Linken.6345 Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 > @"Crossaber.8934" said: > > @"Voltekka.2375" said: > > > @"Linken.6345" said: > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > > > > @"Linken.6345" said: > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > @"Feanor.2358" said: > > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Feanor.2358" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"Feanor.2358" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > You won't continue because you _can't_. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well yeah. After you insist to call a game mode "1/3rd" despite huge differences in player base, content updates and whatnot, there really isn't much I *can* do beside offering a metaphor illustrating the absurdity of your claim (which you ignored). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are 3 gamemodes. PvE is one of them. Hence it is 1 out of the 3 gamemodes. It's really quite simple. Just because one gamemode has a higher population doesn't make it "more" of a gamemode than another. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So what is PvE then? 83.4/100th of a gamemode? LUL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your position is so far off any game design reality that there simply isn't any base for a debate. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is what I'm talking about, you have nothing else to add. The fact that you consider PvE "more" of a gamemode than the others simply because of a higher population, coupled with the fact that you can't seem to understand that legendary armor skins are exclusive to PvE, just serves to prove how little sense you actually make. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > **I never said it's because of higher population**. The higher population is a result, not a cause. The cause is the overall design of the game. It has much, MUCH more content in PvE than anything else. Upon character creation you're dropped into short PvE instance which serves as a basic tutorial and is followed up by your personal story, which, again, is PvE. Under the normal levelling experience, WvW is introduced as late as level 60 and PvP at level 80. The major updates the game receives, the expansions and the Living World Seasons, extend the personal story and the open world of the game, PvE features. Really, it's not that hard to put it all together. It's a PvE game. Yes, it *supports* two pvp game modes, and even does pretty well in them. But to expect them to be treated on even grounds with PvE is unrealistic and naive. That's not the intent of the game, it never was, and it won't be. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes you did. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Feanor.2358" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > > > > You won't continue because you _can't_. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well yeah. **After you insist to call a game mode "1/3rd" despite huge differences in player base**, content updates and whatnot, there really isn't much I *can* do beside offering a metaphor illustrating the absurdity of your claim (which you ignored). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You also said it's because of content updates and "whatnot." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > **Oh, and before I forget again, your made-up term "legendary skin".** There's no such thing in this game. There's legendary gear, the defining feature of which is the ability to stat-swap on demand. Access to this function on armor *IS* available through both sPvP and WvW. Fact. And there are the exclusive skins, which may or may not be tied to said function. Exclusive skins are found everywhere, across all 3 game modes, and outside of them, in the gemstore. You're just making up an excuse because for some reason you decided you're entitled to get a specific exclusive skin without playing the respective content. It would be *exactly* the same if I was asking for The Ascension to be obtainable through, say, world bosses in open world. It doesn't matter that there's Ad Infinitum, because I'm asking for the specific skin - *exactly* what you do. The only difference is, I actually don't. Because I'm well aware of the need of exclusive rewards. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Legendary_armor > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Taken from the Official Guild Wars 2 Wiki on Legendary Armor, "Acquisition of the **PvE sets with their unique skins** is linked to raids..." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Made-up term" LUL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The legendary backpieces aren't an issue because: > > > > > > > > - PvE has Ad Infinitum > > > > > > > > - PvP has The Ascension > > > > > > > > - WvW has Warbringer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Everyone is happy because they all have their own legendary backpieces exclusive to their respective gamemodes. However, there is only _one_ way to obtain the legendary armor skins, and that is through PvE. Thus, WvWers and PvPers are left out/upset/excluded/-insert synonym for dissatisfied here-. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But you're entirely right that I have nothing to add. All this I've told time and again. And it gets ignored, as I'm sure it will get ignored again. **Because you're not looking for a debate. You're looking for free shinies.** However, this game, like any successful game, is ran by people who actually understand game design. So you won't be getting your free shinies. Deal with it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > > > I'd be more than happy to continue debating this topic with you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote me saying that I'm looking for free shinies. You're literally making things up and putting words into my mouth to make up for the fact that the only thing you've been saying this entire time is, "You're wrong." Yet you've failed time and time again to actually prove it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote me where I'm exaggerating. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote me on my absurd claims. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You can't. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Nice cherry picking. Also, strawman. I was listing obvious indications, I didn't say I was listing reasons. :) > > > > > > > > > > > > Nice. I cherry picked the fact that you said (that you never said) that pve is more than 1/3 of the available gamemodes due to it having a higher population. So yes, I cherry picked out a blantant lie and supported it with a quote from you that proved me correct. > > > > > > > > > > > > It's not strawman when I didn't misrepresent your argument in any way. I literally quoted you as the response. LUL so if you're saying what I quoted is strawman, you're calling yourself a liar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. I still don't see anywhere the term "legendary skin". I see "legendary armor" and "unique skin", but not "legendary skin". :) > > > > > > > > > > > > I think if you were to go into LA map chat and say that legendary skins don't exist, you'd be laughed out of the game. Legendary skins clearly exist and the fact that you say otherwise just proves how delusional you are. