Svarty.8019

> @"JTGuevara.9018" said: > > @"God.2708" said: > > > @"JTGuevara.9018" said: > > > > @"God.2708" said: > > > > > @"JTGuevara.9018" said: > > > > > @"subversiontwo.7501" > > > > > > > > > > First off, I will just address your name. You have a massive post, so I will just address it in general. As far as my argument being "baffling", it is simple enough to me. Maybe I should reiterate it? Here it is. I'm just going to be transparent about this. > > > > > > > > > > Guilds should not be given any more power in this game. A potential influx of guilds aided by the implementation of an alliance system will not magically fix WvW, specially at this point. The fact that PUGs are toxic and mean at times are _not_ a viable argument for guilds taking control for this game mode. Period. End of. Guilds are _not_ "the server", as you claim, they are _a part_ of the server, they are _in_ the server. Guilds are no more important than PUGs and everyone else. That is ALL that I have said. > > > > > > > > > > I really cannot make this any more clearer than that. > > > > > > > > I don't think you understand what power actually is, or how it manifests itself in something like WvW. Else you would not be speaking nonsense like you are. > > > > > > My apologies! Might you explain to the rest of us what power is then if what you think I say is "nonsense"? I'll be waiting. > > > > > > @"getalifeturd.8139" > > > > > > It is massive posts like these that just drive the point home for me that any sort of guild 'alliance' system is doomed to fail. All this drama, politicking and backstabbing...for what? Stroking your e-stick to compensate for what you don't have? Doing it just for kicks? Tryharding in this manner is just sad and just drives people away from playing this game. And overall, these situations demonstrate how flawed and broken the server tier system actually is. If ya ask me, honestly, nothing short of unifying all the servers and implementing a WvW mega server with a 3-way faction system will actually address population in any meaningful way. Yes, I know _some_ people will _balk_ at this suggestion, but I honestly see no other way. With the server links that we have, we basically are halfway there. (8 to 4 tiers) However, I see that people are either too loyal to either their guild or their server (aka "guild pride" and "server pride" respectively) to actually accept meaningful changes to WvW. > > > > > > > Power is top down. What something has to exert control on its surroundings by force or tools that grant it said control. If you join my guild I can kick you. > > > > What guilds have that you are describing is authority. That is bottom up. Authority is control gifted from below, and it can be rescinded at anytime by those beneath it. > > > > WvW runs off of authority because there doesn't exist any tools of power. I can't kick anyone off my server, at best I can annoy/troll them which could possibly result in Anet using their power on me to get me removed, so is not very effective. Guilds are given that authority by subsections of the WvW populace for a variety of reasons. Some because they like the commander's attitude, some because they like to PPT, some because they like to troll. The point of alliances is to create a system that lets guilds expand their authority and compete with one another. (IE. a guild that caters to PUGs and gets them to work with it will see more success than one that actively trolls them, regardless of the guilds capabilities when actually playing) > > > > This is why what you are saying is nonsense. Guilds aren't separate entities from PUGs. They are PUGs that have gotten together and agreed on a mutual idea. (It should go without saying that a mode about war would value coordination and cooperation, a topic many PUGs seem to fail to grasp.) You can't get rid of that 'power' because it isn't power, it's authority. Nor can guilds gain 'control' of the mode through alliances. If they have control it is through the collective cooperation of a very large number of people. The only way to get rid of it would be to randomly match people and not let them talk to each other so they can't coordinate. Which, forgive me for saying, sounds kitten awful. > > > > The largest detriment to the mode at the current moment is the fact that Anet makes it actively difficult for servers to gain a consistent identity. Identity and culture create a lasting impact, and are important to a long term mode like WvW. You can take guilds out of Guild Wars 2 but you can't take it out of war. > > > > Also that guy was copypasta ing. > > > > ...no... > > Power is the possession of authority. Guilds _do_ have power, granted by subsections of the WvW community as you say, that's completely fine. However, they just don't have _absolute_ power. I'm guessing this is something you want aka. "I can't kick anyone off my server". In that case, nope...sorry! > > Look at the giant guilds that exist in the game - they wield power akin to those of PUG zergs when it comes to ktraining over objectives with little resistance (particularly at off-peak hours). There are definite distinctions here though; PUG zergs are made up of individuals who retain their autonomy, whereas guild members must obey their leader, lest they be ostracised. Thus guild leaders wield Power, not authority - what has happened is that the environment has changed, the Alliance IS the community when Worlds don't exist. The alliances system removes the autonomy of individuals and puts the power to "kick anyone off my server" into the hands of the guild leaders.

