370 replies to this topic

[Daesu]

Westwater, on 19 December 2012 - 07:15 PM, said:

The only thing your suggestion would do is get less people into WvW.  That post on the last page was a perfect example.  Someone who wasn't really interested in PvP, but because they had a reason to give WvW a shot, they found out that they really enjoyed it.
Now I'm sure you're going to keep preaching this garbage about how Anet is FORCING you to do it, but no, they're not.  Forcing someone to do something would be negative reinforcement.  "You have to go out here and fight people or you won't be able to play anything else."  THAT is forcing.  What Anet is doing is positive reinforcement.  "Hey if you go give this side of the game a shot, you'll get some nice stuff and maybe even have a good time."  They are rewarding you for effort and at the very least trying out WvW.  If you're such a gigantic carebear that you refuse to even attempt any form of pvp whatsoever, why in God's name are you playing a game that is 2/3rds PvP?

If you consider running naked solo out there to do vistas and pois as WvW, sure.  Is that really your idea of what WvW is?  Where people would just run in random directions towards their favorite pois, with no team strategies, no carrying supplies, etc.  Do you really think these players actually contribute to make WvW a better experience for everyone?

Lordkrall, on 19 December 2012 - 07:24 PM, said:

And, as stated before, the game will not be online forever either, so why are we even playing? Sometime in the future the servers WILL shut down, so why spend time on the game?

We can't base things around what might not happen for months. It is free as of now, so there is no problem.

The "fix" when they decide to charge for transfer is to simply play the game and help your server. Simple as that.

So you are saying because the server will shut down one day, therefore server transfer is a "proper fix"?  That is your uber argument against the suggestion?  Right...

I am helping my server alright, I am helping them to lose by running around naked because the only reason I am there is for the pois and stuff.  Get real, this game is designed so that one person cannot overturn the entire WvW result, if my server is losing then it is time for a server transfer (if it is still free).

Edited by Daesu, 19 December 2012 - 07:48 PM.

[Humfly]

Westwater, on 19 December 2012 - 07:15 PM, said:

That post on the last page was a perfect example.  Someone who wasn't really interested in PvP, but because they had a reason to give WvW a shot, they found out that they really enjoyed it.

Entering WvW areas with the aim of obtaining waypoints, POIs, and vistas is not 'giving it a shot'. I didn't give it any kind of shot and that was at the time when people actually wanting to WvW were queuing for hours. I was a burden on my 'world' and the ones I transfered to.

Likewise entering WvW with the aim of getting 50 invader kills and minimum armor repair costs for monthly achievements is not giving it a shot. It involved hanging around at the back of the zerg or behind an arrow cart hoping the structure got attacked.

Both experiences soured my attitude towards WvW. They left me with a deep hatred of the place which so far has inhibited me from giving it a shot.

[Feathermoore]

Daesu, on 19 December 2012 - 07:08 PM, said:

The server transfer was changed to 1 week (from 24hrs) back in Nov 1, only about 2 months after the game was released.  If you take another 2 months (i.e. Jan 1st), the conditions for server transfer is likely to change again.  We do not know if it would still be free then, but we know that the direction of the game is to make it harder for you to transfer servers as time goes on.  So as I have said, server transfer is not going to be a feasible solution in the future, so how can it be a "proper fix" to the game?

My suggestion would make the achievements better by accommodating more players.

The change with the 24 to 1 week switch was because it was destroying WvW. People were hopping daily based off of the standings and it was detrimental to the gameplay. They switched it to a week at the player's request. There is nothing to indicate that it will change in 2 months.

In fact, the free server switching won't leave until we have guesting. And even then, it will probably go on for a couple weeks after that. God knows when we are going to finally get guesting.

[Daesu]

Feathermoore, on 19 December 2012 - 07:57 PM, said:

The change with the 24 to 1 week switch was because it was destroying WvW. People were hopping daily based off of the standings and it was detrimental to the gameplay. They switched it to a week at the player's request. There is nothing to indicate that it will change in 2 months.

In fact, the free server switching won't leave until we have guesting. And even then, it will probably go on for a couple weeks after that. God knows when we are going to finally get guesting.

And you wonder why too many people are switching servers instead of helping their losing team in WvW, considering most of the suggestions here involve switching servers to circumvent the need to go to WvW for world completion.  One thing we know for sure is that ArenaNet will make it harder to change servers with time.

Edited by Daesu, 19 December 2012 - 08:03 PM.

