kharmin.7683

> @"Azazel.7536" said: > To be honest, I am more excited about the achievements (despite certain tediousness) than the mount itself cause I have had a chance to ride fully mastered one on my friend's account and it was a completely underwhelming experience for me, taking into account the extensive achievements wall required to unlock it. I felt the same way. I kept reading how players were extolling the virtues of this mount and saying that it is the only one that they use. Once I had acquired mine, I just didn't see it. .... until I kept using it and getting more familiar with how it moves/flies/etc. I now understand the hype and use mine almost to the exclusion of other mounts. I guess I'm saying that I was in your proverbial shoes with regards to the skyscale, but after giving it a legitimate chance and using it often, I found it to be pretty much up to the hype. Good luck!

> @"Chyanne Waters.8719" said: > > @"firedragon.8953" said: > > I must be getting old. I remember when people payed to get access, a floppy disk, a CD, a license key, etc. etc. and play a game. Once you bought it, that’s it. That was the game. But now, people want to pay to “finish” a game? Why? Is this what Angry Birds and Candy Crush (I never played those, so don’t really know) has done to the game market? Something is too hard, oh nothing a few dollars can’t fix? It’s even worse when it’s a multiplayer game. Imagine if you could just buy a Skyscale for 5000 gems. No, just no. GW2 is not Gold Wars 2. > > Lol but you have to pay 2000 gems to change the look of your mount. The look of a mount does not gate progression in the game. Mastery points can. Take PoF for example: you cannot (easily) get to the Springer without having the necessary mastery for the Raptor for canyon jumping. Getting to elevated areas without the Springer's extra high jump mastery is significantly more difficult than without it. There are areas you cannot access with the Skimmer without the requisite mastery that allows it to increase its height. Likewise, one cannot use sand portals without training one's Jackal to use them. Mount skins are purely cosmetic. Sorry, but your comparison here is flawed.

You might try the forums search function or look in the professions sub-forum for Ranger as this topic has been addressed

> @"Linken.6345" said: > > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > > @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said: > > > > @"BadHealer.3608" said: > > > > > @"Healix.5819" said: > > > > > > > Is this for real or some sick joke? There are no new DRMs and no patch today (unless it is late ... maybe?!) and no new "community event" for this week? > > > > > > Yes, it seems that we failed to reach tier 5 and the story wont progress. Well, maybe they lock later into it or maybe they are to busy with something else. > > > > > It would have only been a week early if reaching T5 was going to affect it. Next week is the usual release cycle. > > > > They did promise WEEKLY new content. Since it didn't come Tuesday and we are close as Thanksgiving, I assume that they fail to deliver. > > > > > > > > We can discussed if weekly new content is good (remember LS1 with two weekly new content), but it just seems that they did screw up already with new content coming only when we reach tier 5, but making it unable to reach tier 5 now. (I assume that this is happening right now.) > > > > > > > > Personally I would find it okay if they slowly increase the release. Maybe one more story, one mastery and two DRM (yes, I know that many got tired of them already), maybe a few more achievements and most would be okay with it. > > > > > > I don't believe the Devs 'promised' weekly updates. > > > This does not mean 'weekly': > > > _In the weeks between releases, each chapter will continue to evolve with new content and ways to play._ > > > > > > 'Weeks' means any time between releases, i.e. sometime in the weeks between the release in November and the release in January. > > > We've rarely, if ever, received any kind of update less than two weeks apart. > > > > Things like this is, IMO, one of the reasons why they don't engage with us on the forums. "Promises" taken out of context and self-made expectations not being met and then being blasted for it. /shrug > > Well it could mean every week every other week or third week. > > They could have been crystal clear and said when champions part 1 released that 2 weeks from now we will have to second content drop and end of this episode. I agree, but with the track record if they actually made a statement like that and then failed to hit the mark, the backlash would have been brutal. As it usually is.

