War claw? Really? I can't believe this.

[Luna Darkblade.3516]

> @"gebrechen.5643" said:

> 1) It is? You mean "winning" means something in WvW? What does winning mean over being 2nd or 3rd? Your PPK mean as much as PPT - nothing. Where is the competition?

> 2) MOST don't want it? How do you know? Based on repeating kitten posts on this forums? How many WvW players read the forums?

> 3) Again you try to tell "what players want". You don't talk for the majority

>

> I really see a lot of opinions, but not a single fact you base that opinion on. Opinions not based on solid facts are based on feelings and therefore not reasonable.

 

To the first point: Competition to me means that you do it with your own manpower. Like PPk and PPt only with people, tactical thinking, achieving stuff with no help. Sure it's easier with mounts and gliding. But were is the challenge? That is why i play wvw. To have fair 1v1 matches or zerg against zerg. (I know actual situtaion with skills isn't really fair but it's still better than fighting with a mount against someone who is just using normal swiftness)

 

to the second point: Most people who are playing wvw,based on my experience on the servers teamchat :) And i don't think that all wvw players read it, but not every pve nor every pvp player reads the forum..so ye

 

to the third point: I also think that a special reward is nice to have if you manage to have some tower for a long time. And I think it's only his opinion based on teamchat (if he is a wvw player) and not the voice of the majority.

 

PS: Do you really think players would be okay with it if someone posts what they say in teamchat in public? sorry i don't think so. tT's everyones right to have an opinion whether it makes sense to you or not. And the arguments he broughtwere definetly more reasonable than yours.

[AcOpolitico.7568]

> @"Blaeys.3102" said:

> And stuff like this is exactly why Anet doesn't do more for WvW. Anything that even smells like a fun change is jumped on and attacked before we even know anything substantial about it. We do not know how the mounts will behave or where/how precisely they can be used.

>

> And to the OPs idea of a new map - I for one would love that, but I don't expect it to happen after the wave of negativity that came the last time they did exactly that.

>

> I know people love wvw, but if you are closed off to them trying anything new, then nothing will ever change and the game mode will stagnate.

>

> And to Anet - don't knee jerk react to the initial wave of negativity from the same people like you did with the desert borderlands. Give it time - and by all means continue to try new things in the game mode.

 

I have to agree with you in two points.

I like the desert borderlands, the only problem is that this map isn´t that stable. Some people get skilllags or lags on this map -I don´t know why , maybe another code or a wrong implementing.

I didn´t think that gliding was a bad because you don´t have an advantage (except the non bought version aka f2p)

And I am open to new things but I also said when the mounts have been released, "Please don´t put into WvW".

(THIS IS MY OWN OPINION)

[Luna Darkblade.3516]

> @"Blaeys.3102" said:

> And stuff like this is exactly why Anet doesn't do more for WvW. Anything that even smells like a fun change is jumped on and attacked before we even know anything substantial about it. We do not know how the mounts will behave or where/how precisely they can be used.

>

> And to the OPs idea of a new map - I for one would love that, but I don't expect it to happen after the wave of negativity that came the last time they did exactly that.

>

> I know people love wvw, but if you are closed off to them trying anything new, then nothing will ever change and the game mode will stagnate.

>

> And to Anet - don't knee jerk react to the initial wave of negativity from the same people like you did with the desert borderlands. Give it time - and by all means continue to try new things in the game mode.

 

I agree partwise. Desert map is great and gliding is okay how it is now.

New things are okay too, we truly don't know how they will bring it in the wvw. If it is like a tacic it will be fine (Like dragon banner or sth like that). Just the right dose of the mount would be another compromise like the one i had in my first comment (new map where everyone can use it as much as they want to, but not in the old ones)

[Naxos.2503]

Judging from this https://www.mmogames.com/gamenews/guild-wars-2-wvw-mount-warclaw-announced/ it Will upset balance by quite a lot, so I'm iffy about it now.

 

For one, it's Path of Fire only, which arbitrarily locks a lot of potential new WvW players out, which is a bad deal for existing WvW ontop of the balance.

 

Second, it has an attack, a siege and a dodge skill, which I assume will be usable Ontop of Bonds, which makes it far too powerful from the get go, unless you're a Path of Fire player and have the Opportunity to use that yourself.

