Kill Proof idea - Let us ping from the Wallet — Guild Wars 2 Forums
Home Fractals/Dungeons/Strike Missions/Raids

Kill Proof idea - Let us ping from the Wallet

There's a lot of issues with "kill proofs", like having to save all the raid tokens, and the now defunct ESS on fractals (although I deposit all my KP on my guild hall and I kept 100 ESS). A quick fix for this would be to let us ping from the wallet and then let us deposit the raid kps in the wallet as well.

Titles are not 100% trustworthy, people can buy those. You need some kind of proof that you can beat them frequently :)

<1

Comments

  • I have suggested some solutions from both community side and anet side, but your one is a good idea too.

    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/114728/removal-of-unstable-cosmic-essence-kp#latest

  • maddoctor.2738maddoctor.2738 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I agree. Pinging from the wallet, but without any chat codes to provide the same result, would be the way to go.

  • YtseJam.9784YtseJam.9784 Member ✭✭✭

    Yeah I support having in-game mechanisms for these things, using external API/websites sounds cumbersome for some people and a lot don't want to use them, even tho I'm a developer and I love the GW2 API, it's not the best user experience to rely on things outside the game. There could be other cool ways of doing this, like you could have a /kp command and it would ping your proofs and make it visible to your party/squad, problem solved, no fake chatcodes, no external websites, etc. But that would just be me if I was implementing an in-game solution :)

  • anduriell.6280anduriell.6280 Member ✭✭✭✭

    this maybe a hot take but there should not be any way to provide any "Kill proof".
    the specific currencies is a lazy development tool which should not be used ever. it creates a muddy currency environment and is only used by exploitative companies to obscure the price of their RTM.

    Gold should be the only currency, and materials the stuff we need to craft dugeon\fractal\raids objects.

  • Clyan.1593Clyan.1593 Member ✭✭✭

    They removed kp as pingable item for a reason lol

  • lare.5129lare.5129 Member ✭✭✭✭

    kp you need only for fractal and raid?
    On raid we already have tokens. So it solved ideal for each boss.
    now about fractal kp
    On fractal we have old cm100 (new 99cm) fractal kp. You still can ping it and prove you place in party.
    Also, if you not hfb(or qfb), party sometimes have additional requiement - fractal god.
    So there is no any point ping from wallet. Also keep attention that from new fractal we have same relics from 98 cm 99 cm and 100cm, so if some party do each day 98cm it not say that thay good in higher.
    Title DwD also wiht each day come more obsolete - you can easy buy if from 10 to 200 mystic coin. So new relics and titles as prove is zero.

    want solid balance ? - play chess.

  • Henry.5713Henry.5713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    All of these pointless currencies should either be removed or go straight to your wallet without exceptions. That part of the change is fine.

    But then ArenaNet can't be so oblivious to not know about how the currency "was used" by the community and why people kept storing them. Which means they made a conscious decision to remove these KPs. We know a lot of players wanted this to protect new players from being excluded and from some (supposed) toxicity. We shall see how things turn out now. I doubt Fractals will suddenly become more inclusive or any less elitist. And I think people will simply come with something else they can use as a safety net against wasting their time. But maybe I am wrong there.

    My hopes have been on an in-game "player inspection" window ever since people started asking you to ping your Berserker gear and check your AP in dungeons. But that seems as unlikely as ever.

    Progress isn't made by early risers. It's made by lazy men trying to find easier ways to do something. ~ Robert Heinlein

  • Ayrilana.1396Ayrilana.1396 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 18, 2020

    @Clyan.1593 said:
    They removed kp as pingable item for a reason lol

    Yeah. Instead of using the existing drops for the new skins, they added a new currency and then a way to convert the old ones to that. This was so veterans wouldn’t unlock everything, or a lot of the skins, on day one. The current currency is in the wallet due to how much you can acquire each day and it’d cause a strain on players’ inventories/banks otherwise.

  • Clyan.1593Clyan.1593 Member ✭✭✭

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Clyan.1593 said:
    They removed kp as pingable item for a reason lol

    Yeah. It’s because they increased how many you could get from each CM so they made it a currency.

    I haven't read into their reasoning for that change, so if you are directly referring to a dev post then alright.
    But even then I would argue one has to be quite dull to not foresee the effect of such a change. They knew what CM runners used KPs for.
    With the upcoming release on steam I think what they truly want is to hide the biggest downside of endcontent - the misery of gatekeeping newbies.

    Don't get me wrong, I don't pick a side when it comes to whether KP pinging is good or bad, but just saying:
    This change is totally calculated and no "official" statement can deceive me into thinking it's solely due to the increase of KP gain.

  • Clyan.1593Clyan.1593 Member ✭✭✭
    edited September 18, 2020

    @Ayrilana.1396 said:

    @Clyan.1593 said:
    They removed kp as pingable item for a reason lol

    Yeah. Instead of using the existing drops for the new skins, they added a new currency and then a way to convert the old ones to that. This was so veterans wouldn’t unlock everything, or a lot of the skins, on day one. The current currency is in the wallet due to how much you can acquire each day and it’d cause a strain on players’ inventories/banks otherwise.

    Nope.

    Comparison:
    1 weapon equals 480 UFE / 3 cms per 4 days. So 64 days in total for full set.
    Converts to:
    1 weapon equals 96 UCE / 1 cm per 48 days on average. So 768 days on average in total for full set.

    Conclusion: They increased the KP gain per day enormously and at the same time artificially created a terrible UCE-UFE conversion rate to justify a new wallet currency while nothing of this was necessary in the first place. The direct and simplest solution would have been to sell the new weapons for (example) around 35~36 UCE which means you'll eventually have all of them after reaching fractal god. Or you know, just make a new currency and keep the old average 2 UCE per day.

    So yeah, it's a cover up to get rid of KP requirements. It's almost gracefully executed, but only almost.

  • Linken.6345Linken.6345 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @lare.5129 said:
    kp you need only for fractal and raid?
    On raid we already have tokens. So it solved ideal for each boss.
    now about fractal kp
    On fractal we have old cm100 (new 99cm) fractal kp. You still can ping it and prove you place in party.
    Also, if you not hfb(or qfb), party sometimes have additional requiement - fractal god.
    So there is no any point ping from wallet. Also keep attention that from new fractal we have same relics from 98 cm 99 cm and 100cm, so if some party do each day 98cm it not say that thay good in higher.
    Title DwD also wiht each day come more obsolete - you can easy buy if from 10 to 200 mystic coin. So new relics and titles as prove is zero.

    Is this on Na servers?
    Never seen a fractal party demand fractal god on Eu

  • Asum.4960Asum.4960 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 18, 2020

    As for the gatekeeping issues/accusations,

    I do agree gatekeeping is an issue, probably most of us can remember how hard/intimidating it was to get into this content ourselves once and wished it was easier, but I also just don't think KP was the crux of that, and the real problem that KP was invented to somewhat solve will still be around just as much if not more.

    KP was mostly simply used for matchmaking, not as some like to think, specifically to keep out new players out of spite by toxic elitists.
    I Imagine most of us vets carried and taught tens if not hundreds of newbies over the years, either just to help or to also selfishly expand our own circle of viable semi static people to call on, rather than having to PuG through a KP gate.

    But people also have to consider the veteran/hardcore's perspective, which I know this community really struggles with.
    It's easy to demand of everybody to just take every new player along, letting them prove themselves and such, that all sounds nice in Theory, especially when one would be on the benefitting end of that.
    Every player thinks they are the exception, that they deserve to just be taken at facevalue, that they could carry their weight, but every vet can tell you that the vast majority can not.
    What people don't empathise with is that most of us hardcore player's don't exactly want to "gatekeep", and that we've all been there, accepting everybody, helping, carrying, not wanting to lock people out - but do people really think it's fun to be essentially forced to do that every day (or how ever frequent one plays) because there is no way to check for more experience, when it's just going miserably day after day after day?

    Even the most dedicated kindest CM runner constantly training people can have days with a bad mood or time constraints and just want a smooth high KP run with experienced players at times.
    Yes, it's frustrating to look at the LFG and just see KP groups and being too afraid to make your own training group or look for a guild and it would be nice if everybody could just get a shot.
    But know what's even more frustrating? Playing the content frequently and every day having to take a gamble on if it will take 1h or 3h, if it will be a smooth and fun run, or a grating chore of wipes, failures, disbands, toxicity.
    And let's not ignore that casuals are, with some very rare super elitist kitten being the exception, some of the most and most frequently toxic players in this game. It's not like Fractal "noobs" join and are this kind vessel for knowledge, welcoming of tips and teachings, but the vast majority of the time very sensitive, arrogant and entitled players who react very poorly to any indication that they aren't doing well and not listening to what they could do better, but instead retort with insults and accusations of toxicity and elitism.

