Trevor Boyer.6524

> @"Shao.7236" said: > @"Dawdler.8521" So where is my infinite stability on demand? Bad bait. > > @"Grand Marshal.4098" There's no such thing as cooldown hacks, claiming as such brings forth way bigger problems than you think, this is clearly an exploited flaw in the rework of the banner that needs to be fixed. Nobody is asking for a nerf. > @"Shao.7236" said: > @"Dawdler.8521" So where is my infinite stability on demand? Bad bait. > > @"Grand Marshal.4098" There's no such thing as cooldown hacks, claiming as such brings forth way bigger problems than you think, this is clearly an exploited flaw in the rework of the banner that needs to be fixed. Nobody is asking for a nerf. There are definitely CD hacks or some way to bug CDs so they are waaaaay lower than they should be. One of the last times I had ragequit this game and vanished for a month, it was due to a DH who had a Dragon's Maw that was on roughly a 10s CD. His other traps were also being cast consistently with seemingly no CD at all, as well as his SOJ never ended. This guy was spamming SOJ like throwing nade autos. I'm not the only person who could tell you this story. I was in the TKL discord with like 8 other people, 4 of them being partied with me who were also seeing the same thing in that match. Then to make it worse, of course he had Rune Of Trapper which allowed him to stay stealthed permanently as he ran around with these no CD traps. So I dunno what's going on there, but the lowering of CDs is definitely a thing that's happening. I have also witnessed a couple of other occasions where it was questionable if someone had some kind of bugged CD on a skill or some kind of hack to lower CDs or maybe reset them when they push some hotkey, but they were situations where IF that was happening, the players were wise to be sneaky and kind of hide it well so I can't really prove anything. But that DH on that one day was blatantly definitely playing with some kind of bugged or hacked CDs.

I had been getting frequent DCs myself and it only was happening in Ranked and ATs. In Unranked & WvW I wasn't getting DCs at all. It makes me wonder if a drophack has been in circulation and being used. People always assume DDOSing, which requires targeting an IP, and it isn't easy for someone to collect enough IPs and always be fishing through them to be able to DDOS several people out of a game at the same time. So considering the frequency of the DCs I was experiencing as of about the past 2 weeks, it seems more drophack which is much easier to do to begin with. Do a search of drophack vs. DDOS if you guys want to read the differences between the two. Drophacks are ridiculously easy to code and have existed in nearly every game since the beginning of online gaming. They aren't exactly something that is easy to create firewalls against from what I am reading. The reason why I bring this up is because I do believe these DCs are linked to match manipulation. At first I thought it was just the servers, but then I began to notice that the DCs would always happen under two circumstances: 1) I am winning the match and oh look someone or two DCs on our team. 2) I go into specifically an AT match against certain very specific players, and each time we have a formidable team that likely will beat them, oh look at that a DC or two on our team. Quite mysterious how these certain guys win so many matches due to lucky DCs. In the past couple of weeks the DCs had been so frequent that it was making streaming Guild Wars 2 Ranked/ATs not worth the effort because the footage is bad when any team is winning due to DCs and having your stream interrupted from you being the one who DCs is just a hassle to deal with, which also contributes to footage that isn't worth the time invested. Even the frequency of DCs that I was having myself, at one point had granted me over an hour of dishonor because so many DCs had happened in a row on that one day. And that was the same day I had to take a break and had gone to find something else to do for awhile. You can't win in an environment like that, can't compete, game isn't even fun when that kind of stuff is happening too much.

I've heard about this but haven't seen it in-game yet. Is it a bug or some kind of hack? If this is a bug, this is the worst game breaking bug we've ever seen. If this isn't fixed soon, the knowledge of how to do it will eventually spread and it will ruin every competitive game mode completely. This is beyond hot-fix worthy. This is the equivalent of the game actually "breaking" to where the modes are no longer playable. Even in pve, how do you wipe in a raid if you had 2x Wars doing this?