 

On the good side, it's useable outside of WvW, so that's a relatively positive thing for everyone involved.

 

Overall though, I can understand the uproar from WvW, the only positive they'll get out of it is an increase interest in WvW, but those new players may not necessarily be interested in Staying in it, so it's a gamble at best. On the downside : it creates inequality between Path of Fire users and non-Path of Fire users, more so than glider ever could, because it gives access to a Lot of commodity to players who own it : Mobility, attack, siegeing, dodging, as well as extra HP for clever players. The fact that WvW player grievance are not heard is in my opinion still unfounded : They're working on Something, that much is clear, this is not so cheap cash grab, and has to be seen in the light of the upcoming alliance system, along with potentially more changes. It'll be messy for a while, and may end up a positive change when the whole thing is done. Until then, it's hard to say.

[gebrechen.5643]

> @"AcOpolitico.7568" said:

 

> I see that you have absolutely no plan of WvW.

 

Great start. Try harder next time.

 

[AcOpolitico.7568]

> @"gebrechen.5643" said:

> Great start. Try harder next time.

>

 

I won´t because you can´t neglect any of my arguments.

[TheGrimm.5624]

> @"Gambino.2109" said:

> Man.. all this talk about lag.. Yeah I remember that well when I use to play on a potato..

> Makes me wonder what specs people are running on their comp and what internet services they have.. cauuuuse I'm pretty sure anet can't fix all your lag problems

 

Actually, that's what shocks me at times. I think Anet's bandwidth foot print is small since all weekend long I have to play WvW on a paperclip internet connection that is usually 500 KB up/1 MB down. But I don't run into that much lag in zerg fights compared to others on voice. So yes, quite often it is the computer people are playing on.

 

Now could ANet use less graphics, yes, could people turn theirs down some too, yes. But your right its not a one sided fix.

[gebrechen.5643]

You had none and started with "your arguments are invalid, because you don't wvw". If you think it's competition because you have a guild that does stuff, your level of competition isn't exactly high.

 

You can still have your opinion, but don't sell it to the forums as the "voice of the majority". There is no majority in this.

Ask 10 players what they want for wvw and you will get 10 different answers.

Remember when people wanted GvG spaces?

They got them. 60% were disappointed.

Remember when people wanted a new map?

They got them. 60% were disappointed.

Remember when people wanted better rewards?

They got them. 60% were disappointed.

 

This is your wvw community. They want stuff, but they don't even know what they want and when they get it, they wanted it different.

 

 

[Substance E.4852]

> @"Naxos.2503" said:

> Judging from this https://www.mmogames.com/gamenews/guild-wars-2-wvw-mount-warclaw-announced/ it Will upset balance by quite a lot, so I'm iffy about it now.

>

> For one, it's Path of Fire only, which arbitrarily locks a lot of potential new WvW players out, which is a bad deal for existing WvW ontop of the balance.

>

> Second, it has an attack, a siege and a dodge skill, which I assume will be usable Ontop of Bonds, which makes it far too powerful from the get go, unless you're a Path of Fire player and have the Opportunity to use that yourself.

>

> On the good side, it's useable outside of WvW, so that's a relatively positive thing for everyone involved.

>

> Overall though, I can understand the uproar from WvW, the only positive they'll get out of it is an increase interest in WvW, but those new players may not necessarily be interested in Staying in it, so it's a gamble at best. On the downside : it creates inequality between Path of Fire users and non-Path of Fire users, more so than glider ever could, because it gives access to a Lot of commodity to players who own it : Mobility, attack, siegeing, dodging, as well as extra HP for clever players. The fact that WvW player grievance are not heard is in my opinion still unfounded : They're working on Something, that much is clear, this is not so cheap cash grab, and has to be seen in the light of the upcoming alliance system, along with potentially more changes. It'll be messy for a while, and may end up a positive change when the whole thing is done. Until then, it's hard to say.

 

1. No shit it's PoF exclusive. It's a mount. You can't glide in WvW without HoT. Also, pretty much any "new player" will have access because you can't buy the game without getting PoF. This argument won't hold water until the next xpack comes out, if there ever is another one.

 

2. It will also have basic mount HP and armor which means it will be one shotted by the average longbow ranger. Also literally any of this can be changed should it prove to be too game breaking. Arrow carts don't have cata range and ungodly damage anymore.

