bronze tier :lol:

Traditionally GW2 has not really had many event-themed items outside of annual celebrations like Halloween/Luna New Year/Wintersday. I could be wrong but that's been the pattern I've seen.

If you think about it, were there any items for the 2014 WorldCup? I don't remember any.

People saying they like or dislike football is irrelevant, the point is that no sporting competition has been considered that important (for Tyria) because it's just that, an event, not a global festival.

Many other games have been able to cash in on merchandise related to current (real) world phenomena, ANet just chooses not to go down that path.

> @"ROMANG.1903" said:

> > @"MarshallLaw.9260" said:

> > > @"ROMANG.1903" said:

> > > A base mounts dye pack would be unfair to people who already bought mounts specifically to dye them

> > Base 4 dye channel mounts pack for 1400/1600gems is not unfair because it's not the same as previous skins. You yourself said this:

> > > @"ROMANG.1903" said:

> > >But dyable base mounts don't exist. The base mount exist, the dye option exist, I'd just like the 2 together. There is no raptor with the same colour paterns. There is no jackal which will retain the same texture and runes and won't dye some parts of the stones the same colour as the sand. There is no springer which has the same rays on their back... There is no Skimmer with the same paints on their body, and no griffon with the same back/front contrast.

> > That's why I said the following (which you've chosen to overlook):

> > > @"MarshallLaw.9260" said:

> > >I agree they should perhaps consider making a basic mount pack for 1600gems (maybe 1400) which retains the same skin shape but opens 4 dye channels for all 5 mounts.

> > Creating a new product as a "budget" set of basic mounts with more dye channels but no extra features is the way forward. It solves your proposed issue.

> To tell you the whole story I actually suggested a base mounts dye pack on a previous topic and received comments from people saying it would devaluate the purchase of people who already bought mounts. I'm actually fine either way, I just wanted to adress the issue with this topic.

Obviously people will have various ways of seeing this but if you break it down logically, the products are different.

As long as the "basic 4-channel" skins are not the same as the ones offered in the original release, there should not be much of an issue. Yes, the problem is that _some_ of the skins initially had very little variance apart from the extra channels so I can see where that idea is coming from.

> Perhaps 1600 gems is a bit too mutch for just the base mounts though? I don't see them having the same value as the branded or spooky ones for example... But that's my opinion.

Again, I think it's only fair to have it at a similar price because the value is subjective. Take for example the Wintersday Mounts Pack. It was the same price as the Branded and Spooky Packs. however I was not a fan of the aesthetics. Personally, I would **value** a basic 4-channel skin pack higher than the Wintersday pack. To keep it fair, 1600 gems seems about right.

Maybe they can release it as POF anniversary Gem Store Item.

> @"ROMANG.1903" said:

> A base mounts dye pack would be unfair to people who already bought mounts specifically to dye them

Base 4 dye channel mounts pack for 1400/1600gems is not unfair because it's not the same as previous skins. You yourself said this:

> @"ROMANG.1903" said:

>But dyable base mounts don't exist. The base mount exist, the dye option exist, I'd just like the 2 together. There is no raptor with the same colour paterns. There is no jackal which will retain the same texture and runes and won't dye some parts of the stones the same colour as the sand. There is no springer which has the same rays on their back... There is no Skimmer with the same paints on their body, and no griffon with the same back/front contrast.

That's why I said the following (which you've chosen to overlook):

> @"MarshallLaw.9260" said:

>I agree they should perhaps consider making a basic mount pack for 1600gems (maybe 1400) which retains the same skin shape but opens 4 dye channels for all 5 mounts.

Creating a new product as a "budget" set of basic mounts with more dye channels but no extra features is the way forward. It solves your proposed issue.

> @"ROMANG.1903" said:

> So, I've heard that the main problem with giving 4 dye slots to base mounts is that it would devaluate the purchase of people who bought skins just to be able to dye them.

> So what if spending something like 1200 gems _(one mount select or 3 liscences)_ or 1600 gems _(one mount pack or 4 liscences)_ on mounts-related products unlocked the base mounts dye channels?