> @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > Yes it would. For every reason I already stated. I already explained how it differentiates between 2s and 3s, through raw natural organic evaluation, in the same way I would judge if guys were good or bad at basketball, only after I showed up on a court and played with them. This way everyone gets a chance to at least play. > That works for a basketball team (in GW2 terms: a guild), where they can train and evaluate their members before a match. You can bet that if there was an LFG version of basketball, and that it was being played for real stakes, and not just for fun, most veterans would not be doing "evaluation through play" either, and only allow proven players to team with them. Ah yes, but those veteran players in the LFG in a world without KPs, are known by their names and from word of mouth of who is good, not from KPs. They had to go in several games with several people and prove they were good with their actual performance, not KPs. <- This way a player who does get a chance to prove himself and show he is good, can do so in a single night which will spread word of mouth, rather than it requiring years of grinding KPs. With a KP system, that good player will be ignored because he has very few KPs or none at all. And even if he is accepted into 1 group, he still has no KPs to show for a different group or to an LFG community. In a game without KPs of any kind, players would begin to lean again on word of mouth recommendation and memory, which is a much truer form of KPs, so to say. **The problem here is that taking KPs for granted and placing all judgement in it and only that, replaces any & all rational common sense past it.** > > In fact, that's how it always worked in games we used to play as kids as well - the new kids were picked for teams only after all the "good players" (as well as friends and family) were already chosen. And those games were theoretically purely for fun, with no stakes associated with winning or losing beyond "mere" bragging rights. Yes but those players they choose are people they know, who have proven themselves in true form through actual demonstrations. They pick those players because they know for a fact that those players are good, or simply because they are friends & family. That is a far cry from picking or booting players that you do not know that you've never seen before, based the faith of a KP system that can be lied about with fake chat codes, that has no way of allowing players to see the strong 2s from the bad 3s, that encourages people to never play with anyone who doesn't meet a KP requirement. In a game without KPs, when a team needed a couple extra players they would give people chances to join no matter who they were, and although it may be annoying to stumble into a few 3s before finding a 2, so be it, as this is providing participation rates which is what we need. But in a game with KPs, no one gets a chance to even try unless they first ping that KP req. This is why 2s get bored and leave, because they are waiting in line too long for it to be worth it. We can INB4 "Well if the 2s REALLY wanted to play, they'd try real hard to find a guild and learn and do it" and this simply is not true at all with the way things are now. You could have 10 players who are considered 2s who are on the scene. They are all of equal skill level and know at least enough to complete wing 1. Out of these 10 players, maybe 1 or 2 of them actually care enough to fight through the social stigma, to wait in line long enough, to get into a reasonable raid guild that actually wants to play with them. The other 8 or 9 players who were also good, who would have stayed if it wasn't a completely unreasonable fiasco to wait in line to get involved in, end up leaving the scene. This is because there aren't enough other 2s around to group with because they also left, because all the players with KPs have hid inside a fortress and have forced the 2s into an impossible to achieve tribulation mode of playing with 3s to build KPs or learn anything at all. And even when the gates to the fortress lower briefly, only a few make it in, and then they still wait and wait and wait on someone else's schedule. What I am saying is that for general casual raid participation through LFG, where people get a chance to prove themselves and find each other, it would be better for KPs to disappear entirely. For the slight annoyance it would cause the elites who already mostly recognize each other, to have to give people a chance again, which the elites represent a very very small % of the GW2 community, it would make the major bulk of the community interested enough to come back and try again. For those elites who STILL are not understanding what I am saying about this problem, imagine this: **Remember back to a time when you were relatively new to raids, but you knew that you were good. You knew that you were good enough to watch any video guide and very quickly adapt & learn any new raid thrown at you. You knew that if a squad gave you a chance, you wouldn't disappoint them. Back in those days you barely had any KP at all. Now imagine yourself now with many KPs, in here defending KPs in this thread while telling me that I am wrong. Imagine yourself now as an ultimate peak level veteran, who had to put an LFG post with what would be considered a moderate to high expectation of KP today. Now imagine yourself again as when you were new and you knew you were good but had no KPs to show. Imagine that you look at that high KP LFG post made by your future self and realize that you aren't going to let yourself into the group because you don't have enough KPs. Imagine that segregation & judgement being based on a KP number instead of knowing someone. And seriously ask yourself: Reeeeeally how much better are you now, than you were back then?** lol I don't know what else to say ^^ > > > > > Some of you guys are still missing the point here. I'm not stating that this is a better system. I am stating that it would increase raid participation rates. > It would not. It's not the lack of training that causes those low rates. It's caused by, on one side, most players having _no desire_ to train as much as it is necessary to clear this content, and, on the other side, by too low release rates (or, for some, content being too easy). Dude the lack of training is because it is unreasonable for 2s to train with 3s all day, so the 2s leave the scene. You seriously cannot learn anything when a group of 3s is keeping you stuck in a certain phase they can't move past. And as I said before, joining guilds there is still wait time and wait time on someone else's schedule, and too much initiation bullshit to prove that you can successfully contribute to beat a video game boss. People get bored waiting in line and they leave. A player can have much desire to want to play & complete the raids, but when faced with the reality of the social stigma, elongated initiation phases, and the KP privilege that older players get to benefit which always put them in the front of the waiting line, a player's reason & general logic kicks in and tells them it isn't worth the time & hassle so they leave. KPs exasperate this problem. > > Basically, content is already meant for a small number of players, and on top of it it's not supported enough to satisfy even that small community. > > > I'm stating that current population & participation rates are so low because players are waiting waaaay too long in line before getting to take a ride, and this is because of KPs. > And my take on it is that you assign too much importance to KPs. They are not a cause, but merely a byproduct of the core issue. "Dealing" with KPs in any way is not going to remove the reason why they appeared in the first place. I agree. I've stated multiple times in this very thread that KPs worked great during high population times, and when the difference between 10 KPs and 50 to a 100 KPs actually mattered. But over the course of time, calling for massive KP overqualification has created segregation & division that is really unnecessary. The difference between 10 or 50 or 100 KPs will certainly show differences in knowledge & skill. But the difference between 200 and 600 KPs starts to matter much much less. The growth rate of a player from 0 to 10 LIs and from 10 to 50 and 50 to 100 is very large, but the growth rate of that player between 200 and 600 is a lot less if noticeable at all. And now you're also talking the guy with 600 LIs only has 600 LIs because he's been doing it for years, whereas the guy with 200 LIs is actually a hot player who is better in every aspect than the guy with 600 LIs, however the guy with 600 LIs will qualify for groups that the 200 LI player cannot. <- Do you see this? How do you not understand it? There are unfair, inaccurate and unnecessary segregations happening now in 2021. KP judgements in GW2 are out of control at this point and it's causing problems for the social cohesion of the community. KPs may have began as a good system and good method of judgement, and it may "feel" that way for the elites, but they truly are not understanding from their point of view inside of and on top of the KP fortress walls, what this is like for new players now. > > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > > @"Psykewne.3025" said: > > > You can't change people's behaviour, no matter what barriers you remove > > > > Are you sure though? > In a way, yes. You can't change people's behaviour, unless you remove the _reason_ behind that behaviour. You can't make people not use KPs (or other forms of prefiltering, in case you would take KPs away) unless you remove the reason for why they want to prefilter in the first place. > > People want to play this content alongside other players that _are good enough to clear the content with_. Thus, prefiltering. I agree ^ but when the prefiltering becomes a ridiculous fiasco demanding serious levels of overqualification, people start walking away. I mean seriously, this is just out of control in GW2 at this point. These kinds of KP pings that people want to see before letting others into raid or CM groups is kind of the equivalent of if I made a post on craigslist that said: "Grocery Run Walmart - Need 5 world class athletes - 3 Olympic Gold Medals Required" Will it be the fastest grocery run ever? Probably. Do I need 5x world class Olympic athletes to complete this grocery run? No, I don't lol. You don't need to possess Olympic gold medals to complete a grocery shopping trip. Stop acting like it matters. The grocery trip is easy. Find the 2s, let them in, stop discriminating with KPs. I have nothing else to say here.

