Ayrilana.1396
-
Posts
6,970 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Articles
Gallery
Posts posted by Ayrilana.1396
-
-
> @"Astralporing.1957" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > @"Anemone.5320" said:
> > > Who on earth has 10k gold?
> >
> > A lot of people. I'd easily have over that much if I made the effort to sell the chak egg that I got over a year ago. If the price cap were higher I may have just sold it on the TP and be done with it, but considering that I'd be losing out on half the value that others are willing to pay for it, I have to trade outside of the TP.
> No, you don't _have_ to trade outside of TP. You just _want_ to earn more from the transaction that TP currently allows.
>
I’m not understanding whether you’re disagreeing with me or not.
Yes, I don’t have to trade outside of the TP just as I don’t have to use the TP as it has a vendor value. This is true.
Yes, I want to earn more than the TP allows because the item is worth more than that. Similarly why I wouldn’t want to vendor the item because it’s worth more than the vendor allows.
All of which I felt was fairly obvious in my post.
-
> @"Astralporing.1957" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > @"Fueki.4753" said:
> > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > And how is it a failure?
> > > Because it didn't (significantly) increased the population in raids, it's easy to see Strike Missions as failures, if you see them as stepping stones into raids.
> > >
> > > All that happened in terms of stepping stones is the opposite of what was intended: Many people (most prominently the KP demanders) turned raiding into a stepping stone for Boneskinner.
> > >
> >
> > Was it stated that the primary goal of strikes was to increase the raider population?
> No, but but it was mentioned that it was _one_ of the goals.
>
> > @"Fire Attunement.9835" said:
> > **Raids**
> >
> > - Raids are a trickier beast. They're a unique experience and community that we want to find better ways to support, the biggest challenge in creating more is the small audience they attract. We gathered data to determine why, and the most common answer was that there is a giant leap in difficulty between raids and other endgame content, and there isn't anything to help players work their way up.
> > - **Our intention was for Strike Missions to be that intermediary step into 10-person content.** As we've mentioned before and you've likely noticed, strike missions are getting harder. Once a full suite of strike missions is complete there should be a graceful ramp up to the existing raid content rather than the imposing leap that previously existed, and **our hope is once that ramp is in place, the number of players participating in raids will go up**. In addition to that, we're striving to make improvements to Strike Missions themselves to make grouping easier, and to improve the rewards. We hope this will help introduce more people to 10-person content, **which will in turn increase the number of people interested in Raids.**
> I bolded the relevant parts.
>
> > Players choosing not to transition to raiding doesn’t mean that strikes failed as a stepping stone
> It means exactly that. A stepping stone to raids fails as a stepping stone if noone's using it to ascend there. And yes, there _was_ a mention about devs hoping that the stepping stones will increase raid population. It was in the same quote where they practically said raids are now abandoned
>
> Anet hoped, that strikes will become a stepping stone to raids _that will increase raid population_. In this, strikes _did_ end up as a failure.
>
>
You're conflating the two. Adding a middle ground between open world content and raids (i.e. a stepping stone) and whether players actually then decide to move onto raids are two very different things.
They succeeded in adding the intermediary step (stepping stone) although it could certainly be fleshed out some more. As far as what appears to be a secondary goal, you cannot say for certain that it didn't cause players to jump into raids just as it cannot be said for certain that it did. We do not have access to that data. You cannot say strikes are a failure solely on that so unless you have something else to back up that claim...
-
I'm confused. I don't remember seeing Tengu in the trailer.
Edit: Oh wait. You're referring to the one for the next episode.
-
> @"Fuchslein.8639" said:
> > @"kharmin.7683" said:
> > Because everyone burns through content within hours of release and then complains that there is nothing new to do.
>
> Makes me wonder how little content there must be, if you can easily rush it in a few hour's.
> I mean, isn't it unusual to play an MMO a few hours every night?
It's generally very little. The bulk of the "content" is grindy achievements.
-
> @"Anemone.5320" said:
> Who on earth has 10k gold?
A lot of people. I'd easily have over that much if I made the effort to sell the chak egg that I got over a year ago. If the price cap were higher I may have just sold it on the TP and be done with it, but considering that I'd be losing out on half the value that others are willing to pay for it, I have to trade outside of the TP.
-
> @"Fueki.4753" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > The failure or success of strikes can’t be based on whether players make a separate choice on whether to do raids or not.
> >
> > There’s a very large difference between open world PvE and raids. Strikes were designed to be a stepping stone for this. If there’s still a large gap then some of the new strikes should be more challenging than what’s currently available.
>
> I specifically wrote that they _can_ be seen as failures, **if they are seen as stepping stones into raids.**
> There is a **fundamental** difference between seeing Strikes Missions on their own and seeing them as stepping stones for raids.