 

I mean, holy hell, do you guys even actually play WvW? Nearly the NUMBER ONE PROBLEM people complain about is getting from point A to point B. Running back to a fight is so obnoxious that people lose stuff avoiding otherwise meaningless death.

 

This solves part of that problem while giving the mode more dimensionality which it desperately needs since people are obviously bored with the format as is.

[DemonSeed.3528]

> @"Substance E.4852" said:

 

> 1. No kitten it's PoF exclusive. It's a mount. You can't glide in WvW without HoT. Also, pretty much any "new player" will have access because you can't buy the game without getting PoF. This argument won't hold water until the next xpack comes out, if there ever is another one.

>

 

You can actually buy Core or HoT on its own without PoF.

[AcOpolitico.7568]

> @"gebrechen.5643" said:

> You had none and started with "your arguments are invalid, because you don't wvw". If you think it's competition because you have a guild that does stuff, your level of competition isn't exactly high.

>

> You can still have your opinion, but don't sell it to the forums as the "voice of the majority". There is no majority in this.

> Ask 10 players what they want for wvw and you will get 10 different answers.

> Remember when people wanted GvG spaces?

> They got them. 60% were disappointed.

> Remember when people wanted a new map?

> They got them. 60% were disappointed.

> Remember when people wanted better rewards?

> They got them. 60% were disappointed._

>

> This is your wvw community. They want stuff, but they don't even know what they want and when they get it, they wanted it different.

>

>

 

1.) Tell me where is a OFFICIAL GvG space? I know some of the GvG-Guilds and they were happy about the little place in EotM

2.) I can remember that most of the people were disappointed because the map is buggy - so, yes, they were disappointed but the anouncement wasn´t the problem

3.) Do you mean the reward tracks? this isn´t what I mean....

But it´s okey, it is your opinion. And if you mean, I don´t know WvW then this is your opinion. Like I told you before you don´t have any plan of WvW/GvG, etc. and this is MY opinion.

 

So I repeat myself, I will look into it very critically. Maybe it´s a good thing, maybe not. I think it´s not. So till Friday´s Twitch stream.

[ArchonWing.9480]

> @"Naxos.2503" said:

 

> For one, it's Path of Fire only, which arbitrarily locks a lot of potential new WvW players out, which is a bad deal for existing WvW ontop of the balance.

 

That is certainly an issue, but I suppose one shouldn't expect full support without the latest version of the game. Not having PoF specs tends to lock one out of the meta except for a few builds anyways.

 

On the other hand, races do let you rent a mount though; wonder if they could do something like that here.

 

 

[devious.4605]

> @"Naxos.2503" said:

> Need more info regarding that mount before crying wolf.

>

> Does everyone, without exception, and regardless of expansion packs get access to it ? (If no, then rage on.)

>

According to multiple media sources, it does require POF.

Pretty much saw the cash grab coming after poor 4th quarter earnings report.

[Blastoise.6273]

It's true that there are more people than just big groups "own" or "speak" for the game mode. However, people in or following these large types of guilds do make up a big portion of WvW players. My understanding is that people come into WvW with enthusiasm or tolerating attitude that there will be PvP. With that said, when redesigning/updating WvW, it seems to only be things for the PvE players enjoyment. While this is my own assumption, I am under the impression that that majority of the people who enter WvW are doing so with the larger intent to PvP, not fight mobs.....or in this new update ride on one that can also break a door. I don't expect ANET to just pool all their resources into satisfying the PvP enthusiastic WvW guilds. That's just bad business. I can understand that. However, I will say what I personally see has been an issue in as far as the logic and approach to WvW updates rather than just satisfying one group.

 

1. The term "World vs World (WvW)" gave me the impression that it all about massive PvP. If it was about PvE, then I would just call it "World vs Environment (WvE)." I know, I know, semantics but you can see how that could cause confusion as the updates that have been made (inclusive of mounts) does not follow the path of the inherent phrase of WvW. I know people could argue that capping objectives is part of the WvW environment. I'm actually ok with it that part. I just personally want to see more PvP focused scenarios get some attention rather than only tools or bells and whistles that don't do anything for the PvP side. These updates mostly help the side of breaking doors that are better suited for PvE people. It doesn't do anything for the PvP stuff.