I didn't vote because the poll is missing: 5. I AFK only when I know for a fact that my team has absolutely no chance of winning. I find that psychologically I tend to make this decision when an enemy team is approaching around 250 points. If my team is holding around 125 vs. the opponent's 250, I'll keep playing. But when the enemy is 250 and my team is like 80 points or less and my PUGs are rolling around in the bushes trying to figure out how their WASD keys work, yeah, sometimes I'll better use that time to AFK and grab a drink.

Shortbow 5 in general just needs to go back to 5 init. Right now we're in a meta where Dragonhunters are doing a better job at Thieving than Thieves. There is a lot wrong there.

> @"Yasai.3549" said: > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > If like 3 dudes are surrounding you in a triangular position, you can run in a complete triangle with rush/target next before its range increment ends. > > > > Amazing pro techniques. Enjoy the whispers from people who think you are hacking after you do it. > > Since this thread is about Rush anyway, do yu think Rush is OP being able to do this? > Skills like this OP? hrm.. maybe. Unintended mechanics that provide a heightened skill ceiling for the skill when good players learn to wield it? Definitely. There is some pretty wonky trickery that you can pull while target shifting during mobility skills. Example: A Warrior is at mid in legacy and he is in a 3v3. That Warrior can use a single use of Bull's Charge and bait a dodge or defense skill from his first target, and then he changes to the 2nd target baiting a dodge or defense skill from that target, and then shifts a second time towards the 3rd target with the intention of landing the strike on the 3rd target. <- In this regard, target shifting is turning what is supposed to be a single strike skill, into a skill with the baiting power of an AoE like Dragon's Maw. Rush in particular could be used in the exact same manner. So depending on how you look at it, this could be viewed as a higher skill ceiling in which to utilize a skill, or possible broken or maybe OP.

> @"Yasai.3549" said: > > @"Shao.7236" said: > > > @"Yasai.3549" People actually retarget with Rush, so nah. It's seeking property is never really lost. > > Good point. > I totally missed that Rush can be retargeted mid run in order to change directions to the other target. > If like 3 dudes are surrounding you in a triangular position, you can run in a complete triangle with rush/target next before its range increment ends. Amazing pro techniques. Enjoy the whispers from people who think you are hacking after you do it.

@"maddoctor.2738" You've somehow missed the point of everything I have said entirely, and yet in the same breath with your own example given, you have proven my point that it would up raid participation rates by allowing everyone to have a chance again. ~ Anyways, I've said enough. Let this thread die and stop necro'ing it.

> @"Psykewne.3025" said: > You can't change people's behaviour, no matter what barriers you remove Are you sure though? Or are you so caught up in your current perspective that you have not well excavated the truths of another? What you said in your response is like saying: "Adding or removing a button in-game that allowed players to automatically DC each other, would not make a difference in the amount of players who were automatically DCing each other." <- and this couldn't be further from the truth because having a code that does this is entirely different than not having a code that does this.

> @"Megametzler.5729" said: > GLICKO is fine. How else do you explain why it is always the same people in high ranks? Glicko is the worst system that could have been chosen for a 5v5 game mode, for every reason. People show up in the same relative rankings each season not because Glicko is working, but because the same people cheat each season, same people who get targeted each season, and the same people who only ever play fairly each season. Doesn't mean Glicko is working, doesn't mean there isn't match manipulation. > > Ranked gives me way more even matches than unranked. That is part of the matchmaking algorithm, which allows higher rating deviations between players in unranked. Add in the fact of teamQ, people playing troll builds and learning new ones and you have actually random resulty. I am experiencing way **way** more blow outs in unranked than in ranked. I was 1599 rated in ranked this season and r24 or something like that in NA. Then about 80 games in, I pissed off some certain group of players, and now for the last 30 games or so, I've been playing at 1400-1420 range and can barely stay out of gold 2. It just depends on how much you are ignored/overlooked or targeted in ranked. > > Usually people are just not as good as they think or their build is terrible. Play for fun, not for rating, and learn from mistakes and losses. You will climb ranks with time. > (And when tryharding, play anything with revenant. Because, you know, it is a class favoured by good players...) That's actually not true, in all honestly. There are walls of social stigma to surprass. Anyone can rise to about 1500 normally or organically. But going past 1500 into 1600 or higher, requires either being ignored completely by everyone in the community or becoming favored by everyone, so throw play doesn't target you. If you've ever given the match manipulators any reason to not like you, you will never see top 100 placement ever again. > > A suggestion: Would it help if the skill rating only showed at the end of the season? Seeing these results seems to lead to a lot of toxicity and frustration, even though the values are - from a GLICKO-point of view - perfectly fine. Glicko is botched and so is solo/duo only synch queue throwing that has no administrative action being take against it. What would help is if Arenanet did an actual real ban phase. One where accounts were removed permanently for match manipulation.

