Can WvW server be made not pay to win.

[Larenc.1269]

Funny I slaughter people in wvw with core builds ;3

 

you've got: Whackamole warrior, Mortar engi/w nades, ret guardian,burn guardian, spiritual necro, Poison thief, staff ele,pew pew ranger, shat heal Mesmer.

 

All good builds covering different types of situations that crop up. In fact spiritual necro is the op's combo in the game for awhile crossing multiple game modes.

 

 

So have you tried not running into the middle of a zerg and dieing? I see idiots doing that alot and its funny.

 

 

PS: I've killed people on my ele with Conjure earth shield. Just for the fun of it. Its a wonder what a dodge roll can do to keep you from dieing alot of the time.

[Sovereign.1093]

this may segway from the original issue but most death i see when we raid has nothing to do with profession but more to do with the following:

 

1. back pedalling

2. turn with keyboard

3. being in the wrong location

4. standing on the enemy bubble

 

to remedy:

 

it's kind of our tradesecret but what the hey. ppl should know this by now

 

1. key bind skills

2. turn with mouse

3. stay near the commander

4. dodge

5th one - you can msg me in game or send me mail to know.

[wanya.1697]

> @"Larenc.1269" said:

> Funny I slaughter people in wvw with core builds ;3

>

> you've got: Whackamole warrior, Mortar engi/w nades, ret guardian,burn guardian, spiritual necro, Poison thief, staff ele,pew pew ranger, kitten heal Mesmer.

>

> All good builds covering different types of situations that crop up. In fact spiritual necro is the op's combo in the game for awhile crossing multiple game modes.

>

>

> So have you tried not running into the middle of a zerg and dieing? I see idiots doing that alot and its funny.

>

>

> PS: I've killed people on my ele with Conjure earth shield. Just for the fun of it. Its a wonder what a dodge roll can do to keep you from dieing alot of the time.

 

that just shows you are a better player

it´s imposible to win against non core builds if both players have the same skill

as elite specs are just so much better that´s why there is so much complain in the forum about the power creep

so it´s p2w simple as that

[Sovereign.1093]

> @"wanya.1697" said:

> that just shows you are a better player

> it´s imposible to win against non core builds if both players have the same skill

> as elite specs are just so much better that´s why there is so much complain in the forum about the power creep

> so it´s p2w simple as that

 

mmm.. fb > than all other guard specs if in a group.

 

herald > renegade or base right now

 

solo - core warrior > berserker or spell. spell > all specs for group.

 

damage reaper > base or scourge. group support scourge > all necro. solo core> others.

 

chron as group support beats all mess. mirage > all mes as solo.

 

weaver > all as damage.

 

...

 

could be gear, food, bonuses, lag. lots of factors you know.

 

but these things, no matter how small or big has a l2play part.

 

and as game expands, yes, they will release new specs. it is not directly pay to win but maybe thinking out of the box.

 

[Vayne.8563]

> @"Israel.7056" said:

> > @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > > @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > > > Yes if you can spend real money JUST to get a power advantage, and NOTHING ELSE, that would be pay to win. But an expansion isn't just a power advantage. It's the continuation of the game. When you buy an MMO you're buying access, not a game. It's like buying a membership to a club. That's just the way it is. In the old days you had a sub. You'd just pay the sub. If you stopped paying the sub, you had to stop playing the game. So yeah, you had to pay to play, which I guess means you'd pay to win as well, since you couldn't play at all without paying. This is a very similar thing. It's a purchase instead of a sub, to let you keep playing. Because you're expected to move forward and continue with the game, it's okay to raise the power. Because you're buying an entire game, not just power. The power is incidental to what you're buying.

> > >

> > > Well I have to ask what if it's now an expected part of gaming that in some games you can buy power out of a cash shop for real money? What if players who play these games now expect to be able to progress and get advantages over players who don't pay in that way? They could turn your argument around and say it's not "pay to win" because they expect the games to work like that. Would you then say their expectations are irrelevant?

> > >

> > > > If you only PvP, well, that doesn't matter. As I said it's like buying a Season ticket to Disney World, but only riding roller coasters. Not enough of them to make that worth it, and you'd have to decide it. Keep in mind, the game simply isn't meant to be free forever. It's a membership you're paying for...even if you're not paying for it monthly.

> > >

> > > It matters to me because I bought the xpacs solely to get a power advantage and I did so knowingly. The only reason I bought them was for the elite specs. If they'd given out the elites for free in WvW I'm sure myself and many many others would never have bought HoT or PoF.

> > >

> >

> > Yes, it's expected that some games will sell power alone out of the cash shop and those games are pay to win. And calling them so you'll be using the name right. There are people who won't play those games because they don't want to play a pay to win game. But those that understand the funding system of MMOs will still buy an MMO that requires you to buy expansions because it's expected that if you're going to continue to play the game, you'll support it by buying those expansions.

> >

> > For people who don't minding paying to win, they'll know which games they are. Once every game is pay to win the term loses its original definition. We then can't decide between the original types of games, funded by expansions and the new games, funded by pay to win. There is a difference, even if you personally don't pay most of the game. It's like buying a car for the leather seats and then claiming you shouldn't have to pay for the motor. It's still a car. It's made to be a car. If you're just paying to sit in the seat, that's on you. This isn't a PvP game. It's a game. You pay for it and support it or all bets are off. Whether you don't play the rest of the game or not, the company is still paying the employees making and supporting the game.

> >

> > And make no mistake. If the PvE portion of this game was removed, there would be no game and you'd be playing nothing.

>

> I think I rest my case on this one.

>

> In the course of this discussion you have contradicted two of the key premises of your position though I'm not sure that you even realize it.

>

> Interesting talk though to be sure.

>

 

The vast majority of people understand what I'm saying. If you really think expansions are fair game for pay to win, why not go post it to any MMORPG site and see what kind of response you get.

 

What I'm saying isn't some mystical hidden lore, nor is it something I've made up in my basement. It's common knowledge.