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. It's almost like PvE has Envoy, WvW has Sublime Misforged and PvP has Ardent Glorious Armor. What a shocking coincidence! :lol: > > > > > > > > > > > > Ardent Glorious Armor is just a reskin of Glorious Hero Armor. It looks almost completely identical. Sublime Mistforged is a reskin of the Triumphant Hero Armor (again, almost completely identical) with only the chest piece having an added effect. > > > > > > > > > > > > My point still stands. The only way to obtain PvE exclusive legendary armor skins is through PvE. The other 2 gamemodes do not have access to the transforming effects as what's available are essentially lazy reskins of already existing ones. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4. Nah, I won't bother. It's all there already. > > > > > > > > > > > > Exactly. You can't quote me because there isn't any. Called it. :] > > > > > > > > > > > > Just saying "it's there," doesn't mean it actually is. Burden of proof lies with the claimant, not the defender. Thus, saying that I'm exaggerating and incorrect, then failing to provide _any_ proof or quotes as to why it is so, is one of the _biggest_ logical fallacies. It's too bad you're entire argument sucks, hence why you can't actually provide a single piece of evidence to back up your claims. > > > > > > > > > > The skins you have for the spvp and wvw legendary upgrades are excluseive to those game modes aswell come again with something else please. > > > > > The fact that you can get the same skins as ascended dont matter its still exlusive. > > > > > > > > Yes the skins are exclusive to their game mode, but you have got to admit it's really cheeky that they did not get any kind of graphical upgrade going to legendary. > > > > > > It took them what 2 years to make the raid ones? So if they start now we should see the wvw in march 2019 and spvp march 2020 boy that would be fun. > > > I admit its kinda kitten that they made the new tech then only used it for 3 sets of full armor tho. > > > > > > Edit > > > but the poster I quoted said only pve have exclusive legendary skin, when infact both the other legendary functioality skins are excluseive to their content aswell. > > > Working on the wvw myself lvl189 of 2k so getting there ;) > > > > No. This is wrong. T2 and T3 skins in wvw ARE exclusive. Theyre not LEGENDARY exclusive. If we were to compare stuff, think of it as the pve precursor (ascended) skin being the same as the legendary skin of the envoy armor. > > The wvw armor are exclusively ugly to begin with, look at obsidian weapon as well, they are never designed with the same affort level as to all RAID exclusive weapon and armor. > > I personally don’t want the same legendary armor skin for wvw or pvp, but the overall lower quality of pvp / wvw skin do pissed me off. Competitive players are not 2nd class citizens of gw2. Well taste differ i like the wvw skin hence why im going for it might aswell make it a legndary while doing so aswell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linken.6345 Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > Also, even if Ardent Glorious Armor and The Ascension didn't exist, I 100% disagree with the fact that people would call Warbringer and Sublime Mistforged Armor "the PvP legendaries" as WvW and PvP are two entirely separate gamemodes with drastically different structures. Instead, they would simply be called "the WvW legendaries." If this _were_ the case, with PvE having Envoy and Ad Infinitum, WvW having Sublime and Warbringer, and PvP legendaries didn't exist, I'd wager that PvPers would **definitely** be outraged. > > The differences between different sidecontents of PvE can actually be greater than those between SPvP and WvW. The only difference is that PvP got officially divided by devs into 2 distinct modes, while equally distinct submodes of PvE were all put into one big container. Raids and Fractals have about as much in common with LS and open world as WvW has with SPvP. If you'll continue to call Ad Infinitum and Envoy Armor **the** PvE legendaries, i'd have to insist that PvE has only one set of those, while PvP has _two_. > > You don't like SPvP being grouped together with WvW? Then understand that a lot of PvErs don't like to be lumped together with raiders either. And many raiders are very vocal about their dislike of many core PvE content types and modes. > > This has nothing to do with my personal prefences on whether or not **I** don't like sPvP and WvW being grouped together. > > The Official Guild Wars 2 Wiki clearly classifies Raids and Fractals of the Mist as PvE content. WvW may be a PvP gamemode, but it is **not** categorized at sPvP and vice versa. You insist on grouping sPvP and WvW together when they are clearly 2 completely separate gamemodes. The fact that they are both related to PvP doesn't mean they are the same. > > Again, this is in contrast to Raids and Fractals being **officially classified** as PvE content. > > - [Raids](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Raid) (sub content) are "10 player squad-based PvE instances." > - [Fractals of the Mists](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Fractals_of_the_Mists) (sub content) are "a special type of dungeon." > - [Dungeons](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Dungeon) (sub content) are "optional party-based PvE instances." > > Meanwhile... > > - [WvW](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/World_versus_World) (main content) is "a combination Player versus Player/Player versus Environment." > - [sPvP](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Structured_PvP) (main content) is "a Player versus Player mode." > > The comparison you're making would be like saying: > - "A lot of League players don't like being lumped together with sPvPers either. And many League players are very vocal about their dislike of many core sPvP content types and modes." > > or... > > - "A lot of Battlegrounds/Borderlands players don't like being lumped together with WvWers either. And many Battlegrounds/Borderlands players are very vocal about their dislike of many core WvW content types and modes." > > However, League players **do** consider themselves sPvPers and Battlegrounds/Borderlands players **do** consider themselves WvWers. Therefore, Raiders and Fractals of the Mists players **are** PvErs regardless of whether or not they "like/dislike" it. Wait spvp got no enviroment so you dont have to hold points to win just go murder players then? I recall some map having pve mobs that you could kill for a point boost aswell but clearly they have taken away that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpass.4236 Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 > @"Linken.6345" said: > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > Also, even if Ardent Glorious Armor and The Ascension didn't exist, I 100% disagree with the fact that people would call Warbringer and Sublime Mistforged Armor "the PvP legendaries" as WvW and PvP are two entirely separate gamemodes with drastically different structures. Instead, they would simply be called "the WvW legendaries." If this _were_ the case, with PvE having Envoy and Ad Infinitum, WvW having Sublime and Warbringer, and PvP legendaries didn't exist, I'd wager that PvPers would **definitely** be outraged. > > > The differences between different sidecontents of PvE can actually be greater than those between SPvP and WvW. The only difference is that PvP got officially divided by devs into 2 distinct modes, while equally distinct submodes of PvE were