> @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > Now what you have happening with a KP system such as LIs, is that the system is good at distinguishing player type 1 from 2 & 3, but it is not good at distinguishing player type 2 from 3. > and > > 2s are ready to complete content but they can't because they are forced to play with 3s and there aren't enough 2s to go around. > > How do you propose we differentiate between 2s and 3s? Because KP, as you say, is used to separate 1s from 2s and 3s. But how can we put 1s and 2s on the same side, while making sure 3s remain on the other side? Removing KP won't accomplish this. Yes it would. For every reason I already stated. I already explained how it differentiates between 2s and 3s, through raw natural organic evaluation, in the same way I would judge if guys were good or bad at basketball, only after I showed up on a court and played with them. This way everyone gets a chance to at least play. Some of you guys are still missing the point here. I'm not stating that this is a better system. I am stating that it would increase raid participation rates. I'm stating that current population & participation rates are so low because players are waiting waaaay too long in line before getting to take a ride, and this is because of KPs. > @"Armen.1483" said: > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > > @"Aridon.8362" said: > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > > > @"Firebeard.1746" said: > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > > > There’s a difference between players offering to teach you and expecting all of them to teach you. > > > > > > > > > > > > Board games are also very different as players are not driven for rewards compared to those doing raids/fractals. Progress for board/card games is nonexistent in the sense that you’re simply playing the game whereas progress in fractals/raids can be slowed or even halted with having new players. > > > > > > > > > > I don't expect all of them to teach me. The teaching doesn't happen enough. If I'm wrong the raiding community would grow. And I'm completely fine with being wrong. > > > > The raid community doesn't grow not because there's not enough players wanting to teach, or not enough opportunities to learn. It's because learning process itself is too tedious/painful for a majority of players, which results in not enough players being willing to stick with it to the end. Which is a byproduct of both content difficulty and the skill discrepancies within community. And those are a byproduct of the combat/skill/traits/gear system design Anet decided on. > > > > > > > > With whole game as it is, and the content being as it is, Raids being sustainable would require GW2 having way, way bigger playerbase than it has. Possibly even bigger than it ever had (, well, apart from maybe first months of the game, but _without_ content locust padding a large part of that number). > > > > > > I disagree with you. It's not that tedious to learn > > > > It's not that it's tedious to learn, it's that it's tedious to organize. > > > > The point of this thread was to point out that heavy KP expectation exasperates this problem in a low population community. > > > > > > How do you know that the gw2 raiding community is low ? Oh please > @"Armen.1483" said: > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > > @"Armen.1483" said: > > > How do you know that the gw2 raiding community is low ? > > Well, that's what the devs told us. It's low enough they don't feel justified to make more raid content anymore, at the very least. > > > Any **official **quotes ? What I have read is that they have abandonned raids to concentrate into LW for the moment, but no reasons were given. And the "low cummunity" part was assumed by the players. And even if that were true, that would not be the cause, but the concequence. You don't need official statements or a world renowned scientific researcher to explain the obvious.