> @"BioDio.3476" said: > > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > > @"BioDio.3476" said: > > > However, this game needs more spending players from my understanding. I'm not joking when I say that I feel like I'm stealing from the devs every time I play the game, look at the ridiculous good quality amount of content Arena Net creates... for free. In 2020... for free. I would vote for them to at least sell an episode half-price during the release window, and not for free. I'm gonna buy the Deluxe Edition of the next expansion and spend some money on the game. I haven't spent money since... pfff... I really dunno, I know I did at some point, and I have the deluxe of PoF, but that's it. There is no P2W, no sub... asking for a couple of coins for every episode, should be fine?! Probably half the people will reject this idea, but really, if you like the game, don't let it die, and show GW2 as an example of a good non-sub MMO that can turn a good amount of profit (I really don't know if they're doing well, but I don't feel like its too hot). > > What is preventing you from buying gems and supporting the studio? If you feel so guilty about it, then go ahead. Many players already do this on their own. There is no need to push or mandate it. > > I'm probably the minority, but, personally, I don't find any vanity items in the cash shop particularly interesting/attractive, game's gear, even level 1 gear, is pretty cool looking, and the HoM gear being free to transmute, including dyes... I can make my character look the way I want. Also, the base mounts look amazing, with the possibility to also dye for free. > I did buy most of the Episodes from Season 2 and Season 3, since I wasn't so active back then, only had a couple of them unlocked, and that was the only time I bought anything from the game since I started playing from the beta. > Never felt the need to spend money besides that. I'm gonna buy some QoL stuff, that's the only thing I feel like I need. > > I'm just saying, this game is much bigger and complex than GW1, but still has the GW1 philosophy, by not asking you to pay for anything besides the game, however, even in GW1 you had to pay for a pack of 4 bonus missions, explaining past events of each game, which was fine, the missions were nice and they gave you some cool weapon skins. > GW2 is massive, in every sense of the word, yet, it doesn't ask you too much to experience everything. The base game is free, and it's by far the best 1-80 experience out there in the market... for free. Again, this is my point of view. Black Desert has a very predatory cash shop, and the game still asks you to pay like 5/8€ just to play it. > > Sure, it's great to get up to a friend and say all the good stuff from the game has to offer without asking too much from you, but, I personally don't think they need to go to such lengths. Asking for up to 50 gems per episode during the release window doesn't seem that crazy. You don't have to buy anything in the gem store. Just buy gems. That's enough to help support the studio. Asking to pay for episodes during the release window goes against precedent. However, you are more than able to buy 50 gems each time a new episode is released. I guess I'm not sure what your agenda is here. It seems like you want to enforce some kind of subscription or mandatory payment model which is opposed by the game's F2P concept from inception?

If you damage enough armor, you'll be running around in your undergarments.

I have the ascended long bow and have started working on the greatsword. I do have exotic versions of the longbow, greatsword and sword.

QoL suggestions should go in the stickied thread above: [https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/53097/suggestions-qol-quality-of-life-ideas-merged#latest](https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/53097/suggestions-qol-quality-of-life-ideas-merged#latest)

> @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said: > > @"BadHealer.3608" said: > > > @"Healix.5819" said: > > > > > Is this for real or some sick joke? There are no new DRMs and no patch today (unless it is late ... maybe?!) and no new "community event" for this week? > > > > Yes, it seems that we failed to reach tier 5 and the story wont progress. Well, maybe they lock later into it or maybe they are to busy with something else. > > > It would have only been a week early if reaching T5 was going to affect it. Next week is the usual release cycle. > > They did promise WEEKLY new content. Since it didn't come Tuesday and we are close as Thanksgiving, I assume that they fail to deliver. > > > > We can discussed if weekly new content is good (remember LS1 with two weekly new content), but it just seems that they did screw up already with new content coming only when we reach tier 5, but making it unable to reach tier 5 now. (I assume that this is happening right now.) > > > > Personally I would find it okay if they slowly increase the release. Maybe one more story, one mastery and two DRM (yes, I know that many got tired of them already), maybe a few more achievements and most would be okay with it. > > I don't believe the Devs 'promised' weekly updates. > This does not mean 'weekly': > _In the weeks between releases, each chapter will continue to evolve with new content and ways to play._ > > 'Weeks' means any time between releases, i.e. sometime in the weeks between the release in November and the release in January. > We've rarely, if ever, received any kind of update less than two weeks apart. Things like this is, IMO, one of the reasons why they don't engage with us on the forums. "Promises" taken out of context and self-made expectations not being met and then being blasted for it. /shrug

> @"BioDio.3476" said: > However, this game needs more spending players from my understanding. I'm not joking when I say that I feel like I'm stealing from the devs every time I play the game, look at the ridiculous good quality amount of content Arena Net creates... for free. In 2020... for free. I would vote for them to at least sell an episode half-price during the release window, and not for free. I'm gonna buy the Deluxe Edition of the next expansion and spend some money on the game. I haven't spent money since... pfff... I really dunno, I know I did at some point, and I have the deluxe of PoF, but that's it. There is no P2W, no sub... asking for a couple of coins for every episode, should be fine?! Probably half the people will reject this idea, but really, if you like the game, don't let it die, and show GW2 as an example of a good non-sub MMO that can turn a good amount of profit (I really don't know if they're doing well, but I don't feel like its too hot). What is preventing you from buying gems and supporting the studio? If you feel so guilty about it, then go ahead. Many players already do this on their own. There is no need to push or mandate it.

