Jump to content

  • Curse Sites


Member Since 16 May 2012
Offline Last Active May 23 2013 05:31 AM

#2058453 The new endgame dungeon on 15th Nov.

Posted clipbord on 02 November 2012 - 06:52 PM

Make boss battle more engaging!, Cause apparently Anet's idea of a hard boss is just giving it a trillion health and kills you in like 2 hits.

#1979230 Social Failure?

Posted Wordsworth on 29 September 2012 - 01:32 PM

I find saying "Rub rub rub" while reviving someone is a good icebreaker.

You should try it out sometime OP.

#1982108 HoD vs SBI vs JQ (Week 3)

Posted Jackiepro on 30 September 2012 - 07:25 PM

View PostMaddBomber83, on 30 September 2012 - 04:49 PM, said:

I have to agree.  The 2v1 thing is huge.  IMO every match up would be fun for everyone in it if the balance were maintained and the top server of the match never had more PPT than the combined of the 2nd and 3rd server.

Looking at a lot of the scores in other brackets, this is rarely the case.  The top ranked match HODvSBIvJQvET is actually the most well matched of anything.

All the other matchups (for NA) often show the 1st server having more ppt than the other two combined.  That's just not fun.

No idea how to fix it, and that may be a bit to far off the topic for this thread.  At the end though, I'm happy to be in the top bracket because it does have good fun most of the time, vs being in the lower brackets and just getting owned or spawn camping.

The way to fix it is to promote a method of comeback instead of linear point gain. Notice how the first 2 days of any match up are super exciting, then afterwards it dies out. This is because people stop bothering once a match up is decided and from there it snowballs. You can never have competitive pvp where the scoring is linear, there needs to be the potential of comeback, done through more than just staying online 24h a day.

#1982338 HoD vs SBI vs JQ (Week 3)

Posted Jackiepro on 30 September 2012 - 09:44 PM

View PostMaddBomber83, on 30 September 2012 - 09:21 PM, said:

You say this, but its clear in the last match up it was not the case. I can understand how to the average player it may look like this, but its just not true.

The match up is NOT decided in the first 2 days.  We'll take the very simple example that HOD was in last place until Tuesday, that's 3 days.

HoD is an exception to the rule because to HoD it doesnt matter whether its a weekend or weekday, they have enough players to cover all the BLs at any time and day of the week. For all other servers, the weekend presents the most active part of the fight and when each server can put out most force, after that if a victor is taking a lead the other servers get demoralized because they have less play time and are already behind, this snowballs to less players queing which causes 1st place keeping 1st place to become a self fulfilling prophecy.

It isnt a myth its a reality of linear scoring. Why do you think competitive games have dynamic game objectives? Think LoL or GW1 GvG, the ideas are that any given moment an entire fight can change. In WvW this isnt the case, a fight can only ever change because 1 server plays more actively than another, that is the ONLY reason HoD come comeback over the weekdays. Do you think if SBI and ET kept up the same pressure up all week as they did over the weekend that HoD would have come anywhere but last? Its not like HoD found some magic formula to win the 2v1, they simply had more coverage. So yes for every server but HoD the match is decided by the weekend.

The idea of playing worse or better isnt very applicable because the match goes over 1 week. There is no 1 key mistake or turning point that happens, not with equal play time amongst servers. If 1 group of players does something really good at a given hour for their server, the likely hood of this advantage being maintained isnt as high because if the following players to come were very good as well that server would not be losing in the first place. Over 1 week it all averages out such that there is very little "good or bad plays" that can tilt a match over.

Contrast this to 1 untimely wipe in any other pvp game mode, which can single handedly turn around the match. There is no single turning point in wvw which makes it linear.

#1980735 Current State of the Game. Fun? Population? Will you continue to play?

Posted BloatedGuppy on 30 September 2012 - 02:38 AM

View PostAventurian, on 30 September 2012 - 01:09 AM, said:

Fun fact: I used to work as a senior engineer and project lead at a major game dev house.

Appeal to authority. It's completely irrelevant what you do for a living.

View PostAventurian, on 30 September 2012 - 01:09 AM, said:

Two million licenses is nothing, it won't offset production costs for GW 2. Also, in the spoiler note I provided all the numbers you need.

Irrelevant to the post you are quoting, which was rebutting your nonsense assertion that they hadn't reached 2 million in sales. Now you're just shifting the goalposts and arguing a new point.

View PostAventurian, on 30 September 2012 - 01:09 AM, said:

Feel free to make up your own facts.

They're actually posting easily verifiable facts, not inventing numbers for the purposes of a diatribe.

View PostAventurian, on 30 September 2012 - 01:09 AM, said:

Doesn't change a thing: GW 2 is not selling enough, and the user base is not growing.

Attribution? Link? Can you support this with data? I'd love to hear it.