So you're asking for an extra reward when you receive exactly what you buy?

> That way, you still have to spend gems to unlock them, but you're not forced to use a mount you don't really like if you prefer the base mount's colour patern.

Base mounts already have 1 dye channel, if you want something different, feel free to purchase it.

Nobody is forced to use any mount skin, that's personal choice.

I agree they should perhaps consider making a basic mount pack for 1600gems (maybe 1400) which retains the same skin shape but opens 4 dye channels for all 5 mounts.

> @"Ayakaru.6583" said:

> > @"aspirine.5839" said:

> > Nice Spoiler title btw......

>

> Oh come on, its been almost a year ago, give how long anet takes per LS chapter ;)

> Inb4 Dumbledore dies and the ring gets destroyed

you forgot about Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker

>! they both die

> @"phokus.8934" said:

> We must be getting drastically different team comps because there's only been one mesmer per team when I've been playing.

Maybe he was looking at clones or phantasms?

> @"Tom Hsiao.9705" said:

> I think it would be very nice if GW2 have elf available for players to select..because right now the only attractive looking race is human... Norm male looks like they're special (if I was norm female I wouldn't even wanna have anything to do with norm male) the norm female looks wayyyy better than male and I'm not sure why the male looks like undeveloped barbarian.... :s

>

> Tree people very ugly IMO...and I'm not interested in mutated dwarf looking asura thing either... cat are alright but they're not very cute or pretty like husky ... Ya please make elf race

>

> Thank you <3

Search function is your friend, my dude, this topic came up a little while back. General community feedback was "no elves" because they are too "generic MMO material" - which is true, they are basic AF.

Create a poll for/against elf implementation and you can have a better idea if you think otherwise.

As for the dev side - there are no elves in GW2 lore which makes it even harder to introduce to an already busy ecosystem.

> @"bbop.9706" said:

> Should I bother with crafting?

Yes

> If yes then when? While levelling or at 80?

any time, gather mats at all levels as you will need a wide selection to help you level your crafting.

> What are the pros and cons?

Pros:

- can craft ascended armor, weapons and not rely on drops (need max level crafting even if you're buying ascended gear from vendors - see Grandmaster Marks)

- can craft unique skins (non-tradable)

- craft unique stat combinations (also non-tradable)

- can craft time-gated items daily (at max level) which sell for profit.

- will need to craft certain items to complete certian collections.

Cons:

- costs to level crafting initially (depends on how much you are prepared to farm or buy really) and the items you make during the process are close to worthless.

> Are crafted items account bound or character bound?

Depends on individual items.

> How much gold does it cost to max a trade?

Check the guides listed, depends on discipline (which craft) 110g minimum I think.

> Anything else I should know?

Did you know that dueling is legal in Paraguay as long as both parties are registered blood donors?

> Thanks!

>

>

Google crafting guides - Personally used TenTonneHammer but the below is probably more up-to-date.

http://gw2crafts.net/

> @"Baked Potatos.7459" said:

> Hello my name is Baked Potatos, Posi before... on old times, i logged on my main account today and my ACCOUNT NAME has changed to Baked Potatos, and all my necros are named Baked Potatos ONE-TWO-THREE.... I still have all my gold and my laurels so i know that must be someone from Anet that did it. Can i get my old names back? :):)

> https://gyazo.com/e21ef2ed0a9d80790e91d78177e3a4ca - This necro was called Posi Moa, now hes Baked Potatos Three

> https://gyazo.com/f1f8a4379596da1773a154fc9d108a56

Sounds like ANet has acted on a ticket regarding your name being reported perhaps (as others have mentioned above).

Out of curiosity, were you sent any messages explaining the situation? were you provided with any name change contracts to remove the names ANet chose for you?

If not, then honestly that seems very harsh. I don't think I'd be affected personally but if a player chose a random name which _happened_ to be similar something inappropriate in another language and was not aware, they should be granted the opportunity to amend the name to what they pick themselves. After all this came about because the game filter did not consider your name as offensive or TOS breaking in the first place.

