More “paths” to legendary gear...

[STIHL.2489]

> @"Lilyanna.9361" said:

>

> Trove?

> TROVE?????

>

> You mean the games that ALL trove YouTubers say it is completely and utterly P2W and have treated their costumers like utter trash??? You mean the game that lost over half of their population on the consoles ALONE?

 

Lets keep in mind this a GW2 forum, so talking about other games and giving reviews, is not really on topic, but I have heard the cries of P2W in Trove, and overall they are unfounded. Max level and U8 content can be accessed in Trove for free. There is no need to spend money at all in Trove, as someone that played it, those "Youtuberts" are just crying for attention and fussing that what they want is more then they are willing to spend, as such those claims are more akin to the claims here on the GW2 forums that the 20 dollar mount skins are P2W.

 

>

> BDO

>

> You mean the game that had devs that didn't care if people were exploiting the server merge and basically said if you don't like it you can just LEAVE? 30 dollars worth of crap just so you can stat wise roflestomp all over noobs. Oh yes, had my fair share with that. Utter garbage.

>

 

Playing BSO right now, don't see any issues with people "roflestomp"-ing me when I started, so... no idea what you are talking about.

 

> So you say the games I list show their age, but you wanna know the difference between your games listed and mine?

>

> RuneScape and WoW in particular, even if they are probably the most old fashioned, grindy, RPG games alive, they were also considered the stepping stone for what you enjoy today.

>

 

No, not really, as GW2, had the goal to get away from grind-games like WoW and Runescape, to break the mold to speak, so in essence, you came to GW2 to get away from WoW.. which is my whole point about them being old or badly done.. or both.

 

After all.. if WoW was as good as you say.. you would be there.. not here.

 

> We have the -illusion- of choice. And people like you are falling for it again and again, expecting that any of these companies are any different from Anet. They aren't. But, at the end of the day, I can't stop people from doing what they want. Whatever people say on these forums, whatever they think, they are stubbornly going to hang on to it until they leave and probably do the same thing on a different game.

 

See we have been over this.. GW2 was very Different then WoW. Both from their design, interaction, development, goal system, even the way they handled expansions the games are literally, worlds apart from each other.

 

If you think the choice is an Illusion, and that WoW is the same as GW2.. well. then the question would be, why did you leave WoW to come to GW2, if you think the choice was illusion and they are both the same?

 

> So at this point, sure. Perhaps it is time for you to find new games if this one seems to lock you out so badly. Even though the paywall and content in most of the other ones is worse without dropping your wallet on the table. But hey, not my money and certainly not my problem.

>

> Have a good day.

 

Exactly.. but it is your problem.. as when my demographic leaves.. YOU are the one left in a dying game, picking up the bill. Or did you not catch that when you were playing WoW?

 

Edit Added:

 

Also, for the record, I have zero inhibitions about paying into a game I enjoy, as I see it as supporting the game, so these "paywalls" you speak of are a non-issue to me, because I would have spent money regardless. Maybe to you spending money on a game is a huge imposition, but it was never a problem for me, as I started gaming in the Era of the Sub based games, so, paying money to support the game I am enjoying, just seems logical, in the Era of Cash Shops, they are willing to give me some baubles for that, which is even better. so get rewarded for supporting the game. Now, maybe Anet does not like the easy sales of people like me, and would rather deal with the hard sells like yourself.. maybe they like the challenge too. I would say that I Hope their efforts to pry fiscal support from you and yours don't drive you away, or make you cry P2W too badly.. but, truth be told, I don't care as.. well.. not my problem.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"STIHL.2489" said:

 

> Exactly.. but it is your problem.. as when my demographic leaves.. YOU are the one left in a dying game, picking up the bill. Or did you not catch that when you were playing WoW?

>

Actually, the game gets better, because Anet can focus on the demographic that is left instead of trying to cater to one that doesn't really appreciate the game in the first place. Assuming that Anet has to continually entice the minority of fringe customers back by appeasing their whims for the game to survive is not realistic.

 

[STIHL.2489]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"STIHL.2489" said:

>

> > Exactly.. but it is your problem.. as when my demographic leaves.. YOU are the one left in a dying game, picking up the bill. Or did you not catch that when you were playing WoW?

> >

> Actually, the game gets better, because Anet can focus on the demographic that is left instead of trying to cater to one that doesn't really appreciate the game in the first place.

>

 

You know what, that is also true. Anet can focus on those that remain with them, so.. in the end.. maybe it would be for the best for players to move on to other games if they were not happy with what was here.. pity those that wanted raids didn't follow that advice years ago, and we never would have had this problem to start with.

[STIHL.2489]

Too bad only 5 - 10% of the game even does raids at all, pretty small circle of players, hopefully the game won't feel too vacant. But hey.. if it does, you all can move on to another game, that has all the casuals, and then fuss there that they need more challenge.. and start this whole moronic process all over again.

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"STIHL.2489" said:

>

> > Exactly.. but it is your problem.. as when my demographic leaves.. YOU are the one left in a dying game, picking up the bill. Or did you not catch that when you were playing WoW?

> >

> Actually, the game gets better, because Anet can focus on the demographic that is left instead of trying to cater to one that doesn't really appreciate the game in the first place. Assuming that Anet has to continually entice the minority of fringe customers back by appeasing their whims for the game to survive is not realistic.

That fringe minority is raiders, you know.