[Feathermoore]

Daesu, on 19 December 2012 - 08:00 PM, said:

And you wonder why too many people are switching servers instead of helping their losing team in WvW, considering most of the suggestions here involve switching servers to circumvent the need to go to WvW for world completion.  One thing we know for sure is that ArenaNet will make it harder to change servers with time.

Coming from a person who has switched servers to mimic the guesting feature, switching from a losing to a winning server is currently incredibly hard. It took me 2 weeks to get back onto my original server. I learned my lesson.

The switching from losing to winning has largely balanced out. The issue was only prevalent with the ability to switch daily. So what you are alluding to just isn't happening. Most of the "suggestions" here are explaining why there is no need for a fix. The suggestion of switching servers is just a way to exploit a current leniency in order to get something easier than you would have to otherwise.

[The_Tree_Branch]

Daesu, on 19 December 2012 - 06:53 PM, said:

So my original question was that server transfer is not a proper fix, it is only a temporary workaround, and would cost 1200 gems/transfer soon.  Which part of your reply actually addressed what I just said?  You clicked on reply to my post without addressing any part of it.

My suggestion of having 2 titles (1 for PvE-only and 1 for PvP-only) would have been a proper fix.  PvE-only/PvP-only people can go for either title and people who like both can go for both titles.  That would even accommodate more players than the current system.

I'm honestly fine with having 2 tracks, PvE and PvP if the star was achieved when you did both. Somehow I have a feeling you would boohoo over that also.

[Daesu]

Feathermoore, on 19 December 2012 - 08:16 PM, said:

Coming from a person who has switched servers to mimic the guesting feature, switching from a losing to a winning server is currently incredibly hard. It took me 2 weeks to get back onto my original server. I learned my lesson.

The switching from losing to winning has largely balanced out. The issue was only prevalent with the ability to switch daily. So what you are alluding to just isn't happening. Most of the "suggestions" here are explaining why there is no need for a fix. The suggestion of switching servers is just a way to exploit a current leniency in order to get something easier than you would have to otherwise.

Guesting is a little different, guesting doesn't allow you to enter WvW, you are still tied to your home server.  Switching server would never be a permanent fix, especially when ArenaNet starts charging for server transfers.  Hard though it maybe to switch servers now, I still did it recently and I know other people are still doing it to circumvent the WvW requirement for world completion.  It would be even worse to wait for a weak WvW server to ever win.

Switching is not going to be feasible when they start charging for server transfer then a proper fix would be even more necessary.  Try as you may, you as a single player is not going to transform your WvW server from a losing to a winning team.  And if your team is losing all the time, it is going to be very hard for you to complete your world achievement since some of the pois/vistas are in enemy keeps.  This is why I suggested having 2 titles instead of 1.

Edited by Daesu, 19 December 2012 - 11:29 PM.

[ExplosivePinata]

Feathermoore, on 19 December 2012 - 05:36 PM, said:

Out of curiosity (and so it doesn't just look like I am making up examples to support my own statements), how likely were you to have tried WvW otherwise? Was it something you truly dreaded? Or just something you were just not interested in and din't plan on doing.

I ask because you seem to be an example of why the design is the way it is. You enjoyed yourself in something you felt you would not enjoy, or at least this is how I understand it. Do you still play WvW? Did you play beyond the requirement for the title?

Interesting post, I can only reply from my irrelevant experience.

I used to play UT2004 in offline mode, I decided one day by my own volition to play Invasion online and met some of the best online people I have met to date and became addicted to that game as a result.  It was never a requirement there, just a choice I wish I'd made earlier.

Edited by ExplosivePinata, 20 December 2012 - 03:31 AM.

[Concepcion30]

What would be the solution to this though? I would love a coupon WvW day, where players who don't get off on killing other players can just finish their map completion. It could be considered a 24 hour cease fire or something? Well anyways, I have been 93% world completion for months because of this issue as well.

The one time I did venture in to get some capping done, I was heading to a point of interest and was immediately jumped upon by a thief and a warrior and although I tried to run away and got pretty far, they kept chasing me until they killed me. I was completely perturbed that I instantly logged out of the game and went to do something else.  I just wanted one character complete, it's not like I wanted to make the weapons or anything, but I may end up staying right where I am.

[pumpkin pie]

if ArenaNet were to do something about this "world completion" thing, then they are going to have hell from players! because everyone would want something that they cannot do or don't like to do changed.

I am not name calling or anything, but if one can't meet a challenge post by the game, how can you also want the rewards?  