> @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > @"coso.9173" said: > > Have we ever got a sequel to an mmo? I don't think so. I've seen remaster and similar things but never an actual sequel. Gw1 want really an mmo so I don't count on it. > Lineage 2/Everquest 2? > > Anyway, we'll know if/when Anet announces it. Shocking revelation, I know. > > I think the question should be, "Has there been a THIRD game in any MMO series?", but then we're getting off-topic because each sequel is a massive opportunity for each franchise to flop. My belief is that without the driving force behind the lore, or people who gave part of their soul to produce the franchise, another sequel is doubtful. On a personal note, I would only be attracted to GW3 if it had a WvW-style gamemode. I don't even *LIKE* Guild Wars lore.

> @"chrispy.7182" said: > Why are there STILL objects in the game which are immune to condition damage??? Bleeding objects makes me chuckle... oh the Torment and Confusion they must feel ... eh... ye. Good luck with that dilemma, I'm just going to /BrainOff. Hopefully WvW keep/tower walls don't become vulnerable to conditions. It'd break the game! Hah! Let's do it! Why not?

> @"castlemanic.3198" said: > Figured this might be a fun topic, what kinds of things that would probably cost more development time and money than they're worth would you want in the game? > Character collision detection.

> @"Bellbirds.1679" said: > GW2 started off fairly similar, GW2 started off with a [baseball cap](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Celebration_Hat). Just saying. That said, I concur that there's way too much flashy, immersion-breaking nonsense.

> @"Lithril Ashwalker.6230" said: > Aside from the desired Tengu from which Cantha has many of. > > What about Largos? > They have [rich culture](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Concordat_of_the_Tethyos_Houses) just waiting to be pried out. Which itself can be based off of the original Guild Wars 1 Assassin. Many largos dual wield swords which could be a new addition to the THIEF class as an offhand weapon. Would be interesting to see as well because they Unending ocean is in between Cantha and our current region so would be a SHAME to not be able to have them at least in the story. > > Tengu - Tengu would be a great addition to the playable races as many desire it but also because they are in the area and have a huge influence on many borders in the original Cantha. > > Maybe new masteries revolving around Luxon and Kurzick alliances, an alliance system that used to be in guild wars 1 where we can aid each other in the guild menus, true GVG and more guild missions!? > > Juggernaut and Siege turtle masteries?! > > let the discussion begin! > I would prefer that time and effort were put into WvW than new races and classes and traits and elite specialisations. More specialisations = more work in future and less sensible class equivalency. Is a team with the same (probably depleting over time) number of people to do ever more work?

Could you kindly clarify what it is that you are asking for, please?

> @"Reaper X.6305" said: > > @"Svarty.8019" said: > > > @"Reaper X.6305" said: > > > Please remove the need to use transmutation charges to change your gear's appearance, and put in-game barber shops in all of the capitol cities so that we can change our hair! It would be such a gesture of good will towards your player base. We all know Fashion Wars is a big selling point of this game, so please don't restrict it! > > > > For a buy-to-play game with no pay-to-win, GW2 garners it's sustenance from cosmetic-only items. > > > > As such, doesn't it behoove the company to leave them as-is? > > > > Once players realize the amount of either time grinding, or real life money they must spend to participate in it, they will be turned off from the game as a whole. I don't disagree with your other points. Where this one is concerned, gamers encounter many intermediary currencies specifically so that they _WON'T_ realise.

> @"Sobx.1758" said: > > @"Svarty.8019" said: > > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > > @"Svarty.8019" said: > > > > > @"LetoII.3782" said: > > > > > > @"Svarty.8019" said: > > > > > > > > > > > If I'm to be frank > > > > > > > > > > Well, Frank. > > > > > What would be the point of superior siege if guild varieties were just as plentiful? > > > > > > > > What's the point in vanilla siege now that superior siege is ubiquitous? > > > > > > What's the point of common gear when pretty much nobody should be really using it regardless of character level anyways? > > > Beacuse it's an option, it's there, you can use it for whatever reason, but you absolutely don't need to use it. In case you're using it, the mere fact that's "it there" is irrelevant to anyone, so what's the point of asking this question? Don't want/need to use it? Then don't. Someone might want to -who cares. > > > > Those things aren't the same. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence > > How are they not close enough in this comparison? They're in the game, there exist better versions of them and you pretty much don't need to use the weakest version at any point of the game. Just because you've linked "false equivalence" as a *cheap way out of answering* doesn't make it an actual false equivalence. The principle around existance of weakest version in both cases is pretty much the same. If you don't want to use them, then it's perfectly fine, but it's also irrelevant to those items existing in the game. I admit it, I cheaped out on the answer and I also think _some_ equivalence, but not as much as you're making out. The best gear doesn't get removed from the system when you use it, but guild siege does - although there is minor time-gating on the crafting side. It's just a messy analogy. The time-gating/tedious nature of the queuing system is what the OP is unhappy about. I suspect they could * make the window bigger and add more slots, OR, * make it instantly add them to guild decoration storage - (like racetrack parts do? But they're bought from a vendor and aren't crafted - so the bottleneck is where?).