 

[STIHL.2489]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"STIHL.2489" said:

> >

> > > Exactly.. but it is your problem.. as when my demographic leaves.. YOU are the one left in a dying game, picking up the bill. Or did you not catch that when you were playing WoW?

> > >

> > Actually, the game gets better, because Anet can focus on the demographic that is left instead of trying to cater to one that doesn't really appreciate the game in the first place. Assuming that Anet has to continually entice the minority of fringe customers back by appeasing their whims for the game to survive is not realistic.

> That fringe minority is raiders, you know.

>

 

That never dawns on them, they believe they make up the bulk of the game, that there is enough content for the filthy casuals, and can't fathom why there is a problem at all.

 

Maybe it really is time for the casuals to move to another game.

[Assic.2746]

> @"STIHL.2489" said:

> Too bad only 5 - 10% of the game even does raids at all, pretty small circle of players, hopefully the game won't feel too vacant. But hey.. if it does, you all can move on to another game, that has all the casuals, and then fuss there that they need more challenge.. and start this whole moronic process all over again.

 

According to GW2Efficiency (data from 168 550 accounts):

 

* 20% of all players is raiding/killed raid bosses multiple times,

 

And this is data not a subjective opinion on imaginery number.

[STIHL.2489]

> @"Assic.2746" said:

> > @"STIHL.2489" said:

> > Too bad only 5 - 10% of the game even does raids at all, pretty small circle of players, hopefully the game won't feel too vacant. But hey.. if it does, you all can move on to another game, that has all the casuals, and then fuss there that they need more challenge.. and start this whole moronic process all over again.

>

> According to GW2Efficiency (data from 168 550 accounts):

>

> * 20% of all players is raiding/killed raid bosses multiple times,

>

> And this is data not a subjective opinion on imaginery number.

 

Oh the numbers are correct, 20% of **ALL** the accounts on GW2Efficiency have done raids.

Lets put that in Prescriptive shall we,

* 20% of **ALL** the accounts on GW2Efficiency also have **multiple** legendary items (as in _more_ then 1)

* 1% of **ALL** the accounts on GW2Efficiency have Legendary Armor.

* Know what else that 1% of **ALL** the accounts on GW2Efficiency also has.. that's right, _19 Legendary Weapons_.

 

Draw whatever conclusions you want from that.. but for me, even Anet said at release that 20% of their population **tried** to raid, and they were pretty happy about that too. So, yah.. I stand by first numbers of 5-10% of the total population of this game.. maybe less.

[STIHL.2489]

The move by Anet to raid lock legendary Armor goes against their founding design principals, which, if nothing else, hurts the faith players would have in their team to build a game with a consistent philosophy. It is akin as if a game like WoW, Suddenly made it so that the best gear dropped from killing random mobs in the open world and made raid gear mediocre.

 

It's not really the Pixels, as some people wish to make it out to be, that onus on them, as they know full well, without those pixels no one would run raids. But, For many, it's the deviation from the foundation principals of this game that are the problem.

 

It's on Anet to do what they want however, their game, we are just players passing though. It's a no brainier that it's a game. played for the fun of it, and if it does not provide enjoyment in the manner we want, we move to some other game that is more willing to provide it. There is no deep meaning or life value to be made here, it's just escapism.

 

Why should Anet provide other paths to Legendary Armor, well, customer retention would be a good reason, to keep with their founding philosophy would be another.. but they don't need to do either of those things. They can take the loss in both players and faith.

[Lunateric.3708]

> @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> This thread has 12k views, nearing 700 comments, yet still no acknowledgement from a dev.

 

The vast majority of the posts come from maybe a dozen users going in circles arguing semantics so as a dev I wouldn't "acknowledge" this kind of tail chasing because it hasn't produced anything other than the obvious conclusion that there are people fine with raid armor and there are people not fine with it.

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Purgatori.3645" said:

> or .. create raids that are PVE .... PVP ... AND WVW .... make them specific to their environment! how hard is this?

 

Extremely. You can't really "adapt" a piece of content designed as a hardcore PvE cooperative challenge to a competitive environment. You *could* keep it PvE, obviously, but then you'd piss the competitive players off. As it is, hardcore WvW players often complain about desert keep lords having rudimentary combat mechanics. They don't want this, that's why they play WvW and not PvE. They want to fight other players. Same for PvP.

 

WvW players already use the term "raid" to describe guild WvW activity. That's the closest you can get, but you can't make the opposing players behave in a specific way in order to provide a desired level of challenge. Hence, there's no meaningful way of structuring rewards for it.

 

 

[Faaris.8013]

> @"Lunateric.3708" said:

> > @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > This thread has 12k views, nearing 700 comments, yet still no acknowledgement from a dev.

>

> The vast majority of the posts come from maybe a dozen users going in circles arguing semantics so as a dev I wouldn't "acknowledge" this kind of tail chasing because it hasn't produced anything other than the obvious conclusion that there are people fine with raid armor and there are people not fine with it.

 

I would like to see a statement by Anet about the stance of raids in this game. Like, how many players (in percentage) did they expect to actually raid when they were planning to create this content, and how reality compares to that. They happily made public statements about how many players got the griffon mount after X hours/days of the expansion's launch. The only numbers we have to get a picture come from gw2efficiency, and we have to consider that the players who put up their API code there are not a representative sample of the whole player base, but rather belong to the more committed part of the community.

