Blaeys.3102

Southsun Cove. There is a lot of room for new events on the map.

> @"TerJiee.6429" said:

> So fun getting acussed for something i did not do .... why would i even do that, ive spent 150 dollar on the game maybe more cuz i love it and will always do. But now it feels like i just got ripped off that money.. This is what i get for playing legally

I feel for you and if you didn't participate in RMT, I hope this gets resolved fast.

The comments you are getting above are a big part of why they discourage posts like yours on these forums. Posting here really doesn't help resolve your specific issue and only serves to rile things up.

Again, I hope your issue gets resolved fairly by the devs through your report.

> @"Danikat.8537" said:

> I find this quite confusing. This is the only game I've played where people act like the only stuff guilds can do together is content the game explicitly labels as guild activities. In every other multiplayer game I've played 'guild' content is literally anything which allows 2 or more people to play it together - guilds are how you find people to play with. So in GW2 'guild' content would be dungeons, raids, Fractals, WvW, PvP, story missions, world bosses, jumping puzzles, meta-events...

>

> I don't think it's a universal view however because I do see guilds doing all those things. There are even dedicated guilds for running specific meta events (with other people, but the guild organises and guarantees enough people to complete it) and as I said my guilds are my go-to group for anything I can't do solo, I use the LFG tool if no one is available or we need an extra person.

>

> I'm not opposed to them adding more guild missions or whatever, but I don't agree that until they do there is nothing for guilds to do.

I don't think anyone is saying there is nothing for guilds to do - again, my guild is the reason I play. The point is there is - and probably will be for the foreseeable future - little to nothing new coming for guilds.

They made a huge deal about guild missions when they released them - and again when HOT came out (specifically saying they were working on new ones for HOT zones - and they were very excited for us to see them).

Then, everything just melted away. What once felt like a cornerstone of the game was something they were seemingly willing to abandon as a side feature. I know that doesn't mean much to many players, but for some of us - who look to the communities we have created as the best part of the game - it was a heartbreaking revelation.

Dissolving the guild team - and abandoning guild missions were mistakes and the game has suffered for them.

They admittedly dissolved the guild activity team a few years ago. Since then, guilds have been more or less ignored - save for a couple new decorations a year.

The last new guild missions were added more than 4.5 years ago. Something that could have really been special died on the vine - which can be said of just about any guild oriented support from Anet.

My guild is the reason I play. I have been bitter by the lack of attention they receive for a while now - but I also know that when I bring it up, it isn't typically a well-discussed topic. I don't see anything changing anytime soon.

> @"Drecien.4508" said:

> This is how megaservers work. Wait till it calms down and then try to do it.

You should at least be able to travel to friends' maps. I normally love content like this - but not if it runs counter to playing with friends.

It is possible to be in a party or squad and end up on a different map than your friends. And, then, if you try to move to their instance, you are kicked out to Snowden Drifts.

Letting people play with their friends should be PRIORITY ONE. Not sure where to post this - it isn't technically a bug - but it is something that is very unacceptable.

We wanted to do this as a guild this weekend, but will now have to find something else to do together. Getting separated with no way to move to one another's map is very bad.

The 11 million strong ad works - it reflects your brand and shows how tightly the game is tied to its community. This is the direction you want to continue to take - emphasizing that GW2 really knows what the "massively multiplayer" in MMO should really mean.

The Black Citadel tourism ad - not as much. It feels like it could be about any MMO - and quite frankly, the locations you "brag" about in the ad don't really add any enticing flavor or content to the game.

Your brand differentiator - the thing that sets you apart from your competitors - is how well the game brings 100+ strangers together on a map to face down a foe. People can play hundreds of thousands of single player games. There are tons of coop games (and other MMOs that are more focused on group content) that bring together small groups (2-10 players) to face a challenge. GW2 shines in the large open world (in both PVE and WVW) where there are 100 or more other players - and I cant think of any other game (including other MMOs) that can rival you there.

Center your marketing around that message (which you do very well in the 11 million strong ad) and you have something worth the effort.

I like the priority list. It's way past time GW2 got back to what sets it apart from other MMOs. They need more energy into open world maps and gameplay that brings large groups together - which can definitely include expanding upon and adding events to existing maps. Focus on giving groups reasons to stay on maps and play together.

Open world and WvW are the two core elements of GW2. Focus on making those as fun and entertaining as possible and this game will have a bright and long future. Everything else is secondary imo.