>
Just as there’s a fundamental difference between strikes being a stepping stone for raids in regards to gameplay as opposed to increasing raid population.
-
> @"Fueki.4753" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > @"Fueki.4753" said:
> > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > And how is it a failure?
> > > Because it didn't (significantly) increased the population in raids, it's easy to see Strike Missions as failures, if you see them as stepping stones into raids.
> > >
> > > All that happened in terms of stepping stones is the opposite of what was intended: Many people (most prominently the KP demanders) turned raiding into a stepping stone for Boneskinner.
> > >
> >
> > Was it stated that the primary goal of strikes was to increase the raider population? Players choosing not to transition to raiding doesn’t mean that strikes failed as a stepping stone
>
> It was stated they should be stepping stones for people to get into raiding.
> That **obviously** means, Arenanet made them with the goal to eventually increase the population in raids.
The failure or success of strikes can’t be based on whether players make a separate choice on whether to do raids or not.
There’s a very large difference between open world PvE and raids. Strikes were designed to be a stepping stone for this. If there’s still a large gap then some of the new strikes should be more challenging than what’s currently available.
-
> @"Fueki.4753" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > And how is it a failure?
> Because it didn't (significantly) increased the population in raids, it's easy to see Strike Missions as failures, if you see them as stepping stones into raids.
>
> All that happened in terms of stepping stones is the opposite of what was intended: Many people (most prominently the KP demanders) turned raiding into a stepping stone for Boneskinner.
>
Was it stated that the primary goal of strikes was to increase the raider population? Players choosing not to transition to raiding doesn’t mean that strikes failed as a stepping stone
-
> @"Astralporing.1957" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > @"Laila Lightness.8742" said:
> > > Boneskinner and whisper is due to they are not easy bosses (wich anet should fix)
> >
> > Nerfing the bosses so that they’re easier defeats the purpose of the strikes. Anet intended for them to be a stepping stone into raids.
> That didn't work. Letting go of that failure of original purpose might at least give them a second life, though.
>
And how is it a failure? Strikes have various degrees of difficulty depending on the boss you fight. They are more difficult than open world content. A “stepping stone” doesn’t mean “raid ready”.
-
Waiting to release the game on Steam until around the time of the expansion was a smart call as they can use the hype from it to bolster steam purchases. Perhaps, if we’re lucky, the whole covid thing will be over with, resulting in people using the internet less, and the connections issues for those experiencing them will have subsided.
-
> @"Mortifera.6138" said:
> We had an Epilogue, no more IbS episodes.
I'm sure you'll be relieved to know that the Icebrood Saga is indeed not over yet with today's announcement. They're referring to it as episode 5.
https://www.guildwars2.com/en/the-game/releases/november-17-2020/
-
> @"Laila Lightness.8742" said:
> Boneskinner and whisper is due to they are not easy bosses (wich anet should fix)
Nerfing the bosses so that they’re easier defeats the purpose of the strikes. Anet intended for them to be a stepping stone into raids.
-
> @"Zok.4956" said:
> > @"maddoctor.2738" said:
> > > @"JohnnyBoy.2314" said:
> > > Hopefully GW2 won't get review-bombed to death on Steam. With all the current issues that is very likely.
> >
> > I hope it does so they fix it. Or if they cannot fix the issue postpone the Steam release until they fix it.
>
> Well, I guess, they heard you. The steam release is postponed.
>
Their announcement clearly said that they want to focus on the upcoming expansion and that’s the reason they’re postponing it indefinitely. There was absolutely no mention that the reason was because some players are having connection issues and they’re delaying it in order to resolve that.
In case you want to refresh your memory on what they actually said:
https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/guild-wars-2-steam-release-news/
-
13:40 into the video you see it. This video is from 2012.
-
> @"mes.4607" said:
> I always see "lab" in LFG. What is the lab?
-
> @"Fuchslein.8639" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > @"Etienne.3049" said:
> > > > @"mercury ranique.2170" said:
> > > > I've been reading the court ruling. The court is very clear that it is important that the content of the lootboxes have a value not only in the virtual economy but also on the real market. As this is not the case with GW2, I doubt this ruling change anything
> > >
> > > At first glance the reasoning of the gambling authority (in 7.1) seems to be that coins, which the objects acquired from the lootbox can be traded for, can be sold for real money on third party sites even if that's against EA's rules, the court seems to accept this reasoning.
> > >
> > > Given that GW2 gold can be sold on 3rd party sites for real money (which is similarly against the rules) and certain items can be sold on the trade post I don't see a lot of reasons for a judgement involving GW2 ending differently (unless this gets appealed resulting in a different conclusion), there's a few small differences but I doubt they'll lead to a different conclusion.