View PostAventurian, on 30 September 2012 - 01:09 AM, said:

I take it that you have your own sources to refute my facts, right? Right?

I'm sure you know what burden of proof is, and why it's yours in this particular circumstance, right? As a senior engineer and product lead, you should be an educated guy. Which makes your bizarre fact-free, rambling discourse about the imminent doom faced by the game really puzzling. Because that kind of crap is usually the province of teenaged internet trolls, not adult professionals.

Honestly, I have no idea how well the game is selling right now. The last data point we have is from 2 weeks ago, when the game passed the 2 million mark you studiously asserted it had yet to reach. It could be closing in on three million, or it could be at two million and one copies sold. I have no idea. Which is why I'm not going to be giving lectures on the subject on internet forums. I recommend you follow my lead in this regard.

If and when more data becomes available that demonstrates the game is under-performing...and I mean actual data, not airy speculation...then you can unleash as many grim jeremiads about the financial future of the game as you please.

#1950583 Anyone else feel like Trahearne is a bit contrived? (Spoilers maybe?)

Posted Konig Des Todes on 20 September 2012 - 04:25 AM

View PostDoki20, on 10 September 2012 - 01:46 PM, said:

Erm.. you know that he was studying Orr for at least a decade? This, and the fact that he had the whole Durmond Priory at his disposal to fill him in with any other Orr knowledge they have found.

If you put these together, then it's not that "magical" that he had this sort of information.
Two and a half decades. He's been studying Orr - not just the risen but also the land, the history, the nation, the people, everything - since he was born.

Personally, having done the whole story, I don't see the problem - outside some returning characters not knowing who you are even if you dealt with them (this is likely an oversight and irrelevant to Trahearne). Trahearne gives you the choice for how to tackles each and every situation. You choose how to further invade Orr. Everyone's relying on you for the major push. Trahearne's the brains, and you're the might and magic - the arrowhead to Trahearne's bow. Trahearne decides from the information he's given and knows what's the best next target, and he wants your opinion on how to proceed - and this stuff is so important he wants you to do it while everyone else is fighting against all the grunts. Grunts fighting grunts, and commander fights the Mouth, Eyes, and risen princes.

So how is that not your personal story? Yes, he's your leader, but you know what? Let's take a look at the beginning of the personal story:
For humans, Logan tells you the options that can be taken (sometimes Anise).
For charr, Rytlock does.
For sylvari, Caithe.
For norn, Eir (sometimes Knut or someone else).
For asura, Zojja.

During the Orders, your mentors give you options for how to proceed and it's up to your opinion on how to do it.

From beginning to end, you're the one finding the issues (it's you who first encounters the Eye of Zhaitan and Mouth of Zhaitan), and you're the one choosing how to confront these issues, and being the main powerhouse behind solving them.

So where does it "stop" becoming your personal story? I'm not seeing it. How is Trahearne contrived? I'm not seeing it.

Yes, his wording can get annoying from time to time, but that's true for everyone. The only bad part about him is that he gives up too damn fast when his first ritual to restore the lands fail.

#1975759 WvW Adjustments: Concept Discussion

Posted Kyzr_Relax on 28 September 2012 - 03:35 AM


I chose the word 'adjustment' specifically, because I don't think WvW is broken, but certainly not working as intended.  The first step in fixing a problem is recognizing there is one.  Population is an issue.  However, focusing on HoD's population is the wrong way to look at it; Instead, ask how do you further encourage more people to WvW?

The suggestions and their explanations are my own, but meant to encourage constructive discussion about improving WvW for everyone, not a soapbox to complain about night players or HoD.  Constructive feedback is greatly appreciated.

-WvW Adjustments-

Commander's Badge - I've long hated this item.  A great concept turned vanity item.  The primary advantage of the badge is the ability to create groups larger than 5 people.  But let's be honest; That's not a problem for organized guilds utilizing VOIP.  The demographic that most benefits from the Badge's advantage are PUGs, to whom it is prohibitively expensive.  ArenaNet would do well to take a page out of Planetside in better implementing this item; Here's how:
  • Groups larger than 5 should be a basic option in WvW; 10 is a good starting point.  Alliances saw little to no benefit in the badge itself, as there's no current in-game tools the badge provides that is better than the instant communication of VOIP.  PUG heavy servers (Blackgate for example), are already missing the advantage of VOIP, making bigger WvW groups only helps them organize better, without hurting Alliance Servers.
  • Commanders should instead get the ability to place icons on the map visible to the entire server (tagged to their respective Commander).  A symbol like the shift-click ping, but permanent, and multiple of them. Attack Here!  Defender Here!  Supply Here!  Siege Here (with an arrow pointing)!  These could add bonuses to the successful taking/defending of objectives, so the Commander provides actual incentive to follow orders.
  • Instead of groups of 10, Commanders should create secondary parties for squad leaders (say, up to 5, for a Commander group max of 41).  These squad leaders head their own 10 man groups, but are simultaneously in a party with a Commander with special Command Chat only they can see (and can be specifically filtered).  This is a command structure, which is a basic military concept, and allows the GUI to help players multi-task, instead of hindering them.
Population Boost - A question ArenaNet said they asked themselves as they developed the game was "Is this fun?".  It's a subjective question, but while WvW is a huge breath of fresh air for MMO players, the answer to that question is slowly becoming "No", and that's not good for the game.  But how do you encourage better attendance?