all put into one big container. Raids and Fractals have about as much in common with LS and open world as WvW has with SPvP. If you'll continue to call Ad Infinitum and Envoy Armor **the** PvE legendaries, i'd have to insist that PvE has only one set of those, while PvP has _two_. > > > You don't like SPvP being grouped together with WvW? Then understand that a lot of PvErs don't like to be lumped together with raiders either. And many raiders are very vocal about their dislike of many core PvE content types and modes. > > > > This has nothing to do with my personal prefences on whether or not **I** don't like sPvP and WvW being grouped together. > > > > The Official Guild Wars 2 Wiki clearly classifies Raids and Fractals of the Mist as PvE content. WvW may be a PvP gamemode, but it is **not** categorized at sPvP and vice versa. You insist on grouping sPvP and WvW together when they are clearly 2 completely separate gamemodes. The fact that they are both related to PvP doesn't mean they are the same. > > > > Again, this is in contrast to Raids and Fractals being **officially classified** as PvE content. > > > > - [Raids](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Raid) (sub content) are "10 player squad-based PvE instances." > > - [Fractals of the Mists](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Fractals_of_the_Mists) (sub content) are "a special type of dungeon." > > - [Dungeons](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Dungeon) (sub content) are "optional party-based PvE instances." > > > > Meanwhile... > > > > - [WvW](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/World_versus_World) (main content) is "a combination Player versus Player/Player versus Environment." > > - [sPvP](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Structured_PvP) (main content) is "a Player versus Player mode." > > > > The comparison you're making would be like saying: > > - "A lot of League players don't like being lumped together with sPvPers either. And many League players are very vocal about their dislike of many core sPvP content types and modes." > > > > or... > > > > - "A lot of Battlegrounds/Borderlands players don't like being lumped together with WvWers either. And many Battlegrounds/Borderlands players are very vocal about their dislike of many core WvW content types and modes." > > > > However, League players **do** consider themselves sPvPers and Battlegrounds/Borderlands players **do** consider themselves WvWers. Therefore, Raiders and Fractals of the Mists players **are** PvErs regardless of whether or not they "like/dislike" it. > > Wait spvp got no enviroment so you dont have to hold points to win just go murder players then? > I recall some map having pve mobs that you could kill for a point boost aswell but clearly they have taken away that. What? I literally just copied and pasted that from the Official Guild Wars 2 Wiki lol... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astralporing.1957 Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > - "A lot of Battlegrounds/Borderlands players don't like being lumped together with WvWers either. And many Battlegrounds/Borderlands players are very vocal about their dislike of many core WvW content types and modes." > > However, League players **do** consider themselves sPvPers and Battlegrounds/Borderlands players **do** consider themselves WvWers. Therefore, Raiders and Fractals of the Mists players **are** PvErs regardless of whether or not they "like/dislike" it. No, you see, that's the actual example of the difference here. WvW players from Battlegrounds don't consider those playing Borderlands to be a different kind of players. League players do not consider those playing unranked to play a completely different type of game. Open World Players and Raiders _do_. That's because the differences within PvE are far greater than the ones in WvW and SPvP (partly because the differences in PvP were acknowledged by splitting the mode into two, while the divisions within PvE are ignored). You not being a PvE player probably means you can't see it, but for us mixing raids, open world, SAB, LS, Fractals etc and pretending one of those can represent the rest is exactly the same as if someone was trying to insist to you that WvW and SPvP are one and the same, and that rewards in one of those should satisfy players of the other. How the devs decided to split (or not to split) the two main modes (PvE and PvP) doesn't change that. It's just labelling. > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > What? I literally just copied and pasted that from the Official Guild Wars 2 Wiki lol... Then you have to realize that each of those labels could be used for each of those modes and would still be true. As i said, changes to labelling do not change the reality. (that's even without reminding you that the wording in the wiki is being made by _players_, not devs) If Anet decided to split the PvE originally into two modes (instanced and open world), and decided to lump all PvP together, they could have. The split into "official modes" is completely arbitrary, after all. The descriptions would have been different accordingly, but the actual differences _would have stayed the same_. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tails.9372 Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > @"Tails.9372" said: > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > "How are PvP and WvW **different enough** to warrant this kind of separation." > > Question: where is the punctuation mark coming from? I'm missing the "while raids and SAB don't?" part, so we're back to cutting of the quotes again... > > Read down 3 lines. It's all there buddy. :] No it's not, you ignored the rest of the sentence compleatly and acted as if I said something entierly different. You failed to show how various PvE game modes like SAB nstuff are not as different by comparison. What you responded to had nothing to do with my original post, it's called taking things out of context. > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > - [WvW](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/World_versus_World) (main content) is "a combination Player versus Player/Player versus Environment." Calling WvW a PvE/PvP hybrid mode would be a gross overstatement. WvW has PvE elements just like sPvP does but it's not the main focus of the gamemode. The guardian NPCs are only there to give enemy players enough time to respond and force bigger groups, thats it. They're entierly passiv in nature and are not tryng to change the status quo in any way shape or form. Even if your team is in last place you're not losing to the NPCs, your losing to the players who tipped off the scale in their favor. It would be differet if there was an NPC fraction participaiting in the battle but this is simply not the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STIHL.2489 Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 Well this has been a fun discussion, but, I still stand by the belief that locking the PvE Legendary Armor Behind an Expansion and a Raid, is a bad move. They should really consider putting in a CORE and a POF path for PvE Legendary Armor, at the very least. Also they really should have a HoT legendary Back Item (maybe link that to Raids as well), and a PoF one (maybe after they finish all the legendary weapons in PoF.. if they ever plan to do that) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linken.6345 Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 > @"STIHL.2489" said: > Well this has been a fun discussion, but, I still stand by the belief that locking the PvE Legendary Armor Behind an Expansion and a Raid, is a bad move. > > They should really consider putting in a CORE and a POF path for PvE Legendary Armor, at the very least. > > Also they really should have a HoT legendary Back Item (maybe link that to Raids as well), and a PoF one (maybe after they finish all the legendary weapons in PoF.. if they ever plan to do that) Yea they plan to do finish the legendary weapons, dident you see the new dagger we got with the new episode? Edit Guess I should explain that no they havent said they would create any more legendary armor or backpacks that we know so far, so you dont take my earlier comment that they somehow planning to do that to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STIHL.2489 Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 > @"Linken.6345" said: > > @"STIHL.2489" said: > > Well this has been a fun discussion, but, I still stand by the belief that locking the PvE Legendary Armor Behind an Expansion and a Raid, is a bad move. > > > > They should really consider putting in a CORE and a POF path for PvE Legendary Armor, at the very least. > > > > Also they really should have a HoT legendary Back Item (maybe link that to Raids as well), and a PoF one (maybe after they finish all the legendary weapons in PoF.. if they ever plan to do that) > > Yea they plan to do finish the legendary weapons, dident you see the new dagger we got with the new episode? > Edit > Guess I should explain that no they havent said they would create any more legendary armor or backpacks that we know so far, so you dont take my earlier comment that they somehow planning to do that to. I think they _should_, this has no bearing what they said they would do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpass.4236 Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > - "A lot of Battlegrounds/Borderlands players don't like being lumped together with WvWers either. And many Battlegrounds/Borderlands players are very vocal about their dislike of many core WvW content types and modes." > > > > However, League players **do** consider themselves sPvPers and Battlegrounds/Borderlands players **do** consider themselves WvWers. Therefore, Raiders and Fractals of the Mists players **are** PvErs regardless of whether or not they "like/dislike" it. > No, you see, that's the actual example of the difference here. WvW players from Battlegrounds don't consider those playing Borderlands to be a different kind of players. League players do not consider those playing unranked to play a completely different type of game. Open World Players and Raiders _do_. That's because the differences within PvE are far greater than the ones in WvW and SPvP (partly because the differences in PvP were acknowledged by splitting the mode into two, while the divisions within PvE are ignored). You not being a PvE player probably means you can't see it, but for us mixing raids, open world, SAB, LS, Fractals etc and pretending one of those can represent the rest is exactly the same as if someone was trying to insist to you that WvW and SPvP are one and the same, and that rewards in one of those should satisfy players of the other. > > How the devs decided to split (or not to split) the two main modes (PvE and PvP) doesn't change that. It's just labelling. I said that Raiders/Fractals player **are** PvErs regardless of whether or not they like/dislike it. I never said anything about one representing the other. Raids and Fractals are both officially classified as PvE content. Although both sPvP and WvW involve PvP, they are entirely two separate entities and should be treated as such. sPvP and WvW have just as many differences as PvE sub-contents do. > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > What? I literally just copied and pasted that from the Official Guild Wars 2 Wiki lol... > Then you have to realize that each of those labels could be used for each of those modes and would still be true. > As i said, changes to labelling do not change the reality. > > (that's even without reminding you that the wording in the wiki is being made by _players_, not devs) > > If Anet decided to split the PvE originally into two modes (instanced and open world), and decided to lump all PvP together, they could have. The split into "official modes" is completely arbitrary, after all. The descriptions would have been different accordingly, but the actual differences _would have stayed the same_. > They could have, but they didn't. There are clearly 3 entirely separate gamemodes. WvW can just as much be grouped with PvE as it can with sPvP according to your logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpass.4236 Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 > @"Tails.9372" said: > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > @"Tails.9372" said: > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > "How are PvP and WvW **different enough** to warrant this kind of separation." > > > Question: where is the punctuation mark coming from? I'm missing the "while raids and SAB don't?" part, so we're back to cutting of the quotes again... > > > > Read down 3 lines. It's all there buddy. :] > No it's not, you ignored the rest of the sentence compleatly and acted as if I said something entierly different. You failed to show how various PvE game modes like SAB nstuff are not as different by comparison. What you responded to had nothing to do with my original post, it's called taking things out of context. I quoted your entire message and responded to it. I didn't act like you said anything. Whatever you read came out of your mouth. Also, SAB is really irrelevant and going off topic. I don't wish to spend the time to explain the obvious differences between PvE sub-content just for the sake of it. > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > - [WvW](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/World_versus_World) (main content) is "a combination Player versus Player/Player versus Environment." > Calling WvW a PvE/PvP hybrid mode would be a gross overstatement. WvW has PvE elements just like sPvP does but it's not the main focus of the gamemode. The guardian NPCs are only there to give enemy players enough time to respond and force bigger groups, thats it. They're entierly passiv in nature and are not tryng to change the status quo in any way shape or form. Even if your team is in last place you're not losing to the NPCs, your losing to the players who tipped off the scale in their favor. It would be differet if there was an NPC fraction participaiting in the battle but this is simply not the case. No, that's exactly what it is. WvW involves both PvE and PvP, your server will not win if it does one and not the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astralporing.1957 Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > I said that Raiders/Fractals player **are** PvErs regardless of whether or not they like/dislike it. I never said anything about one representing the other. And both SPvPers and WvWers **are** PvPers. Regardless of whether they think they have anything to do with each other or not. > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > sPvP and WvW have just as many differences as PvE sub-contents do. Isn't that the very point i was making? Raids and OW are the same content about as much as SPvP and WvW are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astralporing.1957 Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > No, that's exactly what it is. WvW involves both PvE and PvP, your server will not win if it does one and not the other. To quote a post i have made several months ago ([https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/301166#Comment_301166](https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/301166#Comment_301166 "https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/301166#Comment_301166")): Perhaps you haven't noticed that the real goal of sPvP is, surprisingly not to fight enemy players, but to cap points (and utilize additional mechanics well), and concentrating on actual PvP is often one of the fastest ways to lose the match. Your group will not win a SPvP match if you won't cap the points. So, in what way (besides the scale) it is different from WvW? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpass.4236 Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > I said that Raiders/Fractals player **are** PvErs regardless of whether or not they like/dislike it. I never said anything about one representing the other. > And both SPvPers and WvWers **are** PvPers. Regardless of whether they think they have anything to do with each other or not. > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > sPvP and WvW have just as many differences as PvE sub-contents do. > Isn't that the very point i was making? Raids and OW are the same content about as much as SPvP and WvW are. > > I don't feel like continuing with this. It's pointless, off-topic, and somewhat confusing so I'll just leave it at that lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpass.4236 Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > No, that's exactly what it is. WvW involves both PvE and PvP, your server will not win if it does one and not the other. > > To quote a post i have made several months ago ([https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/301166#Comment_301166](https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/301166#Comment_301166 "https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/301166#Comment_301166")): > > Perhaps you haven't noticed that the real goal of sPvP is, surprisingly not to fight enemy players, but to cap points (and utilize additional mechanics well), and concentrating on actual PvP is often one of the fastest ways to lose the match. > > Your group will not win a SPvP match if you won't cap the points. So, in what way (besides the scale) it is different from WvW? > > > This is actually a really, really misinformative and misleading way to describe sPvP. While the main goal _may_ be to cap points, you won't be able to achieve that goal without fighting other players. There is an equally heavy emphasis on both, so saying otherwise is completely and totally (and laughably) wrong. Your group will not win an sPvP match if you don't fight enemy players too. Also, I already covered the similarities and differences. So I'll quote myself rather than re-explain things because you're too lazy to look back a page. > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > Similarities: > 1. It's Player vs. Player > > Differences: > 1. sPvP has a stat system tied to amulets and runes while WvW has a stat system tied to gear. > 2. Conquest in sPvP has 3 nodes while WvW has many different objectives to fight over. > 3. The scoring system > 4. The amount of players per map > 5. Literally everything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tails.9372 Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > I quoted your entire message and responded to it. You quoting the entire message means nothing if all you do is taking one part of it out of context. Nothing you listed had anything to do with the point I was making. > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > I didn't act like you said anything. Yeah that's the problem, you just ignored it. > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > Also, SAB is really irrelevant and going off topic. No it's not, its just as different from OW PvE as WvW is from sPvP which makes it a valid example to bring up. If you really think that it's "off topic" then I have to assume that you have no idea what you're actually responding to. > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > I don't wish to spend the time to explain the obvious differences between PvE sub-content just for the sake of it. You don't have to (unless you disagree with what I actually said), it wasn't about what the differences are. It was about your double standards and it's quite interesting to see how many leaps your willing to take just to avoid the actual argument. > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > No, that's exactly what it is. WvW involves both PvE and PvP, your server will not win if it does one and not the other. Classic CTF also involves necessary interaction with the environment, it's still not a PvE hybrid due to the fact that it's about competition with the enemy team. Same with WvW which is why I said it has PvE elements but is not actual PvE. There is no "vE" involved when it comes to the overarking goal, you're not competing against the NPCs for the win. Win or loss is decided entierly by player action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astralporing.1957 Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > No, that's exactly what it is. WvW involves both PvE and PvP, your server will not win if it does one and not the other. > > > > To quote a post i have made several months ago ([https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/301166#Comment_301166](https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/301166#Comment_301166 "https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/301166#Comment_301166")): > > > > Perhaps you haven't noticed that the real goal of sPvP is, surprisingly not to fight enemy players, but to cap points (and utilize additional mechanics well), and concentrating on actual PvP is often one of the fastest ways to lose the match. > > > > Your group will not win a SPvP match if you won't cap the points. So, in what way (besides the scale) it is different from WvW? > > > > > > > > This is actually a really, really misinformative and misleading way to describe sPvP. > > While the main goal _may_ be to cap points, you won't be able to achieve that goal without fighting other players. There is an equally heavy emphasis on both, so saying otherwise is completely and totally (and laughably) wrong. > > Your group will not win an sPvP match if you don't fight enemy players too. The same with WvW. > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > Also, I already covered the similarities and differences. So I'll quote myself rather than re-explain things because you're too lazy to look back a page. > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > Similarities: > > 1. It's Player vs. Player > > > > Differences: > > 1. sPvP has a stat system tied to amulets and runes while WvW has a stat system tied to gear. > > 2. Conquest in sPvP has 3 nodes while WvW has many different objectives to fight over. > > 3. The scoring system > > 4. The amount of players per map > > 5. Literally everything else. Notice how nothing in those differences actually makes one a strict pvp, but other a pvpve? That's because those points that are sometimes brought up to make WvW a PvP/PvE mix exist in SPvP also. Also, the differeces you