 

They already said they will not add more paths for legendary armor (in some other thread here). So I think those who are unhappy with the situation should focus on arguing for making raids more accessible. But maybe it is indeed half of the player base who raids regularly and 10% of all players got the armor, and that's exactly how Anet imagined it when they created raids. I have my doubts though. My guess is that about 1 out of 500 players got legendary armor.

[Feanor.2358]

> @"STIHL.2489" said:

>it's the deviation from the foundation principals of this game that are the problem.

 

It's called "evolution". Or if you prefer "adaptability". Through the years ANet have tried different approaches in various aspects of the game - trait system, reward structures, endgame content, even monetization. They drop some, they introduce some, they change some. That's a normal process for a game of 5+ years. You can't expect game design from before 2012 to work the same way in 2018. The market changes, the players' expectation change, and so does the design philosophy.

[shadowpass.4236]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > @"Tails.9372" said:

> > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > Exactly ... Just because in theory, multiple legendary paths sounds like a good idea doesn't mean it happens. the PRACTICAL side is the time it takes and how it's done. I don't really see it's worth the effort. What return on Anet's effort do they get, other than some goodwill for entitled players that aren't willing to do what is required NOW to get it?

> > > > It gives players a long term goal and keeps them playing, that's the main reason why legendaries were introduced in the first place.

> > >

> > > Yes sure, but that happens with or without multiple paths ...

> > Only for raiders. Which would be likely raiding anyway even without that armor, by the way. For everyone else it's useless in that regard, because a goal you won't work toward (because you don't like the path) will not keep you engaged.

> > Basically, if you want to give players a long-term goal to keep them playing, you don't put that goal behind a content most players will _not_ play. That completely defeats its purpose.

>

> There isn't anything wrong with this. Anet cannot chase the whim of every player who is unwilling to do specific content for specific gear. That's not PRACTICAL. Anet does not expect every player to get every reward they want, so that isn't a compelling reason to ask for multiple paths. The whole premise of multiple paths is based on a faulty expectation.

>

> > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > Exactly. Thus, pushing players into paths offering them the game experience those players actively dislike is not really desirable. It's far better to offer them choice.

>

> Yes it is, but this isn't a decision based on fairness.

 

How would people feel if legendary armor was PvP exclusive and only available to the top 25 people on the leaderboard? Sure, everyone _can_ get it, but not everyone plays at that level of PvP. The same applies to normal PvE vs. Raids.

 

This would just exclude PvErs and to a lesser extent, WvWers, and only appeases 1/3 of the population. This is essentially what the current system does and it makes no sense.

[Feanor.2358]

> @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > @"Tails.9372" said:

> > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > Exactly ... Just because in theory, multiple legendary paths sounds like a good idea doesn't mean it happens. the PRACTICAL side is the time it takes and how it's done. I don't really see it's worth the effort. What return on Anet's effort do they get, other than some goodwill for entitled players that aren't willing to do what is required NOW to get it?

> > > > > It gives players a long term goal and keeps them playing, that's the main reason why legendaries were introduced in the first place.

> > > >

> > > > Yes sure, but that happens with or without multiple paths ...

> > > Only for raiders. Which would be likely raiding anyway even without that armor, by the way. For everyone else it's useless in that regard, because a goal you won't work toward (because you don't like the path) will not keep you engaged.

> > > Basically, if you want to give players a long-term goal to keep them playing, you don't put that goal behind a content most players will _not_ play. That completely defeats its purpose.

> >

> > There isn't anything wrong with this. Anet cannot chase the whim of every player who is unwilling to do specific content for specific gear. That's not PRACTICAL. Anet does not expect every player to get every reward they want, so that isn't a compelling reason to ask for multiple paths. The whole premise of multiple paths is based on a faulty expectation.

> >

> > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > Exactly. Thus, pushing players into paths offering them the game experience those players actively dislike is not really desirable. It's far better to offer them choice.

> >

> > Yes it is, but this isn't a decision based on fairness.

>

> How would people feel if legendary armor was PvP exclusive and only available to the top 25 people on the leaderboard? Sure, everyone _can_ get it, but not everyone plays at that level of PvP. The same applies to normal PvE vs. Raids.

>

> This would just exclude PvErs and to a lesser extent, WvWers, and only appeases 1/3 of the population. This is essentially what the current system does and it makes no sense.

 

First off, PvE isn't 1/3 of the population, it's much more.

 

Second, raiding isn't remotely the same as getting "top 25".

 

Finally, when you disregard the gross exaggerations from your argument, there's nothing left from it.

[shadowpass.4236]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > @"Tails.9372" said:

> > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > > Exactly ... Just because in theory, multiple legendary paths sounds like a good idea doesn't mean it happens. the PRACTICAL side is the time it takes and how it's done. I don't really see it's worth the effort. What return on Anet's effort do they get, other than some goodwill for entitled players that aren't willing to do what is required NOW to get it?

> > > > > > It gives players a long term goal and keeps them playing, that's the main reason why legendaries were introduced in the first place.

> > > > >

> > > > > Yes sure, but that happens with or without multiple paths ...

> > > > Only for raiders. Which would be likely raiding anyway even without that armor, by the way. For everyone else it's useless in that regard, because a goal you won't work toward (because you don't like the path) will not keep you engaged.