> @"Linken.6345" said: > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > Soooooo we're repeating this thread? > > > https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/119910/impossible-for-new-players-raids/ > > > > > > It's not tedious to learn, if you want to learn and get into raiding you will. If you don't want to learn, then you have noone and nothing to blame. > > > "KPs bad in low pop" -maybe, but then again maybe not. Seeing how all it does is providing the way to distinguish players that are experienced/inexperienced (not a fool-proof method, sure, but it's... something), I'm not sure not having kps would somehow make anything better. You'd get into raid party, instantly show you don't know what is happening and get kicked. > > > > ^ Exactly > > > > > @"Vilin.8056" said: > > > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > > > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > > > > > > @"yann.1946" said: > > > > > > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Firebeard.1746" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > > > > > > > > No, other games invalidate old content allowing skill less players to have a sense of success by beating content which otherwise would be unbeatable to them at a later point. Or they introduce difficulty tiers which are barely above free loot, to make even the worst players feel accomplished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nox100. I agree but you're moving what i was saying a different direction. The refresh helps make getting into groups easier. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No, it doesn't. Players who did not properly tackle challenging content gain NOTHING with gear depreciation in other MMOs in regards to improving game skill wise. What they gain is the ability to out-gear old content and experience it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In that regard GW2 is actually superior. There is no required "cut-off" point one has to wait for. If you want to take on challenging content, you can start doing so at any point in time. Most often all it requires is a different approach to content in this game, often ideally paired with a more social approach and making contacts, but even that is only beneficial and not needed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Simply put: > > > > > > > > If you lacked the knowledge, experience and underlying understanding how to approach challenging content, you are/were in the exact same spot in every other MMO even after a new gear set. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Firebeard.1746" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > > > > > > > > We have that in GW2. We have that in lower tier fractals. What we do not have is the gear deprecation and dumbing down of content to the same extent, though power creep is certainly present. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you want to be successful in other MMOs and take on challenging content, the approach there is exactly the same as here: join a guild, practice, improve, succeed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What % of guilds are doing progression runs? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Irrelevant in that most players who want to get into CMs never even take that approach. They demand others take them "as is" via LFG groups. You are demanding just that in this very thread. I linked you youtube video of a fractal training guild member/leader. There obviously are discord and guilds. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Even if not, here is what I did: > > > > > > > > I asked guildies in one of my more casual guilds which were already doing T4 semi regularly if they would be interested in-trying CMs. I did so AFTER actually spending a ton of time as duo with a friend in learning how to run CMs. I trained up 3 roster worth of guildies to be able to run CMs because eventually people don't have time or take a break from the game or fractals, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The point is: the key in succeeding at this content is playing with other players regularly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Firebeard.1746" said: > > > > > > > > > As for your comment on time, if nourishing the community around raiding is too time consuming then the game mode isn't sustainable. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No, a game mode becomes unsustainable if the amount of players playing it drops to far or the developers decide that they have to move on due to technical reasons (dungeons were by far not underpopulated but a mess code wise) which is far more related to updates that content receives. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nourishing happens, just not the way you like it: between random parties all the time constantly. It happens in social groups of different degree most of the time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree with you. > > > > > > > It seems to me people always seem to confuse being friendly with being social. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > People don't just stroll to random people playing boardgames and ask then to teach it to them. > > > > > > > > > > > > Actually, that is usually how people learn new board games or card games. You go somewhere and people are playing a game and they want you to play so they sit you down and teach you. I've been watching it happen for 35+ years. > > > > > > > > > > > > I have never once sat down and read a ruleset for monopoly or scrabble or poker or hearts, nor basketball or soccer or baseball. I learned these games because there were people around who wanted to get others involved in them, rather than push them away. > > > > > > > > > > > > Strangely enough, I can't help to imagen that people wanting to teach other people these games, must have something to do with why these games are undying and have stood the test of time. And as much can be said in contrast for why raids are dying Guild Wars 2, because people want to isolate instead of create community cohesion. > > > > > > > > > > > > It truly is an interesting difference in sociology to evaluate. The difference between how things work IRL vs. an online video game, and why. > > > > > > > > > > So, if I was now to make the case that every person you walk up to is unsocial because they might not be interested to teach you a board game right at that very moment in time, I'd have a strong argument? > > > > > > > > > > Yes, friends or family teach each other new board games. It's a social interaction. Or people go to comic/board game/trading card game shops and play and teach others. That's on their terms. That is akin to taking a guild member along or doing a training run. > > > > > > > > > > At no point in time does this happen though when the other party is not interested or lacking time. > > > > > > > > > > The differences between RL and online video game are not that different, IF one accounts for the fact that in RL you have spacial distance which manages interest and goals. In online games you do not since it's basically a binar state: online or offline. > > > > > > > > > > All you have to imagine is this: > > > > > Players who are not in the mood to train others are basically not in your spacial vacinity. In real lifey, you wouldn't have met them at that point in time, aka they wouldn'thave shown up to that game night. If you want something from them, do so at the appropriate time and place, just as you would when interacting with them im real life. Easy peasy. > > > > > > > > This conversation has somehow deviated far far away from where it started. > > > > > > > > My OP post was never about player reluctance to take the time and effort to train someone new. > > > > > > > > My OP post was about experienced players discriminating against experienced players because someone has 9000 LIs and someone else only has 6000. > > > > > > > > A veteran wanting to get his clear done quickly on a night rather than taking hours and hours to train new players is certainly reasonable. But veterans discriminating against other veterans over some diminutive difference in skill value, could only be viewed as ridiculous at best. > > > > > > > > Big difference there. > > > > > > 9000 and 6000 LIs? I guess making an unrealistic assumption to judge a community isn't ridiculous to you. > > > > > > Kill Proofs simply represent a means to bypass the trust barrier when strangers joining a squad for something that is only meant for players of a certain skill level. Even eliminating all KPs doesn't meant there won't be trust issues among different level of players, veteran players will still find a way to filter out undesired players in order to make the squad functional. > > > > ^ Exactly > > > > So what you're looking at without KPs, is that everyone gets a chance to prove themselves at least once. And then players can remember each other by account/character name. This is a much more realistic gauge of actual efficiency level, regardless of how many KPs a person has or does not have or is willing to fake ping. Removing KPs entirely would usher in a short phase of the community reevaluating everyone from a true skill standpoint like this, rather than a KP number. Some players may find this to be a frustrating phase, but it would serve as a remedy for the lack of raid participation in general. > > > > Look, you've got 3 different types of players when it comes to raids, concerning level of efficiency. 1) You have experienced players who have been doing it for a long time. 2) You have good players who are willing to watch videos and try hard, who know they as an individual are good enough to learn quickly even though they are inexperienced. 3) You have players doing everything wrong, who won't ever get much done. Now what you have happening with a KP system such as LIs, is that the system is good at distinguishing player type 1 from 2 & 3, but it is not good at distinguishing player type 2 from 3. The player type 1 then builds a wall of KPs around itself, to block out type 2 and type 3, so that runs are faster and more efficient, which works great in higher population. In a higher population there are plenty of 1s to maintain a sound active player base inside of the KP fortress, and there are enough 2s showing up on the scene to find each other and eventually build other fortresses in other places. However, with low population the active numbers inside the type 1 fortress begin to dwindle, and rather than lower the KP gates to allow more in, for some reason the KP gate keeps getting higher. Outside of the gates, the type 2s are also in lower population, and it is becoming much much more difficult for 2s to form groups of 2s. So new 2s show up on the scene and can't get into the gates of the KP walls, so they are forced to play with 3s. When the 2s are forced to play with 3s, even though the 2s know the content and are ready to complete it to build KPs, they can't. Then the 2s end up deciding the raids are neither fun or worth the time to organize. <- This is because there aren't enough 2s to play with and the 1s rarely let them in either. And then the participation rates and population in general, dies off. > > > > Some of you are still not identifying this, and some of you are actively trying to fight this fact. The fact of the matter is, that wall of Kill Proofs and the eminence front that it is, in most cases prevents types 1s from bringing in type 2s, and it prevents type 2s from playing with type 1s so they maintain interest and stick around. > > > > This isn't a hypothesis. This is certainly what is happening and as much is obvious to anyone who takes the time to seriously evaluate it. > > > > > > The 2s can do what you say no kp will do. > Group together use friend list to add good people and build up a big enough nr of 2 to play with right? No, they can't. There aren't enough 2s to form groups of 2s. I've already stated this. And when the one or two guys who are 2s are forced to play with a bunch of 3s, they lose interest and leave the scene. This is what is happening. I repeat, there are not enough 2s to group into groups of 2s. This is what those inside of the KP fortress are not understanding. There is a newer thread here -> https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/119910/impossible-for-new-players-raids and many of these statements, including the OP statement, are 100% detailing what I have explained to you here, but in other words. Again, this is all happening because of the KP wall. 2s are ready to complete content but they can't because they are forced to play with 3s and there aren't enough 2s to go around. Then the 2s lose interest and leave the scene. If the 2s who are ready, were allowed inside the gates, they would have fun and would maintain interest and stay, adding to the population of participants who can complete content. But they will never be allowed into those walls because the rare 2 cannot complete content with groups of 3s, and thus he will never be able to build KP to show. Even if he does occasionally snag an LI here or there, it will take WAY TOO LONG if it is even possible at all, to ever build enough to be "Trusted" in better groups, for the raids to ever be worth his time. Click on that link I posted and read just the first page. Finest example on the internet of what I've explained in this thread. And then you get statements like this: > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > The groups that you see requiring LI are those trying to do clears. They're not intended for new players as they would slow things down and even possibly cause a wipe. Those players are free to create their own LFG with specifications that all are welcome. There are also training guilds/discords which will help teach players new to raids. The thing that the people who dwell within the KP fortress are not understanding, is that there aren't enough 2s for other 2s to play with. And 2s can't get anything done in groups of all 3s, so they leave the scene and don't come back. And this whole thing about "Just join a raid guild" has become a meme blanket statement within this community. The reality of raid guilds is that you get to wait and sit around for 7 days until someone happens to be in the mood to form a party of five type 1s, so they can train five type 2s. And that's if a person is lucky enough to even get a spot in a training run or two for that week. And that's not even guaranteeing the run will even last longer than an hour. It simply is no where even in the ballpark of practical for new 2s on the scene to stick around. It simply isn't worth the time neither in fun or reward. And this problem is mainly due to the KP fortress community. **Look, you can argue to preserve your KP wall, that's fine. Just understand what I am saying. What I am saying is that there will be more participation in raids if KPs were removed entirely. Whether the elite community likes it or not, whether their runs in the LFG become more difficult or not, it is true.**