 

And not detailing a supposed flaw isn't going to win an argument. There's no case to defend here. No one calls WoW pay to win, but by your definition it is. Either we all follow the same rules or none of us do. Pay to win was invented to single out free games that sold power in the cash shop period. Not a guess. Not a rewriting of history. Until you can address that, there's really no point in even talking further about it.

[Israel.7056]

> @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > > > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > > > > Yes if you can spend real money JUST to get a power advantage, and NOTHING ELSE, that would be pay to win. But an expansion isn't just a power advantage. It's the continuation of the game. When you buy an MMO you're buying access, not a game. It's like buying a membership to a club. That's just the way it is. In the old days you had a sub. You'd just pay the sub. If you stopped paying the sub, you had to stop playing the game. So yeah, you had to pay to play, which I guess means you'd pay to win as well, since you couldn't play at all without paying. This is a very similar thing. It's a purchase instead of a sub, to let you keep playing. Because you're expected to move forward and continue with the game, it's okay to raise the power. Because you're buying an entire game, not just power. The power is incidental to what you're buying.

> > > >

> > > > Well I have to ask what if it's now an expected part of gaming that in some games you can buy power out of a cash shop for real money? What if players who play these games now expect to be able to progress and get advantages over players who don't pay in that way? They could turn your argument around and say it's not "pay to win" because they expect the games to work like that. Would you then say their expectations are irrelevant?

> > > >

> > > > > If you only PvP, well, that doesn't matter. As I said it's like buying a Season ticket to Disney World, but only riding roller coasters. Not enough of them to make that worth it, and you'd have to decide it. Keep in mind, the game simply isn't meant to be free forever. It's a membership you're paying for...even if you're not paying for it monthly.

> > > >

> > > > It matters to me because I bought the xpacs solely to get a power advantage and I did so knowingly. The only reason I bought them was for the elite specs. If they'd given out the elites for free in WvW I'm sure myself and many many others would never have bought HoT or PoF.

> > > >

> > >

> > > Yes, it's expected that some games will sell power alone out of the cash shop and those games are pay to win. And calling them so you'll be using the name right. There are people who won't play those games because they don't want to play a pay to win game. But those that understand the funding system of MMOs will still buy an MMO that requires you to buy expansions because it's expected that if you're going to continue to play the game, you'll support it by buying those expansions.

> > >

> > > For people who don't minding paying to win, they'll know which games they are. Once every game is pay to win the term loses its original definition. We then can't decide between the original types of games, funded by expansions and the new games, funded by pay to win. There is a difference, even if you personally don't pay most of the game. It's like buying a car for the leather seats and then claiming you shouldn't have to pay for the motor. It's still a car. It's made to be a car. If you're just paying to sit in the seat, that's on you. This isn't a PvP game. It's a game. You pay for it and support it or all bets are off. Whether you don't play the rest of the game or not, the company is still paying the employees making and supporting the game.

> > >

> > > And make no mistake. If the PvE portion of this game was removed, there would be no game and you'd be playing nothing.

> >

> > I think I rest my case on this one.

> >

> > In the course of this discussion you have contradicted two of the key premises of your position though I'm not sure that you even realize it.

> >

> > Interesting talk though to be sure.

> >

>

> The vast majority of people understand what I'm saying. If you really think expansions are fair game for pay to win, why not go post it to any MMORPG site and see what kind of response you get.

>

> What I'm saying isn't some mystical hidden lore, nor is it something I've made up in my basement. It's common knowledge.

>

> And not detailing a supposed flaw isn't going to win an argument. There's no case to defend here. No one calls WoW pay to win, but by your definition it is. Either we all follow the same rules or none of us do. Pay to win was invented to single out free games that sold power in the cash shop period. Not a guess. Not a rewriting of history. Until you can address that, there's really no point in even talking further about it.

 

My argument is that the term as it's commonly used is inherently logically inconsistent and marred with arbitrary distinctions that quickly fall apart upon scrutiny and I think you have demonstrated that pretty clearly here in this discussion.

 

I agree that there's no reason to discuss this further as it seems to me that I have nothing left to demonstrate to try to prove my point.

[Vayne.8563]

> @"Israel.7056" said:

> > @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > > @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > > > > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > > > > > Yes if you can spend real money JUST to get a power advantage, and NOTHING ELSE, that would be pay to win. But an expansion isn't just a power advantage. It's the continuation of the game. When you buy an MMO you're buying access, not a game. It's like buying a membership to a club. That's just the way it is. In the old days you had a sub. You'd just pay the sub. If you stopped paying the sub, you had to stop playing the game. So yeah, you had to pay to play, which I guess means you'd pay to win as well, since you couldn't play at all without paying. This is a very similar thing. It's a purchase instead of a sub, to let you keep playing. Because you're expected to move forward and continue with the game, it's okay to raise the power. Because you're buying an entire game, not just power. The power is incidental to what you're buying.

> > > > >

> > > > > Well I have to ask what if it's now an expected part of gaming that in some games you can buy power out of a cash shop for real money? What if players who play these games now expect to be able to progress and get advantages over players who don't pay in that way? They could turn your argument around and say it's not "pay to win" because they expect the games to work like that. Would you then say their expectations are irrelevant?

> > > > >

> > > > > > If you only PvP, well, that doesn't matter. As I said it's like buying a Season ticket to Disney World, but only riding roller coasters. Not enough of them to make that worth it, and you'd have to decide it. Keep in mind, the game simply isn't meant to be free forever. It's a membership you're paying for...even if you're not paying for it monthly.

> > > > >

> > > > > It matters to me because I bought the xpacs solely to get a power advantage and I did so knowingly. The only reason I bought them was for the elite specs. If they'd given out the elites for free in WvW I'm sure myself and many many others would never have bought HoT or PoF.

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > Yes, it's expected that some games will sell power alone out of the cash shop and those games are pay to win. And calling them so you'll be using the name right. There are people who won't play those games because they don't want to play a pay to win game. But those that understand the funding system of MMOs will still buy an MMO that requires you to buy expansions because it's expected that if you're going to continue to play the game, you'll support it by buying those expansions.