They have been reusing model rigs since the game first came out (and, as others have pointed out - it is a very common practice in game development). It isn't a sign that the game is failing or that they put in less effort than they should have on the Warclaw - it is just a sign that they reused the griffon rig to make the warclaw (nothing more).

The warclaw looks and plays well in game. That is really all that matters.

What happened last week was inevitable - unfortunate because it involved 100+ people losing their jobs - but still inevitable.

Ive said this many times - in the past few years, the team at ArenaNet lost sight of what made the game great. They took their early successes and tried to expand into areas that ran antithetical to their original vision for the game.

Guild Wars 2 is successful because of four primary elements, imo -

* A robust and ever growing open world,

* an engaging and competitive WvW scene,

* a fluid and fun combat system (including elite specs)

* social tools that encourage forming large friendly groups (guild halls, shared resource nodes, commander tags, no treadmill, etc)

Everything else is extraneous and a general waste of resources, imo.

I believe that what happened last week - while terrible for those employees affected - will actually be beneficial to the game and its players. Management will have to make changes to how the game evolves - hopefully cutting the "me too" stuff we already see in other games and focusing all of their resources on the four areas I mention above (open world/LS, WvW, combat/character specs, and social tools/mechanics). Pare away everything else and focus on making those four areas as fun and engaging as absolutely possible.

I like the obvious move toward more active playstyles. It feels like a lot of thought went into these changes (and really do hope people give them a chance before reaching for the pitchforks - like you said, they really can't be gauged properly in a vacuum).

I can't wait to experiment with the new gyro changes. I love scrapper already, but currently only use the bulwark and sneak gyros. It'll be fun to give some of the others a try again.

Sorry you and your team have had to go through this.

Still think GW2 is one of the best games of all time.

This seems like a very bad move on their part. Gaile will be missed terribly.

> @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > @"Blaeys.3102" said:

> > It's very different. A subscription would lock people out of all parts of the game, whereas the system I describe only monetize upcoming new content. Basically, you pay to permanently add to your game vs paying to access the game you already have.

> Umm.... how is this any different than the current model? I purchase expansions and get content permanently added to my account?

>

Its different in that it injects income into a company more often and more reliably, while also increasing the rate at which we potentially see more premium style features (such as elite specializations) - and potentially ups the value of the periodic content.

Keep in mind I wasn't comparing to what we have now, but rather comparing the idea of a more dlc style approach (pay for each living world installment, but have more features included as potential additions) to the large expansion model, where we only see those features every few years.

> @"kasoki.5180" said:

> > @"Blaeys.3102" said:

> > Obviously a subscription will never happen in this game and isn't worth even discussing (for the many reasons people list above).

> >

> > I think a better model would be a pure dlc style approach. Abandon the concept of expansions and instead charge $5-$10 dollars for a smaller update each quarter (replacing the current living world update).

> >

> > Then move any personnel you have on expansions to that team and beef up what is in these updates to include things like new elite specs (2-3 professions with each update), a more aggressive fractal/raid/WvW update schedule and more relevant/larger world maps (including faster expansion into Cantha).

> >

> > I would happily spend an extra $10 every 3-4 months for a beefier update with the above elements. The long term income for Anet would significantly outpace the $30 every 2-3 years they would see from larger expansions and give players more to look forward to with the smaller more frequent update.

>

> How is that different than what some of us here have suggested as a premium model subscription? From the perspective of people who dont wanna subscribe its the same thing, while it gives additional options and QoL for people who want this hypothetical subscription/premium model. People who dont subscribe can purchase each individual dlc, while people who are in the premium/subscription programme get them with no additional cost.

It's very different. A subscription would lock people out of all parts of the game, whereas the system I describe only monetize upcoming new content. Basically, you pay to permanently add to your game vs paying to access the game you already have.

Obviously a subscription will never happen in this game and isn't worth even discussing (for the many reasons people list above).

I think a better model would be a pure dlc style approach. Abandon the concept of expansions and instead charge $5-$10 dollars for a smaller update each quarter (replacing the current living world update).

Then move any personnel you have on expansions to that team and beef up what is in these updates to include things like new elite specs (2-3 professions with each update), a more aggressive fractal/raid/WvW update schedule and more relevant/larger world maps (including faster expansion into Cantha).