brought up? I could do a similar list for PvE submodes, and the differences would be similar (and in some cases much bigger) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpass.4236 Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > No, that's exactly what it is. WvW involves both PvE and PvP, your server will not win if it does one and not the other. > > > > > > To quote a post i have made several months ago ([https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/301166#Comment_301166](https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/301166#Comment_301166 "https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/301166#Comment_301166")): > > > > > > Perhaps you haven't noticed that the real goal of sPvP is, surprisingly not to fight enemy players, but to cap points (and utilize additional mechanics well), and concentrating on actual PvP is often one of the fastest ways to lose the match. > > > > > > Your group will not win a SPvP match if you won't cap the points. So, in what way (besides the scale) it is different from WvW? > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is actually a really, really misinformative and misleading way to describe sPvP. > > > > While the main goal _may_ be to cap points, you won't be able to achieve that goal without fighting other players. There is an equally heavy emphasis on both, so saying otherwise is completely and totally (and laughably) wrong. > > > > Your group will not win an sPvP match if you don't fight enemy players too. > The same with WvW. ??? You literally just said that the main goal is to cap points rather than fight enemy players. Yet there is an equally heavy emphasis on both. You cannot do one without the other. It **isn't** the same as WvW. Your server can win the matchup in WvW simply by controlling the objectives. You don't need to fight enemy players at all in order to win. This is further reinforced by the fact that there are literally commanders who go out of their way to avoid each other and just circle around the map behind each other capping and recapping objectives for exp and karma. > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > Also, I already covered the similarities and differences. So I'll quote myself rather than re-explain things because you're too lazy to look back a page. > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > Similarities: > > > 1. It's Player vs. Player > > > > > > Differences: > > > 1. sPvP has a stat system tied to amulets and runes while WvW has a stat system tied to gear. > > > 2. Conquest in sPvP has 3 nodes while WvW has many different objectives to fight over. > > > 3. The scoring system > > > 4. The amount of players per map > > > 5. Literally everything else. > Notice how nothing in those differences actually makes one a strict pvp, but other a pvpve? That's because those points that are sometimes brought up to make WvW a PvP/PvE mix exist in SPvP also. > > Also, the differeces you brought up? I could do a similar list for PvE submodes, and the differences would be similar (and in some cases much bigger) > > > Yes, sPvP is strictly PvP. (lol) Seriously? Why is this even a topic for debate. sPvP is quite clearly 100% PvP. I hope you realize that PvE stands for Player versus Enemies (NPCs) while PvP stands for Player versus Player. sPvP is won by fighting **enemy players** for control of nodes. The only NPCs in sPvP are Chieftain and Svanir and killing these are not only detrimental in most cases, but also an extremely minor (if at all) focus. However, you win in WvW by **killing NPCs** guarding objectives. Enemy players can **defend** these NPCs and objectives. Hence, making it PvP **and** PvE as both elements share an equal focus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpass.4236 Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 > @"Tails.9372" said: > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > I quoted your entire message and responded to it. > You quoting the entire message means nothing if all you do is taking one part of it out of context. Nothing you listed had anything to do with the point I was making. > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > I didn't act like you said anything. > Yeah that's the problem, you just ignored it. > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > Also, SAB is really irrelevant and going off topic. > No it's not, its just as different from OW PvE as WvW is from sPvP which makes it a valid example to bring up. If you really think that it's "off topic" then I have to assume that you have no idea what you're actually responding to. > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > I don't wish to spend the time to explain the obvious differences between PvE sub-content just for the sake of it. > You don't have to (unless you disagree with what I actually said), it wasn't about what the differences are. It was about your double standards and it's quite interesting to see how many leaps your willing to take just to avoid the actual argument. > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > No, that's exactly what it is. WvW involves both PvE and PvP, your server will not win if it does one and not the other. > Classic CTF also involves necessary interaction with the environment, it's still not a PvE hybrid due to the fact that it's about competition with the enemy team. Same with WvW which is why I said it has PvE elements but is not actual PvE. There is no "vE" involved when it comes to the overarking goal, you're not competing against the NPCs for the win. Win or loss is decided entierly by player action. I'm not going to address the first part because it just seems like your ranting on and I don't feel the need to respond to "he said she said" like a child. If I ignored part of your message, it was likely because I didn't feel it worth responding to. I could cry and whine, "You ignored me, how could you?! :(" like you just did, but in reality it does nothing if not move the discussion even further off topic. However, like I said in the post above, WvW is won by killing NPCs guarding objectives. So yes, there is "vE" involved when it comes to the "overarching goal" because you have to kill "E's" to win. It doesn't matter what or who you're competing against, PvE simply means Player versus Enemies (NPCs). Judging by the fact that the only way to win is to kill the NPCs (that can be guarded by players), WvW is very clearly a PvP/PvE gamemode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tails.9372 Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > I'm not going to address the first part because it just seems like your ranting on and I don't feel the need to respond to "he said she said" like a child. If I ignored part of your message, it was likely because I didn't feel it worth responding to. I could cry and whine, "You ignored me, how could you?! :(" like you just did, but in reality it does nothing if not move the discussion even further off topic. Interesting to see how you're always throwing ad hominems around when you can't win an argument. And yet you're the one calling other people childish, the irony. Also this thread is about legendary gear for every mode which is hard to argue for when we have some people who refuse to acknowledge various game modes for what they are thanks to their double standards. There is nothing off topic about this. > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > However, like I said in the post above, WvW is won by killing NPCs