> @"Reaper X.6305" said: > Please remove the need to use transmutation charges to change your gear's appearance, and put in-game barber shops in all of the capitol cities so that we can change our hair! It would be such a gesture of good will towards your player base. We all know Fashion Wars is a big selling point of this game, so please don't restrict it! For a buy-to-play game with no pay-to-win, GW2 garners it's sustenance from cosmetic-only items. As such, doesn't it behoove the company to leave them as-is?

> @"LetoII.3782" said: > Do a bunch of work and have nothing improve, or just leave things as-is and cash in.. I suspect the former has happened internally but the latter is what the players see.

> @"Cromx.3941" said: > Yep this game chases away tons of new comers because of the abusive CC mechanics and ridiculous amount of one shotting that goes on. There is way too much damage going back and forth between mobs and players and it completely destroys the entire defensive side of the equation, which dumbs down the game dramatically. The only thing that really matters is active defenses and dodging. Which comes off as gimicky. Either you get with it and stack only offensive stats and try to burn enemies to the ground before they do this stuff or you find another game. Its a huge problem with this game. All of this stuff makes the game very shallow and eliminates most stat combinations and many build configurations as a result. A lot of wasted time ands effort went into designing things that will never be used. ^This. Downed state covers up a lot of problems, but relies on other people being in the game with you...

Traits are just fine, there aren't enough resources to waste of frivolous things like this.

> @"Sobx.1758" said: > > @"Svarty.8019" said: > > > @"LetoII.3782" said: > > > > @"Svarty.8019" said: > > > > > > > If I'm to be frank > > > > > > Well, Frank. > > > What would be the point of superior siege if guild varieties were just as plentiful? > > > > What's the point in vanilla siege now that superior siege is ubiquitous? > > What's the point of common gear when pretty much nobody should be really using it regardless of character level anyways? > Beacuse it's an option, it's there, you can use it for whatever reason, but you absolutely don't need to use it. In case you're using it, the mere fact that's "it there" is irrelevant to anyone, so what's the point of asking this question? Don't want/need to use it? Then don't. Someone might want to -who cares. Those things aren't the same. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence

The device was re-implemented almost as soon as it was implemented, but sadly didn't get looked at since. It reminds me of the way you can't "use all" on the WvW Guild Tactics/Upgrades you can choose in Skirmish Chests. When I mentioned this to the devs on the livestream, they said you CAN... ... but obviously they meant you can Use All the things you buy from the merchant, but the things inside them can't be ADDED to your guild storage in a pile, so you end up clicking over and over. The game is really big and the devs just don't SEE stuff because they're so busy trying to come up with some "suprise and delight" guff for yet another new PvE map. The Device is one of those things that gets overlooked. Constantly.

> @"LetoII.3782" said: > > @"Svarty.8019" said: > > > If I'm to be frank > > Well, Frank. > What would be the point of superior siege if guild varieties were just as plentiful? What's the point in vanilla siege now that superior siege is ubiquitous?

> @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > @"Svarty.8019" said: > > I've edited your quote, so that an Arenanet employee could read it more clearly. > If an Anet employee hasnt read it in 2 years, why would they want to read it more clearly now? Without any acknowledgement whatsoever, we can only assume that it was too opaque for said people to comprehend the first time around.

> @"Sobx.1758" said: > How about no? > There's absolutely no reason to do it and you can stop pretending you want to "promote more thoughtful play" seeing how you also made a thread about "removing unblockables because nobody uses them on blocks and *that level of gameplay doesn't exist* " :neutral: Not to pick on you specifically, but ... Is it too much to ask for something constructive from commenters?