> > > >

> > > > For people who don't minding paying to win, they'll know which games they are. Once every game is pay to win the term loses its original definition. We then can't decide between the original types of games, funded by expansions and the new games, funded by pay to win. There is a difference, even if you personally don't pay most of the game. It's like buying a car for the leather seats and then claiming you shouldn't have to pay for the motor. It's still a car. It's made to be a car. If you're just paying to sit in the seat, that's on you. This isn't a PvP game. It's a game. You pay for it and support it or all bets are off. Whether you don't play the rest of the game or not, the company is still paying the employees making and supporting the game.

> > > >

> > > > And make no mistake. If the PvE portion of this game was removed, there would be no game and you'd be playing nothing.

> > >

> > > I think I rest my case on this one.

> > >

> > > In the course of this discussion you have contradicted two of the key premises of your position though I'm not sure that you even realize it.

> > >

> > > Interesting talk though to be sure.

> > >

> >

> > The vast majority of people understand what I'm saying. If you really think expansions are fair game for pay to win, why not go post it to any MMORPG site and see what kind of response you get.

> >

> > What I'm saying isn't some mystical hidden lore, nor is it something I've made up in my basement. It's common knowledge.

> >

> > And not detailing a supposed flaw isn't going to win an argument. There's no case to defend here. No one calls WoW pay to win, but by your definition it is. Either we all follow the same rules or none of us do. Pay to win was invented to single out free games that sold power in the cash shop period. Not a guess. Not a rewriting of history. Until you can address that, there's really no point in even talking further about it.

>

> My argument is that the term as it's commonly used is inherently logically inconsistent and marred with arbitrary distinctions that quickly fall apart upon scrutiny and I think you have demonstrated that pretty clearly here in this discussion.

>

> I agree that there's no reason to discuss this further as it seems to me that I have nothing left to demonstrate to try to prove my point.

 

The original definition isn't arbitrary. It's the original definition. The new definition, that's arbitrary. You're the one changing it from it's original intention, not me. It had a definitive purpose. You're trying to repurpose it. Without good reason, and you've yet to give any reason, you have no argument.

[Israel.7056]

> @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > > > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > > > > > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > > > > > @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > > > > > > Yes if you can spend real money JUST to get a power advantage, and NOTHING ELSE, that would be pay to win. But an expansion isn't just a power advantage. It's the continuation of the game. When you buy an MMO you're buying access, not a game. It's like buying a membership to a club. That's just the way it is. In the old days you had a sub. You'd just pay the sub. If you stopped paying the sub, you had to stop playing the game. So yeah, you had to pay to play, which I guess means you'd pay to win as well, since you couldn't play at all without paying. This is a very similar thing. It's a purchase instead of a sub, to let you keep playing. Because you're expected to move forward and continue with the game, it's okay to raise the power. Because you're buying an entire game, not just power. The power is incidental to what you're buying.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Well I have to ask what if it's now an expected part of gaming that in some games you can buy power out of a cash shop for real money? What if players who play these games now expect to be able to progress and get advantages over players who don't pay in that way? They could turn your argument around and say it's not "pay to win" because they expect the games to work like that. Would you then say their expectations are irrelevant?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > If you only PvP, well, that doesn't matter. As I said it's like buying a Season ticket to Disney World, but only riding roller coasters. Not enough of them to make that worth it, and you'd have to decide it. Keep in mind, the game simply isn't meant to be free forever. It's a membership you're paying for...even if you're not paying for it monthly.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > It matters to me because I bought the xpacs solely to get a power advantage and I did so knowingly. The only reason I bought them was for the elite specs. If they'd given out the elites for free in WvW I'm sure myself and many many others would never have bought HoT or PoF.

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Yes, it's expected that some games will sell power alone out of the cash shop and those games are pay to win. And calling them so you'll be using the name right. There are people who won't play those games because they don't want to play a pay to win game. But those that understand the funding system of MMOs will still buy an MMO that requires you to buy expansions because it's expected that if you're going to continue to play the game, you'll support it by buying those expansions.

> > > > >

> > > > > For people who don't minding paying to win, they'll know which games they are. Once every game is pay to win the term loses its original definition. We then can't decide between the original types of games, funded by expansions and the new games, funded by pay to win. There is a difference, even if you personally don't pay most of the game. It's like buying a car for the leather seats and then claiming you shouldn't have to pay for the motor. It's still a car. It's made to be a car. If you're just paying to sit in the seat, that's on you. This isn't a PvP game. It's a game. You pay for it and support it or all bets are off. Whether you don't play the rest of the game or not, the company is still paying the employees making and supporting the game.

> > > > >

> > > > > And make no mistake. If the PvE portion of this game was removed, there would be no game and you'd be playing nothing.

> > > >

> > > > I think I rest my case on this one.

> > > >

> > > > In the course of this discussion you have contradicted two of the key premises of your position though I'm not sure that you even realize it.

> > > >

> > > > Interesting talk though to be sure.

> > > >

> > >

> > > The vast majority of people understand what I'm saying. If you really think expansions are fair game for pay to win, why not go post it to any MMORPG site and see what kind of response you get.

> > >

> > > What I'm saying isn't some mystical hidden lore, nor is it something I've made up in my basement. It's common knowledge.

> > >

> > > And not detailing a supposed flaw isn't going to win an argument. There's no case to defend here. No one calls WoW pay to win, but by your definition it is. Either we all follow the same rules or none of us do. Pay to win was invented to single out free games that sold power in the cash shop period. Not a guess. Not a rewriting of history. Until you can address that, there's really no point in even talking further about it.

> >

> > My argument is that the term as it's commonly used is inherently logically inconsistent and marred with arbitrary distinctions that quickly fall apart upon scrutiny and I think you have demonstrated that pretty clearly here in this discussion.

> >

> > I agree that there's no reason to discuss this further as it seems to me that I have nothing left to demonstrate to try to prove my point.