WvW is a specific game mode, like PvE or sPvP.  The boosted stats of a <80 are in a word; Terrible.  My Lv8 Thief can get 250-500 AoE Shortbow #2 hits, while a guildmate's Lv80 can get 3k ones.  Largely due to traits, but also due to under-powered boosting; sub-80s feel like (and sadly, are) a liability.  This is a huge untapped potential boost in population.  As it stands, I would not WvW on an alt; Here's how to fix it.
  • WvW Gear Vendors: Free Lv80 Rares (WvW only, non-salvageable).  Everyone has a different playstyle, so just boosting stats can't add +CritDMG, or +Healing.  Obviously should be as generic looking as possible, and still weaker than Lv80 Exotics.  This one change alone could potentially fix WvW Population issues, while still positively affecting Alliance Servers.
  • WvW Traits: sPvP has it, and with the above fix, this would bring every WvW member to a near-80 par, which would increase participation in only good ways.  Not having access to these traits (and the above gear), means you're only at your most effective when using Siege weapons, which are fairly expensive for sub-80s.
  • Remove item wear from WvW.  While the cost isn't overly damning, there's a psychological component that can't be ignored.  If the intent was to prevent repeated zerg attempts at attacking/defense, it's failed in that regard.  Furthermore, it encourages the losing teams to just give up, because there's an added cost for failure.  While losing a good/close fight can still feel good, getting steamrolled makes item wear a slap in the face.
  • Mercenary Queue:  What if the Overflow system was applied to WvW?  While you're in WvW queue, you could opt to join a match in different bracket.  You get to WvW right away, while a server with a population disadvantage gets some additional people.  You could even have a different name: "Isle of Janthir Mercenary" surrounded by "Dragonbrand Invader".

Population Balance - A lot of people are saying that paid transfers will be the best fix.  While obviously a good idea, the way it's implemented could have the opposite effect.  If populations were suddenly "locked" as is, the gap between the top servers would stall.  ET, SBI, and JQ would never be able to compete with HoD on it's current level.  At that point, it would be a race to see if HoD burns out before their competition does, which is both unlikely and a lose/lose for the game.
  • When paid transfers come, it should be tiered, starting with HoD alone.  Free transfers off, 1600 gem (I think that was the initial idea) transfers on.  You could even "reward" gems to people leaving HoD to other servers to encourage the move ("Well, I never get through the queue anyway, I'll take the gems and head to SBI for 400 gems, or Yak's Bend for 800, etc.)
  • Merge EU and NA server lists for WvW.  Ping might be an issue, but right now there's an even larger issue in having 4x Tier1 servers, in that the Tier2 groupings get obliterated as Server #4 cycles out.  Blackgate's population was decimated by being in an un-winnable tier week after week.  Each of these brackets desperately need another #1 competitive server.
  • Allow Guild transfers.  There was a great post on reddit the other week about how the queue graphs had made their point about the population on HoD, and that the guilds would love to leave if it didn't mean starting an influence grind over again.  As far as I recall, those guilds haven't left HoD yet for this exact reason.


Thanks for taking the time to read.  If you were looking for the "tl;dr", it starts at the top with the first sentence, jerk.  

Regardless of what you agree or disagree with, it's OUR constructive feedback as players that will give Guild Wars 2 the staying power we all want it to have.  WvW is fun, but pretending it's not without it's faults is being dishonest and dismissive of legitimate complaints/concerns, even if they're not always eloquently stated.

#1968159 IoJ vs SoS vs FA

Posted Mif on 25 September 2012 - 07:38 PM

Looking very green in EB today :D

Posted Image

#1963950 IoJ vs SoS vs FA

Posted G L J on 24 September 2012 - 03:48 PM

View PostCharliePrince, on 24 September 2012 - 07:21 AM, said:

Fort Aspenwood is nothing but a hacking server who can't win normally so they have to use flying/teleportation hacks

This needs to stop - Gate of Madness, Sea of Sorrows, and now Fort Aspenwood - have all gained a 'bad reputation' from the actions of what is most likely one or two people in a population full of thousands. Yes, I deplore people that cheat. However you cannot use the actions of one person to vilify the entire server. That happened once, and we call it the War on Terrorism.