> @"Haaznahnuff.1907" said: > Imagine, you put a bed at one place in one instance, and you want it to be at the right place in another instance??? > > Home instances are visited at least once by every character, the same as any other city district. For those ones, they should appear at least as another district, and my point is that they should have been ever better, as compared to a "standard" district, just because they are home of Tyrian champions. Now, I understand if lore-wise, populated centers (festivals, markets, economic seats (hubs), etc) are more populated and animated. I have 11 characters on my account. Only 2-3 have ever been in their home instance for anything. The others haven't even run chapter 1 of the personal story. > The second point is, that in the character's home instance proper, there should have been more material related to the personal story, and there could be more personalization options. Personally, I don't see why. Again, for all intents and purposes, I never enter my home instance. > Even in a MMO game, I think that both these expectations are reasonable, and more so if new players are scheduled to come, who won't necessarily be formatted by GW1 o WoW and other MMOs. The personal story and its instanced content have always been considered as an important stage for the new player's initiation, to familiarize them to the duality of a MMO world and instanced high level content. I agree that once initiation is over, the player has no need of its material. If I said that designers didn't now what to do with home instances, its because, as you say, they could have been replaced from the start by a public area with a green star to enter an instanced version of this area, just as what is done with most of the personal story instances. I'm sure that they would have been more polished in that case. No, on the contrary, they chose to keep them instanced even after initiation is completed (for the player) and an order is integrated (for the character). I believe this choice and the lack of correction afterwards could arm the consistency of the game, for any new player sensible enough to RP, as I was. Yes, from a RP point of view, I would rather get rid of home instances, as they are useless and armful as empty as they are (better integrate their content to the world). From a RP point of you, who seriously cares of a NPC that only says "Hello"? So ... after an initial period, the home instance is no longer needed? I can agree with that. > Now on metrics (the everlasting controversy), the question is less "what metrics say on their usage", than "where do we want players to spend a small part of their time" and "how much do we want to be consistent to new players" (that is being toward a less following and a more directive design on the scale, even if feedback, adaptation, and retro-action are all necessary). Overcrowded hubs are fun to watch but at times laggy. Having like 10% less people here on the average wouldn't be a loss, if those people still use the hubs anyway (for a less time, not less often). So, are you advocating for more resources to be spent on home instances in the hope that it would drive 10% of a hub-map into said instances and reduce some lag?

> @"Wistfallen.7340" said: > You should show what sort of builds you're running before complaining about the difficulty. Difficulty is always going to be relative. Some players aren't physically able to be more efficient than others which has nothing to do with their build. Some players are simply "better" at these kinds of games than others and can do well in harder content with less META builds. There are many factors involved that relate to the level of difficulty for individual players. Builds matter, but aren't the only factor that should be addressed.

While I appreciate and understand your frustrations, nothing you have said here hasn't already been said in other threads.

> @"Orion Templar.4589" said: > I'd simply like to have a way (maybe a gem store item?) to have all my home nodes harvested instantly. So I'd go into my home instance, talk to my new NPC service, and instantly have all the items added to my inventory. I know that probably sounds lazy, but after having walked the same home path harvesting path nearly every day for many many months, I'm ready for some time savings. I'd like to simply log in and get a legendary of my choice.