>

> The original definition isn't arbitrary. It's the original definition. The new definition, that's arbitrary. You're the one changing it from it's original intention, not me. It had a definitive purpose. You're trying to repurpose it. Without good reason, and you've yet to give any reason, you have no argument.

 

The original definition is based on entirely arbitrary distinctions and inconsistent logic as i believe you have clearly shown in your attempted rebuttals to my original contentions.

 

You have subsequently contradicted every one of your major premises as I outlined them earlier and which you seemed to agree to at the time.

 

I believe i presented my argument several times very clearly and succinctly in the course of our discussion. If you still don't know what it is i honestly don't know how to help you here.

 

[Israel.7056]

For the record im not saying that all expansions for all games are necessarily p2w.

 

I'm saying that I agree with the op's assertion that these particular expansions have been structured as p2w because of the elite specs and even then only because the elite specs have consistently offered competitive advantages against those who do not have them which i think is inarguably the case.

[Bigpapasmurf.5623]

Appears that some are salty they can't fight vs expansion classes, whether they can't play the classes to learn weaknesses, or because they are unable to get the expansion for their own reasons and feel its unfair that they cannot when others can.

 

If its the fact you are getting beat, let me know and I will be more than happy to go over some weaknesses and strategies of these classes you have issues with.

 

If its that you cannot obtain any of the expansions for you own personal reasons, then look at it this way....I am a streamer on twitch. I have people that subscribe to me. Because they subscribe to me, they pay money for such. Because they do such, they get perks. Whether it be a special sub badge, special emoticons, sub priority for things...whichever. They get a small special treatment in some/way/shape or form because they are spending the money. Its like if a viewer complains that its not fair they get these perks.

 

You wouldn't go to Costco and see a beautiful Smart TV thats $3000 and complain that it gives a better viewing experience and you are unable to get it for whatever personal reasons, so they shouldn't be able to sell it if all TV's are not smart TV's.

 

People pay for percs. Whether its mounts, gliding or specs. If its teh specs you are complaining about, its not because its p2w, its potentially due to balancing reasons.

[Israel.7056]

> @"Bigpapasmurf.5623" said:

> Appears that some are salty they can't fight vs expansion classes, whether they can't play the classes to learn weaknesses, or because they are unable to get the expansion for their own reasons and feel its unfair that they cannot when others can.

>

> If its the fact you are getting beat, let me know and I will be more than happy to go over some weaknesses and strategies of these classes you have issues with.

>

> If its that you cannot obtain any of the expansions for you own personal reasons, then look at it this way....I am a streamer on twitch. I have people that subscribe to me. Because they subscribe to me, they pay money for such. Because they do such, they get perks. Whether it be a special sub badge, special emoticons, sub priority for things...whichever. They get a small special treatment in some/way/shape or form because they are spending the money. Its like if a viewer complains that its not fair they get these perks.

>

> You wouldn't go to Costco and see a beautiful Smart TV thats $3000 and complain that it gives a better viewing experience and you are unable to get it for whatever personal reasons, so they shouldn't be able to sell it if all TV's are not smart TV's.

>

> People pay for percs. Whether its mounts, gliding or specs. If its teh specs you are complaining about, its not because its p2w, its potentially due to balancing reasons.

 

I'm gonna assume this one is addressed to the op.

[Bigpapasmurf.5623]

> @"Israel.7056" said:

> > @"Bigpapasmurf.5623" said:

> > Appears that some are salty they can't fight vs expansion classes, whether they can't play the classes to learn weaknesses, or because they are unable to get the expansion for their own reasons and feel its unfair that they cannot when others can.

> >

> > If its the fact you are getting beat, let me know and I will be more than happy to go over some weaknesses and strategies of these classes you have issues with.

> >

> > If its that you cannot obtain any of the expansions for you own personal reasons, then look at it this way....I am a streamer on twitch. I have people that subscribe to me. Because they subscribe to me, they pay money for such. Because they do such, they get perks. Whether it be a special sub badge, special emoticons, sub priority for things...whichever. They get a small special treatment in some/way/shape or form because they are spending the money. Its like if a viewer complains that its not fair they get these perks.

> >

> > You wouldn't go to Costco and see a beautiful Smart TV thats $3000 and complain that it gives a better viewing experience and you are unable to get it for whatever personal reasons, so they shouldn't be able to sell it if all TV's are not smart TV's.

> >

> > People pay for percs. Whether its mounts, gliding or specs. If its teh specs you are complaining about, its not because its p2w, its potentially due to balancing reasons.

>

> I'm gonna assume this one is addressed to the op.

 

Where I did not quote anyone, that would be a safe assumption :)

[Aury.1367]

WvW people want you to max out your usage. No one cares what you choose in open world PvE, you can also use whatever you want in WvW roaming. But in blobs/GvGs its always: Usage + performance first. People in WvW (And i think generally in all modes) dont care what expansion you have bought. Its only about usage + performance. If your class has no viability in WvW, use another, adapt or handle getting kicked out of squad.

 

GW2 is a game which is almost free. Youre not forced to buy expansions (which is like 20-30€ each two years). So if you decide not to buy expansions for that ridiculous small amount of money (Sorry but, if you cant get 20€ each two years, you shouldnt be playing on the computer but thats just my opinion) you should handle that others have an advantage.

 

And just in case you decide to not buy any expansion:

- Core warrior still OP for roaming

- Core Ele still okay for blobbing

[Junkpile.7439]

At least they could make expansion classes fun to play or boost vanilla specs.

[Vayne.8563]

> @"Israel.7056" said:

> For the record im not saying that all expansions for all games are necessarily p2w.

>

> I'm saying that I agree with the op's assertion that these particular expansions have been structured as p2w because of the elite specs and even then only because the elite specs have consistently offered competitive advantages against those who do not have them which i think is inarguably the case.

 

And I'm saying it's not true, because EVERY expansion is structured that way for every MMO and it's never counted before. You're changing the narrative by taking this out of context.