    Do people really think it's fair for veterans who just want fun runs with like minded players to be stuck with those people every day, wiping for hours, getting yelled at by entitled but bad players, people who bail on the group instantly after any criticisms making them stuck mid run etc.?

    I imagine almost every single one of those players ranting about KP and feeling entitled to join experienced groups without going through the process of finding training groups and guilds or putting their own stuff together like most of us once did, would be the first to then also feel entitled to always getting good groups and not having to deal with lower skilled players themselves, wiping them needlessly for hours every day when they just want to have a good time and play with like minded and experienced players, once they are better/on that level themselves.

    R.I.P. Build Templates, 15.10.2019

  • Raknar.4735Raknar.4735 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 18, 2020

    @YtseJam.9784 said:
    Titles are not 100% trustworthy, people can buy those. You need some kind of proof that you can beat them frequently :)

    You could just create a static with people you know. 100% trustworthy, and the proof are your past runs with the group.
    Only like minded players.
    It‘s not that hard to create your own groups ;)

    Unrelated to op, but related to some other posters:
    Guess it‘s just easier to complain about „toxic casuals“, even though you would actually never see casuals anywhere near to T4.
    They‘re just the scapegoat term for some „hardcore“ (LULW) players. Big cope.
    Hint: The people you are pugging with aren‘t actually casual players, those bad players belong to your same group of „hardcore“ people, you‘re just cannibalizing your own community. Nice job.
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    You have a heart of gold. Don't let them take it from you.
    Remaster confirmed! Umbasa!

  • lare.5129lare.5129 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Linken.6345 said:
    Is this on Na servers?

    don't know how it is on Na. I am about Eu

    Never seen a fractal party demand fractal god on Eu

    as I say it not main requirement, kp first. Part time I have open lfg t4 window, so for example then last cm100 come I see that additional requirement in 5+ parties fro some achiv/modes per 2-3 hours. Don't prioritize that as main part of kp value

    want solid balance ? - play chess.

  • Raknar.4735Raknar.4735 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 18, 2020

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @YtseJam.9784 said:
    Titles are not 100% trustworthy, people can buy those. You need some kind of proof that you can beat them frequently :)

    You could just create a static with people you know. 100% trustworthy, and the proof are your past runs with the group.
    Only like minded players.
    It‘s not that hard to create your own groups ;)

    Unrelated to op, but related to some other posters:
    Guess it‘s just easier to complain about „toxic casuals“, even though you would actually never see casuals anywhere near to T4.
    They‘re just the scapegoat term for some „hardcore“ (LULW) players. Big cope.
    Hint: The people you are pugging with aren‘t actually casual players, those bad players belong to your same group of „hardcore“ people, you‘re just cannibalizing your own community. Nice job.

    There is no binary switch which makes one player casual or hardcore, even if that is the most easy approach by players, of any part of the community, to easily blame and demonize other players. As such, a vast majority of players who play T4 fractals are in fact casual, if performance and ability is used as definition for someone being casual or hardcore.

    It would also not matter. The term used is irrelevant. The fact that there is a huge discrepancy even ONLY within T4 tier is the actual issue. Mind you the even bigger discrepancy going higher up into CMs. The fact you treat all players as "hardcore" above a certain skill threshold is just plain insulting. That's like saying every single person with a certain shade of darker skin are all black. Way to put all minority groups into one basket (maybe this analogy will make you realize how toxic your statement is, with real world similarities).

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    You mean the same way you just now marginalized an entire group of different skilled players as all being "hardcore" and as such "elitist"? How are you not being toxic at this point in time? Doesn't even matter if you consider yourself casual or what ever, toxic is toxic, and that's the exact mentality which others refer to as "toxic casual". Thought I will agree, the added descriptor is not needed. Strait up toxic suffices in this case.

    To your entitlement argument: every player has the same right to shape and form the groups they want. If one group of players is not allowed to shape and form their groups, no one is.

    So, you didn‘t get my post at all. Nice. I have never said being hardcore is about skill level, not sure where you got that from. Insinuating that is just insulting. What I have said is that some people that use the label „hardcore“ for themselves are being toxic to their own community by calling other people „toxic casuals“, for some reason, thus cannibalizing the instance-going community.

    How you got from there to minority groups with an argument i’ve never actually made is puzzling, that stretch is actually pretty worrying. Your blatant misrepresentation of my post and opinion is pretty toxic, straight up toxic.

    Also, just getting a static would fix most of the proplems some people here have. Can’t be that hard to create your own group, can it?
    Sure, you have the right do shape your group how you want, but you don‘t have the right to be toxic to others by calling them names for no reason, as simple as that.

    You have a heart of gold. Don't let them take it from you.
    Remaster confirmed! Umbasa!

  • MarkoGold.7126MarkoGold.7126 Member ✭✭
    edited September 18, 2020

    i run cms +t4 daily on my main kp is necessary not to waste my time and i will keep asking for old kp or switch to li if need be but it will be dwd 400li or kp or gtfo, like it should be.

  • lare.5129lare.5129 Member ✭✭✭✭

    simple idea from new players, who not have true kp. Do cms, buy celestial infusions. And ping them.
    I remember we have players who ping 20+. It acceptable.

    want solid balance ? - play chess.

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 18, 2020

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @YtseJam.9784 said:
    Titles are not 100% trustworthy, people can buy those. You need some kind of proof that you can beat them frequently :)

    You could just create a static with people you know. 100% trustworthy, and the proof are your past runs with the group.
    Only like minded players.
    It‘s not that hard to create your own groups ;)

    Unrelated to op, but related to some other posters:
    Guess it‘s just easier to complain about „toxic casuals“, even though you would actually never see casuals anywhere near to T4.
    They‘re just the scapegoat term for some „hardcore“ (LULW) players. Big cope.
    Hint: The people you are pugging with aren‘t actually casual players, those bad players belong to your same group of „hardcore“ people, you‘re just cannibalizing your own community. Nice job.

    There is no binary switch which makes one player casual or hardcore, even if that is the most easy approach by players, of any part of the community, to easily blame and demonize other players. As such, a vast majority of players who play T4 fractals are in fact casual, if performance and ability is used as definition for someone being casual or hardcore.

    It would also not matter. The term used is irrelevant. The fact that there is a huge discrepancy even ONLY within T4 tier is the actual issue. Mind you the even bigger discrepancy going higher up into CMs. The fact you treat all players as "hardcore" above a certain skill threshold is just plain insulting. That's like saying every single person with a certain shade of darker skin are all black. Way to put all minority groups into one basket (maybe this analogy will make you realize how toxic your statement is, with real world similarities).

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    You mean the same way you just now marginalized an entire group of different skilled players as all being "hardcore" and as such "elitist"? How are you not being toxic at this point in time? Doesn't even matter if you consider yourself casual or what ever, toxic is toxic, and that's the exact mentality which others refer to as "toxic casual". Thought I will agree, the added descriptor is not needed. Strait up toxic suffices in this case.

    To your entitlement argument: every player has the same right to shape and form the groups they want. If one group of players is not allowed to shape and form their groups, no one is.

    So, you didn‘t get my post at all. Nice. I have never said being hardcore is about skill level, not sure where you got that from. Insinuating that is just insulting. What I have said is that some people that use the label „hardcore“ for themselves are being toxic to their own community by calling other people „toxic casuals“, for some reason, thus cannibalizing the instance-going community.

    Your blatant misrepresentation of my post and opinion is pretty toxic, straight up toxic.

    You never gave a definition for what you define as casual or hardcore, and as such I gave one for how I used the terms. If your definition varied, you are welcome to give that differing one, though it will not change any of the facts that:
    1. the main issue here is difference in player skill, which is present no matter in which content but of significant importance in more challenging content
    2. you still approach this entire issue the same way as other toxic members of either side of the spectrum approach it: as binary "us versus them" and no definition you could give would alleviate your wording here
    3. the terms "casual" and "hardcore" are absolutely insufficient to even remotely give justice to the vast amount of difference in player skill or individual approach to this issue. Which is exactly WHY a crude system like KP is in effect in the first place the way it is handled, because numeric values can distinguish, even with all its flaws

    Hurts when one points out what was actually said, doesn't it? Your wording and approach is part of the problem the community of this game faces, and it does not matter which side of the argument you think you are on.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Also, just getting a static would fix most of the proplems some people here have. Can’t be that hard to create your own group, can it?

