Blaeys.3102

If they had implemented this on day one, I could see it working. But, after five years, many people have developed multiple ties to different communities on their server. It isn't uncommon for someone to WvW with one guild on Monday and one with a different playstyle on Tuesday.

Under the proposed system, that will be pretty much gone for all practical purposes. Because of alliance limits, most harder core wvw guilds will be very picky about who is (and who isn't) in their alliance. The people running the alliance will have no choice but to look for the most competitive guilds to group with - regardless of how tight their current communities are. The players that join them for a night or two - and then run with more casual groups later in the week (and there are a lot more of these kinds of wvwers than you might think) - will now be forced to either make a larger commitment to WvW or risk missing out entirely.

In the past five years, servers have banded together. They have bought expensive teamspeak servers and websites. They have set up fun little theme nights for less hardcore players. They have built ties based around things other than how good a player someone is.

The proposed alliance system will harm that. Again, if it had been like this from day one, it wouldn't be an issue. But asking this of the community five years in makes me think that Anet has grown out of touch with the real in-game communities (which aren't really represented here on the wvw forums, btw).

> @"KalasDelRio.8921" said:

> I'm not sure why I'm seeing so many complaints about "Elitism".

>

> Will this system promote WvW-focused Guilds to recruit more hardcore members? Yes, of course it will. Will those WvW-focused Guilds end up walking all over more casual Guilds? Unlikely, seeing that both players and Guilds are going to be monitored for how much time and effort you put into the game-mode.

>

> Simply put: If you and your Guild play nothing but WvW, expect to be placed alongside like-minded players against other worlds full of like-minded players. This should result in a higher level of WvW play for players/Guilds who enjoy playing at that level.

>

> If you enjoy a more casual approach, expect a more casual level of play with other casual players against other casual worlds. It's not that hard to figure out.

>

> And if you're a solo player that enjoys playing on a certain server, there'll no doubt be Server Guilds/Alliances that pop up to keep people together. Yes, you might technically have to join a Guild, but that doesn't mean you have to run as a Guild.

If you look at guilds as solid single entities, your points work.

But that isn't the case. There are players out there that enjoy playing with different groups of friends throughout the week. Many bounce between harder-core full time wvw groups and their smaller groups based around friendships or spillovers from PVE activities. This will be impossible to do under the new system, unless those guilds are all in the same alliance (which is highly unlikely if any of them are more casual than the others - or if the alliance cap is restrictive). So, the system will force guilds to ally not based on friendships, but rather on perceived skill levels - which is definitely worth labeling as elitism.

And getting away from elitism is why many shifted from other MMOs to GW2 in the first place. It baffles that Anet wants to mess around with that.

The proposed system only works if everyone is either in a full time wvw guild or in a casual wvw guild. When you have crossover between the two (and you definitely have a lot of that), then the system falls apart - and makes the decisions you make about who to wvw with affect real tangible friendships.

There are potential solutions that would help balance populations without decimating the current server communities in the game. I recall a video that made the rounds several years ago that discussed implementing more than 3 borderlands maps in a given match, allowing for a single regional wvw match - where all of the servers are essentially grouped (and periodically regrouped) into three large teams - and then enough borderlands maps are generated to accommodate for all of them in the given time period. While still not a perfect solution, it has to be better than what they are proposing here, which essentially invalidates the communities built in the last five years.

Of course, this would require more work from Anet, but that is better than putting this onto players (and the inevitable elitism that comes with that as casual guilds jockey for semi-decent wvw experiences).

I tried to find the video but cannot - I remember it being extremely well done. If someone remembers it (or the person who created it sees this), it would be worth linking.

I see several potential problems with this proposed system.

First, there are many guilds, like mine, that characterize themselves as PVX, meaning they are made up of players who enjoy the different aspects of the game (open world, raids, wvw, etc) together. Several members fill in with WvW through other guilds, but they still enjoy our 1-2 nights as a guild in WvW. What you are proposing will essentially kill this dynamic.

Second, even servers that aren't necessarily super competitive in WvW still have fun together - and have dedicated literally years and thousands of dollars (outside of GW2) to enrich those communities. As an example, our server members maintain a high count teamspeak server and website. These communities mean a lot to us and we do not want to see that investment invalidated, even if the result is better balance (we would rather retain our community).

Third, this system will likely encourage even greater elitism in the game. I worry that the guilds we run with now will end up hitting the alliance "cap" and more casual guilds like mine will be placed in the untenable position of "holding them back" in order to be a part of these limited number community. While some may find this to make the game mode more competitive, I worry that many more will find it creating a more toxic WvW community.

That isn't a direction GW2, which has always leaned toward a more casual environment and playerbase, should be going in. You risk alienating more casual players - segmenting them into a sort of sub-class in the community that no one wants to play with or be associated with.