I would happily spend an extra $10 every 3-4 months for a beefier update with the above elements. The long term income for Anet would significantly outpace the $30 every 2-3 years they would see from larger expansions and give players more to look forward to with the smaller more frequent update.

> @"AcOpolitico.7568" said:

> > @"juno.1840" said:

> >

> > "Mounts" definitely not the same as "Nothing". Everyone who says they are quitting WvW over mounts are flat out lying.

> >

> > The game mode has become stale and mounts will freshen it up a bit. The only thing players like you are accomplishing is discouraging ANet from implementing anything. Is that really what you want?

> >

> > You know what will really make people quit????? Anet actually doing "NOTHING".

> >

> > Bunch of spoiled players coming in to complain about something they haven't even tried... something new... to a game mode that desperately needs something new.

>

> Mounts are like NOTHING. They won´t freshen it up like, they will give a hype for about 2 weeks and then it´s over - great "fresh up"!

> And I don´t lie about quitting.. If the mount is that what I think it is, you won´t see me again in GW2 till it´s fixed, deleted or nerfed so no one wants it anymore.

> I complain about the real Problems in WvW - class balancing, enjoyable rewards for server, guild and player, A NEW MAP!?! - maybe

> WvW is a competitive game mode. Yes we need some changes but that ones - no gimmicks or something like that.

> I know that there are many problems between the devs and the WvW players but is it that hard to do something the players want?

> For instance the alliance system - I am looking forward to it. This is a good idea - maybe the first really joyable one!

>

> I know what you mean and I think you are right, mounts aren´t nothing, but they are nothing compared to existing problems in WvW.

There is a balance patch coming next week as well.

And the last time they gave us a new map, people screamed and yelled at them to the point where I don't really blame them for being wary of trying anything new in WvW.

At least them try something new - small or large - without literally complaining about it before it is even in the game.

And stuff like this is exactly why Anet doesn't do more for WvW. Anything that even smells like a fun change is jumped on and attacked before we even know anything substantial about it. We do not know how the mounts will behave or where/how precisely they can be used.

And to the OPs idea of a new map - I for one would love that, but I don't expect it to happen after the wave of negativity that came the last time they did exactly that.

I know people love wvw, but if you are closed off to them trying anything new, then nothing will ever change and the game mode will stagnate.

And to Anet - don't knee jerk react to the initial wave of negativity from the same people like you did with the desert borderlands. Give it time - and by all means continue to try new things in the game mode.

> @"perilisk.1874" said:

> > @"Blaeys.3102" said:

> > > @"Clayton Kisko.5207" said:

> > > > @"Blaeys.3102" said:

> > > > Thank you for the logical answer.

> > > >

> > > > In case it wasn't evident (and matters for the future on maps where the parameters you describe do not exist) - my guild loves (LOVES LOVES LOVES) doing bounties together.

> > >

> > > Noted! :)

> >

> > Part of the beauty of bounties is that they give groups something to do between meta events on a map. We love the new map, but last Sunday when we tried to do events together on the map, we did spend WAY too much time sitting around waiting for an event to trigger. If you aren't going to use something like bounties, you definitely need it make it easier to know when and where events are active on a map. There should always be something for people to do together - and it should be easy to figure out what your options are. The new map (which, again, is very well done) does fall down when it comes to achieving that goal.

>

> Maybe something in between bounties, HPs, and adventures would work?

>

> That is, an event you can trigger almost immediately after the previous one completes (like HPs), where success/fail is group-oriented but scalable (like bounties), and where personal participation is rewarded based on daily bronze/silver/gold tiers with some very discrete criteria, shown using the adventures UI.

>

> Like, for THP, a really basic approach could have been a Nightfall style bounty, based around culling branded and gathering crystals to charge resonance crystals or whatever. Trigger the event, and each branded killed in the event area spawns a crystal "trophy" (which every event participant can separately grab). Event success would be based on killing a certain number of branded before the timer runs out, but player rewards would be based on how many trophies they grab during the event (provided that it succeeds).

>

>

Ive always wished they would do more with the "guild event banner"s that we craft in the guild hall to include more types of events. Right now, they just trigger Karka Queen, Tequatl and Triple Trouble. Imagine if guilds could use them to trigger escort or other mid sized events on maps. It would go a long way toward making the maps fell more alive while, at the same time, ensuring at least a minimal level or coordination was involved (because a guild would be there triggering it - even if everyone else on the map could benefit). Im not sure if that is even possible, but it is something I would love to see.