> > > > Basically, if you want to give players a long-term goal to keep them playing, you don't put that goal behind a content most players will _not_ play. That completely defeats its purpose.

> > >

> > > There isn't anything wrong with this. Anet cannot chase the whim of every player who is unwilling to do specific content for specific gear. That's not PRACTICAL. Anet does not expect every player to get every reward they want, so that isn't a compelling reason to ask for multiple paths. The whole premise of multiple paths is based on a faulty expectation.

> > >

> > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > Exactly. Thus, pushing players into paths offering them the game experience those players actively dislike is not really desirable. It's far better to offer them choice.

> > >

> > > Yes it is, but this isn't a decision based on fairness.

> >

> > How would people feel if legendary armor was PvP exclusive and only available to the top 25 people on the leaderboard? Sure, everyone _can_ get it, but not everyone plays at that level of PvP. The same applies to normal PvE vs. Raids.

> >

> > This would just exclude PvErs and to a lesser extent, WvWers, and only appeases 1/3 of the population. This is essentially what the current system does and it makes no sense.

>

> First off, PvE isn't 1/3 of the population, it's much more.

>

> Second, raiding isn't remotely the same as getting "top 25".

>

> Finally, when you disregard the gross exaggerations from your argument, there's nothing left from it.

 

1. That's likely due to the fact that PvE is the only gamemode that actually receives updates/support from the devs.

2. Comparing the raiding population to the entire PvE population is not unlike comparing the top 25 on the leaderboard to the (much smaller) PvP population.

3. LUL

 

[Obtena.7952]

> @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > @"Tails.9372" said:

> > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > Exactly ... Just because in theory, multiple legendary paths sounds like a good idea doesn't mean it happens. the PRACTICAL side is the time it takes and how it's done. I don't really see it's worth the effort. What return on Anet's effort do they get, other than some goodwill for entitled players that aren't willing to do what is required NOW to get it?

> > > > > It gives players a long term goal and keeps them playing, that's the main reason why legendaries were introduced in the first place.

> > > >

> > > > Yes sure, but that happens with or without multiple paths ...

> > > Only for raiders. Which would be likely raiding anyway even without that armor, by the way. For everyone else it's useless in that regard, because a goal you won't work toward (because you don't like the path) will not keep you engaged.

> > > Basically, if you want to give players a long-term goal to keep them playing, you don't put that goal behind a content most players will _not_ play. That completely defeats its purpose.

> >

> > There isn't anything wrong with this. Anet cannot chase the whim of every player who is unwilling to do specific content for specific gear. That's not PRACTICAL. Anet does not expect every player to get every reward they want, so that isn't a compelling reason to ask for multiple paths. The whole premise of multiple paths is based on a faulty expectation.

> >

> > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > Exactly. Thus, pushing players into paths offering them the game experience those players actively dislike is not really desirable. It's far better to offer them choice.

> >

> > Yes it is, but this isn't a decision based on fairness.

>

> How would people feel if legendary armor was PvP exclusive and only available to the top 25 people on the leaderboard?

 

The same way that non-raiders feel now ... what's the problem?

 

> @"STIHL.2489" said:

> Why should Anet provide other paths to Legendary Armor, well, customer retention would be a good reason, to keep with their founding philosophy would be another.. but they don't need to do either of those things. They can take the loss in both players and faith.

 

So be it ... Anet can't make the game everything for everyone. I see no problem with that. It's reasonable and practical. There are lots of great reasons to do lots of great things, but Anet can't do them all. Furthermore, people leave the game for all kinds of reasons and it makes no sense for Anet to try to throw a carrot to everyone by fixing every reason they leave for. The best they can do is provide a game experience that makes people want to stay. That's why game experience is more important than throwing pixels around. ... but since you think pixels > game experience, I still can't see why you want all these alternate paths in the first place; care to explain?

[Feanor.2358]

> @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > > @"Tails.9372" said:

> > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > > > Exactly ... Just because in theory, multiple legendary paths sounds like a good idea doesn't mean it happens. the PRACTICAL side is the time it takes and how it's done. I don't really see it's worth the effort. What return on Anet's effort do they get, other than some goodwill for entitled players that aren't willing to do what is required NOW to get it?

> > > > > > > It gives players a long term goal and keeps them playing, that's the main reason why legendaries were introduced in the first place.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Yes sure, but that happens with or without multiple paths ...

> > > > > Only for raiders. Which would be likely raiding anyway even without that armor, by the way. For everyone else it's useless in that regard, because a goal you won't work toward (because you don't like the path) will not keep you engaged.

> > > > > Basically, if you want to give players a long-term goal to keep them playing, you don't put that goal behind a content most players will _not_ play. That completely defeats its purpose.

> > > >

> > > > There isn't anything wrong with this. Anet cannot chase the whim of every player who is unwilling to do specific content for specific gear. That's not PRACTICAL. Anet does not expect every player to get every reward they want, so that isn't a compelling reason to ask for multiple paths. The whole premise of multiple paths is based on a faulty expectation.

> > > >

> > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > > Exactly. Thus, pushing players into paths offering them the game experience those players actively dislike is not really desirable. It's far better to offer them choice.

> > > >

> > > > Yes it is, but this isn't a decision based on fairness.

> > >

> > > How would people feel if legendary armor was PvP exclusive and only available to the top 25 people on the leaderboard? Sure, everyone _can_ get it, but not everyone plays at that level of PvP. The same applies to normal PvE vs. Raids.