guarding objectives. So yes, there is "vE" involved when it comes to the "overarching goal" because you have to kill "E's" to win. It doesn't matter what or who you're competing against, PvE simply means Player versus Enemies (NPCs). Judging by the fact that the only way to win is to kill the NPCs (that can be guarded by players), WvW is very clearly a PvP/PvE gamemode. PvE stands for "Player versus Environment" not "Player versus Enemies" (or do you want to say that JPs aren't PvE?) and CTF is still not a PvE hybrid despite the fact that you have to get the flag in order to win a match. Furthermore, in RTS games you often time have to beat NPCs in order to get the resources you need to win and still no one calls it "PvE" unless the enemy fraction is controled by an NPC. Killing NPCs is just a means to the end (hence the "they are PvE elements") but the mode itself is about fractions of human players competing against each other so my point still stands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STIHL.2489 Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 > @"Astralporing.1957" said: > Your group will not win a SPvP match if you won't cap the points. So, in what way (besides the scale) it is different from WvW? > Well there are Siege Mechanics, Upgrade Mechanics, Server Matching Mechanics, that makes things a whole lot different.. Just saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpass.4236 Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 > @"Tails.9372" said: > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > I'm not going to address the first part because it just seems like your ranting on and I don't feel the need to respond to "he said she said" like a child. If I ignored part of your message, it was likely because I didn't feel it worth responding to. I could cry and whine, "You ignored me, how could you?! :(" like you just did, but in reality it does nothing if not move the discussion even further off topic. > Interesting to see how you're always throwing ad hominems around when you can't win an argument. And yet you're the one calling other people childish, the irony. Also this thread is about legendary gear for every mode which is hard to argue for when we have some people who refuse to acknowledge various game modes for what they are thanks to their double standards. There is nothing off topic about this. > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > However, like I said in the post above, WvW is won by killing NPCs guarding objectives. So yes, there is "vE" involved when it comes to the "overarching goal" because you have to kill "E's" to win. It doesn't matter what or who you're competing against, PvE simply means Player versus Enemies (NPCs). Judging by the fact that the only way to win is to kill the NPCs (that can be guarded by players), WvW is very clearly a PvP/PvE gamemode. > PvE stands for "Player versus Environment" not "Player versus Enemies" (or do you want to say that JPs aren't PvE?) and CTF is still not a PvE hybrid despite the fact that you have to get the flag in order to win a match. Furthermore, in RTS games you often time have to beat NPCs in order to get the resources you need to win and still no one calls it "PvE" unless the enemy fraction is controled by an NPC. Killing NPCs is just a means to the end (hence the "they are PvE elements") but the mode itself is about fractions of human players competing against each other so my point still stands. > I've already corrected you enough times to the point where I understand that I'm speaking with someone who has no idea what they're talking about. Sure, Player versus Environment. Whoop-dee-doo. My point still stands, the objectives are controlled by NPCs. You will not win WvW by killing enemy players alone. WvW is more about objective control than anything else as that's where the main source of points come from. The four main objectives, camps, towers, keeps, and a castle are all controlled by NPCs. These objectives (I'm saying this for the umpteenth time) **can** be defended by other players. Hence why WvW is **officially** classified as a PvP/PvE gamemode. As I've already said before, it doesn't matter that players are competing against each other... those players are competing against each other by killing each other **and** NPCs. It's really not that hard to understand but if you keep on repeating the same incorrect information, I'm going to ignore you entirely and leave you to your delusions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linken.6345 Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > @"Tails.9372" said: > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > I quoted your entire message and responded to it. > > You quoting the entire message means nothing if all you do is taking one part of it out of context. Nothing you listed had anything to do with the point I was making. > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > I didn't act like you said anything. > > Yeah that's the problem, you just ignored it. > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > Also, SAB is really irrelevant and going off topic. > > No it's not, its just as different from OW PvE as WvW is from sPvP which makes it a valid example to bring up. If you really think that it's "off topic" then I have to assume that you have no idea what you're actually responding to. > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > I don't wish to spend the time to explain the obvious differences between PvE sub-content just for the sake of it. > > You don't have to (unless you disagree with what I actually said), it wasn't about what the differences are. It was about your double standards and it's quite interesting to see how many leaps your willing to take just to avoid the actual argument. > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > No, that's exactly what it is. WvW involves both PvE and PvP, your server will not win if it does one and not the other. > > Classic CTF also involves necessary interaction with the environment, it's still not a PvE hybrid due to the fact that it's about competition with the enemy team. Same with WvW which is why I said it has PvE elements but is not actual PvE. There is no "vE" involved when it comes to the overarking goal, you're not competing against the NPCs for the win. Win or loss is decided entierly by player action. > > I'm not going to address the first part because it just seems like your ranting on and I don't feel the need to respond to "he said she said" like a child. If I ignored part of your message, it was likely because I didn't feel it worth responding to. I could cry and whine, "You ignored me, how could you?! :(" like you just did, but in reality it does nothing if not move the discussion even further off topic. > > However, like I said in the post above, WvW is won by killing NPCs guarding objectives. So yes, there is "vE" involved when it comes to the "overarching goal" because you have to kill "E's" to win. It doesn't matter what or who you're competing against, PvE simply means Player versus Enemies (NPCs). Judging by the fact that the only way to win is to kill the NPCs (that can be guarded by players), WvW is very clearly a PvP/PvE gamemode. The is a missconception here pve aint player vs enemies its environment so its the node and objective caping aswell. The npc are only there to hinder you abit from taking your objective they are not what you fight for you cant win by only killing npcs becouse then you would