    Sure, doesn't this apply to all players? No matter how skilled they are? Couldn't weaker players not also form statics? Does the ability to form a static supersede or benefit a specific group of players?

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Sure, you have the right do shape your group how you want, but you don‘t have the right to be toxic to others, as simple as that.

    I never claimed anyone has a right to be toxic, but that is not what you said now is it? You gave descriptors and lade the blame clearly on a subsection of the payer base. You literally wrote:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    That is by far not the same as stating: no one should be toxic.

    EDIT:
    all that said, @Asum.4960 gave a very good summary of where more experienced players are coming from. Some people might want to read his explanation, it mirrors pretty much exactly my personal experience with the game.

  • Raknar.4735Raknar.4735 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 18, 2020

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @YtseJam.9784 said:
    Titles are not 100% trustworthy, people can buy those. You need some kind of proof that you can beat them frequently :)

    You could just create a static with people you know. 100% trustworthy, and the proof are your past runs with the group.
    Only like minded players.
    It‘s not that hard to create your own groups ;)

    Unrelated to op, but related to some other posters:
    Guess it‘s just easier to complain about „toxic casuals“, even though you would actually never see casuals anywhere near to T4.
    They‘re just the scapegoat term for some „hardcore“ (LULW) players. Big cope.
    Hint: The people you are pugging with aren‘t actually casual players, those bad players belong to your same group of „hardcore“ people, you‘re just cannibalizing your own community. Nice job.

    There is no binary switch which makes one player casual or hardcore, even if that is the most easy approach by players, of any part of the community, to easily blame and demonize other players. As such, a vast majority of players who play T4 fractals are in fact casual, if performance and ability is used as definition for someone being casual or hardcore.

    It would also not matter. The term used is irrelevant. The fact that there is a huge discrepancy even ONLY within T4 tier is the actual issue. Mind you the even bigger discrepancy going higher up into CMs. The fact you treat all players as "hardcore" above a certain skill threshold is just plain insulting. That's like saying every single person with a certain shade of darker skin are all black. Way to put all minority groups into one basket (maybe this analogy will make you realize how toxic your statement is, with real world similarities).

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    You mean the same way you just now marginalized an entire group of different skilled players as all being "hardcore" and as such "elitist"? How are you not being toxic at this point in time? Doesn't even matter if you consider yourself casual or what ever, toxic is toxic, and that's the exact mentality which others refer to as "toxic casual". Thought I will agree, the added descriptor is not needed. Strait up toxic suffices in this case.

    To your entitlement argument: every player has the same right to shape and form the groups they want. If one group of players is not allowed to shape and form their groups, no one is.

    So, you didn‘t get my post at all. Nice. I have never said being hardcore is about skill level, not sure where you got that from. Insinuating that is just insulting. What I have said is that some people that use the label „hardcore“ for themselves are being toxic to their own community by calling other people „toxic casuals“, for some reason, thus cannibalizing the instance-going community.

    Your blatant misrepresentation of my post and opinion is pretty toxic, straight up toxic.

    You never gave a definition for what you define as casual or hardcore, and as such I gave one for how I used the terms. If your definition varied, you are welcome to give that differing one, though it will not change any of the facts that:
    1. the main issue here is difference in player skill, which is present no matter in which content but of significant importance in more challenging content
    2. you still approach this entire issue the same way as other toxic members of either side of the spectrum approach it: as binary "us versus them" and no definition you could give would alleviate your wording here
    3. the terms "casual" and "hardcore" are absolutely insufficient to even remotely give justice to the vast amount of difference in player skill or individual approach to this issue. Which is exactly WHY a crude system like KP is in effect in the first place the way it is handled, because numeric values can distinguish

    Hurts when one points out what was actually said, doesn't it? Your wording and approach is part of the problem the community of this game faces, and it does not matter which side of the argument you think you are on.

    So you put words into my mouth that were based on your assumptions and shared all your anger based on that? Wow.
    You even went as far as insinuating racism. Truly worrying.
    Casual and hardcore have nothing to do with skill in my eyes.
    Maybe you should have asked first before assuming things. That‘s key to conversation. This really is part of the problem of this community.
    You seem to have this „us“ vs „them“ problem. The only „them“ i see as a problem are the ones calling others names.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Also, just getting a static would fix most of the proplems some people here have. Can’t be that hard to create your own group, can it?

    Sure, doesn't this apply to all players? No matter how skilled they are? Couldn't weaker players not also form statics? Does the ability to form a static supersede or benefit a specific group of players?

    Yes this applies to everyone,, nowhere have i stated something else. Are you trying to move the goalpost?

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Sure, you have the right do shape your group how you want, but you don‘t have the right to be toxic to others, as simple as that.

    I never claimed anyone has a right to be toxic, but that is not what you said now is it? You gave descriptors and lade the blame clearly on a subsection of the payer base. You literally wrote:

    I didn‘t say you did claim that? It was just a general statement everyone should agree on: Don‘t be toxic.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    That is by far not the same as stating no one should be toxic.

    Yeah, I blame the subsection of the player base that calls other people names and is toxic, in this case the term „toxic casual“.
    I also tell them that not everyone will behave how they want, unless they create a static. So to fix their problems with meeting „toxic casuals“, as they call them, they could simply create a static group.

    I was giving a suggestion.

    You have a heart of gold. Don't let them take it from you.
    Remaster confirmed! Umbasa!

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @YtseJam.9784 said:
    Titles are not 100% trustworthy, people can buy those. You need some kind of proof that you can beat them frequently :)

    You could just create a static with people you know. 100% trustworthy, and the proof are your past runs with the group.
    Only like minded players.
    It‘s not that hard to create your own groups ;)

    Unrelated to op, but related to some other posters:
    Guess it‘s just easier to complain about „toxic casuals“, even though you would actually never see casuals anywhere near to T4.
    They‘re just the scapegoat term for some „hardcore“ (LULW) players. Big cope.
    Hint: The people you are pugging with aren‘t actually casual players, those bad players belong to your same group of „hardcore“ people, you‘re just cannibalizing your own community. Nice job.

    There is no binary switch which makes one player casual or hardcore, even if that is the most easy approach by players, of any part of the community, to easily blame and demonize other players. As such, a vast majority of players who play T4 fractals are in fact casual, if performance and ability is used as definition for someone being casual or hardcore.

    It would also not matter. The term used is irrelevant. The fact that there is a huge discrepancy even ONLY within T4 tier is the actual issue. Mind you the even bigger discrepancy going higher up into CMs. The fact you treat all players as "hardcore" above a certain skill threshold is just plain insulting. That's like saying every single person with a certain shade of darker skin are all black. Way to put all minority groups into one basket (maybe this analogy will make you realize how toxic your statement is, with real world similarities).

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    You mean the same way you just now marginalized an entire group of different skilled players as all being "hardcore" and as such "elitist"? How are you not being toxic at this point in time? Doesn't even matter if you consider yourself casual or what ever, toxic is toxic, and that's the exact mentality which others refer to as "toxic casual". Thought I will agree, the added descriptor is not needed. Strait up toxic suffices in this case.

    To your entitlement argument: every player has the same right to shape and form the groups they want. If one group of players is not allowed to shape and form their groups, no one is.

    So, you didn‘t get my post at all. Nice. I have never said being hardcore is about skill level, not sure where you got that from. Insinuating that is just insulting. What I have said is that some people that use the label „hardcore“ for themselves are being toxic to their own community by calling other people „toxic casuals“, for some reason, thus cannibalizing the instance-going community.

    Your blatant misrepresentation of my post and opinion is pretty toxic, straight up toxic.

    You never gave a definition for what you define as casual or hardcore, and as such I gave one for how I used the terms. If your definition varied, you are welcome to give that differing one, though it will not change any of the facts that:
    1. the main issue here is difference in player skill, which is present no matter in which content but of significant importance in more challenging content
    2. you still approach this entire issue the same way as other toxic members of either side of the spectrum approach it: as binary "us versus them" and no definition you could give would alleviate your wording here
    3. the terms "casual" and "hardcore" are absolutely insufficient to even remotely give justice to the vast amount of difference in player skill or individual approach to this issue. Which is exactly WHY a crude system like KP is in effect in the first place the way it is handled, because numeric values can distinguish

    Hurts when one points out what was actually said, doesn't it? Your wording and approach is part of the problem the community of this game faces, and it does not matter which side of the argument you think you are on.

    So you put words into my mouth that were based on your assumptions and shared all your anger based on that? Wow.
    Maybe you should have asked first before assuming things. That‘s key to conversation. This really is part of the problem of this community.