I like to make a comparison,  I cannot jump fast enough or maybe it was my internet connection that made me unable to complete the Special Event jump puzzles. without those 2 , i won't have a completed 100% done hero achievement. It is because i am NOT GOOD AT JUMPING. Do i ask for this to be remedied? No.  

Its a challenge of the game! if you can't meet it, your solution is to have it removed?

[4arsie4]

Your basic premise is already wrong. If World Completion requires you to WvW, then it is obviously not solely a PvE achievement. It is a mix of PvE and WvW achievement.

[Craywulf]

Does ArenaNet actually use the words "World Completion"? And is there any specific wording that indicates it's exclusively a PvE feature?

[Trei]

Humfly, on 19 December 2012 - 07:49 PM, said:

Entering WvW areas with the aim of obtaining waypoints, POIs, and vistas is not 'giving it a shot'. I didn't give it any kind of shot and that was at the time when people actually wanting to WvW were queuing for hours. I was a burden on my 'world' and the ones I transfered to.

Likewise entering WvW with the aim of getting 50 invader kills and minimum armor repair costs for monthly achievements is not giving it a shot. It involved hanging around at the back of the zerg or behind an arrow cart hoping the structure got attacked.

Both experiences soured my attitude towards WvW. They left me with a deep hatred of the place which so far has inhibited me from giving it a shot.

Well, that's... too bad, I guess.

Nevertheless, the achievement served its purpose; it got you into the zone.
Everything else you choose to do there is entirely up to you.

So thanks for the +1 on the point of no actual PvP being forced upon players for the achievement.

Yes, you may have been a burden to your server though, that much is true.
However, you chose to be.

Don't blame the consequences of your own personal choices and wants on the achievement.

Edited by Trei, 20 December 2012 - 06:45 AM.

[iLag]

This thread is so stupid yet so full. Wow I only play sPvP and WvW I'm forced to do PvE for world completion? WTF?

[Daesu]

Trei, on 20 December 2012 - 06:44 AM, said:

Well, that's... too bad, I guess.

Nevertheless, the achievement served its purpose; it got you into the zone.
Everything else you choose to do there is entirely up to you.

So thanks for the +1 on the point of no actual PvP being forced upon players for the achievement.

Yes, you may have been a burden to your server though, that much is true.
However, you chose to be.

Don't blame the consequences of your own personal choices and wants on the achievement.

PvP is forced in the sense that when you are traveling in the WvW map, you are inevitably forced into combat when attacked.  One way out for PvE players who wish to protest against this is to run naked and simply allow yourself to be killed instead of PvPing.  This seems like a gapping WvW loophole to grant people from another server, perhaps your friends?, unlimited free loot and badges of honor.

Even if you do decide to fight back, which means you are doing pvp, you are just doing this on the premise of keeping yourself alive, not necessarily working with the rest of your team on their current strategy.  You are still not working as a team and not making anyone's WvW experience any better.

Edited by Daesu, 20 December 2012 - 07:10 AM.

[I'm Squirrel]

iLag, on 20 December 2012 - 06:59 AM, said:

This thread is so stupid yet so full. Wow I only play sPvP and WvW I'm forced to do PvE for world completion? WTF?

Uh... no. That's completely irrelevant to the OP's thread... and the game itself.

[Lordkrall]

Daesu, on 19 December 2012 - 10:31 PM, said:

Guesting is a little different, guesting doesn't allow you to enter WvW, you are still tied to your home server.  Switching server would never be a permanent fix, especially when ArenaNet starts charging for server transfers.  Hard though it maybe to switch servers now, I still did it recently and I know other people are still doing it to circumvent the WvW requirement for world completion.  It would be even worse to wait for a weak WvW server to ever win.

Switching is not going to be feasible when they start charging for server transfer then a proper fix would be even more necessary.  Try as you may, you as a single player is not going to transform your WvW server from a losing to a winning team.  And if your team is losing all the time, it is going to be very hard for you to complete your world achievement since some of the pois/vistas are in enemy keeps.  This is why I suggested having 2 titles instead of 1.

But that is just the thing.
You fix things because they are broken.
World completion is not broken, so therefore it don't need a fix.

Simple as that.

A single player can turn the tide in WvW. It is called being a Commander.

And you still keep talking about something that is not yet in the game nor do we have ANY indications that it will happen soon. We can't run around thinking about and basing arguments around stuff that will happen at some point in the future.

[Daesu]

Lordkrall, on 20 December 2012 - 07:29 AM, said:

But that is just the thing.
You fix things because they are broken.
World completion is not broken, so therefore it don't need a fix.

Simple as that.

A single player can turn the tide in WvW. It is called being a Commander.