Make no mistake, cheating is obviously wrong and if I see it I will report it. However it serves no one any good to accuse an entire server of wrongdoing. Not only is this blatantly false, but it is so painfully obvious that the only result of the accusations would serve to foster bad blood.

These past few days have been amazing in terms of combat. Each side using multitudes of trebuchets, the sheer scale of the sieges and the absolutely ridiculous battles over Stonemist Castle. And yet you choose to ignore it all, simply because of one or two hackers - which will be banned.

Recently, an American Ambassador to Libya was killed. Another ambassador wrote an Op-Ed here: http://globalpublics...ters/?hpt=wo_r1

In this article, he cites the three toxic results that inevitably sprang up, the Accusers, the Apologists, and the Political Gamesters. You, good sir, are being an Accuser - whether you like it or not that is the role you are playing. Instead of moving past the action, decrying it as evil and allowing justice to be done, you are driving a wedge between two servers. An action that should not be seen with any better light than the hacking itself.

(and yes, I did just compare hacking to assassinating a US ambassador. deal with it)

#1962008 JQ vs DB vs CD

Posted Faize on 24 September 2012 - 12:18 AM

Pretty much what getting DB and CD to not attack each other feels like.

#1945284 IoJ need NA guilds

Posted Ztiggs on 18 September 2012 - 09:11 PM

View Posttbox, on 18 September 2012 - 02:41 PM, said:

Yeah you do.... Sea of Sorrows.

Like I said nobody wants to transfer.  People on Blackgate dont want to.  Brunzaga " Blackgate is our home and we are not going to leave it" and IoJ oceanics are the same way.  

I am in shocked people on IoJ think its an organization issue. Its not in this  matchup. Organization can always be better but you are a fool to think we can put up a fight against Eredon Terrace by being more organized.   WvW is designed around a  3 way fight and right now its a 2 way if any way at all on IoJ, SoS and ET.

IoJ's unoffical strategy is to farm PvE gear or roll alts. I am looking at my guild roster lastnight and 50% of members not with us on Gates of Madness WvW vacation are rolling alts.

Thats because it is an organization issue, and the more tough matchups we get, the better.  It forces us to come together and work with other guilds/alliances/servers.  My major complaint in WvW has always been our organization, but lately we are working closely with each other even if its to late to win this matchup.  You get better by facing tough opponents, learning from it and coming back stronger, not looking for  easier matches.  IoJ will only be termpered by this trial by fire, and will emerge even stronger the next matchup.

Those that choose to leave for "greener pastures", I hope you do have fun on your next server.  Those looking at IoJ as a possible destination, you will face top tier servers in some matchups, things will be tough, we wont win all the time, but your coming into a great group of Oceanics and an emerging NA alliance.  If thats what your looking for, IoJ is for you.



#1937235 I eventually think we'll see several oceanic guilds from IOJ or SoS joini...

Posted fxfighter on 16 September 2012 - 01:53 PM

Should just have some NA guilds move to SoS/IoJ since they are NA timezone deficient and the longest queues are currently in NA timezone. Then you'll have all the oceanic presence you need!

#1936601 I eventually think we'll see several oceanic guilds from IOJ or SoS joini...

Posted crowea on 16 September 2012 - 06:09 AM

Loved the title of this thread. Wishful thinking. I hardly think ET would be the first choice of a move for anyone from SoS.

And really, if you want to play with oceanic types, don't wait for oceanics to move to you. You move to IoJ or SoS. Much happier communities than some of the other servers around (especially ET).

#1895334 Server Ranks NA

Posted Talamare on 07 September 2012 - 03:23 AM

Color Code
Increased Two Tiers
Increased One Tier
Decreased One Tier
Decreased Two Tiers

10/5 - 10/12
X Rank - Henge of Denravi
S Rank - Jade Quarry Eredon Terrace
A Rank - Stormbluff Isle Isle of Janthir Blackgate // Crystal Desert Dragonbrand Tarnished Coast
B Rank - Sea of Sorrows Maguuma Fort Aspenwood  // Yaks Bend Sanctum of Rall Northern Shiverpeaks
C Rank - Gates of Madness Ehmry Bay Sorrows Furnace // Darkhaven Anvil Rock Ferguson Crossing
D Rank - Borlis Pass Devona Rest Kaineng


Arena Net Official Ratings

Arena Net Official Rankings Chart

#1921363 Every single name is used. Literally.

Posted Verranicus on 12 September 2012 - 07:26 AM

View PostKaiarra, on 12 September 2012 - 07:22 AM, said:

And that's the problem when you make names game wide... always thought it was a stupid idea.

You could try adding accents to some more uncommon names, as some of them are allowed. Otherwise you're pretty much out of luck at this stage; personally I made placeholder name alts the first day of headstart because this issue was so predictable.

Or you could be more original and not desperately cling to a few names.