    I didn't assume. There is literally NO definition you can use which would change the wording you used. Which was strait up binary, but nice try to deflect.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Also, just getting a static would fix most of the proplems some people here have. Can’t be that hard to create your own group, can it?

    Sure, doesn't this apply to all players? No matter how skilled they are? Couldn't weaker players not also form statics? Does the ability to form a static supersede or benefit a specific group of players?

    Yes this applies to everyone,, nowhere have i stated something else. Are you trying to move the goalpost?

    So if it aplies to everyone, it is of no value as argument that one type of players should be required to take this step instead of using the LFG. No?

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Sure, you have the right do shape your group how you want, but you don‘t have the right to be toxic to others, as simple as that.

    I never claimed anyone has a right to be toxic, but that is not what you said now is it? You gave descriptors and lade the blame clearly on a subsection of the payer base. You literally wrote:

    I didn‘t say you did claim that? It was just a general statement everyone should agree on: Don‘t be toxic.

    Agreed.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    That is by far not the same as stating no one should be toxic.

    Yeah, I blame the subsection of the player base that calls other people names and is toxic, in this case the term „toxic casual“.
    I also tell them that not everyone will behave how they want, unless they create a static. So to fix their problems with meeting „toxic casuals“, as they call them, they could simply create a static group.

    Okay, that is more understandable, yet this also applies to all players. If players don't want to meet "toxic elitist", they should form a static. In fact they should simply make their own groups. Yet I will yield that even with making personal groups, some cross over of toxic players from any part of the player base might join, but it is a step towards healthier group compositions.

  • Raknar.4735Raknar.4735 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 18, 2020

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @YtseJam.9784 said:
    Titles are not 100% trustworthy, people can buy those. You need some kind of proof that you can beat them frequently :)

    You could just create a static with people you know. 100% trustworthy, and the proof are your past runs with the group.
    Only like minded players.
    It‘s not that hard to create your own groups ;)

    Unrelated to op, but related to some other posters:
    Guess it‘s just easier to complain about „toxic casuals“, even though you would actually never see casuals anywhere near to T4.
    They‘re just the scapegoat term for some „hardcore“ (LULW) players. Big cope.
    Hint: The people you are pugging with aren‘t actually casual players, those bad players belong to your same group of „hardcore“ people, you‘re just cannibalizing your own community. Nice job.

    There is no binary switch which makes one player casual or hardcore, even if that is the most easy approach by players, of any part of the community, to easily blame and demonize other players. As such, a vast majority of players who play T4 fractals are in fact casual, if performance and ability is used as definition for someone being casual or hardcore.

    It would also not matter. The term used is irrelevant. The fact that there is a huge discrepancy even ONLY within T4 tier is the actual issue. Mind you the even bigger discrepancy going higher up into CMs. The fact you treat all players as "hardcore" above a certain skill threshold is just plain insulting. That's like saying every single person with a certain shade of darker skin are all black. Way to put all minority groups into one basket (maybe this analogy will make you realize how toxic your statement is, with real world similarities).

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    You mean the same way you just now marginalized an entire group of different skilled players as all being "hardcore" and as such "elitist"? How are you not being toxic at this point in time? Doesn't even matter if you consider yourself casual or what ever, toxic is toxic, and that's the exact mentality which others refer to as "toxic casual". Thought I will agree, the added descriptor is not needed. Strait up toxic suffices in this case.

    To your entitlement argument: every player has the same right to shape and form the groups they want. If one group of players is not allowed to shape and form their groups, no one is.

    So, you didn‘t get my post at all. Nice. I have never said being hardcore is about skill level, not sure where you got that from. Insinuating that is just insulting. What I have said is that some people that use the label „hardcore“ for themselves are being toxic to their own community by calling other people „toxic casuals“, for some reason, thus cannibalizing the instance-going community.

    Your blatant misrepresentation of my post and opinion is pretty toxic, straight up toxic.

    You never gave a definition for what you define as casual or hardcore, and as such I gave one for how I used the terms. If your definition varied, you are welcome to give that differing one, though it will not change any of the facts that:
    1. the main issue here is difference in player skill, which is present no matter in which content but of significant importance in more challenging content
    2. you still approach this entire issue the same way as other toxic members of either side of the spectrum approach it: as binary "us versus them" and no definition you could give would alleviate your wording here
    3. the terms "casual" and "hardcore" are absolutely insufficient to even remotely give justice to the vast amount of difference in player skill or individual approach to this issue. Which is exactly WHY a crude system like KP is in effect in the first place the way it is handled, because numeric values can distinguish

    Hurts when one points out what was actually said, doesn't it? Your wording and approach is part of the problem the community of this game faces, and it does not matter which side of the argument you think you are on.

    So you put words into my mouth that were based on your assumptions and shared all your anger based on that? Wow.
    Maybe you should have asked first before assuming things. That‘s key to conversation. This really is part of the problem of this community.

    I didn't assume. There is literally NO definition you can use which would change the wording you used. Which was strait up binary, but nice try to deflect.

    Except I‘m not deflecting. You‘re just assuming.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Also, just getting a static would fix most of the proplems some people here have. Can’t be that hard to create your own group, can it?

    Sure, doesn't this apply to all players? No matter how skilled they are? Couldn't weaker players not also form statics? Does the ability to form a static supersede or benefit a specific group of players?

    Yes this applies to everyone,, nowhere have i stated something else. Are you trying to move the goalpost?

    So if it aplies to everyone, it is of no value as argument that one type of players should be required to take this step instead of using the LFG. No?

    ??? Stop moving the goalpost. Creating a static would solve so many problems.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Sure, you have the right do shape your group how you want, but you don‘t have the right to be toxic to others, as simple as that.

    I never claimed anyone has a right to be toxic, but that is not what you said now is it? You gave descriptors and lade the blame clearly on a subsection of the payer base. You literally wrote:

    I didn‘t say you did claim that? It was just a general statement everyone should agree on: Don‘t be toxic.

    Agreed.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    That is by far not the same as stating no one should be toxic.

    Yeah, I blame the subsection of the player base that calls other people names and is toxic, in this case the term „toxic casual“.
    I also tell them that not everyone will behave how they want, unless they create a static. So to fix their problems with meeting „toxic casuals“, as they call them, they could simply create a static group.

    Okay, that is more understandable, yet this also applies to all players. If players don't want to meet "toxic elitist", they should form a static. In fact they should simply make their own groups. Yet I will yield that even with making personal groups, some cross over of toxic players from any part of the player base might join, but it is a step towards healthier group compositions.

    Yes, exactly. That is my point. Just create statics and you won‘t have to deal with people that might be toxic. (Or atleast the chance is way lower)
    Edit: Asum edited his post. Not as bad as it was before now, so fine.

    You have a heart of gold. Don't let them take it from you.
    Remaster confirmed! Umbasa!

  • Asum.4960Asum.4960 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @YtseJam.9784 said:
    Titles are not 100% trustworthy, people can buy those. You need some kind of proof that you can beat them frequently :)

    You could just create a static with people you know. 100% trustworthy, and the proof are your past runs with the group.
    Only like minded players.
    It‘s not that hard to create your own groups ;)

    I can't even recall the amount of statics I've formed or joined over the years anymore, but let's be real, through severe lack of content and massive missteps like the Build "Template" Patch etc. people have been quitting/taking breaks in droves, especially over the last ~2 years or so.
    Sure I've had statics last for even years for some content at times, and good times they were, but others also barely a month, or even falling apart due to scheduling and such in the first week.
    And each time that happens, it's back to pugging (or quitting yourself), at least for a while.

    Plus some people have different playtimes available from a day to day or week to week basis, which generally just doesn't work for statics at all.

    So sure, statics are the best case scenario to play content such as this with, but they aren't an automatic fix or perfect solution either, especially not for everyone.
    And just because the imperfect solution of statics exists, doesn't mean another imperfect solution like KP for non statics isn't beneficial to exist simultaneously.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    Absolutely, people aren't entitled to play with good players every time.
    That doesn't at all mean though that community tools like KP aren't valuable to at least somewhat facilitate the attempted search for that.
    KP was an (imperfect) community solution to a problem. Removing it doesn't suddenly fix those underlying issues that made the attempted solution emerge in the first place.

    Toxicity usually is the result of people with vastly different mindsets, skillsets and expectations clashing. The problem is neither super hardcore players, nor super casual players, not high skilled player nor low skilled players - the problem is each of those groups to each other, and not giving or removing systems for each of those players to play with whom they want to play with.
    The invention of KP requirements tried to negate that somewhat by allowing people to matchmake based on experience and investment, which while not perfectly accurate at least strongly relates to mindset, skillset and expectations.