And you still keep talking about something that is not yet in the game nor do we have ANY indications that it will happen soon. We can't run around thinking about and basing arguments around stuff that will happen at some point in the future.

I don't think even a Commander can turn the tide of battle for a server that has been losing perpetually.  Furthermore, you need to waste 100g in order to be a Commander, not many people has that much gold to waste.

Since you know that server transfer would not be free at some point in the future, how can you position it as a proper fix?  It is a workaround at best.  It would only get harder to transfer server as time goes by, that is a confirmed fact from ArenaNet.

World Completion is broken because it forces PvP onto people who may not be interested in PvP and PvE onto people who may not be interested in PvE.

Edited by Daesu, 20 December 2012 - 07:49 AM.

[Lordkrall]

Daesu, on 20 December 2012 - 07:46 AM, said:

I don't think even a Commander can turn the tide of battle for a server that has been losing perpetually.  Furthermore, you need to waste 100g in order to be a Commander, not many people has that much gold to waste.

Since you know that server transfer would not be free at some point in the future, how can you position it as a proper fix?  It is a workaround at best.  It would only get harder to transfer server as time goes by, that is a confirmed fact from ArenaNet.

World Completion is broken because it forces PvP onto people who may not be interested in PvP and PvE onto people who may not be interested in PvE.

It can, since most servers loses simply because they don't have good leadership.
You don't need a badge in order to be a Commander.
A good leader is a good leader even if he does not spend 100g for a silly badge.


Since I also know that the game will shut down sometime in the future I suppose I should not even bother to play the game at all then?

We live in the present, so use the abilities available at present instead of whine about what might happen six months from now.

They don't need to FIX it since it is not BROKEN. Why do you refuse to accept that?

[Daesu]

Lordkrall, on 20 December 2012 - 07:53 AM, said:

It can, since most servers loses simply because they don't have good leadership.
You don't need a badge in order to be a Commander.
A good leader is a good leader even if he does not spend 100g for a silly badge.


Since I also know that the game will shut down sometime in the future I suppose I should not even bother to play the game at all then?

We live in the present, so use the abilities available at present instead of whine about what might happen six months from now.

They don't need to FIX it since it is not BROKEN. Why do you refuse to accept that?

First of all, you are expecting a PvE player with no or limited WvW experience to suddenly be a "good" leader in WvW.  That is unrealistic.  Second, servers can lose due to a number of reasons, not just having someone there to provide good leadership.  For example, perhaps there are not enough players from their home server or their players are simply not experienced and don't work well together.  So even if you have a good leader, that doesn't mean everyone would automatically choose to listen to him.  I know I don't, I just run to where my needed poi is because that is what the current world completion title compels me to do.  

What makes you think that guesting is going to be six months away?  For all we know, it maybe ready by January and ArenaNet would start charging for server transfer then.  Your guess is only as good as mine.

Again, World Completion is broken because it forces PvP onto people who may not be interested in PvP and PvE onto people who may not be interested in PvE.

Edited by Daesu, 20 December 2012 - 08:07 AM.

[Mortec]

I see your point - but, sadly, I don't agree with you.

At some point we, (the players), have to let go of what we want, how we'd like it to look, how to get it etc etc. And accept the game that has "been put" before us. There'll, probably, never be a perfect equilibrium in games like these.

Personally, I wanted the star and the achievement of, really, having been there, (and to a certain extent - done that). Wasn't really an avid WvWvW'er, but I thought; "well, if that's the achievement I want - that's what I'll have to do"

My experience ranges from some "perfect runs", where I managed to get a fair few points ticked of here and there - crossed it of me list! (made a spreadsheet - handy!). To, yes, sometimes getting sillyspanked beyond all sense. What to do? Not much, dust yerself of and go again - or, wait a bit.

It's hard to bring the concept of 'fairness' to this discussion table - as I think we'll find both(/all?) sides are, to a certain point, right. Understanding and sympathy are - and should be - in abundance.

How about this for an outlook when, (not if ), you get your star; You did it the hard, proper way.

Good luck!














Oh, I really like WvWvW now.

[Daesu]

Mortec, on 20 December 2012 - 08:13 AM, said:

I see your point - but, sadly, I don't agree with you.

At some point we, (the players), have to let go of what we want, how we'd like it to look, how to get it etc etc. And accept the game that has "been put" before us. There'll, probably, never be a perfect equilibrium in games like these.