> @"Haaznahnuff.1907" said: > I read you, but on this account, all starting areas and most parts of capitals would be deserted as well, once exploration is done. Yet they are finely animated, and home instances could have received a tenth of this love. But I have the feeling that designers didn't have a clear idea of what to do with home instances for starting: a gallery for personal trophies without shelters (the resource nodes, a late addition, are "dumped" in what looks random or rather, most "convenient" places, that is a few hops from the entrance), a private housing without housing (because it was against lore, a homestead is not a private location, and it could have competed with other places of socialization in game), ... so new players are enticed, and then, they are left with an empty shell. Nobody, except the purest role players would like to return to an empty shell, you are right. Capitals aren't instanced content and have resources there that all players can use. IMO, these are two entirely different things and the capitals should have more attention as they are used by more players. > The concept of a whole instanced district of a town was an original and promising idea, though, once you get accustomed to both the instanced personal and living story mechanics. In a solo game, the whole cities could have been customized according to the player's feats, and it was reasonable, in a MP game, to limit this customization to a small part only. Thus, we all share the same cities, and at the same time, we are all the one defender of Tyria, the killer of the dragon, and the main actor of ours parallel stories. Home instances could have played for invited groups and solo players the role Guild Halls are promised to play for guilds. As we are often told, despite how many play GW2 in that way, the game is not a solo player game but an MMO. It makes sense to me to not dedicate resources to solo-centric things. > Yet, we had home instances from release day on, when guilds were still quite fledging... Correcting the injustice now, making home instances as animated as other districts, would be diverting resources, for sure, but to what amount, as compared to an episode of the Living World? Yeah, I don't know why these were ever a thing to begin with. And we can't know how much would be diverted -- perhaps a lot, maybe not so much. Still, I would prefer that resources be aimed more toward open content rather than instanced, solo content. This is also why I am against the implementation of player housing. But that's my preference. > It happens that after posting my previous message, I just noticed that home instances are now used by the secondary chronicles, as per my 1st point (a rendez-vous with a NPC). A good start! Who knew?

Already requested here: [https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/71324/skins-for-minions](https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/71324/skins-for-minions) Please use the forums search feature.

> @"otto.5684" said: > > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > > @"otto.5684" said: > > > > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > > > > @"otto.5684" said: > > > > > Same here. I dunno why we moved away from some HoT designs. VB and AB are viewed very highly by most players. > > > > I highly suspect your statement that these maps are viewed highly by MOST players. > > > > > > When people criticize HoT they typically mention TD. When I see favorite maps list, AB and VB tend to come out a lot. > > > > I get that. It also depends on the definition for "viewed very highly". I think that the maps are very well done. I don't enjoy playing them. > > > > EDIT: It also depends on whom you ask. Your circle of players might share the same opinion as you as would mine (see: confirmation bias). In either case, I don't believe that you or I can say with certainty that "most" players view HoT maps highly. > > Or otherwise. If I say that PoF maps suck, can you proof this statement wrong? This is why I said I see AB and VB come out in the forums as favorite maps a lot. I did not say it is conclusive statistics, cuz even Anet do not have that. Or even my personal favorite maps. I am only debating the fact that you laid out. You said.... >@"otto.5684" said: > VB and AB are viewed very highly by most players. I don't believe that these maps are "viewed highly by most players" and was looking for your support for that statement. The forums in no way represent "most players". So, how can you justify that point? Actually, there was a lot of contention on the forums when HoT originally released. One could argue, using your point, that most players at that time were opposed to what was released.

> @"Psientist.6437" said: > > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > > @"Psientist.6437" said: > > > > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > > > > @"Psientist.6437" said: > > > > > Could there be any better way to put the argument over whether female armor is sexualized to rest? > > > > That argument was put to rest centuries ago since male armor is sexualized. Its not until the modern age that feminists once again has been shocked to realize that the female form look different from males, they would naturally wear a different kind of sexualized armor suited for their shapes. > > > > > > > > I mean unless women *want* to wear a huge metal codpiece to show off their big... uh... > > > > > > > > I wont judge. > > > > > > Where can I find men's Tyrian armor that is as sexualized as women's Tyrian armor? Or are you arguing from a general statement while ignoring that the general condition doesn't map to Tyria's specific condition. You are right that women's and mens's armor would be sexualized or designed to exaggerate features, but we don't see any parity in Tyra. A large portion of female armor looks like a Broadway theatrical performance starring women's pelvises. Only a small portion of men's armor use access to flesh as a design pillar. > > > > Really? A large portion of female armor? What ratio? I don't see this evidenced in any of the heavy armor sets that I have. Perhaps a bit of hyperbole to make a point? > > What threshold would I have pass to qualify for "large portion"? There are a lot of butt capes as drawn stage curtains in light armor. Some in medium. If I look for "armor that uses access to flesh as a design pillar" I find obvious examples in heavy armor. Are you really going to argue that there is parity men's and women's armor?!?!? > > I play female characters and often equip them with sexualized skins. I understand and experience the attraction but I won't pretend parity exists. > > OP, forgive me if this seems like a high jacking. I won't continue. > No, I was disagreeing with your statement that a "large portion of female armor looks like a Broadway theatrical performance starring women's pelvises." I just don't see the validity in that statement. That was all.