> > >

> > > This would just exclude PvErs and to a lesser extent, WvWers, and only appeases 1/3 of the population. This is essentially what the current system does and it makes no sense.

> >

> > First off, PvE isn't 1/3 of the population, it's much more.

> >

> > Second, raiding isn't remotely the same as getting "top 25".

> >

> > Finally, when you disregard the gross exaggerations from your argument, there's nothing left from it.

>

> 1. That's likely due to the fact that PvE is the only gamemode that actually receives updates/support from the devs.

> 2. Comparing the raiding population to the entire PvE population is not unlike comparing the top 25 on the leaderboard to the (much smaller) PvP population.

> 3. LUL

>

 

1. Has it occurred to you it might be intended? This game is primarily PvE by design.

2. It is unlike it. According to gw2efficiency [stats](https://gw2efficiency.com/account/statistics/statistics.legendaryInsights "stats"), 20% of the players have non-zero LIs, meaning they at least tried raiding. 10% have 90 LIs, which is in the same order of magnitude of what's required for your first set. Unless the PvP population consists of about 250 players in total, your comparison remains grossly exaggerated.

3. If only "lol" and its derivatives were a valid argument.

[shadowpass.4236]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > @"Tails.9372" said:

> > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > > Exactly ... Just because in theory, multiple legendary paths sounds like a good idea doesn't mean it happens. the PRACTICAL side is the time it takes and how it's done. I don't really see it's worth the effort. What return on Anet's effort do they get, other than some goodwill for entitled players that aren't willing to do what is required NOW to get it?

> > > > > > It gives players a long term goal and keeps them playing, that's the main reason why legendaries were introduced in the first place.

> > > > >

> > > > > Yes sure, but that happens with or without multiple paths ...

> > > > Only for raiders. Which would be likely raiding anyway even without that armor, by the way. For everyone else it's useless in that regard, because a goal you won't work toward (because you don't like the path) will not keep you engaged.

> > > > Basically, if you want to give players a long-term goal to keep them playing, you don't put that goal behind a content most players will _not_ play. That completely defeats its purpose.

> > >

> > > There isn't anything wrong with this. Anet cannot chase the whim of every player who is unwilling to do specific content for specific gear. That's not PRACTICAL. Anet does not expect every player to get every reward they want, so that isn't a compelling reason to ask for multiple paths. The whole premise of multiple paths is based on a faulty expectation.

> > >

> > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > Exactly. Thus, pushing players into paths offering them the game experience those players actively dislike is not really desirable. It's far better to offer them choice.

> > >

> > > Yes it is, but this isn't a decision based on fairness.

> >

> > How would people feel if legendary armor was PvP exclusive and only available to the top 25 people on the leaderboard?

>

> The same way that non-raiders feel now ... what's the problem?

 

That _is_ the problem. If legendary armor was only obtainable through the highest levels of PvP, PvErs would be excluded and have almost no chance of actually getting it.

 

>

> > @"STIHL.2489" said:

> > Why should Anet provide other paths to Legendary Armor, well, customer retention would be a good reason, to keep with their founding philosophy would be another.. but they don't need to do either of those things. They can take the loss in both players and faith.

>

> So be it ... Anet can't make the game everything for everyone. I see no problem with that. It's reasonable and practical. There are lots of great reasons to do lots of great things, but Anet can't do them all. Furthermore, people leave the game for all kinds of reasons and it makes no sense for Anet to try to throw a carrot to everyone by fixing every reason they leave for. The best they can do is provide a game experience that makes people want to stay. That's why game experience is more important than throwing pixels around.

 

That's okay. I just don't see why there wouldn't be legendary armor exclusive for each individual gamemode. It would make more sense to reward the best players in PvE, WvW, and PvP. Instead, only the PvErs are rewarded.

[shadowpass.4236]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > > > @"Tails.9372" said:

> > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > > > > Exactly ... Just because in theory, multiple legendary paths sounds like a good idea doesn't mean it happens. the PRACTICAL side is the time it takes and how it's done. I don't really see it's worth the effort. What return on Anet's effort do they get, other than some goodwill for entitled players that aren't willing to do what is required NOW to get it?

> > > > > > > > It gives players a long term goal and keeps them playing, that's the main reason why legendaries were introduced in the first place.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Yes sure, but that happens with or without multiple paths ...

> > > > > > Only for raiders. Which would be likely raiding anyway even without that armor, by the way. For everyone else it's useless in that regard, because a goal you won't work toward (because you don't like the path) will not keep you engaged.

> > > > > > Basically, if you want to give players a long-term goal to keep them playing, you don't put that goal behind a content most players will _not_ play. That completely defeats its purpose.

> > > > >

> > > > > There isn't anything wrong with this. Anet cannot chase the whim of every player who is unwilling to do specific content for specific gear. That's not PRACTICAL. Anet does not expect every player to get every reward they want, so that isn't a compelling reason to ask for multiple paths. The whole premise of multiple paths is based on a faulty expectation.

> > > > >

> > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > > > Exactly. Thus, pushing players into paths offering them the game experience those players actively dislike is not really desirable. It's far better to offer them choice.

> > > > >

> > > > > Yes it is, but this isn't a decision based on fairness.