> > > Now whether GW2 is anywhere near he top of the list for enforcement is another question.
> > >
> > > > @"aspirine.6852" said:
> > > > I'd rather see that my government doesnt meddle in my gaming affairs. I think they have some more serious issues right now instead of belittle people..
> > >
> > > "Gambling affairs", not "gaming affairs".
> > >
> > > As for the excuses Anet might use that some people are mentioning, good luck with that, but I'm not seeing those working.
> >
> > Easy solution. Created a version of the black lion chest for those countries ruling against loot boxes and have all items be account bound.
> >
> > Or Anet can calculate the amount to sell each of the tradeable items from the chest by taking the **average number of keys that it would take** and use the cost for those keys. If it would take $100 in keys for an item then it sells for $100. Those that don’t want to pay that much can just buy gold and purchase them off the TP.
>
> So ... a friend of mine is quite lucky with BL-Keys. He has often got mounts and other valuable stuff by opening 1-10 keys. Often even with the first key which he also dropped randomly.
> Does this mean that the items are free or just a few $ ? :)
I bolded the part of my post that's relevant to what you said. I never said anything about outliers.
> @"Manasa Devi.7958" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > @"Manasa Devi.7958" said:
> > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > Easy solution. Created a version of the black lion chest for those countries ruling against loot boxes and have all items be account bound.
> > > >
> > > > Or Anet can calculate the amount to sell each of the tradeable items from the chest by taking the average number of keys that it would take and use the cost for those keys. If it would take $100 in keys for an item then it sells for $100.
> > >
> > > That's not really an easy solution, because there's no single set of rules that applies. In Belgium, for instance, the resellability of acquired items isn't a factor like it is in the Netherlands. Until the EU introduces universal rules for the whole block, expect every country to come up with its own rules with their own particular quirks.
> > >
> > > Also worth noting, neither the Netherlands nor Belgium have passed any laws specific to loot boxes. Both countries just have had existing laws tested against loot box systems.
> >
> > But the second option can apply to all situations. You assign prices to all items not already available on the TP at the cost it would take on average to obtain them by buying keys. You of course make the black lion chest unavailable to those individuals. No RNG. No Loot boxes. You acquire the items at the cost you would have otherwise spent on average.
> They could, true, but they'll never do that because the insane prices they'd have to put on things like the permanent contracts would make them the talk of the town, and not in a good way. They could make those drops less rare of course.
>
> Edit: I guess by TP you mean the trading post instead of the BL store for direct purchase. If so, ignore the above.
I meant the BL store but I honestly don't think they would go that route. I was just trying to highlight that, what I believe to be the case, is that most of the people against loot boxes just want the items for cheaper.
Anet could also just sell the statuettes directly for the cost of keys or instead use them as a sort of rewards system where you get a fixed amount depending on the cost of the purchase.
-
> @"Manasa Devi.7958" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > Easy solution. Created a version of the black lion chest for those countries ruling against loot boxes and have all items be account bound.
> >
> > Or Anet can calculate the amount to sell each of the tradeable items from the chest by taking the average number of keys that it would take and use the cost for those keys. If it would take $100 in keys for an item then it sells for $100.
>
> That's not really an easy solution, because there's no single set of rules that applies. In Belgium, for instance, the resellability of acquired items isn't a factor like it is in the Netherlands. Until the EU introduces universal rules for the whole block, expect every country to come up with its own rules with their own particular quirks.
>
> Also worth noting, neither the Netherlands nor Belgium have passed any laws specific to loot boxes. Both countries just have had existing laws tested against loot box systems.
But the second option can apply to all situations. You assign prices to all items not already available on the TP at the cost it would take on average to obtain them by buying keys. You of course make the black lion chest unavailable to those individuals. No RNG. No Loot boxes. You acquire the items at the cost you would have otherwise spent on average.
Unless of course the real issue is that people are against loot boxes because they want it removed in hopes of getting the items for cheaper than now.
-
> @"Etienne.3049" said:
> > @"mercury ranique.2170" said:
> > I've been reading the court ruling. The court is very clear that it is important that the content of the lootboxes have a value not only in the virtual economy but also on the real market. As this is not the case with GW2, I doubt this ruling change anything
>
> At first glance the reasoning of the gambling authority (in 7.1) seems to be that coins, which the objects acquired from the lootbox can be traded for, can be sold for real money on third party sites even if that's against EA's rules, the court seems to accept this reasoning.
>
> Given that GW2 gold can be sold on 3rd party sites for real money (which is similarly against the rules) and certain items can be sold on the trade post I don't see a lot of reasons for a judgement involving GW2 ending differently (unless this gets appealed resulting in a different conclusion), there's a few small differences but I doubt they'll lead to a different conclusion.
> Now whether GW2 is anywhere near he top of the list for enforcement is another question.