Would be interested to know how this gets resolved.

> @"Meesterlijk.6849" said:

> Someone was leaving in at start of the game it was like 46-25. We lost eventually and that counts as a loss we play 4 vs 5 almost the whole match. What kind of bs is this?

If you're still at the placement stage then the loss won't count when there is a 4v5 situation. You'll be placed based on the remaining matches.

I agree however, that historically I've had matches during seasons where a player leaves/DCs for more than half the game but the loss has still counted against us which should be looked at. Not very common occurrence but frustrating when it happens.

Personally I would be in support of harsher point deductions for abandoning (regardless of cause). This probably isn't a popular opinion but from a selfish point of view, why should some be punished because someone else chooses to continuously queue with a terrible connection?

> @"Dantert.1803" said:

> I think that it would be possible to have them if they are not retroactive, what I mean by that is that you get a new race but it starts with a few armors (and obviously all outfits) and has no access to the old armor sets.

That is a _huge_ limitation. There are currently aprox 54 armor sets per weight class not including individual pieces (rough count from wiki).

Consider how ANet would have to sell it - "Play as the [insert race here], but you wont be able to wear 90% of the items all the other races have"

How would this work for loot? A player can pick up a large quantity of gear but due to their race, be unable to use it.

> Same with the weapons, you get a new weapon type but that weapon type doesn't get added to the older sets.

This is a different beast. There was another discussion regarding this.

The way I see it is that we can get 1 new weapon for all 9 classes (e.g. land spear) but then it's the most common weapon, everyone has it, doesn't feel slightly unique or exclusive- probably not a good route to go down. Alternatively, we have 3 new weapons (1 per weight class for example or 1 per 3 random proffs) or 1 step further, each prof gets a new equip.

This gets more complicated. Even considering 1 new weapon - all loot tables would need to be updated to accommodate any new equipment. That's an enormous task.

I think there is a possibility to have this for a future expansion but it wouldn't be easy.

Perhaps you could get around the loot issue if each class were to get 1 wep and 1 crafting mentor/vendor/trainer which could offer different versions of this 1 weapon for loot, quests, currency from different sources.

For example - let's say warrior was given a 2H axe. Warrior players can now speak to their "new class" mentor who will offer 2H axes for completing quests all over Tyria(& beyond) and depending on what quest, will determine which axe you can purchase. Let's say you went on a quest in the Shiverpeaks - upon completion, you return to your trainer and now can access the Frost-themed axe. Quests can be like bounties, collections or events. Maybe throw in some crafting options.

This way we would actually bypass the "needs to be on every loot table" issue but how the playersbase would feel about it is unknown.

> Also this topic wuld be applied to the base story. Not being able to play the Gw2 vanilla and expansions that came before the release of the race or being able to play them but with just a few tweaks to justify the introduction of a new race.

> My question is, would you be fine with this?

No. Playing as this new proposed race would (for me) feel **incomplete**. You would never be able to have the _full_ story, and never have the _full_ choice of gear (skins). Literally second-class citizen.

> I'm just saying this if we ever get new races or weapons I'm not saying that we will get them. I heard already the people that think that they prefer not to have a new race or that they think it's too much work for arenanet, thia is not the point of this post, so if that is your reply you can save yourself some time and avoid this thread :D

Overall, I would much rather resources were put into a good, solid story for all existing races, instance content, events, maps, balancing, PvP modes. Enhance, expand and develop the content we have rather than trying to bolt on a half-cooked addition.

Using the hotkey method listed above, you spend less than half a second being mountless. I'm fairly sure this mount interaction is part of intended gameplay rather than a QoL issue to be resolved. Just double tap the hotkey.

> @"Eloc Freidon.5692" said:

> I prefer the Guild location in Lions Arch compared to ruins.