> > > >

> > > > How would people feel if legendary armor was PvP exclusive and only available to the top 25 people on the leaderboard? Sure, everyone _can_ get it, but not everyone plays at that level of PvP. The same applies to normal PvE vs. Raids.

> > > >

> > > > This would just exclude PvErs and to a lesser extent, WvWers, and only appeases 1/3 of the population. This is essentially what the current system does and it makes no sense.

> > >

> > > First off, PvE isn't 1/3 of the population, it's much more.

> > >

> > > Second, raiding isn't remotely the same as getting "top 25".

> > >

> > > Finally, when you disregard the gross exaggerations from your argument, there's nothing left from it.

> >

> > 1. That's likely due to the fact that PvE is the only gamemode that actually receives updates/support from the devs.

> > 2. Comparing the raiding population to the entire PvE population is not unlike comparing the top 25 on the leaderboard to the (much smaller) PvP population.

> > 3. LUL

> >

>

> 1. Has it occurred to you it might be intended? This game is primarily PvE by design.

 

Regardless of whether or not this game is PvE by design, PvP and WvW still consist of 2/3s of the game. The fact that only 1 out of the 3 continue to receive updates and support is mind boggling.

 

> 2. It is unlike it. According to gw2efficiency [stats](https://gw2efficiency.com/account/statistics/statistics.legendaryInsights "stats"), 20% of the players have non-zero LIs, meaning they at least tried raiding. 10% have 90 LIs, which is in the same order of magnitude of what's required for your first set. Unless the PvP population consists of about 250 players in total, your comparison remains grossly exaggerated.

 

You're really hung up over the number 25. So, I'll make it easier for you to understand by broadening it to "the highest level PvPers."

 

> 3. If only "lol" and its derivatives were a valid argument.

 

It's valid when you purposefully misunderstood the meaning behind what I said to the point where it's only worth responding to with "LUL."

[Obtena.7952]

> @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > > @"Tails.9372" said:

> > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > > > Exactly ... Just because in theory, multiple legendary paths sounds like a good idea doesn't mean it happens. the PRACTICAL side is the time it takes and how it's done. I don't really see it's worth the effort. What return on Anet's effort do they get, other than some goodwill for entitled players that aren't willing to do what is required NOW to get it?

> > > > > > > It gives players a long term goal and keeps them playing, that's the main reason why legendaries were introduced in the first place.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Yes sure, but that happens with or without multiple paths ...

> > > > > Only for raiders. Which would be likely raiding anyway even without that armor, by the way. For everyone else it's useless in that regard, because a goal you won't work toward (because you don't like the path) will not keep you engaged.

> > > > > Basically, if you want to give players a long-term goal to keep them playing, you don't put that goal behind a content most players will _not_ play. That completely defeats its purpose.

> > > >

> > > > There isn't anything wrong with this. Anet cannot chase the whim of every player who is unwilling to do specific content for specific gear. That's not PRACTICAL. Anet does not expect every player to get every reward they want, so that isn't a compelling reason to ask for multiple paths. The whole premise of multiple paths is based on a faulty expectation.

> > > >

> > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > > Exactly. Thus, pushing players into paths offering them the game experience those players actively dislike is not really desirable. It's far better to offer them choice.

> > > >

> > > > Yes it is, but this isn't a decision based on fairness.

> > >

> > > How would people feel if legendary armor was PvP exclusive and only available to the top 25 people on the leaderboard?

> >

> > The same way that non-raiders feel now ... what's the problem?

>

> That _is_ the problem. If legendary armor was only obtainable through the highest levels of PvP, PvErs would be excluded and have almost no chance of actually getting it.

>

That's not a problem at all. No one is excluded because they CHOOSE to not do content. That's disingenuous.

>>

> > > @"STIHL.2489" said:

> > > Why should Anet provide other paths to Legendary Armor, well, customer retention would be a good reason, to keep with their founding philosophy would be another.. but they don't need to do either of those things. They can take the loss in both players and faith.

> >

> > So be it ... Anet can't make the game everything for everyone. I see no problem with that. It's reasonable and practical. There are lots of great reasons to do lots of great things, but Anet can't do them all. Furthermore, people leave the game for all kinds of reasons and it makes no sense for Anet to try to throw a carrot to everyone by fixing every reason they leave for. The best they can do is provide a game experience that makes people want to stay. That's why game experience is more important than throwing pixels around.

>

> That's okay. I just don't see why there wouldn't be legendary armor exclusive for each individual gamemode. It would make more sense to reward the best players in PvE, WvW, and PvP. Instead, only the PvErs are rewarded.

 

There are lots of reasons, you just choose to ignore them or don't know what they are. If people don't choose to do content, that's not Anet's problem.

[Feanor.2358]

> @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > > > > @"Tails.9372" said:

> > > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > > > > > Exactly ... Just because in theory, multiple legendary paths sounds like a good idea doesn't mean it happens. the PRACTICAL side is the time it takes and how it's done. I don't really see it's worth the effort. What return on Anet's effort do they get, other than some goodwill for entitled players that aren't willing to do what is required NOW to get it?

> > > > > > > > > It gives players a long term goal and keeps them playing, that's the main reason why legendaries were introduced in the first place.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Yes sure, but that happens with or without multiple paths ...

> > > > > > > Only for raiders. Which would be likely raiding anyway even without that armor, by the way. For everyone else it's useless in that regard, because a goal you won't work toward (because you don't like the path) will not keep you engaged.