    What does removing KP exactly fix? Besides players just eventually resorting to more clunky and inconvenient things anyway?

    R.I.P. Build Templates, 15.10.2019

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 18, 2020

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @YtseJam.9784 said:
    Titles are not 100% trustworthy, people can buy those. You need some kind of proof that you can beat them frequently :)

    You could just create a static with people you know. 100% trustworthy, and the proof are your past runs with the group.
    Only like minded players.
    It‘s not that hard to create your own groups ;)

    Unrelated to op, but related to some other posters:
    Guess it‘s just easier to complain about „toxic casuals“, even though you would actually never see casuals anywhere near to T4.
    They‘re just the scapegoat term for some „hardcore“ (LULW) players. Big cope.
    Hint: The people you are pugging with aren‘t actually casual players, those bad players belong to your same group of „hardcore“ people, you‘re just cannibalizing your own community. Nice job.

    There is no binary switch which makes one player casual or hardcore, even if that is the most easy approach by players, of any part of the community, to easily blame and demonize other players. As such, a vast majority of players who play T4 fractals are in fact casual, if performance and ability is used as definition for someone being casual or hardcore.

    It would also not matter. The term used is irrelevant. The fact that there is a huge discrepancy even ONLY within T4 tier is the actual issue. Mind you the even bigger discrepancy going higher up into CMs. The fact you treat all players as "hardcore" above a certain skill threshold is just plain insulting. That's like saying every single person with a certain shade of darker skin are all black. Way to put all minority groups into one basket (maybe this analogy will make you realize how toxic your statement is, with real world similarities).

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    You mean the same way you just now marginalized an entire group of different skilled players as all being "hardcore" and as such "elitist"? How are you not being toxic at this point in time? Doesn't even matter if you consider yourself casual or what ever, toxic is toxic, and that's the exact mentality which others refer to as "toxic casual". Thought I will agree, the added descriptor is not needed. Strait up toxic suffices in this case.

    To your entitlement argument: every player has the same right to shape and form the groups they want. If one group of players is not allowed to shape and form their groups, no one is.

    So, you didn‘t get my post at all. Nice. I have never said being hardcore is about skill level, not sure where you got that from. Insinuating that is just insulting. What I have said is that some people that use the label „hardcore“ for themselves are being toxic to their own community by calling other people „toxic casuals“, for some reason, thus cannibalizing the instance-going community.

    Your blatant misrepresentation of my post and opinion is pretty toxic, straight up toxic.

    You never gave a definition for what you define as casual or hardcore, and as such I gave one for how I used the terms. If your definition varied, you are welcome to give that differing one, though it will not change any of the facts that:
    1. the main issue here is difference in player skill, which is present no matter in which content but of significant importance in more challenging content
    2. you still approach this entire issue the same way as other toxic members of either side of the spectrum approach it: as binary "us versus them" and no definition you could give would alleviate your wording here
    3. the terms "casual" and "hardcore" are absolutely insufficient to even remotely give justice to the vast amount of difference in player skill or individual approach to this issue. Which is exactly WHY a crude system like KP is in effect in the first place the way it is handled, because numeric values can distinguish

    Hurts when one points out what was actually said, doesn't it? Your wording and approach is part of the problem the community of this game faces, and it does not matter which side of the argument you think you are on.

    So you put words into my mouth that were based on your assumptions and shared all your anger based on that? Wow.
    Maybe you should have asked first before assuming things. That‘s key to conversation. This really is part of the problem of this community.

    I didn't assume. There is literally NO definition you can use which would change the wording you used. Which was strait up binary, but nice try to deflect.

    Except I‘m not deflecting. You‘re just assuming.

    Let's move on. I'm sure you would phrase quite a few things differently in hindsight, given your persistence that any type of definition used could change the wording you used.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Also, just getting a static would fix most of the proplems some people here have. Can’t be that hard to create your own group, can it?

    Sure, doesn't this apply to all players? No matter how skilled they are? Couldn't weaker players not also form statics? Does the ability to form a static supersede or benefit a specific group of players?

    Yes this applies to everyone,, nowhere have i stated something else. Are you trying to move the goalpost?

    So if it aplies to everyone, it is of no value as argument that one type of players should be required to take this step instead of using the LFG. No?

    ??? Stop moving the goalpost. Creating a static would solve so many problems.

    Yes it would, for each and every player. So I fail how suggesting this as solution to part of the player base is any argument. Outside of this suggestion though, everyone has the same right to the LFG and creating the group they desire.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Sure, you have the right do shape your group how you want, but you don‘t have the right to be toxic to others, as simple as that.

    I never claimed anyone has a right to be toxic, but that is not what you said now is it? You gave descriptors and lade the blame clearly on a subsection of the payer base. You literally wrote:

    I didn‘t say you did claim that? It was just a general statement everyone should agree on: Don‘t be toxic.

    Agreed.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    That is by far not the same as stating no one should be toxic.

    Yeah, I blame the subsection of the player base that calls other people names and is toxic, in this case the term „toxic casual“.
    I also tell them that not everyone will behave how they want, unless they create a static. So to fix their problems with meeting „toxic casuals“, as they call them, they could simply create a static group.

    Okay, that is more understandable, yet this also applies to all players. If players don't want to meet "toxic elitist", they should form a static. In fact they should simply make their own groups. Yet I will yield that even with making personal groups, some cross over of toxic players from any part of the player base might join, but it is a step towards healthier group compositions.

    Yes, exactly. That is my point. Just create statics and you won‘t have to deal with people that might be toxic. (Or atleast the chance is way lower)
    Asum would be an example of someone calling others names with his free use of „toxic casual“

    Actually he explains nicely how a specific mindset present in some players creates toxicity. He uses terms like toxic casual and toxic elitist while explaining exactly to which type of player this might apply. In relation to toxic casual, he specifically refers to players who:

    • lack the required experience and/or skill
    • yet still want to get taken along demanding more experienced players do so
    • will likely be just as toxic or even more toxic once they have gained the experience and skill required

    In summary: players with egoistical nature.

    Being an egoist is unrelated to player skill. His explanation does show though how even non egoistical players, or less egoistical players, will be in favor of gate keeping by simple matter of repetition and time constraints. It's simple really:

    • there are a ton of experienced players helping out on their own terms as often as they can, who still want their smooth runs when they want them.
    • There are a ton of less experienced players willing to learn and progress naturally or find others to teach them, then progress and improve as they play the game.
    • Then finally there are the 2 small subgroups of egoists, often among the most vocal on the forums in demands: in one case, those who demand others take them along far outside their own abilities. In the other case, not willing to extend a helping hand ever when more experienced.

    Hint: that last minority is often one and the same type of player, just at a different place in their in-game skill and ability.

  • Raknar.4735Raknar.4735 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Asum.4960 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @YtseJam.9784 said:
    Titles are not 100% trustworthy, people can buy those. You need some kind of proof that you can beat them frequently :)

    You could just create a static with people you know. 100% trustworthy, and the proof are your past runs with the group.
    Only like minded players.
    It‘s not that hard to create your own groups ;)

    I can't even recall the amount of statics I've formed or joined over the years anymore, but let's be real, through severe lack of content and massive missteps like the Build "Template" Patch etc. people have been quitting/taking breaks in droves, especially over the last ~2 years or so.
    Sure I've had statics last for even years for some content at times, and good times they were, but others also barely a month, or even falling apart due to scheduling and such in the first week.
    And each time that happens, it's back to pugging (or quitting yourself), at least for a while.

    Plus some people have different playtimes available from a day to day or week to week basis, which generally just doesn't work for statics at all.

    So sure, statics are the best case scenario to play content such as this with, but they aren't an automatic fix or perfect solution either, especially not for everyone.
    And just because the imperfect solution of statics exists, doesn't mean another imperfect solution like KP for non statics isn't beneficial to exist simultaneously.

    Yes, statics can be hard to build, but there‘s also guilds and discords. You could create one of those with players you deem competent, until you have a community large enough with always ready to do certain content. Not a training raiding/fractal community, but an actual /fractal community with players always at the ready. Maybe it even grows large enough for Anet to notice, so that they spend more ressources.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    Absolutely, people aren't entitled to play with good players every time.
    That doesn't at all mean though that community tools like KP aren't valuable to at least somewhat facilitate the attempted search for that.
    KP was an (imperfect) community solution to a problem. Removing it doesn't suddenly fix those underlying issues that made the attempted solution emerge in the first place.