> @"Fat Disgrace.4275" said: > > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > *Did you mean skirts?* > > What? Nono, butt capes Awesome! I need a few more of those. Can't seem to get enough of 'em! /s

Pretty sure GW2 won't come to consoles because of the method by which their updates would have to be approved and such. There are several threads on that topic that can be found with the search function. Any "future proofing" would probably entail a massive undertaking. We've already been told how convoluted and cumbersome the existing code is. To future proof the game, they might need to start all over rather than try to fix the antiquated code. I wouldn't expect anything to really change in this aspect short of releasing GW3, which I don't see happening. /shrug

> @"Psientist.6437" said: > > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > > @"Psientist.6437" said: > > > Could there be any better way to put the argument over whether female armor is sexualized to rest? > > That argument was put to rest centuries ago since male armor is sexualized. Its not until the modern age that feminists once again has been shocked to realize that the female form look different from males, they would naturally wear a different kind of sexualized armor suited for their shapes. > > > > I mean unless women *want* to wear a huge metal codpiece to show off their big... uh... > > > > I wont judge. > > Where can I find men's Tyrian armor that is as sexualized as women's Tyrian armor? Or are you arguing from a general statement while ignoring that the general condition doesn't map to Tyria's specific condition. You are right that women's and mens's armor would be sexualized or designed to exaggerate features, but we don't see any parity in Tyra. A large portion of female armor looks like a Broadway theatrical performance starring women's pelvises. Only a small portion of men's armor use access to flesh as a design pillar. Really? A large portion of female armor? What ratio? I don't see this evidenced in any of the heavy armor sets that I have. Perhaps a bit of hyperbole to make a point?

> @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > @"lokh.2695" said: > > We can count ourselves lucky if there is a plan beyond the next three months. By plan I mean an actual direction and an idea of what will and what will not be inplemented by said time, not the PR-speak that are """""roadmaps""""". > Frankly, i'd be happy if they had any sort of plan like that for just the more immediate future. So far, they haven't got one. They might have had some _release_ plans, but they never seemed to have any idea about the design direction the game should go in, or any longterm vision for the game. It's always as if they picked ideas by using darts. Or magic 8-balls. > So, yeah, looking at the situation we're now, hearing they have any sort of vision for the next _week_ would be a great news. > > Just because we haven't been given a plan doesn't mean that Anet doesn't have one.

> @"Veprovina.4876" said: > Oh, and how do you embed pictures in posts? I can't seem to get it to work. > For when i post my own pictures. [https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/386/faq-about-using-the-forums](https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/386/faq-about-using-the-forums)

> @"Kichwas.7152" said: > The price is set poorly. It's above impulse buy, so a person stops and thinks 'do I really want that, is it really going to improve my experience?' > - and once you are thinking about a purchase, the majority of potential buyers walk. Personally, I agree with this. > The price needs to be about half of what it is. Cut it there, and they'd get about 3-4x as many buyers. There is a point where this diminishes, but I suspect it's even lower than half... because these things are not even new mounts, they're mostly just reskins - and so the impulse price on that is probably around under $3-5... Yet that bird... cost me $20. Which is why it was the first time since 2017 that I bought any mount skin. Anet sets the price point to generate the most revenue. Just because neither you nor I agree with the price doesn't make it the wrong price. If these items didn't sell for the price that Anet set, then they would change the price. Since it seems to be meeting their financial goals, there is no need for them to change it.

> @"otto.5684" said: > > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > > @"otto.5684" said: > > > Same here. I dunno why we moved away from some HoT designs. VB and AB are viewed very highly by most players. > > I highly suspect your statement that these maps are viewed highly by MOST players. > > When people criticize HoT they typically mention TD. When I see favorite maps list, AB and VB tend to come out a lot. I get that. It also depends on the definition for "viewed very highly". I think that the maps are very well done. I don't enjoy playing them. EDIT: It also depends on whom you ask. Your circle of players might share the same opinion as you as would mine (see: confirmation bias). In either case, I don't believe that you or I can say with certainty that "most" players view HoT maps highly.