> > > > > > > Basically, if you want to give players a long-term goal to keep them playing, you don't put that goal behind a content most players will _not_ play. That completely defeats its purpose.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > There isn't anything wrong with this. Anet cannot chase the whim of every player who is unwilling to do specific content for specific gear. That's not PRACTICAL. Anet does not expect every player to get every reward they want, so that isn't a compelling reason to ask for multiple paths. The whole premise of multiple paths is based on a faulty expectation.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > > > > Exactly. Thus, pushing players into paths offering them the game experience those players actively dislike is not really desirable. It's far better to offer them choice.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Yes it is, but this isn't a decision based on fairness.

> > > > >

> > > > > How would people feel if legendary armor was PvP exclusive and only available to the top 25 people on the leaderboard? Sure, everyone _can_ get it, but not everyone plays at that level of PvP. The same applies to normal PvE vs. Raids.

> > > > >

> > > > > This would just exclude PvErs and to a lesser extent, WvWers, and only appeases 1/3 of the population. This is essentially what the current system does and it makes no sense.

> > > >

> > > > First off, PvE isn't 1/3 of the population, it's much more.

> > > >

> > > > Second, raiding isn't remotely the same as getting "top 25".

> > > >

> > > > Finally, when you disregard the gross exaggerations from your argument, there's nothing left from it.

> > >

> > > 1. That's likely due to the fact that PvE is the only gamemode that actually receives updates/support from the devs.

> > > 2. Comparing the raiding population to the entire PvE population is not unlike comparing the top 25 on the leaderboard to the (much smaller) PvP population.

> > > 3. LUL

> > >

> >

> > 1. Has it occurred to you it might be intended? This game is primarily PvE by design.

>

> Regardless of whether or not this game is PvE by design, PvP and WvW still consist of 2/3s of the game. The fact that only 1 out of the 3 continue to receive updates and support is mind boggling.

 

PvP and WvW do not amount to anything remotely resembling 1/3rd of the game. They're different game modes within the same game, yeah. To call them thirds based on that is like comparing the Moon to the Sun on the basis they're both celestial bodies within the same solar system.

 

> @"shadowpass.4236" said:

>

> > 2. It is unlike it. According to gw2efficiency [stats](https://gw2efficiency.com/account/statistics/statistics.legendaryInsights "stats"), 20% of the players have non-zero LIs, meaning they at least tried raiding. 10% have 90 LIs, which is in the same order of magnitude of what's required for your first set. Unless the PvP population consists of about 250 players in total, your comparison remains grossly exaggerated.

>

> You're really hung up over the number 25. So, I'll make it easier for you to understand by broadening it to "the highest level PvPers."

 

So, like The Ascension? Yeah, I have no problem with it being pvp-only. Your point?

 

> @"shadowpass.4236" said:

>

> > 3. If only "lol" and its derivatives were a valid argument.

>

> It's valid when you purposefully misunderstood the meaning behind what I said to the point where it's only worth responding to with "LUL."

 

Except not, and you're just wrong. When confronted with actual facts you're wiggling away using vague and ambiguous expressions like "highest level pvpers". And you did, in fact, [appeal to emotion](https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-emotion "appeal to emotion") by exaggerating on purpose to make your original claim sounds like it has some validity.

[Purgatori.3645]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > @"Purgatori.3645" said:

> > or .. create raids that are PVE .... PVP ... AND WVW .... make them specific to their environment! how hard is this?

>

> Extremely. You can't really "adapt" a piece of content designed as a hardcore PvE cooperative challenge to a competitive environment. You *could* keep it PvE, obviously, but then you'd kitten the competitive players off. As it is, hardcore WvW players often complain about desert keep lords having rudimentary combat mechanics. They don't want this, that's why they play WvW and not PvE. They want to fight other players. Same for PvP.

>

> WvW players already use the term "raid" to describe guild WvW activity. That's the closest you can get, but you can't make the opposing players behave in a specific way in order to provide a desired level of challenge. Hence, there's no meaningful way of structuring rewards for it.

>

>

 

ok this makes complete sense to me. Thank you for this comment :)

 

Seems like an awful lot of work and time to invest without getting the corresponding skins with the armor. This really blows for non PVE players. I hope they can find a better compromise than an "upgrade" on ascended etc

 

Thanks again!

[shadowpass.4236]

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > > > @"Tails.9372" said:

> > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > > > > Exactly ... Just because in theory, multiple legendary paths sounds like a good idea doesn't mean it happens. the PRACTICAL side is the time it takes and how it's done. I don't really see it's worth the effort. What return on Anet's effort do they get, other than some goodwill for entitled players that aren't willing to do what is required NOW to get it?

> > > > > > > > It gives players a long term goal and keeps them playing, that's the main reason why legendaries were introduced in the first place.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Yes sure, but that happens with or without multiple paths ...

> > > > > > Only for raiders. Which would be likely raiding anyway even without that armor, by the way. For everyone else it's useless in that regard, because a goal you won't work toward (because you don't like the path) will not keep you engaged.

> > > > > > Basically, if you want to give players a long-term goal to keep them playing, you don't put that goal behind a content most players will _not_ play. That completely defeats its purpose.

> > > > >

> > > > > There isn't anything wrong with this. Anet cannot chase the whim of every player who is unwilling to do specific content for specific gear. That's not PRACTICAL. Anet does not expect every player to get every reward they want, so that isn't a compelling reason to ask for multiple paths. The whole premise of multiple paths is based on a faulty expectation.