    Toxicity usually is the result of people with vastly different mindsets, skillsets and expectations clashing. The problem is neither super hardcore players, nor super casual players, not high skilled player nor low skilled players - the problem is each of those groups to each other, and not giving or removing systems for each of those players to play with whom they want to play with.
    The invention of KP requirements tried to negate that somewhat by allowing people to matchmake based on experience and investment, which while not perfectly accurate at least strongly relates to mindset, skillset and expectations.

    What does removing KP exactly fix? Besides players just eventually resorting to more clunky and inconvenient things anyway?

    Form a guild or a whole discord community with good players if a static isn‘t reasonable! With enough players running instanced content any time would be no problem. You wouldn‘t have to resort to imperfect solutions then. The new weeklies give even more reason to so so.
    TTT e.g. does something like this, with players ready to kill TT daily.

    You have a heart of gold. Don't let them take it from you.
    Remaster confirmed! Umbasa!

  • Asum.4960Asum.4960 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 18, 2020

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Asum.4960 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @YtseJam.9784 said:
    Titles are not 100% trustworthy, people can buy those. You need some kind of proof that you can beat them frequently :)

    You could just create a static with people you know. 100% trustworthy, and the proof are your past runs with the group.
    Only like minded players.
    It‘s not that hard to create your own groups ;)

    I can't even recall the amount of statics I've formed or joined over the years anymore, but let's be real, through severe lack of content and massive missteps like the Build "Template" Patch etc. people have been quitting/taking breaks in droves, especially over the last ~2 years or so.
    Sure I've had statics last for even years for some content at times, and good times they were, but others also barely a month, or even falling apart due to scheduling and such in the first week.
    And each time that happens, it's back to pugging (or quitting yourself), at least for a while.

    Plus some people have different playtimes available from a day to day or week to week basis, which generally just doesn't work for statics at all.

    So sure, statics are the best case scenario to play content such as this with, but they aren't an automatic fix or perfect solution either, especially not for everyone.
    And just because the imperfect solution of statics exists, doesn't mean another imperfect solution like KP for non statics isn't beneficial to exist simultaneously.

    Yes, statics can be hard to build, but there‘s also guilds and discords. You could create one of those with players you deem competent, until you have a community large enough with always ready to do certain content. Not a training raiding/fractal community, but an actual /fractal community with players always at the ready. Maybe it even grows large enough for Anet to notice, so that they spend more ressources.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    Absolutely, people aren't entitled to play with good players every time.
    That doesn't at all mean though that community tools like KP aren't valuable to at least somewhat facilitate the attempted search for that.
    KP was an (imperfect) community solution to a problem. Removing it doesn't suddenly fix those underlying issues that made the attempted solution emerge in the first place.

    Toxicity usually is the result of people with vastly different mindsets, skillsets and expectations clashing. The problem is neither super hardcore players, nor super casual players, not high skilled player nor low skilled players - the problem is each of those groups to each other, and not giving or removing systems for each of those players to play with whom they want to play with.
    The invention of KP requirements tried to negate that somewhat by allowing people to matchmake based on experience and investment, which while not perfectly accurate at least strongly relates to mindset, skillset and expectations.

    What does removing KP exactly fix? Besides players just eventually resorting to more clunky and inconvenient things anyway?

    Form a guild or a whole discord community with good players if a static isn‘t reasonable! With enough players running instanced content any time would be no problem. You wouldn‘t have to resort to imperfect solutions then. The new weeklies give even more reason to so so.
    TTT e.g. does something like this, with players ready to kill TT daily.

    Yes, thank you for repeating your previous point. But that doesn't address anything I said in response.
    My point was, I've been there, over and over and over again - and I'm sure if I stick with it I'll be there again with yet another new group/guild.
    I don't really need to be told that statics and guilds exist as options or how to find/form them, when I just stated that I had plenty of those over the last 8 years, but how they aren't a perfect and always sustained solution either.

    But why is the existence and possibility of going for a static group and playtime exclusive with a reasonable way to pug in your eyes?
    Just because statics are an option doesn't mean LFG needs to be a complete gamble and mess. Why not give players who can't or won't for whatever reason join a static, or just currently don't have one, some at least better tools (like KP) to filter LFG by?

    You just haven't made a point for that yet.

    R.I.P. Build Templates, 15.10.2019

  • Raknar.4735Raknar.4735 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @YtseJam.9784 said:
    Titles are not 100% trustworthy, people can buy those. You need some kind of proof that you can beat them frequently :)

    You could just create a static with people you know. 100% trustworthy, and the proof are your past runs with the group.
    Only like minded players.
    It‘s not that hard to create your own groups ;)

    Unrelated to op, but related to some other posters:
    Guess it‘s just easier to complain about „toxic casuals“, even though you would actually never see casuals anywhere near to T4.
    They‘re just the scapegoat term for some „hardcore“ (LULW) players. Big cope.
    Hint: The people you are pugging with aren‘t actually casual players, those bad players belong to your same group of „hardcore“ people, you‘re just cannibalizing your own community. Nice job.

    There is no binary switch which makes one player casual or hardcore, even if that is the most easy approach by players, of any part of the community, to easily blame and demonize other players. As such, a vast majority of players who play T4 fractals are in fact casual, if performance and ability is used as definition for someone being casual or hardcore.

    It would also not matter. The term used is irrelevant. The fact that there is a huge discrepancy even ONLY within T4 tier is the actual issue. Mind you the even bigger discrepancy going higher up into CMs. The fact you treat all players as "hardcore" above a certain skill threshold is just plain insulting. That's like saying every single person with a certain shade of darker skin are all black. Way to put all minority groups into one basket (maybe this analogy will make you realize how toxic your statement is, with real world similarities).

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    You mean the same way you just now marginalized an entire group of different skilled players as all being "hardcore" and as such "elitist"? How are you not being toxic at this point in time? Doesn't even matter if you consider yourself casual or what ever, toxic is toxic, and that's the exact mentality which others refer to as "toxic casual". Thought I will agree, the added descriptor is not needed. Strait up toxic suffices in this case.

    To your entitlement argument: every player has the same right to shape and form the groups they want. If one group of players is not allowed to shape and form their groups, no one is.

    So, you didn‘t get my post at all. Nice. I have never said being hardcore is about skill level, not sure where you got that from. Insinuating that is just insulting. What I have said is that some people that use the label „hardcore“ for themselves are being toxic to their own community by calling other people „toxic casuals“, for some reason, thus cannibalizing the instance-going community.

    Your blatant misrepresentation of my post and opinion is pretty toxic, straight up toxic.

    You never gave a definition for what you define as casual or hardcore, and as such I gave one for how I used the terms. If your definition varied, you are welcome to give that differing one, though it will not change any of the facts that:
    1. the main issue here is difference in player skill, which is present no matter in which content but of significant importance in more challenging content
    2. you still approach this entire issue the same way as other toxic members of either side of the spectrum approach it: as binary "us versus them" and no definition you could give would alleviate your wording here
    3. the terms "casual" and "hardcore" are absolutely insufficient to even remotely give justice to the vast amount of difference in player skill or individual approach to this issue. Which is exactly WHY a crude system like KP is in effect in the first place the way it is handled, because numeric values can distinguish

    Hurts when one points out what was actually said, doesn't it? Your wording and approach is part of the problem the community of this game faces, and it does not matter which side of the argument you think you are on.

    So you put words into my mouth that were based on your assumptions and shared all your anger based on that? Wow.
    Maybe you should have asked first before assuming things. That‘s key to conversation. This really is part of the problem of this community.

    I didn't assume. There is literally NO definition you can use which would change the wording you used. Which was strait up binary, but nice try to deflect.

    Except I‘m not deflecting. You‘re just assuming.

    Let's move on. I'm sure you would phrase quite a few things differently in hindsight, given your persistence that any type of definition used could change the wording you used.

    I wouldn‘t!

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Also, just getting a static would fix most of the proplems some people here have. Can’t be that hard to create your own group, can it?

    Sure, doesn't this apply to all players? No matter how skilled they are? Couldn't weaker players not also form statics? Does the ability to form a static supersede or benefit a specific group of players?

    Yes this applies to everyone,, nowhere have i stated something else. Are you trying to move the goalpost?

    So if it aplies to everyone, it is of no value as argument that one type of players should be required to take this step instead of using the LFG. No?

    ??? Stop moving the goalpost. Creating a static would solve so many problems.