 

If WoW gives you an advantage for having an expansion for 12 years and no one is saying WOW is pay to win, then why is suddenly this game pay to win, when it's doing what MMOs have been doing from the beginning. We never even had the term P2W until free to play MMOs started coming out and doing something different. That something different was selling power, alone, by itself, in the cash shop.

 

We all expected to have to buy expansions to keep current and stay with the game. That was a normal, expected part of MMOs, so no one counted it. If you're going to start counting it, you have to also say WoW is pay to win. You'd probably have to say every MMO is pay to win. And once you do that, I'm asking again, what value does the term have.

 

Keep in mind the term was already defined back then. If you want to change the definition you need a different term, that's all. If you want to say that you need to buy expansions to be current in an MMO and be as powerful as people who have the expansion, well that's true of all expansions.

[Swagger.1459]

> @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > For the record im not saying that all expansions for all games are necessarily p2w.

> >

> > I'm saying that I agree with the op's assertion that these particular expansions have been structured as p2w because of the elite specs and even then only because the elite specs have consistently offered competitive advantages against those who do not have them which i think is inarguably the case.

>

> And I'm saying it's not true, because EVERY expansion is structured that way for every MMO and it's never counted before. You're changing the narrative by taking this out of context.

>

> If WoW gives you an advantage for having an expansion for 12 years and no one is saying WOW is pay to win, then why is suddenly this game pay to win, when it's doing what MMOs have been doing from the beginning. We never even had the term P2W until free to play MMOs started coming out and doing something different. That something different was selling power, alone, by itself, in the cash shop.

>

> We all expected to have to buy expansions to keep current and stay with the game. That was a normal, expected part of MMOs, so no one counted it. If you're going to start counting it, you have to also say WoW is pay to win. You'd probably have to say every MMO is pay to win. And once you do that, I'm asking again, what value does the term have.

>

> Keep in mind the term was already defined back then. If you want to change the definition you need a different term, that's all. If you want to say that you need to buy expansions to be current in an MMO and be as powerful as people who have the expansion, well that's true of all expansions.

 

Exactly...

 

And some context for those that don’t know...

 

World of Warcraft was released November 23, 2004.

 

The Burning Crusade was released on January 16, 2007.

 

Wrath of the Lich King was released on November 13, 2008.

 

Cataclysm was released on December 7, 2010.

 

Mists of Pandaria was released on September 25, 2012.

 

Warlords of Draenor was released on November 13, 2014.

 

Legion was released on August 30, 2016.

 

Battle for Azeroth was released on August 14, 2018.

 

World of Warcraft max level was 60 on release. Battle for Azeroth max level is now 110.

 

You had to buy expansions to gain access to increased levels, better gear, new races, new classes, new content, new zones... and a ton more... All while having to pay a monthly fee regardless of what expansion you had...

 

...Long story short for the “pay to win” crew... Spend $30 every couple years to update your game to support a fair and good game company... Let your suggestion stand alone without the labels that paint xpac updates as some unethical cash grab practice.

 

Anet stays true to the 80 level cap, doesn’t devalue your max level gear, doesn’t charge a monthly fee to play and sticks to non-pay to win gem store items for the players... That’s pretty damn cool considering how a ton of other mmos monetize and update their games.

[Klypto.1703]

Maybe playable choya can be p2w it will be awesome but before they do it we need a month long wvw event where everyone is a choya so when you get to buy playable choya it can be p2w. Yes I love this idea so we have it where you explode on death so we get to see which side explodes the most choya.

[Skeletor.9360]

> @"Swagger.1459" said:

> > @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > For the record im not saying that all expansions for all games are necessarily p2w.

> > >

> > > I'm saying that I agree with the op's assertion that these particular expansions have been structured as p2w because of the elite specs and even then only because the elite specs have consistently offered competitive advantages against those who do not have them which i think is inarguably the case.

> >

> > And I'm saying it's not true, because EVERY expansion is structured that way for every MMO and it's never counted before. You're changing the narrative by taking this out of context.

> >

> > If WoW gives you an advantage for having an expansion for 12 years and no one is saying WOW is pay to win, then why is suddenly this game pay to win, when it's doing what MMOs have been doing from the beginning. We never even had the term P2W until free to play MMOs started coming out and doing something different. That something different was selling power, alone, by itself, in the cash shop.

> >

> > We all expected to have to buy expansions to keep current and stay with the game. That was a normal, expected part of MMOs, so no one counted it. If you're going to start counting it, you have to also say WoW is pay to win. You'd probably have to say every MMO is pay to win. And once you do that, I'm asking again, what value does the term have.

> >

> > Keep in mind the term was already defined back then. If you want to change the definition you need a different term, that's all. If you want to say that you need to buy expansions to be current in an MMO and be as powerful as people who have the expansion, well that's true of all expansions.

>

> Exactly...

>

> And some context for those that don’t know...

>

> World of Warcraft was released November 23, 2004.

>

> The Burning Crusade was released on January 16, 2007.

>

> Wrath of the Lich King was released on November 13, 2008.

>

> Cataclysm was released on December 7, 2010.

>

> Mists of Pandaria was released on September 25, 2012.

>

> Warlords of Draenor was released on November 13, 2014.

>

> Legion was released on August 30, 2016.

>

> Battle for Azeroth was released on August 14, 2018.

>

> World of Warcraft max level was 60 on release. Battle for Azeroth max level is now 110.

>

> You had to buy expansions to gain access to increased levels, better gear, new races, new classes, new content, new zones... and a ton more... All while having to pay a monthly fee regardless of what expansion you had...

>

> ...Long story short for the “pay to win” crew... Spend $30 every couple years to update your game to support a fair and good game company... Let your suggestion stand alone without the labels that paint xpac updates as some unethical cash grab practice.

 

Sorry but no...you have made an invalid argument.

See as a WvW player that plays almost all of his time on the middle map. - There was no expansion at all. Few slight map alterations, but nothing close to an expansion. Really just design/bug fixes.

 

Now to use your analogy of WoW.