> > > > >

> > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > > > Exactly. Thus, pushing players into paths offering them the game experience those players actively dislike is not really desirable. It's far better to offer them choice.

> > > > >

> > > > > Yes it is, but this isn't a decision based on fairness.

> > > >

> > > > How would people feel if legendary armor was PvP exclusive and only available to the top 25 people on the leaderboard?

> > >

> > > The same way that non-raiders feel now ... what's the problem?

> >

> > That _is_ the problem. If legendary armor was only obtainable through the highest levels of PvP, PvErs would be excluded and have almost no chance of actually getting it.

> >

> That's not a problem at all. No one is excluded because they CHOOSE to not do content. That's disingenuous.

 

So having PvE exclusive legendary armor skins isn't exclusive?

 

> >>

> > > > @"STIHL.2489" said:

> > > > Why should Anet provide other paths to Legendary Armor, well, customer retention would be a good reason, to keep with their founding philosophy would be another.. but they don't need to do either of those things. They can take the loss in both players and faith.

> > >

> > > So be it ... Anet can't make the game everything for everyone. I see no problem with that. It's reasonable and practical. There are lots of great reasons to do lots of great things, but Anet can't do them all. Furthermore, people leave the game for all kinds of reasons and it makes no sense for Anet to try to throw a carrot to everyone by fixing every reason they leave for. The best they can do is provide a game experience that makes people want to stay. That's why game experience is more important than throwing pixels around.

> >

> > That's okay. I just don't see why there wouldn't be legendary armor exclusive for each individual gamemode. It would make more sense to reward the best players in PvE, WvW, and PvP. Instead, only the PvErs are rewarded.

>

> There are lots of reasons, you just choose to ignore them or don't know what they are. If people don't choose to do content, that's not Anet's problem.

 

So then list them. Just saying "there are lots of reasons" doesn't mean there actually _are_ "lots of reasons."

[Obtena.7952]

> @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > > > > @"Tails.9372" said:

> > > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > > > > > > > > Exactly ... Just because in theory, multiple legendary paths sounds like a good idea doesn't mean it happens. the PRACTICAL side is the time it takes and how it's done. I don't really see it's worth the effort. What return on Anet's effort do they get, other than some goodwill for entitled players that aren't willing to do what is required NOW to get it?

> > > > > > > > > It gives players a long term goal and keeps them playing, that's the main reason why legendaries were introduced in the first place.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Yes sure, but that happens with or without multiple paths ...

> > > > > > > Only for raiders. Which would be likely raiding anyway even without that armor, by the way. For everyone else it's useless in that regard, because a goal you won't work toward (because you don't like the path) will not keep you engaged.

> > > > > > > Basically, if you want to give players a long-term goal to keep them playing, you don't put that goal behind a content most players will _not_ play. That completely defeats its purpose.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > There isn't anything wrong with this. Anet cannot chase the whim of every player who is unwilling to do specific content for specific gear. That's not PRACTICAL. Anet does not expect every player to get every reward they want, so that isn't a compelling reason to ask for multiple paths. The whole premise of multiple paths is based on a faulty expectation.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > > > > Exactly. Thus, pushing players into paths offering them the game experience those players actively dislike is not really desirable. It's far better to offer them choice.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Yes it is, but this isn't a decision based on fairness.

> > > > >

> > > > > How would people feel if legendary armor was PvP exclusive and only available to the top 25 people on the leaderboard?

> > > >

> > > > The same way that non-raiders feel now ... what's the problem?

> > >

> > > That _is_ the problem. If legendary armor was only obtainable through the highest levels of PvP, PvErs would be excluded and have almost no chance of actually getting it.

> > >

> > That's not a problem at all. No one is excluded because they CHOOSE to not do content. That's disingenuous.

>

> So having PvE exclusive legendary armor skins isn't exclusive?

>

I don't know what you mean ... NO one is excluded from doing raid content to obtain legendary armor. NO player is excluded EXCEPT by their own choice.

 

> > >>

> > > > > @"STIHL.2489" said:

> > > > > Why should Anet provide other paths to Legendary Armor, well, customer retention would be a good reason, to keep with their founding philosophy would be another.. but they don't need to do either of those things. They can take the loss in both players and faith.

> > > >

> > > > So be it ... Anet can't make the game everything for everyone. I see no problem with that. It's reasonable and practical. There are lots of great reasons to do lots of great things, but Anet can't do them all. Furthermore, people leave the game for all kinds of reasons and it makes no sense for Anet to try to throw a carrot to everyone by fixing every reason they leave for. The best they can do is provide a game experience that makes people want to stay. That's why game experience is more important than throwing pixels around.

> > >

> > > That's okay. I just don't see why there wouldn't be legendary armor exclusive for each individual gamemode. It would make more sense to reward the best players in PvE, WvW, and PvP. Instead, only the PvErs are rewarded.

> >

> > There are lots of reasons, you just choose to ignore them or don't know what they are. If people don't choose to do content, that's not Anet's problem.

>

> So then list them. Just saying "there are lots of reasons" doesn't mean there actually _are_ "lots of reasons."

 

I've already made my points. If you missed them, go back and look. I've thought of more too ... just biding my time. The current reasons still hold fast.