> @"Sobx.1758" said: > Soooooo we're repeating this thread? > https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/119910/impossible-for-new-players-raids/ > > It's not tedious to learn, if you want to learn and get into raiding you will. If you don't want to learn, then you have noone and nothing to blame. > "KPs bad in low pop" -maybe, but then again maybe not. Seeing how all it does is providing the way to distinguish players that are experienced/inexperienced (not a fool-proof method, sure, but it's... something), I'm not sure not having kps would somehow make anything better. You'd get into raid party, instantly show you don't know what is happening and get kicked. ^ Exactly > @"Vilin.8056" said: > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > > > > @"yann.1946" said: > > > > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > > > > > @"Firebeard.1746" said: > > > > > > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > > > > > > No, other games invalidate old content allowing skill less players to have a sense of success by beating content which otherwise would be unbeatable to them at a later point. Or they introduce difficulty tiers which are barely above free loot, to make even the worst players feel accomplished. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nox100. I agree but you're moving what i was saying a different direction. The refresh helps make getting into groups easier. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No, it doesn't. Players who did not properly tackle challenging content gain NOTHING with gear depreciation in other MMOs in regards to improving game skill wise. What they gain is the ability to out-gear old content and experience it. > > > > > > > > > > > > In that regard GW2 is actually superior. There is no required "cut-off" point one has to wait for. If you want to take on challenging content, you can start doing so at any point in time. Most often all it requires is a different approach to content in this game, often ideally paired with a more social approach and making contacts, but even that is only beneficial and not needed. > > > > > > > > > > > > Simply put: > > > > > > If you lacked the knowledge, experience and underlying understanding how to approach challenging content, you are/were in the exact same spot in every other MMO even after a new gear set. > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Firebeard.1746" said: > > > > > > > > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > > > > > > > We have that in GW2. We have that in lower tier fractals. What we do not have is the gear deprecation and dumbing down of content to the same extent, though power creep is certainly present. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you want to be successful in other MMOs and take on challenging content, the approach there is exactly the same as here: join a guild, practice, improve, succeed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What % of guilds are doing progression runs? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Irrelevant in that most players who want to get into CMs never even take that approach. They demand others take them "as is" via LFG groups. You are demanding just that in this very thread. I linked you youtube video of a fractal training guild member/leader. There obviously are discord and guilds. > > > > > > > > > > > > Even if not, here is what I did: > > > > > > I asked guildies in one of my more casual guilds which were already doing T4 semi regularly if they would be interested in-trying CMs. I did so AFTER actually spending a ton of time as duo with a friend in learning how to run CMs. I trained up 3 roster worth of guildies to be able to run CMs because eventually people don't have time or take a break from the game or fractals, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > The point is: the key in succeeding at this content is playing with other players regularly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Firebeard.1746" said: > > > > > > > As for your comment on time, if nourishing the community around raiding is too time consuming then the game mode isn't sustainable. > > > > > > > > > > > > No, a game mode becomes unsustainable if the amount of players playing it drops to far or the developers decide that they have to move on due to technical reasons (dungeons were by far not underpopulated but a mess code wise) which is far more related to updates that content receives. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nourishing happens, just not the way you like it: between random parties all the time constantly. It happens in social groups of different degree most of the time. > > > > > > > > > > I agree with you. > > > > > It seems to me people always seem to confuse being friendly with being social. > > > > > > > > > > People don't just stroll to random people playing boardgames and ask then to teach it to them. > > > > > > > > Actually, that is usually how people learn new board games or card games. You go somewhere and people are playing a game and they want you to play so they sit you down and teach you. I've been watching it happen for 35+ years. > > > > > > > > I have never once sat down and read a ruleset for monopoly or scrabble or poker or hearts, nor basketball or soccer or baseball. I learned these games because there were people around who wanted to get others involved in them, rather than push them away. > > > > > > > > Strangely enough, I can't help to imagen that people wanting to teach other people these games, must have something to do with why these games are undying and have stood the test of time. And as much can be said in contrast for why raids are dying Guild Wars 2, because people want to isolate instead of create community cohesion. > > > > > > > > It truly is an interesting difference in sociology to evaluate. The difference between how things work IRL vs. an online video game, and why. > > > > > > So, if I was now to make the case that every person you walk up to is unsocial because they might not be interested to teach you a board game right at that very moment in time, I'd have a strong argument? > > > > > > Yes, friends or family teach each other new board games. It's a social interaction. Or people go to comic/board game/trading card game shops and play and teach others. That's on their terms. That is akin to taking a guild member along or doing a training run. > > > > > > At no point in time does this happen though when the other party is not interested or lacking time. > > > > > > The differences between RL and online video game are not that different, IF one accounts for the fact that in RL you have spacial distance which manages interest and goals. In online games you do not since it's basically a binar state: online or offline. > > > > > > All you have to imagine is this: > > > Players who are not in the mood to train others are basically not in your spacial vacinity. In real lifey, you wouldn't have met them at that point in time, aka they wouldn'thave shown up to that game night. If you want something from them, do so at the appropriate time and place, just as you would when interacting with them im real life. Easy peasy. > > > > This conversation has somehow deviated far far away from where it started. > > > > My OP post was never about player reluctance to take the time and effort to train someone new. > > > > My OP post was about experienced players discriminating against experienced players because someone has 9000 LIs and someone else only has 6000. > > > > A veteran wanting to get his clear done quickly on a night rather than taking hours and hours to train new players is certainly reasonable. But veterans discriminating against other veterans over some diminutive difference in skill value, could only be viewed as ridiculous at best. > > > > Big difference there. > > 9000 and 6000 LIs? I guess making an unrealistic assumption to judge a community isn't ridiculous to you. > > Kill Proofs simply represent a means to bypass the trust barrier when strangers joining a squad for something that is only meant for players of a certain skill level. Even eliminating all KPs doesn't meant there won't be trust issues among different level of players, veteran players will still find a way to filter out undesired players in order to make the squad functional. ^ Exactly So what you're looking at without KPs, is that everyone gets a chance to prove themselves at least once. And then players can remember each other by account/character name. This is a much more realistic gauge of actual efficiency level, regardless of how many KPs a person has or does not have or is willing to fake ping. Removing KPs entirely would usher in a short phase of the community reevaluating everyone from a true skill standpoint like this, rather than a KP number. Some players may find this to be a frustrating phase, but it would serve as a remedy for the lack of raid participation in general. Look, you've got 3 different types of players when it comes to raids, concerning level of efficiency. 1) You have experienced players who have been doing it for a long time. 2) You have good players who are willing to watch videos and try hard, who know they as an individual are good enough to learn quickly even though they are inexperienced. 3) You have players doing everything wrong, who won't ever get much done. Now what you have happening with a KP system such as LIs, is that the system is good at distinguishing player type 1 from 2 & 3, but it is not good at distinguishing player type 2 from 3. The player type 1 then builds a wall of KPs around itself, to block out type 2 and type 3, so that runs are faster and more efficient, which works great in higher population. In a higher population there are plenty of 1s to maintain a sound active player base inside of the KP fortress, and there are enough 2s showing up on the scene to find each other and eventually build other fortresses in other places. However, with low population the active numbers inside the type 1 fortress begin to dwindle, and rather than lower the KP gates to allow more in, for some reason the KP gate keeps getting higher. Outside of the gates, the type 2s are also in lower population, and it is becoming much much more difficult for 2s to form groups of 2s. So new 2s show up on the scene and can't get into the gates of the KP walls, so they are forced to play with 3s. When the 2s are forced to play with 3s, even though the 2s know the content and are ready to complete it to build KPs, they can't. Then the 2s end up deciding the raids are neither fun or worth the time to organize. <- This is because there aren't enough 2s to play with and the 1s rarely let them in either. And then the participation rates and population in general, dies off. Some of you are still not identifying this, and some of you are actively trying to fight this fact. The fact of the matter is, that wall of Kill Proofs and the eminence front that it is, in most cases prevents types 1s from bringing in type 2s, and it prevents type 2s from playing with type 1s so they maintain interest and stick around. This isn't a hypothesis. This is certainly what is happening and as much is obvious to anyone who takes the time to seriously evaluate it.