I strongly urge you to consider these points - and possibly implement some kind of in game opinion collection. I know that tonight, in our guild run in teamspeak, there is not a single player who thinks this is a good idea.

I further hope this isn't a foregone conclusion. The potential damage to in game communities - that many of us care deeply for - isn't worth any potential benefits this system might bring.

The only realistic reason I could ever see for GW3 would be to improve the game engine - and I don't see that as a legitimate reason for shifting gears right now.

The shift from GW1 and GW2 made sense because GW1 was never actually an MMO. It was a coop game with a public in game lobby. GW2 is a fully fleshed out (and extremely well done) MMO. Not sure where you would go with a GW3.

I actually like how things are now. I find it neat when someone asks what a particular skin is or where it came from. Nice bit of social interaction centered around a little flattery. That wouldn't happen if people could just right click and inspect.

Run vipers in your armor and weapon slots and dire or trailblazer in your trinket/rings/backpiece. You'll find a nice mix of survival and heavy single target condi damage. Over time, you can even start to replace some of the rings, etc with vipers - as you get accustomed to the other ways a Mirage can stay alive (evasions, blinks, stealth, etc).

And welcome to the Mirage fan club. It is my single favorite elite spec (in all parts of the game).

The idea of profession diversity in GW2 died years ago. It's worse here than it ever was in most other MMOs.

All professions and builds will never be equal in terms of viability - whether that be measure in direct damage, conditions, breaks, boon sharing, etc.

The true problem - and single biggest issue with raids since day one - is the huge disparity between the best and worst professions on a fight to fight basis - and, in the case of chronomancers, on EVERY SINGLE RAID fight currently in the game.

There should never be such a huge advantage to bringing one profession over another. As the most obvious example - when 100% alacrity, pared with quickness, uptime makes a massive difference across the board (not just with dps, but with heals and ccs as well), then it becomes almost mandatory to bring 2 chronomancers (or risk making the fight much rougher than it needs to be).

That is extremely poor game design.

Not sure what the solution is at this point, however - and we can DEFINITELY be assured that Anet doesnt really care. They have had more than 2 years to address this issue and seem either blind or willfully ignorant of the problem.

If there is any group or individuals that could be assembled regarding the topic of guilds and guild related activities/support, that would get my vote.

Outside of that, as others have said, the balance team should probably be near the top of the must do list.

And now guildees are saying they like it :)

Were gonna make a bunch of them now.

Someone in the guild just pointed out that its a replica of one of the presents used in the Wintersday Jumping Puzzle.

I guess that makes sense. Still not exactly what I was expecting.

Is it really supposed to be this big?


(that's me standing on top of it)

There is no way that fits under the Wintersday Tree decoration :)

There are games 2-3 times older than GW2 (and even older than GW1) that have good colorblind modes. Another game I play now has 3 different colorblind settings based around the different types of the affliction out there.

This should have been a no brainer for inclusion on day one - and, after 5 years of people asking for it, it is just sad that it still isn't a thing.

Power Scrapper

Any tank other than chrono

When it comes to open world content, such as maps, dynamic events, collections, jumping puzzles, etc, no one does it better than ArenaNet. That we get a new high quality map with well thought out content every 3-4 months is impressive and really makes the game something special, imo.

Here's a prediction - now that a mod has moved the thread from the general subforum to the raid subforum, we will see the opinion skew heavily toward the "raids should only be hardcore" point of view in the poll.

It's something we've seen before. Limiting the audience will result in very different results. Sorry to see that happen. Hopefully, any Anet devs trying to read into any results understands that and actually sees the (admittedly small scale) results prior to the thread move.

I had this in another thread, but it makes more sense to state it here -

I know some people do not want to accept it, but the reason WoW is seen as the posterchild for how to make raiding work in an MMO is because the developers there adapted the game mode throughout the years and ended up with something that fits with the rest of the game. By including multiple difficulty tiers (including and LFG and flex raid tier), they were able to do things that a game like GW2 cannot, most notably incorporating strong story and lore focused content into raids. Since they do not have to worry about the accessibility factor, raids could become a deeply integrated part of the WoW experience.

And it worked (despite the complaints from elitists claiming lower tiers somehow "ruined" raids). That game offers some of the (if not the) best raiding experiences in the industry - and has done so for almost a decade now.

Unfortunately (I believe), Anet wants raids to be something different in this game. In a game that has always been about accessibility and community (where they even bragged about being the "friendliest" MMO), they have injected semi-exclusionary content. They cannot tie that content strongly to the rest of the story and, by their own admission, want it to be almost exclusively for a small percentage of players.

Given that, they have made the conscious decision to limit the size of the raid development team to the point where new raids will probably come 2-3 times a year, at the fastest.