2. Now don't get me wrong, I don't mind small bells and whistles here and there, but only as an added feature. I would prefer it isn't passed off as the only/main thing that they ever update on. They dress it up as this massive feature that everyone will get excited for. I would've welcomed this warclaw feature we already had those PvP scenarios in place. I'm sure the PvE enthusiastic people would appreciate it. Not sure about the PvP enthusiastic people though. I remember joking with some friends about mounts coming to WvW a year ago. We all laughed at how little we cared if that actually came to pass. We only cared if they made an update that actually gave us an interesting spin on PvP scenarios.

3. Every update I've seen lately has done nothing to foster PvP scenarios. The only thing remotely close to that are balance patches. New siege weapons, tactivators, and even the KDR do nothing for PvP experiences. I'm mean, I guess that stuff is cool, but it isn't a PvP thing. KDR simply shows a measurement of PvP activity, but it really didn't do anything for the PvP aspect of WvW. Now that mounts are here are the new thing, it's just another mobile siege weapon to me. It still doesn't prioritize the PvP aspect of WvW.

 

At this rate, it feels like WvW will become a game mode where you see enemy worlds....but you don't hurt each other. The only way to hurt each other is getting on defensive siege. It'd just become a PvE game mode with the added "race" feature. That's honestly what it feels like to me. Anything that fosters PvP seems to be a low priority to the ANET team. I can understand if whatever research the ANET claims to indicate that there isn't enough people in WvW that only wants a massive PvP situation. That could make sense to make it a low priority. But if that were the case, what's the point of having an environment built around the inherent idea of massive PvP? Might as well make it all PvE.

 

Now, I'm not the type to say all of this without at least some kind of suggested solution. I know this may have a lot of flaws or opposing views with this but it was a thought in an effort to follow the inherent assumption of PvP or "WvW" side instead of the "WvE" side of things. An example of what I thought of before:

_When RBL was on that large revamp, they took Oasis from something very PvE (fighting mobs) to the same old thing in the Alpine BLs with spreading out and holding the points at all at once on a timer. So instead of doing that, I wondered what if they took that middle area and turned it into a large 3 way death pit every hour or something. Last server standing wins the bloodlust for the next round. At least this way, fights can ensue and people can actually fight each other instead of playing with tools that break doors._

 

If you're wondering why I'm focusing so much on the PvP scenarios of this game mode, it's because of that 1st reason: WvW inherently suggests massive PvP. I can't speak for the community of PvP enthusiastic people. This is just how i personally would like to see the path for WvW. If the game mode continues to do little to no moves to foster a higher PvP interest, there's no reason I wouldn't look into and/or trying other games....and I have been. I do enjoy Gw2 and hope it does change how I want to see it. But alas, I am only person.

[RubberDougie.2750]

> @"Naxos.2503" said:

 

> For one, it's Path of Fire only, which arbitrarily locks a lot of potential new WvW players out, which is a bad deal for existing WvW ontop of the balance.

 

And? What is viable for compositions that isn't PoF besides Chrono, Scrapper, and possibly Tempest?

 

[Pwent.2639]

> @"RubberDougie.2750" said:

> > @"Naxos.2503" said:

>

> > For one, it's Path of Fire only, which arbitrarily locks a lot of potential new WvW players out, which is a bad deal for existing WvW ontop of the balance.

>

> And? What is viable for compositions that isn't PoF besides Chrono, Scrapper, and possibly Tempest?

>

 

Reaper is still really good in small group, nothing takes out boonbunkers and cleaves like it.

Forgot herald as well.

[Jasper Defthand.3018]

Am I the only one around here looking forward to the wvw mount? No longer having to rely on swiftness uptime to travel across the map to objectives hastily seems pretty good, and the rope siege ability looks cool.

[Ancient Prophet.4205]

> @"gebrechen.5643" said:

> You had none and started with "your arguments are invalid, because you don't wvw". If you think it's competition because you have a guild that does stuff, your level of competition isn't exactly high.

>

> You can still have your opinion, but don't sell it to the forums as the "voice of the majority". There is no majority in this.

> Ask 10 players what they want for wvw and you will get 10 different answers.

> Remember when people wanted GvG spaces?

> They got them. 60% were disappointed.

> Remember when people wanted a new map?

> They got them. 60% were disappointed.

> Remember when people wanted better rewards?