> @"Aridon.8362" said: > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > @"Firebeard.1746" said: > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said: > > > > There’s a difference between players offering to teach you and expecting all of them to teach you. > > > > > > > > Board games are also very different as players are not driven for rewards compared to those doing raids/fractals. Progress for board/card games is nonexistent in the sense that you’re simply playing the game whereas progress in fractals/raids can be slowed or even halted with having new players. > > > > > > I don't expect all of them to teach me. The teaching doesn't happen enough. If I'm wrong the raiding community would grow. And I'm completely fine with being wrong. > > The raid community doesn't grow not because there's not enough players wanting to teach, or not enough opportunities to learn. It's because learning process itself is too tedious/painful for a majority of players, which results in not enough players being willing to stick with it to the end. Which is a byproduct of both content difficulty and the skill discrepancies within community. And those are a byproduct of the combat/skill/traits/gear system design Anet decided on. > > > > With whole game as it is, and the content being as it is, Raids being sustainable would require GW2 having way, way bigger playerbase than it has. Possibly even bigger than it ever had (, well, apart from maybe first months of the game, but _without_ content locust padding a large part of that number). > > I disagree with you. It's not that tedious to learn It's not that it's tedious to learn, it's that it's tedious to organize. The point of this thread was to point out that heavy KP expectation exasperates this problem in a low population community.

@"Norbe.7630" Thanks for posting this btw. It explains many things. I can see how this would normally work, but I absolutely 100% guarantee you this wouldn't work in GW2 due to the win trading gates. You'd get around 1600-1650 before you were noticed, and if you weren't match manipulating yourself or in with the cool crowd to be ignored, you wouldn't make it any higher than that.

It's a bug that applies to some skills.