So, what we end up with is content that feels disconnected from the rest of the game, that is only enjoyed by a small percentage of players, that people "master" within a few weeks (month at the longest), and that comes out at a snail's pace (unfortunately, rightfully so, given the size of the team and target audience).

That is not a sustainable model for success. If you doubt that, think about what raids would look like if the rest of the game weren't here. No one - not even hardcore raiders - would think that was enough - or interesting enough - to warrant their attention. They are relegated to ancillary content at best. And, when that ancillary content cannot have strong story ties to the rest of the game and is partially walled off due to the math of raiding (refuse to call them actually difficult), it will eventually begin to feel more and more out of place.

Despite the reluctance from the developers and worries from hardercore raiders, the mode needs difficulty tiers. It needs them to justify stronger story ties to the GW2 narrative and to justify more development resources from Anet. Until that happens, we are stuck with how raids are now, a model that I believe is unsustainable longterm.

Glad to see this topic again (this has to be the most popular raid related topic by a wide margin).

There are many ways this could manifest itself:

* A console inside the instance that gives group members a wide range of buffs - and possibly a damage modifier. Given that this tech already exists in a form in the special forces training area, I have to think it would be possible (no idea how easy it would be)

* Open the raid to larger raid group sizes without scaling the content in any way. Guilds or pugs could then take in 11-20 players to experience the content (more than 20 would probably be a little bit too crazy).

* Story motes that work similar to challenge motes, but in the opposite direction (paring away mechanics, toning down mathematical requirements, etc)

And probably a dozen more. I'm sure there is some creative solution out there that would require little ongoing development oversight and provide this solution elegantly.

Again, I am glad to see this topic - ONCE AGAIN - resurface. It is important that people keep voicing a desire for this kind of feature. Surely, at this point, Anet can see that this is something that isn't going away as long as raids exist in their current format. And, while they have said there are no plans for it right now, it is still worth bringing up every chance we can.

I know people (including probably ANet) are tired of hearing me on this topic at this point. My view is well documented (and documented and documented ....). I will now force myself to stay out of this particular thread after this response to save you all the pain :).

And, to reinforce Vinceman's post, of course any lesser difficulty would have to have significantly less reward. I don't think that is even debatable.

As others have noted, gearscore simply wouldn't work in this game because of the how gear works.

I know some people do not want to accept it, but the reason WoW is seen as the posterchild for how to make raiding work in an MMO is because the developers there adapted the game mode throughout the years and ended up with something that fits with the rest of the game. By including multiple difficulty tiers (including and LFG and flex raid tier), they were able to do things that a game like GW2 cannot, most notably incorporating strong story and lore focused content into raids. Since they do not have to worry about the accessibility factor, raids could become a deeply integrated part of the WoW experience.

And it worked (despite the complaints from elitists claiming lower tiers somehow "ruined" raids). That game offers some of the (if not the) best raiding experiences in the industry - and has done so for almost a decade now.

Unfortunately (I believe), Anet wants raids to be something different in this game. In a game that has always been about accessibility and community (where they even bragged about being the "friendliest" MMO), they have injected semi-exclusionary content. They cannot tie that content strongly to the rest of the story and, by their own admission, want it to be almost exclusively for a small percentage of players.

Given that, they have made the conscious decision to limit the size of the raid development team to the point where new raids will probably come 2-3 times a year, at the fastest.

So, what we end up with is content that feels disconnected from the rest of the game, that is only enjoyed by a small percentage of players, that people "master" within a few weeks (month at the longest), and that comes out at a snail's pace (unfortunately, rightfully so, given the size of the team and target audience).

That is not a sustainable model for success. If you doubt that, think about what raids would look like if the rest of the game weren't here. No one - not even hardcore raiders - would think that was enough - or interesting enough - to warrant their attention. They are relegated to ancillary content at best. And, when that ancillary content cannot have strong story ties to the rest of the game and is partially walled off due to the math of raiding (refuse to call them actually difficult), it will eventually begin to feel more and more out of place.

Despite the reluctance from the developers and worries from hardercore raiders, the mode needs difficulty tiers. It needs them to justify stronger story ties to the GW2 narrative and to justify more development resources from Anet. Until that happens, we are stuck with how raids are now, a model that I believe is unsustainable longterm.

> @Hesacon.8735 said:

> My biggest issue is it's way harder to organize 10 people for raids with no barrier to entry than other game modes.

>

> Take fractals for example. You only need to organize 5 people, AND there is a barrier for entry in agony resistance. Fewer and more dedicated people make it a much less painful process.

>

> I want to raid, I just don't want to deal with the sheer logistics involved in building the groups.