> They got them. 60% were disappointed.

>

> This is your wvw community. They want stuff, but they don't even know what they want and when they get it, they wanted it different.

>

>

 

IF percentages have anything to go by due to your in depth evaluation of players, can you explain this like/dislike ratio and let me know what you think?

[Mexi.2764]

I honestly believe we need a polling system where the anet team asks us what we want and at the end of the day we need our voices heard not sensored.

 

[Zhaid Zhem.6508]

2000 gems in pve.

[ArchonWing.9480]

> @"gebrechen.5643" said:

 

> This is your wvw community. They want stuff, but they don't even know what they want and when they get it, they wanted it different.

 

That is also a problem.

 

So many people care about PPT and coverage wars, and look what happened, lol.

[ShinigamiPL.4086]

> @"Substance E.4852" said:

 

> I mean, holy hell, do you guys even actually play WvW? Nearly the NUMBER ONE PROBLEM people complain about is getting from point A to point B. Running back to a fight is so obnoxious that people lose stuff avoiding otherwise meaningless death.

>

> This solves part of that problem while giving the mode more dimensionality which it desperately needs since people are obviously bored with the format as is.

 

Isn't it the whole concept of the game mode? I mean - you can play in zerg groups or u can hunt other players who are not ready to 1 on 1 with someone on roaming build? Like the sole purpose of roamers was to help your zerg by removing the reinforcements? Giving players the ability to move fast is a huge change - i'm really interested how many roaming thiefs will be there after mounts come out. Mounts like this will have huge huge impact on supply policy, cause if i understand the idea correctly - we won't be needing them in many cases. No more protecting the camps, no more resupplying, no more fixing the gates and locking the attackers inside...

 

[MithranArkanere.8957]

> @"AcOpolitico.7568" said:

> Thanks for this Thread.

> EVERYONE should like this!

> Please DON´T give the WvW a mount!!!

>

> I am also thinking about to quit this game!

> Thanks for NOTHING @ ArenaNet

 

It's a little too late for that. Siege golems are already mounts. They just won't show the character riding it like in the beta trailers.

 

In fact, they should fix that. Have the head and shoulders of people riding the golem show inside, like one of Pilaf's machines in Dragon Ball.

[Teon.5168]

> @"gebrechen.5643" said:

> Remember when everyone said "Gliding will kill wvw." It didn't.

> Stop telling everyone the sky is falling, when you have ZERO information. It's stupid.

>

> Let's wait and see what we get.

>

 

I don't ever recall lots of wvw'ers saying that gliding would kill wvw. First off, it is limited to the areas that your side controls. Secondly, there are not going to be huge zergs battling each other with said gliders. However, there will be huge zergs battling each other with mounts, and this will cause more graphics load, which will cause more lag, even on the top end machines. Why Anet thought this would be a good idea without first completely revamping the graphics engine is beyond me.

 

But you are right with your last statement. Let's wait and see what happens.

[Substance E.4852]

> @"ShinigamiPL.4086" said:

> > @"Substance E.4852" said:

>

> > I mean, holy hell, do you guys even actually play WvW? Nearly the NUMBER ONE PROBLEM people complain about is getting from point A to point B. Running back to a fight is so obnoxious that people lose stuff avoiding otherwise meaningless death.

> >

> > This solves part of that problem while giving the mode more dimensionality which it desperately needs since people are obviously bored with the format as is.

>

> Isn't it the whole concept of the game mode? I mean - you can play in zerg groups or u can hunt other players who are not ready to 1 on 1 with someone on roaming build? Like the sole purpose of roamers was to help your zerg by removing the reinforcements? Giving players the ability to move fast is a huge change - i'm really interested how many roaming thiefs will be there after mounts come out. Mounts like this will have huge huge impact on supply policy, cause if i understand the idea correctly - we won't be needing them in many cases. No more protecting the camps, no more resupplying, no more fixing the gates and locking the attackers inside...

>

 

You're argument is flawed on the face of it because you assume a world without roaming thieves being giant pains in the ass would be a bad thing.

 

You're also making incredibly presumptuous statements about mechanics that we haven't even tried yet. Hell, we don't even know if Anet isn't also packaging in other changes to WvW along with this.

 

People need to stop acting like they just announced permanent "Golem Rush" mode until we can actually play around with the thing.