never cap anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linken.6345 Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > @"Tails.9372" said: > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > I'm not going to address the first part because it just seems like your ranting on and I don't feel the need to respond to "he said she said" like a child. If I ignored part of your message, it was likely because I didn't feel it worth responding to. I could cry and whine, "You ignored me, how could you?! :(" like you just did, but in reality it does nothing if not move the discussion even further off topic. > > Interesting to see how you're always throwing ad hominems around when you can't win an argument. And yet you're the one calling other people childish, the irony. Also this thread is about legendary gear for every mode which is hard to argue for when we have some people who refuse to acknowledge various game modes for what they are thanks to their double standards. There is nothing off topic about this. > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > However, like I said in the post above, WvW is won by killing NPCs guarding objectives. So yes, there is "vE" involved when it comes to the "overarching goal" because you have to kill "E's" to win. It doesn't matter what or who you're competing against, PvE simply means Player versus Enemies (NPCs). Judging by the fact that the only way to win is to kill the NPCs (that can be guarded by players), WvW is very clearly a PvP/PvE gamemode. > > PvE stands for "Player versus Environment" not "Player versus Enemies" (or do you want to say that JPs aren't PvE?) and CTF is still not a PvE hybrid despite the fact that you have to get the flag in order to win a match. Furthermore, in RTS games you often time have to beat NPCs in order to get the resources you need to win and still no one calls it "PvE" unless the enemy fraction is controled by an NPC. Killing NPCs is just a means to the end (hence the "they are PvE elements") but the mode itself is about fractions of human players competing against each other so my point still stands. > > > > I've already corrected you enough times to the point where I understand that I'm speaking with someone who has no idea what they're talking about. > > Sure, Player versus Environment. Whoop-dee-doo. My point still stands, the objectives are controlled by NPCs. You will not win WvW by killing enemy players alone. WvW is more about objective control than anything else as that's where the main source of points come from. The four main objectives, camps, towers, keeps, and a castle are all controlled by NPCs. These objectives (I'm saying this for the umpteenth time) **can** be defended by other players. Hence why WvW is **officially** classified as a PvP/PvE gamemode. As I've already said before, it doesn't matter that players are competing against each other... those players are competing against each other by killing each other **and** NPCs. It's really not that hard to understand but if you keep on repeating the same incorrect information, I'm going to ignore you entirely and leave you to your delusions. And same goes for spvp you win by controlling map nodes you will not win by killing enemy players alone. Clearly spvp is just a sub category of wvw we need to get anet to fix this and take away the path to backpack in wvw and armor in spvp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpass.4236 Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 > @"Linken.6345" said: > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > @"Tails.9372" said: > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > I quoted your entire message and responded to it. > > > You quoting the entire message means nothing if all you do is taking one part of it out of context. Nothing you listed had anything to do with the point I was making. > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > I didn't act like you said anything. > > > Yeah that's the problem, you just ignored it. > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > Also, SAB is really irrelevant and going off topic. > > > No it's not, its just as different from OW PvE as WvW is from sPvP which makes it a valid example to bring up. If you really think that it's "off topic" then I have to assume that you have no idea what you're actually responding to. > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > I don't wish to spend the time to explain the obvious differences between PvE sub-content just for the sake of it. > > > You don't have to (unless you disagree with what I actually said), it wasn't about what the differences are. It was about your double standards and it's quite interesting to see how many leaps your willing to take just to avoid the actual argument. > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > No, that's exactly what it is. WvW involves both PvE and PvP, your server will not win if it does one and not the other. > > > Classic CTF also involves necessary interaction with the environment, it's still not a PvE hybrid due to the fact that it's about competition with the enemy team. Same with WvW which is why I said it has PvE elements but is not actual PvE. There is no "vE" involved when it comes to the overarking goal, you're not competing against the NPCs for the win. Win or loss is decided entierly by player action. > > > > I'm not going to address the first part because it just seems like your ranting on and I don't feel the need to respond to "he said she said" like a child. If I ignored part of your message, it was likely because I didn't feel it worth responding to. I could cry and whine, "You ignored me, how could you?! :(" like you just did, but in reality it does nothing if not move the discussion even further off topic. > > > > However, like I said in the post above, WvW is won by killing NPCs guarding objectives. So yes, there is "vE" involved when it comes to the "overarching goal" because you have to kill "E's" to win. It doesn't matter what or who you're competing against, PvE simply means Player versus Enemies (NPCs). Judging by the fact that the only way to win is to kill the NPCs (that can be guarded by players), WvW is very clearly a PvP/PvE gamemode. > > The is a missconception here pve aint player vs enemies its environment so its the node and objective caping aswell. > The npc are only there to hinder you abit from taking your objective they are not what you fight for you cant win by only killing npcs becouse then you would never cap anything. > You can't take the objective without killing the NPCs. > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > Sure, Player versus Environment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tails.9372 Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > My point still stands No it doesn't because you failed explain how capturing a point in WvW is any different than getting a flag in CTF when it comes to the necessity of having to deal with the environment in order to win the game. But I agree, there is really no point in discussing with someone who obviously has no interest in having an honest discussion about the topic. But at least you should reflect on your own words: > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > It's common for people to get extremely defensive when they are outed as being completely wrong. Keeping that in mind should help you to keep the conversation on a somewhat bearable level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now