    Yes it would, for each and every player. So I fail how suggesting this as solution to part of the player base is any argument. Outside of this suggestion though, everyone has the same right to the LFG and creating the group they desire.

    Yeah, every player has the same right to use the LFG. But that‘s the problem, toxic people also will use it. In a static the chance is lowered dramatically.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Sure, you have the right do shape your group how you want, but you don‘t have the right to be toxic to others, as simple as that.

    I never claimed anyone has a right to be toxic, but that is not what you said now is it? You gave descriptors and lade the blame clearly on a subsection of the payer base. You literally wrote:

    I didn‘t say you did claim that? It was just a general statement everyone should agree on: Don‘t be toxic.

    Agreed.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    That is by far not the same as stating no one should be toxic.

    Yeah, I blame the subsection of the player base that calls other people names and is toxic, in this case the term „toxic casual“.
    I also tell them that not everyone will behave how they want, unless they create a static. So to fix their problems with meeting „toxic casuals“, as they call them, they could simply create a static group.

    Okay, that is more understandable, yet this also applies to all players. If players don't want to meet "toxic elitist", they should form a static. In fact they should simply make their own groups. Yet I will yield that even with making personal groups, some cross over of toxic players from any part of the player base might join, but it is a step towards healthier group compositions.

    Yes, exactly. That is my point. Just create statics and you won‘t have to deal with people that might be toxic. (Or atleast the chance is way lower)
    Asum would be an example of someone calling others names with his free use of „toxic casual“

    Actually he explains nicely how a specific mindset present in some players creates toxicity. He uses terms like toxic casual and toxic elitist while explaining exactly to which type of player this might apply. In relation to toxic casual, he specifically refers to players who:

    • lack the required experience and/or skill
    • yet still want to get taken along demanding more experienced players do so
    • will likely be just as toxic or even more toxic once they have gained the experience and skill required

    In summary: players with egoistical nature.

    Being an egoist is unrelated to player skill. His explanation does show though how even non egoistical players, or less egoistical players, will be in favor of gate keeping by simple matter of repetition and time constraints. It's simple really:

    • there are a ton of experienced players helping out on their own terms as often as they can, who still want their smooth runs when they want them.
    • There are a ton of less experienced players willing to learn and progress naturally or find others to teach them, then progress and improve as they play the game.
    • Then finally there are the 2 small subgroups of egoists, often among the most vocal on the forums in demands: in one case, those who demand others take them along far outside their own abilities. In the other case, not willing to extend a helping hand ever when more experienced.

    Hint: that last minority is often one and the same type of player, just at a different place in their in-game skill and ability.

    His explanation is pretty biased against the players of „lesser skill“ he originally called „toxic casuals“.
    The term itself is the problem. It insinuates those „toxic casuals“ are all part of the „casual“ playerbase.
    Being a casual is unrelated to playerskill, though. People that do nothing in the game but raid once a week would be part of the casual playerbase, as they only play GW2 casually. Someone that farms silverwastes 24/7 is hardcore.

    It‘s the original problem. What you see and I see as casual and hardcore is completely different. There are pretty much maybe 0.5% of actual hardcore people in this game, the rest is just average. The casuals don‘t play the game much.

    Seriously, just create a static and you wouldn‘t have the problem of meeting those „egoistical“ players.

    You have a heart of gold. Don't let them take it from you.
    Remaster confirmed! Umbasa!

  • Raknar.4735Raknar.4735 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 18, 2020

    @Asum.4960 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Asum.4960 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @YtseJam.9784 said:
    Titles are not 100% trustworthy, people can buy those. You need some kind of proof that you can beat them frequently :)

    You could just create a static with people you know. 100% trustworthy, and the proof are your past runs with the group.
    Only like minded players.
    It‘s not that hard to create your own groups ;)

    I can't even recall the amount of statics I've formed or joined over the years anymore, but let's be real, through severe lack of content and massive missteps like the Build "Template" Patch etc. people have been quitting/taking breaks in droves, especially over the last ~2 years or so.
    Sure I've had statics last for even years for some content at times, and good times they were, but others also barely a month, or even falling apart due to scheduling and such in the first week.
    And each time that happens, it's back to pugging (or quitting yourself), at least for a while.

    Plus some people have different playtimes available from a day to day or week to week basis, which generally just doesn't work for statics at all.

    So sure, statics are the best case scenario to play content such as this with, but they aren't an automatic fix or perfect solution either, especially not for everyone.
    And just because the imperfect solution of statics exists, doesn't mean another imperfect solution like KP for non statics isn't beneficial to exist simultaneously.

    Yes, statics can be hard to build, but there‘s also guilds and discords. You could create one of those with players you deem competent, until you have a community large enough with always ready to do certain content. Not a training raiding/fractal community, but an actual /fractal community with players always at the ready. Maybe it even grows large enough for Anet to notice, so that they spend more ressources.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    Absolutely, people aren't entitled to play with good players every time.
    That doesn't at all mean though that community tools like KP aren't valuable to at least somewhat facilitate the attempted search for that.
    KP was an (imperfect) community solution to a problem. Removing it doesn't suddenly fix those underlying issues that made the attempted solution emerge in the first place.

    Toxicity usually is the result of people with vastly different mindsets, skillsets and expectations clashing. The problem is neither super hardcore players, nor super casual players, not high skilled player nor low skilled players - the problem is each of those groups to each other, and not giving or removing systems for each of those players to play with whom they want to play with.
    The invention of KP requirements tried to negate that somewhat by allowing people to matchmake based on experience and investment, which while not perfectly accurate at least strongly relates to mindset, skillset and expectations.

    What does removing KP exactly fix? Besides players just eventually resorting to more clunky and inconvenient things anyway?

    Form a guild or a whole discord community with good players if a static isn‘t reasonable! With enough players running instanced content any time would be no problem. You wouldn‘t have to resort to imperfect solutions then. The new weeklies give even more reason to so so.
    TTT e.g. does something like this, with players ready to kill TT daily.

    Yes, thank you for repeating your previous point. But that doesn't address anything I said in response.
    My point was, I've been there, over and over and over again - and I'm sure if I stick with it I'll be there again with yet another new group/guild.

    But why is the existence and possibility of going for a static group and playtime exclusive with a reasonable way to pug in your eyes?
    Just because statics are an option doesn't mean LFG needs to be a complete gamble and mess. Why not give players who can't or won't for whatever reason join a static, or just currently don't have one, some at least better tools (like KP) to filter LFG by?

    You just haven't made a point for that yet.

    Because the best tool to gauge playerskill is already there: socialize and experience how good the players are. And in that way you can form a community. This is an MMORPG, not a single player game. You will have to deal with people. The other players aren‘t simple NPCs.

    You have a heart of gold. Don't let them take it from you.
    Remaster confirmed! Umbasa!

  • Asum.4960Asum.4960 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 18, 2020

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    His explanation is pretty biased against the players of „lesser skill“ he originally called „toxic casuals“.
    The term itself is the problem. It insinuates those „toxic casuals“ are all part of the „casual“ playerbase.
    Being a casual is unrelated to playerskill, though. People that do nothing in the game but raid once a week would be part of the casual playerbase, as they only play GW2 casually. Someone that farms silverwastes 24/7 is hardcore.

    It‘s the original problem. What you see and I see as casual and hardcore is completely different. There are pretty much maybe 0.5% of actual hardcore people in this game, the rest is just average. The casuals don‘t play the game much.

    Seriously, just create a static and you wouldn‘t have the problem of meeting those „egoistical“ players.

    My post in question you are talking about literally was intended to showcase and illustrate the view point of high skill hard core players and the issues they face.
    I'm pretty sure I was wearing my bias on my sleeves there, what you want to read into that further is up to you.

    Not sure how that invalidates or addresses the points made though. We can fight about semantics all day, but it won't address my call for some simple baseline empathy.
    Not just for for new players trying to get into the content and the real struggles they face with that, but also for the sizeable non static running hardcore population and their real struggles.

    You can shout statics all you want, but that doesn't relate to the argument of KP's and applies to both sides equally as alternative solution, KP or not.
    I personally think though it shouldn't be the only solution available.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Because the best tool to gauge playerskill is already there: socialize and experience how good the players are. And in that was you can form a community. This is an MMORPG, not a single player game. You will have to deal with people.

    So you don't have an argument for that, got it.