> @"Tycura.1982" said: > What kind of nutshell? I said pistachio last time but I think it should be walnut this time ooh or pecan I love pecans. No, cashews best.

> @"Stallic.2397" said: > Gotta admit, there's a core Necro build with minions and tons of life force that basically does nothing but spit out condi and stand on node till either you give up or die. Irritating as kitten. Talk about low effort for a build that can 2v1. > > Just an example of the gimmicky meta. Funny you mention that. Last night I was fighting a Core Minion Necro and somehow even though I could have the actual Necro tied up in a CC chain, he could push his minion's utility attacks all at the same time and if they actually all hit you, it was like a 12k solid burst every time. That minion damage is way way over the top for what it is right now.

could artificially inflate the ping of certain players so everyone lags equally. Then it would be fair.

> @"Avatar.3568" said: > > @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > > As a Ranger main, here are the 1v1s that are good fun balanced match ups that could go either way: > > > > * vs. Spellbreakers > > * vs. Power Heralds > > * vs. Holosmith > > * vs. GOOD Thieves. Less skilled Thieves are easily countered by Ranger > > * vs. Power based Mesmer specs > > > > Vs. anything else, you're either countering or getting countered. But the aforementioned 1v1s allow for the type of play to happen that your OP post mentions, and yes, the game is so so much more fun when the dynamic is skill based and less rock/paper/scissors based. > > Looks like you have problems with condi Not really. I didn't say I struggled with condi, I said that other match ups are rather imbalanced or simply not fun. Other match ups look like this, if you were say DPS Soulbeast at least: * Soulbeast = Core Guard in the end. A Core Guard counters you on node, but the Ranger counters the Core Guard if it plays smart and kites * Soulbeast > DH ^ same ordeal, but the Ranger has a few advantages due to Sic Em vs. trap rune and the DH being squishy * Soulbeast = FB but it is often you can't actually kill the FB, it just tanks and kites and never dies * Soulbeast = Condi Herald but again, it often results in neither being able to actually kill each other. The Ranger kites too well for the CH to seal the deal on a kill and a well played CH is too sustainy for the Ranger to seal a kill. Not a fun match up and often boring * Soulbeast < Renegade, everything about Renegade hard counters power based Ranger specs * Soulbeast > Scrapper, for all the defense a Scrapper would seem to have, when the big burst lands, the Scrapper doesn't have enough topped out vita to endure the blows and recover from it. Scrapper is good vs. anything not glass cannon though. * Soulbeast > All Necros * Soulbeast < Weavers, and they can't kill good Tempests either, but the Tempests also cannot kill them

Eeeeeeeh You don't "always push far" or "never push far", it's more complex than that. You need to know when it's a good idea to open an initial split with a far push and when it would be a bad idea to open the initial split with a far push. It's all situational.

As a Ranger main, here are the 1v1s that are good fun balanced match ups that could go either way: * vs. Spellbreakers * vs. Power Heralds * vs. Holosmith * vs. GOOD Thieves. Less skilled Thieves are easily countered by Ranger * vs. Power based Mesmer specs Vs. anything else, you're either countering or getting countered. But the aforementioned 1v1s allow for the type of play to happen that your OP post mentions, and yes, the game is so so much more fun when the dynamic is skill based and less rock/paper/scissors based.

> @"Kuma.1503" said: > At this point, I doubt there are enough P2+ players on the forum to support this idea. You might, at most, have 10 people who qualify, and also post on the forums regularly. It would most likely devolve into an echo chamber in which there aren't enough voices to cancel out any group biases. Assuming the devs actually take these ideas to heart, it would likely result in a decline in balance. As far as NA is concerned, there are seriously only 7 people who play at 1600+ margins who even post in this forum. Me, Shao, Tycura, Memausz, RedAvenged, Vallun and Grimjack. Other p2+ have seemingly disappeared from this forum within about the past 6 months. I dunno, maybe I'm missing some people, sorry if that's the case. The p2 - p3 - legend community is incredibly small in NA. The other day I was 1599 rating, enough to be rank 24 or something like that on the leaderboards. So you're talking only 24 players from 1600 and up. Even the p1 community is just really small in NA even, and tbh I don't see many of them posting in this forum either. As much as people like to hiiiiiiide these things, the truth is that the large bulk of feedback in this pvp forum, I'm talking 95% of it, is coming from a place well bellow the bell curve. Well wait a minute.. this brings up a good new question: **"Where even is the new bell curve?"** a lot of things have changed with low population. A year or two ago, the bell curve was still like gold 3'ish, but lately It's starting to look like high gold 2'ish is the new bell curve in NA. These are the types of things that start happening in low population. Honestly people maybe should shift their perceptions a bit on "Who's opinions are valid and who's aren't." And on a similar note, there are a lot of guys in NA that I know could play p1-p2 margins if they honestly cared, but lately they play random classes/builds for memes cause it's fun, because they want something different to do. They hold g3'ish type rankings due to this, even though they are the better players to pick up for AT teams when you get them on their mains and get them to actually try. I guess the moral of the story is: Don't let rating fool you too much. There are so many reasons why good players are lower than they should be, and how mediocre players find ways to wiggle into higher ratings than they should be. Can't speak for EU. I have absolutely no idea what is going on in EU.

> @"FrownyClown.8402" said: > The game doesnt need to be balanced. It needs frequent updates to keep the meta interesting. I agree with this. But I can add that the frequent updates should be balanced updates. We should not be getting updates where 1 or 2 classes become S+ tier whilst everything else is A- B+ at best. It's acceptable to have like 3 or 4 S tiers amongst mostly A tiers and maybe a few Bs, but it just annoys everyone when 1 or 2 builds are S+ tiers, then you have 1 A tier, and then everyone else is B or C <- That's just a really imbalanced patching and it isn't fun.