The hardest part of raiding has always been logistics, even within organized groups or guilds - so the idea of raiding requiring "skill" is really more of an illusion than anything.

To that point, in my raids, I find myself constantly having to play the bad guy with people I consider to be close friends. When we struggle on a fight, it is rarely because of a lack of skill, but rather because Anet chose to limit certain tools that make raiding significantly easier to very few - or even one - profession/build(s) (one most point to is alacrity). It gets tiring telling people that the profession they have chosen to play and learned to love over the years isn't good enough - that in order to be a good raider, they have to play something they don't enjoy.

It is sad how raids in their current form have turned GW2 from what many considered to be the most accepting and friendly MMO on the market into one of the most narrowminded and toxic environments in gaming.

I think Mike OBrien's post about this on reddit summarized the issue well. While we, as consumers, look at it from a money for value perspective, Anet has to take a bigger point of view.

They have to find price points that ensure profits while not being so painful that no one ever buys them. They are - rightfully so - going to push the limits of that economic model as far as they can. And the motivation will have to be profitability - to ensure that they can keep pushing out living story and make as much of a profit as possible at the same time (which, despite what you read in most reddit posts, isn't a bad thing).

Now, will I pay 2000 gems for a peacock skin for my raptor? No - absolutely not. But if enough other people do - and it provides the money they need to keep putting out the content I love (and I do love this new map), then I think they should charge whatever they can.

Side note - I am glad to see them move away from gambling boxes though. That is a heinous practice and needs to be shunned by everyone in the gaming world.

Likes:

* New map metas are fun and appropriately rewarding

* New bounty boards (figured they were coming, but really glad to actually see them)

* Story is interesting and fun (ending was just emotional enough to matter)

* New fractal feels different than past fractals

* Rytlock basically tells Braham to stop whining (subtle moment, but it is there)

* Easier to acquire gear with new stats through fractal vendors

* New focus skin is among the best looking weapons ever put in the game

Dislikes

* New focus skin is among the best looking weapons ever put in the game (now I have to spend hours getting it :) )

* Only one new guild hall decoration - and the price is a little ridiculous

* Still really want new guild content in some of these new maps

Overall, this is a really good update. I can't wait to organize guild runs of the new metas and bounties this weekend.

> @Cyninja.2954 said:

> I stand by what I said earlier, the story in raids is minimal at best.

>

> Honestly, the back and forth in this thread only leads me to believe a couple of people who do not raid just want to make a fuzz about something which they have not even experienced themselves and are imagining or interpreting way more context or story than there ever was. Watch a WP video on the raid story, realize that the 30-50 minutes or so he spends on talking about the raid story is based on maybe 1/2 a page of dialog and story (because he is WP, he made a 20+ minute video on 1 screenshot of the new raid).

>

> Personally I have no objection if they tell side stories which are of absolutely 0 consequence to the main story (and might be related to GW1 things that would never have made it into the game anyway). While doing the actual raid you miss 80% of the story anyway and at best go through the raid instance afterwards and collect all the story achievements. I had way more insight into the raid story from watching someone explain it on youtube than I ever had while running through the raid.

Which supports the idea of just leaving lore or character related story out of raids altogether. Most raiders do not care.

Also, I do raid - at least 2 nights every week (not that it matters for this particular discussion).

> @maddoctor.2738 said:

> > @Blaeys.3102 said:

> > I'm pretty sure that some of the people in this thread could justify just about anything as side story. As a perfect example, I'm sure they would have called the Balthazar story arc a "side story" if it had happened in a raid - not because it was actually a side story, but rather because they could find some tiny part of it that separated it from the "main story" (in that case, because it didn't directly deal with the dragons). I'm sure they would have said the same of the Minister Cadeceus arc - and even the Scarlet story from season one.

>

> It's the other way around. Someone found a tiny part of it that somehow connects with the story, but still you get all the same info (and more) about it in-game anyway, and calls it not a Side Story. I think some people in this thread would find any tiny excuse to justify that raid story is not a side story, or simply don't say anything, nor counter anything, and follow up with a smile at the end of their post.

Which is my whole point. Different people define that term differently - to the point where, especially in this conversation, it has no meaning whatsoever.

As I mentioned, it isn't what's important anyway. The really important question is would the general GW2 population - the ones that live in the Living World - find them interesting to experience (again - important word - a youtube video is not the same thing)? The answer is, of course they would. The first raid kicked off the bloodstone storyline. Wing 4 provided closure to a storyline/character that many people cared about and speculated about for years.

So, once again - they need to tell these stories outside of raids - because, by their own admission, raids are balanced for a smaller percentage of the game's community. If they are not going to change that (and they recently said they have no plans to), then they need to be VERY careful about making sure raids are not a primary device for any aspect of the lore or story.