Many of us who came from GW1 believe that defining the game shouldn't just be a 1-sided affair.  For the past 7+ years, it has always been us providing feedback to ArenaNet and ArenaNet considering our feedback.  They may not agree with us all the time, but many times they do.  If they don't agree with us, they usually have good reasons why.

Now, that was ArenaNet when they were a startup.  I am not sure if they are still such a company now though, since they have gotten bigger.

Edited by Daesu, 20 December 2012 - 08:19 AM.

[Trei]

Daesu, on 20 December 2012 - 07:46 AM, said:

World Completion is broken because it forces PvP onto people who may not be interested in PvP and PvE onto people who may not be interested in PvE.

Going with such perspective, there would be nothing that is not broken somehow to someone in the game, or any other game.

Dungeons are broken. I hate boss fights but all dungeons have them, I'm forced to kill bosses to complete dungeons.
Rangers are broken. I hate bows but they're the only weapons with 1200 range, I'm forced to use bows to play as a max range combat ranger.
Jumping puzzles are broken. I hate jumping and traps but I'm forced to jump and brave traps to complete jumping puzzles.

Everything is broken....



No, the achievement itself is not being forced upon the player.
It is entirely your choice to do or not to do it.
You don't get penalized for choosing not to do it.

What is your choice?

[Red J]

I really don't understand why they wouldn't split PvE and WvW exploration. I don't suppose people who focus on WvW would ever want to waste hours exploring Tyria neither. Let us have two titles instead- One for Tyria, and one for the Mists.

It's practically win-win situation.

[Trei]

Red J, on 20 December 2012 - 08:21 AM, said:

I really don't understand why they wouldn't split PvE and WvW exploration. I don't suppose people who focus on WvW would ever want to waste hours exploring Tyria neither. Let us have two titles instead- One for Tyria, and one for the Mists.

It's practically win-win situation.

I really don't understand why you need that title either.
I suspect the answer to both our questions are one and the same.

[Mortec]

I didn't play GW1 so I cannot comment too much on that other than that sounds like a good working relationship, and well done to all involved.

Daesu, on 20 December 2012 - 08:19 AM, said:

they usually have good reasons why.

Not having a go at you, but couldn't this be attributed to the world completion?

[Daesu]

Trei, on 20 December 2012 - 08:20 AM, said:

Going with such perspective, there would be nothing that is not broken somehow to someone in the game, or any other game.

Dungeons are broken. I hate boss fights but all dungeons have them, I'm forced to kill bosses to complete dungeons.
Rangers are broken. I hate bows but they're the only weapons with 1200 range, I'm forced to use bows to play as a max range combat ranger.
Jumping puzzles are broken. I hate jumping and traps but I'm forced to jump and brave traps to complete jumping puzzles.

Bosses are everywhere in PvE.  If you hate PvE, then you shouldn't need to play it.  You don't have to play bows all the time as a ranger, my ranger uses an axe and you can always weapon switch.  If you hate jumping puzzles then there is no need for you to attempt them.

[Trei]

Daesu, on 20 December 2012 - 08:24 AM, said:

Bosses are everywhere in PvE.  If you hate PvE, then you shouldn't need to play it.  You don't have to play bows all the time as a ranger, my ranger uses an axe and you can always weapon switch.  If you hate jumping puzzles then there is no need for you to attempt them.

Precisely.

You don't have to WvW all the time, just go in for as long as it takes to get your map completion and leave forever.

If you hate the WvW map, then there is no need for you to get this achievement.

Edited by Trei, 20 December 2012 - 08:29 AM.

[Daesu]

Mortec, on 20 December 2012 - 08:24 AM, said:

Not having a go at you, but couldn't this be attributed to the world completion?

When I said they have good reasons why, means they actually made a public statement to the community to explain why.  Not keeping silent in the shadows, while people just assume they have some unknown good reasons why.

Trei, on 20 December 2012 - 08:25 AM, said:

If you hate the WvW map, then you don't get this achievement.

The achievement is broken.

Trei, on 20 December 2012 - 08:23 AM, said:

I really don't understand why you need that title either.
I suspect the answer to both our questions are one and the same.

The all too common internet fallacies: "nobody forces you to do it so it is optional", " you don't need it", "nobody puts a gun in your head, so you don't need it".

Did anyone ever put a gun in your head to force you to marry the girl you love?  So why not just marry any other girl?  You don't need to marry this one because nobody forces you to.

Edited by Daesu, 20 December 2012 - 08:31 AM.

[Mortec]

But thats kinda my point.

At a certain spot, we have to accept the terms that are laid out in front of us. (Said terms might change - due to a number of reasons, but at the moment, this one hasn't).