> @"Clayton Kisko.5207" said:

> > @"Blaeys.3102" said:

> > Thank you for the logical answer.

> >

> > In case it wasn't evident (and matters for the future on maps where the parameters you describe do not exist) - my guild loves (LOVES LOVES LOVES) doing bounties together.

>

> Noted! :)

Part of the beauty of bounties is that they give groups something to do between meta events on a map. We love the new map, but last Sunday when we tried to do events together on the map, we did spend WAY too much time sitting around waiting for an event to trigger. If you aren't going to use something like bounties, you definitely need it make it easier to know when and where events are active on a map. There should always be something for people to do together - and it should be easy to figure out what your options are. The new map (which, again, is very well done) does fall down when it comes to achieving that goal.

Thank you for the logical answer.

In case it wasn't evident (and matters for the future on maps where the parameters you describe do not exist) - my guild loves (LOVES LOVES LOVES) doing bounties together.

> @"Lonami.2987" said:

> Good video about the topic:

>

>

>

> Also, poll numbers for the record, for a total of 1022 votes:

>

> * We need both easy and hard modes - 51% - 531 votes

> * We need an easy mode, but not a hard mode - 7% - 78 votes

> * We need a hard mode, but not an easy mode - 7% - 81 votes

> * Raids are fine the way they are, combining bosses of various difficulties - 25% - 260 votes

> * Raids have problems, but we need a better solution - 7% - 72 votes

>

> We have 65% of the voters wanting easy or hard mode, 58% wanting easy mode, and 58% wanting hard mode. Only 25% are fine with the current status of raids, against a 74% which isn't happy with the current situation.

Great video and analysis.

And the ideas Teapot raises in the video have potential in both directions - something some of us have been saying as far back as 3 years ago (in the dev thread asking what raids could be before they came out). Most of the current living story steps (like the recent fight against a certain giant dragon) could incorporate similar tools and be made into raid fights - without corrupting the easier mode experience. Using these simple tools, they could expand the game exponentially for all players - both hard core (by adding challenge to existing easy mode content) and casual (by adding easy modes to existing challenge/raid content).

The numbers show this is something the community wants (in VERY clear terms). The video shows an easy way (presumably) of accomplishing it. Hopefully, the developers are listening.

One thing that is missing from the new map is a bounty board, making it the first new map since POF launched to not include one.

Were they cut because of time/deadlines - or did Arenanet decide to stop doing them - or did someone just feel they didnt fit with the new map?

I am enjoying the new content - and the new map - tremendously, but LOVE doing bounties with my guild and was looking forward to doing them on a new map this weekend. Just curious about the reasoning behind the omission.

> @"Shikaru.7618" said:

> > @"Blaeys.3102" said:

> > The other big problem with DPS meters is that they encourage selfish individualized gameplay that often runs counter to the needs of the group. Dodge that damage? Better not - it will hurt my rotation and put me lower on the meter? Rez that healer? Better not - it will hurt my rotation and put me lower on the meter. Move poison out of the squad? Better not - it will hurt my rotation and put me lower on the meter. Share that boon? Better not - (you get the idea).

> >

> > Some people look at meters as this great tool, but the truth is they usually hurt far more than they help, even in top level competitive groups.

>

> No. That's why you consult the combat parser and look at his mechanics failed and times he stopped to res. The tool provides all of this information but people don't think to look at this. This is not an issue with the tool but peoples ability to do proper analysis.

The problem is a lot of raiders don't think about that part mid-fight. They only care about whether or not their name is above everyone else's on the meter - which leads to meters making the overall group's dps lower for the ego of a single player.

If meters were limited to the individual - you can only see your personal dps/statistics, it would solve the problem of toxicity, give people a way to improve and eliminate the need to constantly measure your worth to the group based on how you measure up to everyone else there.

The other big problem with DPS meters is that they encourage selfish individualized gameplay that often runs counter to the needs of the group. Dodge that damage? Better not - it will hurt my rotation and put me lower on the meter? Rez that healer? Better not - it will hurt my rotation and put me lower on the meter. Move poison out of the squad? Better not - it will hurt my rotation and put me lower on the meter. Share that boon? Better not - (you get the idea).

Some people look at meters as this great tool, but the truth is they usually hurt far more than they help, even in top level competitive groups.