> @"Samnang.1879" said: > Agreed. > > We should also be told in advance if we need certain items for future things... so I don't delete them and realise I need them... example tomes of knowledge... I always delete them but then realised I need 100 to buy something -_- I saw devs on the Livestream asking each other why players don't delete ... I think it was Legendary Spikes from WvW. We don't delete things because we don't know what the devs will implement in the future... but here's the irony... because they might not work there long, neither do THEY! So why they're mystified about this is beyond me. I agree with the OP.

> @"Gudradain.3892" said: > I prefer never having to repair equipment. This. I hate repairing. I would buy an auto-repair bot from the gem store. ... Ah! Oh I see! The OP is the agent provocateur, and the devs will implement repairs claiming that it's because of "popular demand" so they can charge gems for players to get into a situation they had before they even implemented it. Yes, I am being sarcastic - Fun, isn't it?

> @"LetoII.3782" said: > They're meant to be rare. If you're using hundreds of siege a night superior is for you. Do you have access to the design documentation? We don't know what they're "meant" to be, we only know what they ARE. If they're meant to be rare, then they'd be made from expensive materials. If materials become cheap over time, that's on Anet. If I'm to be frank, I'd say it's yet another symptom of WvW not getting enough attention.

> @"Sylvyn.4750" said: > Lots of buffs seem to have a condition counterpart...slow vs quickness, protection vs vulnerability...should they all just cancel out? Seems like that would really hurt condi builds if there were more ways to remove condis in addition to all the traits, skills and weapon procs that also remove condis. It'd change things, but with an expac coming, what better time to make big alterations to the core mechanics? They'll be adding lots of things that do that. > @"Mini Crinny.6190" said: > probably not something anet are prepared to put time into tbh, I don't think its a good idea because then this just opens the door for every other boon and condi countering each other aswell as potentially making classes worse based on what condi and boons they have access too A good way to fine-tune classes, then!

> @"Sviel.7493" said: > I'm really curious as to what they're doing here. I missed the announcement (if there was one?) about the first part, though I did notice that wall health was lower. 6 months is a long time--what could they possible have in store that can't even be mentioned in that time frame? > > Also, apparently they don't have any fun fighting to open structures...which is not a great look when designing a territory control game. They should seriously consider hiring [someone who knows how the territory control game works] I've edited your quote, so that an Arenanet employee could read it more clearly. I concur with your opinion and would very much like to see what would happen if such an employee were to appear. It seems to me that there are many things that could be tried in terms of wall adjustments in order to make the capturing process more interesting. I believe we're currently in a situation where the game favours a specific types of attacker (giant group, aka zerg) - especially now that pulls and other crowd control abilities are way more common than their counters (such as Stability). The knock-on effect is that the traditional counters to siege, i.e. disablers and counter-siege are themselves death-traps - countering big groups is now too difficult. I posit that Just because you bring a giant group, doesn't NECESSARILY mean you should get a free cap (effortless capture). -we're losing players because it appears that Arenanet don't agree. Why bother trying to defend anymore?

> @"kamikharzeeh.8016" said: > like a ton of stuff, he wasn't updated. and btw, isn't the name "Siegerazor"? might have misread it till now, bc i like that name more :P > Something like that... https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Champion_Commander_Siegerazer He raises siege, however, so perhaps that's how I remember it. > > maybe the alpines should get similar mechanics, like some special tactivator that only gets available when u lose the garri, summoning both legendary updated comms + several legendary defenders to help retaking the garri from both sides There are Siegeraiser/Siegecrusher for the Alpine maps, but I've not seen them in quite a while. Maybe "they" removed them or nerfed them or something? I know there are tweaks that occur randomly - a tree appeared at Wildcreek on EB recently, I believe.

> @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > @"Svarty.8019" said: > > * Guilds are a fun way to make a small, cozy, community of like-minded people, > > Can be. > > > * Guilds are a great way to get things done. They focus the goals of several individuals with the exclusion of distractions, > > * I find that guilds become ghettos where community members disappear to and barely participate in the non-guild activities, > > Really poor choice of words to me. If they didn’t participate in ‘non guild activities’ then you wouldn’t see people at festivals, in WvW solo or other than guild activities, in open world activities etc. I'll concede that point, the wording could be much better. > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > I wouldn’t expect them to do anything anyway... > Isn't an expac when expectations go out of the window and you let optimism in?