Say I PVP'ed on WoW just like I do with GW2 and locked my pvp toon to 25 or whatever that magic level is.

I twink out my character and buy stuff off the AH to do so.

None of the expansions you mention would DOWN grade my character because I have access to all the same character skills as somebody who purchased all the expansion packs. In fact friends could give me the very best level 25 gear.

 

So thank you very much for proving my point. I have no option like that in GW2. WoW is not pay to win BTW as I just proved. GW2is totally P2W because you have no alternatives. Sorry but themz the facts. You don't like it encourage the GW2 team to make changes. My suggestion is to use desert maps as expansion maps and other maps as "classic". Then the maps which have had NO expansion on them are as they were and all is even expansion or not.

 

BTW: Had a fantastic night with my ranger - I'm so awesome! No deaths. A good 5 stomps and maybe 50 downs and finished at range for a bag.

 

Some peoples hopes of me getting rolled are terribly unfulfilled! lol

[Vayne.8563]

> @"Skeletor.9360" said:

> > @"Swagger.1459" said:

> > > @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > > > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > > For the record im not saying that all expansions for all games are necessarily p2w.

> > > >

> > > > I'm saying that I agree with the op's assertion that these particular expansions have been structured as p2w because of the elite specs and even then only because the elite specs have consistently offered competitive advantages against those who do not have them which i think is inarguably the case.

> > >

> > > And I'm saying it's not true, because EVERY expansion is structured that way for every MMO and it's never counted before. You're changing the narrative by taking this out of context.

> > >

> > > If WoW gives you an advantage for having an expansion for 12 years and no one is saying WOW is pay to win, then why is suddenly this game pay to win, when it's doing what MMOs have been doing from the beginning. We never even had the term P2W until free to play MMOs started coming out and doing something different. That something different was selling power, alone, by itself, in the cash shop.

> > >

> > > We all expected to have to buy expansions to keep current and stay with the game. That was a normal, expected part of MMOs, so no one counted it. If you're going to start counting it, you have to also say WoW is pay to win. You'd probably have to say every MMO is pay to win. And once you do that, I'm asking again, what value does the term have.

> > >

> > > Keep in mind the term was already defined back then. If you want to change the definition you need a different term, that's all. If you want to say that you need to buy expansions to be current in an MMO and be as powerful as people who have the expansion, well that's true of all expansions.

> >

> > Exactly...

> >

> > And some context for those that don’t know...

> >

> > World of Warcraft was released November 23, 2004.

> >

> > The Burning Crusade was released on January 16, 2007.

> >

> > Wrath of the Lich King was released on November 13, 2008.

> >

> > Cataclysm was released on December 7, 2010.

> >

> > Mists of Pandaria was released on September 25, 2012.

> >

> > Warlords of Draenor was released on November 13, 2014.

> >

> > Legion was released on August 30, 2016.

> >

> > Battle for Azeroth was released on August 14, 2018.

> >

> > World of Warcraft max level was 60 on release. Battle for Azeroth max level is now 110.

> >

> > You had to buy expansions to gain access to increased levels, better gear, new races, new classes, new content, new zones... and a ton more... All while having to pay a monthly fee regardless of what expansion you had...

> >

> > ...Long story short for the “pay to win” crew... Spend $30 every couple years to update your game to support a fair and good game company... Let your suggestion stand alone without the labels that paint xpac updates as some unethical cash grab practice.

>

> Sorry but no...you have made an invalid argument.

> See as a WvW player that plays almost all of his time on the middle map. - There was no expansion at all. Few slight map alterations, but nothing close to an expansion. Really just design/bug fixes.

>

> Now to use your analogy of WoW.

> Say I PVP'ed on WoW just like I do with GW2 and locked my pvp toon to 25 or whatever that magic level is.

> I twink out my character and buy stuff off the AH to do so.

> None of the expansions you mention would DOWN grade my character because I have access to all the same character skills as somebody who purchased all the expansion packs. In fact friends could give me the very best level 25 gear.

>

> So thank you very much for proving my point. I have no option like that in GW2. WoW is not pay to win BTW as I just proved. GW2is totally P2W because you have no alternatives. Sorry but themz the facts. You don't like it encourage the GW2 team to make changes. My suggestion is to use desert maps as expansion maps and other maps as "classic". Then the maps which have had NO expansion on them are as they were and all is even expansion or not.

>

> BTW: Had a fantastic night with my ranger - I'm so awesome! No deaths. A good 5 stomps and maybe 50 downs and finished at range for a bag.

>

> Some peoples hopes of me getting rolled are terribly unfulfilled! lol

 

He didn't prove your point since WOW has maps that have open world PvP in them, and on PvP servers, you're at a disadvantage if you're lower level. You're just ignoring anything in the game or any argument that doesn't support your cause.

[Chaba.5410]

> @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > @"Skeletor.9360" said:

> > > @"Swagger.1459" said:

> > > > @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > > > > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > > > For the record im not saying that all expansions for all games are necessarily p2w.

> > > > >

> > > > > I'm saying that I agree with the op's assertion that these particular expansions have been structured as p2w because of the elite specs and even then only because the elite specs have consistently offered competitive advantages against those who do not have them which i think is inarguably the case.

> > > >

> > > > And I'm saying it's not true, because EVERY expansion is structured that way for every MMO and it's never counted before. You're changing the narrative by taking this out of context.

> > > >

> > > > If WoW gives you an advantage for having an expansion for 12 years and no one is saying WOW is pay to win, then why is suddenly this game pay to win, when it's doing what MMOs have been doing from the beginning. We never even had the term P2W until free to play MMOs started coming out and doing something different. That something different was selling power, alone, by itself, in the cash shop.

> > > >

> > > > We all expected to have to buy expansions to keep current and stay with the game. That was a normal, expected part of MMOs, so no one counted it. If you're going to start counting it, you have to also say WoW is pay to win. You'd probably have to say every MMO is pay to win. And once you do that, I'm asking again, what value does the term have.