Agreed, but the commute from LA to Istan farm is considerably longer than from Vabi ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Edit: on topic, I think it would be a nice feature to have 1 or 2 small halls created for smaller guilds.

> @"RandomWolf.3986" said:

> In order to finish one of the banner collections, I must speak with Nayrim during the Epilogue. Well, I did... and she gave me no items. Without this item, I can't complete the collection. I've replayed the Epilogue several times by now and talked to her every single time and nothing happened.

>

> The item in question is "Embroidered Sunspear Sigil".

Did you choose to support the Sunspears on that particular character(during your story)?

If not, you need to pick a character who has chosen that path and complete all(most of?) the tasks on that character.

edit: _Suggest that Amnoon support the Order of the Sunspears in the story step "Blazing a Trail."_

> @"ROMANG.1903" said:

> > @"MarshallLaw.9260" said:

> > The original mount adoption licences were introduced as pack of 30. ANet later decided that this was not the optimal way of selling these due to the backlash experienced from some of the community. However you also have to remember that many people bought 10, 20 or all 30 of these before the newer system of individual 2k mounts and 1.6k packs was introduced.

> Yes but I recall the whole thing being priced at 100€/$... And I don't see how that is a problem at all. People who bought these packs knew they would get a random mount, and they got one. It's their choice of going RNG system, and I don't think that because some people used it, that now we shouldn't introduce a way of selecting what kind of mount we want.

Yes, it was about $120 for the whole collection. ANet has already put out a statement that it would be unfair to modify the acquisition method for this set. Many people bought 10, 20, 30 just for 1 or 2 skins so introducing a picking method for a fraction of the price would be insulting.

> > The gem store team made some alterations to acquisition methods due to some players being dissatisfied that they could not choose specifics and now we have that option with the Istan skins generation.

> The new thing is nice, but it still obeys to no logic, why should the super glowy griffon be worth the same as slightly-different-than-base-skin rabbit?

Because at the end of the day this is **purely subjective**. Functionally, all skins are equal as they give 0 advantage in game. The perceived value is developed by individuals and the community

>

> > With all due respect, your pricing/costs are unrealistic.

> > This is already an option with Istan Isles Mounts but the difference is that players pay and _additional 800gems_ to be able to pick their skin. Asking to lower the price by almost 95% is ludicrous.

> The pricing I suggest may be unrealistic, but I think you didn't get the idea. The thing I suggest is to be able to chose if the mount skin we get will be for the raptor, springer, skimmer or else, but you would still get a random skin for that mount.

I would be in complete support for them trying this system out for the next stable set they release.

> > In conclusion, we can probably agree that it's better to leave the original 30pack alone as it is. It's been over 6 months and many players have invested and played the RNG system to get what they want. Some have exactly the right skin, some might still be working on it. Changing it to be selectable would go against what ANet previously stated when they said it will not be touched.

> Again, it is their choice. They perfectly knew the mounts were random, they got what they paid for. I don't see the problem. I might add, that it's not because we introduce a new system that the "pay 400 for a random mount" should be removed. We can have both ways to get mounts. That way, people who want to invest in everything can buy the random mount liscences, while those who want more specific things can target their purchases.

Yes, but you're missing the point. Introducing a new system of being able to pick from an old collection _when this was never an option_ impacts players who already have the skins. If someone bought all 30 skins because they were unlucky but only wanted 1 or 2, they essentially paid about 4-5k gems for their 2 skins.

I'm not against trialing different ways of picking/rolling mounts for future releases as long as it doesn't negatively impact those players who stood by ANet during Mountgate and supported them by purchasing products.

> > The newer sets which come out already have the RNG _and_ "pay extra to pick" options so really there is no need to change anything.

> Yea well it's still the minority of the mounts, and honnestly, the pricing is wayyy too high. I would understand it if you pick the fancy fire mount, but when you just want to dye your raptor? 1200 gems? Seriously?

This is where we seriously disagree. You're one of the "price too high" crowd which I cannot agree with. Mounts are priced correctly.

As mentioned before, comparative value is subjective.