>
> > @"aspirine.6852" said:
> > I'd rather see that my government doesnt meddle in my gaming affairs. I think they have some more serious issues right now instead of belittle people..
>
> "Gambling affairs", not "gaming affairs".
>
> As for the excuses Anet might use that some people are mentioning, good luck with that, but I'm not seeing those working.
Easy solution. Created a version of the black lion chest for those countries ruling against loot boxes and have all items be account bound.
Or Anet can calculate the amount to sell each of the tradeable items from the chest by taking the average number of keys that it would take and use the cost for those keys. If it would take $100 in keys for an item then it sells for $100. Those that don’t want to pay that much can just buy gold and purchase them off the TP.
-
If people want to see him during the year, he shows up randomly in a raid.
-
> @"Mortifera.6138" said:
> What's the deal with "Steve"? Why do they call him that, and how is it funny?
Overused meme. It wasn't that funny the first time it certainly hasn't gotten funnier over time.
-
> @"Yggranya.5201" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > @"Yggranya.5201" said:
> > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > > @"Jilora.9524" said:
> > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > > > > @"Yggranya.5201" said:
> > > > > > > > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > > > > > > > If they saw someone griefing them and reported that player, they weren't actually AFK then.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sure, they were "at the keyboard" as it were. Of course they weren't actually playing the game, but it's pretty apparent that none of that matters. The rules are all just vague enough so they can do anything or nothing at their leisure, as it is in all MMOs. Just react to protect the companys intrests, the rest can rot.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What the difference between minions killing mobs on one screen while watching Netflix on the other versus staring at only a single screen where the minions are killing the mobs?
> > > > >
> > > > > None. Both instances the player isn't actually playing if he does nothing but watch his minions kill mobs or watch netflix while his minions kill mobs. That's where everyone differs on here. Some think you shouldn't get loot that way while others think it's perfectly splendid to read a book or do homework as you get loot doing nothing but stand in one spot.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Except that it's allowed by Anet. You may dislike it but it's their game and their rules.
> > >
> > > In other words, all of these threads are redundant as anet is indifferent to their own ToS. As i said, just vague enough rules so anet doesn't need to enforce anything until it fits anets needs so they can keep as many people "playing" as possible. It's just what i have come to expect from MMO developers.
> > >
> > > Want proof that anet doesn't care? Go to iron marches: bloodfin lake, and watch as they are still standing there with their army of engineers that have been there for years. I'm sure they are just AFKing... You can say what you want, but you will never convince me that someone is willing to farm anything for years without doing anything else in game. After all, when they stand there every single day, they obviously can't be doing anything else, unless it's allowed to just use two or more accounts at the same time (i wonder how they activate the skills conviniently at regular intervals? Hmmm...). If it is allowed, then as i said, all these threads are redundant as soon as anet stops pretending and just admits it.
> >
> > Can you prove that those have been the same accounts? Can you prove that those people are actually AFK?
> >
> > What about the rules are vague to you?
> >
> > Unattended and inattentive are two very different things.
>
> So as i said, all these threads are redundant. I could repeat what i have said before but that would be, well, redundant. After all, if you are indifferent or participate in this kind of behaviour, what could i possibly say? I don't need to prove that going beyond human endurance and skipping sleeping permanently just to farm stuff seems unlikely. I don't need to stand there all day, every day to simply check if they are still there. Are they? Yes, they are, and they will be there until the servers get shut down.
>
Let's say SW has people farming the meta 24/7. I assume those must be the same people doing it the entire time?
Unless you're maintaining a log by tracking each _AFK farmer_ by their account at different time intervals during the day, there's really no way you can be so certain that it's the same players farming hours on end.
-
> @"Ashantara.8731" said:
> > @"Linken.6345" said:
> > Next time maybe not warn the other servers that there will be free lootbags in edge of the mist?
>
> :lol: Yes, that _might_ actually do the trick. Will forward the advice to the people in charge. ;)
>
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > I can't think of why they would be there but I guess this is a difference between regions.
>
> It was a community organized endeavor - and it's a PvE community.
I was referring to there being enough players on the other sides to disrupt your community’s event.
-
> @"Ashantara.8731" said:
> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:
> > The map has always been fairly dead when I looked at it so a party of players should be enough to capture everything.
>
> Nope, it's filled with enemy players on EU. We swapped instances, but they followed us and kept killing the PvE players who know nothing about WvW tactics, equipment and fight mechanics.
I can't think of why they would be there but I guess this is a difference between regions.
-
I never really use it as I manage my inventory in a way that makes it unnecessary.
Tengu could be a useable races on EOD
in Guild Wars 2 Discussion
Posted
I’d also think that adding mounts requires considerably less work from adding a new race as well.