> > > >

> > > > Keep in mind the term was already defined back then. If you want to change the definition you need a different term, that's all. If you want to say that you need to buy expansions to be current in an MMO and be as powerful as people who have the expansion, well that's true of all expansions.

> > >

> > > Exactly...

> > >

> > > And some context for those that don’t know...

> > >

> > > World of Warcraft was released November 23, 2004.

> > >

> > > The Burning Crusade was released on January 16, 2007.

> > >

> > > Wrath of the Lich King was released on November 13, 2008.

> > >

> > > Cataclysm was released on December 7, 2010.

> > >

> > > Mists of Pandaria was released on September 25, 2012.

> > >

> > > Warlords of Draenor was released on November 13, 2014.

> > >

> > > Legion was released on August 30, 2016.

> > >

> > > Battle for Azeroth was released on August 14, 2018.

> > >

> > > World of Warcraft max level was 60 on release. Battle for Azeroth max level is now 110.

> > >

> > > You had to buy expansions to gain access to increased levels, better gear, new races, new classes, new content, new zones... and a ton more... All while having to pay a monthly fee regardless of what expansion you had...

> > >

> > > ...Long story short for the “pay to win” crew... Spend $30 every couple years to update your game to support a fair and good game company... Let your suggestion stand alone without the labels that paint xpac updates as some unethical cash grab practice.

> >

> > Sorry but no...you have made an invalid argument.

> > See as a WvW player that plays almost all of his time on the middle map. - There was no expansion at all. Few slight map alterations, but nothing close to an expansion. Really just design/bug fixes.

> >

> > Now to use your analogy of WoW.

> > Say I PVP'ed on WoW just like I do with GW2 and locked my pvp toon to 25 or whatever that magic level is.

> > I twink out my character and buy stuff off the AH to do so.

> > None of the expansions you mention would DOWN grade my character because I have access to all the same character skills as somebody who purchased all the expansion packs. In fact friends could give me the very best level 25 gear.

> >

> > So thank you very much for proving my point. I have no option like that in GW2. WoW is not pay to win BTW as I just proved. GW2is totally P2W because you have no alternatives. Sorry but themz the facts. You don't like it encourage the GW2 team to make changes. My suggestion is to use desert maps as expansion maps and other maps as "classic". Then the maps which have had NO expansion on them are as they were and all is even expansion or not.

> >

> > BTW: Had a fantastic night with my ranger - I'm so awesome! No deaths. A good 5 stomps and maybe 50 downs and finished at range for a bag.

> >

> > Some peoples hopes of me getting rolled are terribly unfulfilled! lol

>

> He didn't prove your point since WOW has maps that have open world PvP in them, and on PvP servers, you're at a disadvantage if you're lower level. You're just ignoring anything in the game or any argument that doesn't support your cause.

 

Yea, like it was already explained why he wasn't downgraded, but he'll continue to say it.

 

- You can complete all the old content without needing to upgrade: not a downgrade.

- Free skill balance patches that don't need to be paid for allow for some core non-expansion builds to compete against expansion specs.

[Sovereign.1093]

wow's pve and pvp servers has been merged fyi. you only need to turn on pvp.

[phs.6089]

> @"Skeletor.9360" said:

> > @"Swagger.1459" said:

> > > @"Vayne.8563" said:

> > > > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > > > For the record im not saying that all expansions for all games are necessarily p2w.

> > > >

> > > > I'm saying that I agree with the op's assertion that these particular expansions have been structured as p2w because of the elite specs and even then only because the elite specs have consistently offered competitive advantages against those who do not have them which i think is inarguably the case.

> > >

> > > And I'm saying it's not true, because EVERY expansion is structured that way for every MMO and it's never counted before. You're changing the narrative by taking this out of context.

> > >

> > > If WoW gives you an advantage for having an expansion for 12 years and no one is saying WOW is pay to win, then why is suddenly this game pay to win, when it's doing what MMOs have been doing from the beginning. We never even had the term P2W until free to play MMOs started coming out and doing something different. That something different was selling power, alone, by itself, in the cash shop.

> > >

> > > We all expected to have to buy expansions to keep current and stay with the game. That was a normal, expected part of MMOs, so no one counted it. If you're going to start counting it, you have to also say WoW is pay to win. You'd probably have to say every MMO is pay to win. And once you do that, I'm asking again, what value does the term have.

> > >

> > > Keep in mind the term was already defined back then. If you want to change the definition you need a different term, that's all. If you want to say that you need to buy expansions to be current in an MMO and be as powerful as people who have the expansion, well that's true of all expansions.

> >

> > Exactly...

> >

> > And some context for those that don’t know...

> >

> > World of Warcraft was released November 23, 2004.

> >

> > The Burning Crusade was released on January 16, 2007.

> >

> > Wrath of the Lich King was released on November 13, 2008.

> >

> > Cataclysm was released on December 7, 2010.

> >

> > Mists of Pandaria was released on September 25, 2012.

> >

> > Warlords of Draenor was released on November 13, 2014.

> >

> > Legion was released on August 30, 2016.

> >

> > Battle for Azeroth was released on August 14, 2018.

> >

> > World of Warcraft max level was 60 on release. Battle for Azeroth max level is now 110.

> >

> > You had to buy expansions to gain access to increased levels, better gear, new races, new classes, new content, new zones... and a ton more... All while having to pay a monthly fee regardless of what expansion you had...

> >

> > ...Long story short for the “pay to win” crew... Spend $30 every couple years to update your game to support a fair and good game company... Let your suggestion stand alone without the labels that paint xpac updates as some unethical cash grab practice.

>

> Sorry but no...you have made an invalid argument.

> See as a WvW player that plays almost all of his time on the middle map. - There was no expansion at all. Few slight map alterations, but nothing close to an expansion. Really just design/bug fixes.

>

> Now to use your analogy of WoW.

> Say I PVP'ed on WoW just like I do with GW2 and locked my pvp toon to 25 or whatever that magic level is.

> I twink out my character and buy stuff off the AH to do so.

> None of the expansions you mention would DOWN grade my character because I have access to all the same character skills as somebody who purchased all the expansion packs. In fact friends could give me the very best level 25 gear.

>

> So thank you very much for proving my point. I have no option like that in GW2. WoW is not pay to win BTW as I just proved. GW2is totally P2W because you have no alternatives. Sorry but themz the facts. You don't like it encourage the GW2 team to make changes. My suggestion is to use desert maps as expansion maps and other maps as "classic". Then the maps which have had NO expansion on them are as they were and all is even expansion or not.

>

> BTW: Had a fantastic night with my ranger - I'm so awesome! No deaths. A good 5 stomps and maybe 50 downs and finished at range for a bag.

>

> Some peoples hopes of me getting rolled are terribly unfulfilled! lol

 

Again. In WoW you pay subs to play, stop ignoring this fact. It is 3rd time i bring up this argument and all you just prefer not to note. You pay-you play. So is it P2W?

[Orakus.1863]

I'm a bit confused with some of the people that say this is pay to win, yet on their comments they keep saying that they kill other HoT/PoF players, or as you can see below you die once an hour etc... Its seems to me that your base class is still viable based on your comments, so by definition not pay to win with POF +HOT.

> @"Skeletor.9360" said:

> So you might get the feeling that I'm frustrated and dying a bunch. Well its true. But what is a bunch for me? Once an hour. Used to be once 4 hours. Why am I dying more now. Well I used to be able to compete against a good player and win most of the time. If I couldn't win I'd at least survive. Now however a ranger has 3 invisibility skills. How many does my base one have? One. Do I hit harder because of less skills? Nope. Do I have more heals? Nope he does? What about movement skills. Again he has way better ones.

>

> Well thats just rangers...NOPE...

>

> thief..same have 2

> mesmer...same have 2

> warriar...same have 1

> Guardian...same have 1

> engineer...same have 2

> elementalist have 1

>

> So you see I'm not some noob that is getting owned and crying. There are REAL problems. Don't believe me or disagree? Roll a base class and post your unedited 4 hours session. It will be a target fest most likely or a structure hugging event.

>

Are there balance issues that moved your death timer from 4 to 1 ? Sure and ANET really needs to work there, I for one do not like to be OS by someone I can not see until I'm down ( deadeye in WvW ). But tell me which perfect game does not have balance issues please I'll go play that.

 

As I red WOW a bunch of times on posts, and level brackets that some people like and you can be competitive with base game still etc. In pandaria MoP you could own level 10 to 70 brackets with a monk and guess what you needed the expansion to play that class , oh and on top of that you needed the expansions coming before mist of pandaria. Same wotlk and brackets from 51+ to max with death knight etc. IMHO GW2 model is as fair as you can get on the industry and far from P2W.

 

This said I think that the problematic is not the P2W aspect but your idea for core only WvW. Which I believe is a good one and I hope they implement something like this, or better yet give us the freedom to do that on our own with alliances maybe? For example three alliances (only core members) can choose to fight each other.

I hope they do this for sure but I will also say that as someone who bought core+HOT+POF, they do not put this on a priority before any new content we can have in game that would bring novelty and not a time travel on the early days. I think most of the players in WvW have the expansions (at least on my server) and most of them do not really care for core WvW maps but something really new for WvW that will revitalize the scene and bring a breath of fresh air to it.

 

At the end of the day I think it will be a business decision, put resources on customers not happy with our last content and try to get them back without Anet earning anything out of their daily work on it. Or keep the people that like PoF , maybe a Cantha Xpack (yes still dreaming for a Kurzick armor in GW2) or any new content on a faster schedule if possible happy. If I was Anet, I would not put any effort in core WvW only and certainly not put any good valuable programmers on it, but who knows maybe they will...

 

 

[XenesisII.1540]

> @"phs.6089" said:

> Eeeerm, you know the game is Buy 2 Play, right?

>

> > @"XenesisII.1540" said:

>

>

> > Wow has level brackets for battleground pvp, or max level for arena, and they also have the new open world pvp mode which has level scaling.

> > A person without an expansion won't be playing into the new expansion levels, with those that do.

> > They also revamp classes from top to bottom which everyone has access to, not just add separate specs that only expansion people have access to.

> > Unlike gw2 which allows everyone free/core/hot/pof to join wvw and spvp in one massive pool of players, which in turn allows the new specs which are usually overtuned, to be dominating, which in turn makes anyone without the latest expansion to call it p2w.

>

> also wow has monthly subscription, so wow is p2w, if you don't pay subs, you can't play and you lose to those that can pay

>

 

You can buy tokens for gold which can be used for subs, I haven't paid for subs the last 6 months I've been in wow and another 4 tokens in my bags. Also that's not pay to win that's pay to play.

[Orakus.1863]

 

 

 

 

> @"XenesisII.1540" said:

> > @"phs.6089" said:

> > Eeeerm, you know the game is Buy 2 Play, right?

> >

> > > @"XenesisII.1540" said:

> >

> >

> > > Wow has level brackets for battleground pvp, or max level for arena, and they also have the new open world pvp mode which has level scaling.

> > > A person without an expansion won't be playing into the new expansion levels, with those that do.

> > > They also revamp classes from top to bottom which everyone has access to, not just add separate specs that only expansion people have access to.

> > > Unlike gw2 which allows everyone free/core/hot/pof to join wvw and spvp in one massive pool of players, which in turn allows the new specs which are usually overtuned, to be dominating, which in turn makes anyone without the latest expansion to call it p2w.

> >

> > also wow has monthly subscription, so wow is p2w, if you don't pay subs, you can't play and you lose to those that can pay

> >

>

> You can buy tokens for gold which can be used for subs, I haven't paid for subs the last 6 months I've been in wow and another 4 tokens in my bags. Also that's not pay to win that's pay to play.

 

As you like wow brackets for their fairness to vanilla (core game owners) , whoever got WOTLK and a DK destroyed brackets who did not have the xpack, same with monk when it came out, so WOW is P2W as well...