    R.I.P. Build Templates, 15.10.2019

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @YtseJam.9784 said:
    Titles are not 100% trustworthy, people can buy those. You need some kind of proof that you can beat them frequently :)

    You could just create a static with people you know. 100% trustworthy, and the proof are your past runs with the group.
    Only like minded players.
    It‘s not that hard to create your own groups ;)

    Unrelated to op, but related to some other posters:
    Guess it‘s just easier to complain about „toxic casuals“, even though you would actually never see casuals anywhere near to T4.
    They‘re just the scapegoat term for some „hardcore“ (LULW) players. Big cope.
    Hint: The people you are pugging with aren‘t actually casual players, those bad players belong to your same group of „hardcore“ people, you‘re just cannibalizing your own community. Nice job.

    There is no binary switch which makes one player casual or hardcore, even if that is the most easy approach by players, of any part of the community, to easily blame and demonize other players. As such, a vast majority of players who play T4 fractals are in fact casual, if performance and ability is used as definition for someone being casual or hardcore.

    It would also not matter. The term used is irrelevant. The fact that there is a huge discrepancy even ONLY within T4 tier is the actual issue. Mind you the even bigger discrepancy going higher up into CMs. The fact you treat all players as "hardcore" above a certain skill threshold is just plain insulting. That's like saying every single person with a certain shade of darker skin are all black. Way to put all minority groups into one basket (maybe this analogy will make you realize how toxic your statement is, with real world similarities).

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    You mean the same way you just now marginalized an entire group of different skilled players as all being "hardcore" and as such "elitist"? How are you not being toxic at this point in time? Doesn't even matter if you consider yourself casual or what ever, toxic is toxic, and that's the exact mentality which others refer to as "toxic casual". Thought I will agree, the added descriptor is not needed. Strait up toxic suffices in this case.

    To your entitlement argument: every player has the same right to shape and form the groups they want. If one group of players is not allowed to shape and form their groups, no one is.

    So, you didn‘t get my post at all. Nice. I have never said being hardcore is about skill level, not sure where you got that from. Insinuating that is just insulting. What I have said is that some people that use the label „hardcore“ for themselves are being toxic to their own community by calling other people „toxic casuals“, for some reason, thus cannibalizing the instance-going community.

    Your blatant misrepresentation of my post and opinion is pretty toxic, straight up toxic.

    You never gave a definition for what you define as casual or hardcore, and as such I gave one for how I used the terms. If your definition varied, you are welcome to give that differing one, though it will not change any of the facts that:
    1. the main issue here is difference in player skill, which is present no matter in which content but of significant importance in more challenging content
    2. you still approach this entire issue the same way as other toxic members of either side of the spectrum approach it: as binary "us versus them" and no definition you could give would alleviate your wording here
    3. the terms "casual" and "hardcore" are absolutely insufficient to even remotely give justice to the vast amount of difference in player skill or individual approach to this issue. Which is exactly WHY a crude system like KP is in effect in the first place the way it is handled, because numeric values can distinguish

    Hurts when one points out what was actually said, doesn't it? Your wording and approach is part of the problem the community of this game faces, and it does not matter which side of the argument you think you are on.

    So you put words into my mouth that were based on your assumptions and shared all your anger based on that? Wow.
    Maybe you should have asked first before assuming things. That‘s key to conversation. This really is part of the problem of this community.

    I didn't assume. There is literally NO definition you can use which would change the wording you used. Which was strait up binary, but nice try to deflect.

    Except I‘m not deflecting. You‘re just assuming.

    Let's move on. I'm sure you would phrase quite a few things differently in hindsight, given your persistence that any type of definition used could change the wording you used.

    I wouldn‘t!

    Suit yourself. In that case I'll just consider your very binary approach into dividing players and selectively putting half of them down as toxic.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Also, just getting a static would fix most of the proplems some people here have. Can’t be that hard to create your own group, can it?

    Sure, doesn't this apply to all players? No matter how skilled they are? Couldn't weaker players not also form statics? Does the ability to form a static supersede or benefit a specific group of players?

    Yes this applies to everyone,, nowhere have i stated something else. Are you trying to move the goalpost?

    So if it aplies to everyone, it is of no value as argument that one type of players should be required to take this step instead of using the LFG. No?

    ??? Stop moving the goalpost. Creating a static would solve so many problems.

    Yes it would, for each and every player. So I fail how suggesting this as solution to part of the player base is any argument. Outside of this suggestion though, everyone has the same right to the LFG and creating the group they desire.

    Yeah, every player has the same right to use the LFG. But that‘s the problem, toxic people also will use it. In a static the chance is lowered dramatically.

    That's again no argument for or against KP. On the contrary, going along this argument, any system in place which reduces toxicity as result of different players meshing, would be benficial.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Sure, you have the right do shape your group how you want, but you don‘t have the right to be toxic to others, as simple as that.

    I never claimed anyone has a right to be toxic, but that is not what you said now is it? You gave descriptors and lade the blame clearly on a subsection of the payer base. You literally wrote:

    I didn‘t say you did claim that? It was just a general statement everyone should agree on: Don‘t be toxic.

    Agreed.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    That is by far not the same as stating no one should be toxic.

    Yeah, I blame the subsection of the player base that calls other people names and is toxic, in this case the term „toxic casual“.
    I also tell them that not everyone will behave how they want, unless they create a static. So to fix their problems with meeting „toxic casuals“, as they call them, they could simply create a static group.

    Okay, that is more understandable, yet this also applies to all players. If players don't want to meet "toxic elitist", they should form a static. In fact they should simply make their own groups. Yet I will yield that even with making personal groups, some cross over of toxic players from any part of the player base might join, but it is a step towards healthier group compositions.

    Yes, exactly. That is my point. Just create statics and you won‘t have to deal with people that might be toxic. (Or atleast the chance is way lower)
    Asum would be an example of someone calling others names with his free use of „toxic casual“

    Actually he explains nicely how a specific mindset present in some players creates toxicity. He uses terms like toxic casual and toxic elitist while explaining exactly to which type of player this might apply. In relation to toxic casual, he specifically refers to players who:

    • lack the required experience and/or skill
    • yet still want to get taken along demanding more experienced players do so
    • will likely be just as toxic or even more toxic once they have gained the experience and skill required

    In summary: players with egoistical nature.

    Being an egoist is unrelated to player skill. His explanation does show though how even non egoistical players, or less egoistical players, will be in favor of gate keeping by simple matter of repetition and time constraints. It's simple really:

    • there are a ton of experienced players helping out on their own terms as often as they can, who still want their smooth runs when they want them.
    • There are a ton of less experienced players willing to learn and progress naturally or find others to teach them, then progress and improve as they play the game.
    • Then finally there are the 2 small subgroups of egoists, often among the most vocal on the forums in demands: in one case, those who demand others take them along far outside their own abilities. In the other case, not willing to extend a helping hand ever when more experienced.

    Hint: that last minority is often one and the same type of player, just at a different place in their in-game skill and ability.

    His explanation is pretty biased against the players of „lesser skill“ he originally called „toxic casuals“.
    The term itself is the problem. It insinuates those „toxic casuals“ are all part of the „casual“ playerbase.

    Except he clearly defines which part of the player base he means.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Being a casual is unrelated to playerskill, though. People that do nothing in the game but raid once a week would be part of the casual playerbase, as they only play GW2 casually. Someone that farms silverwastes 24/7 is hardcore.

    It‘s the original problem. What you see and I see as casual and hardcore is completely different. There are pretty much maybe 0.5% of actual hardcore people in this game, the rest is just average. The casuals don‘t play the game much.

    Again with the binary approach to define an entire player base. I don't see players as casual or hardcore, and to me it makes no difference. I see as players on dozens of different levels of personal skill, and under that view, the term casual incompasses a lot more than 0.5% of the player base.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Seriously, just create a static and you wouldn‘t have the problem of meeting those „egoistical“ players.

    I have statics. For both raids and fractals. That does not mean I have to accept bogus arguments why the LFG should be a total mess and unusable by players of each skill level.

  • Raknar.4735Raknar.4735 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Asum.4960 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    His explanation is pretty biased against the players of „lesser skill“ he originally called „toxic casuals“.
    The term itself is the problem. It insinuates those „toxic casuals“ are all part of the „casual“ playerbase.
    Being a casual is unrelated to playerskill, though. People that do nothing in the game but raid once a week would be part of the casual playerbase, as they only play GW2 casually. Someone that farms silverwastes 24/7 is hardcore.

    It‘s the original problem. What you see and I see as casual and hardcore is completely different. There are pretty much maybe 0.5% of actual hardcore people in this game, the rest is just average. The casuals don‘t play the game much.

    Seriously, just create a static and you wouldn‘t have the problem of meeting those „egoistical“ players.

    My post in question you are talking about literally was intended to showcase and illustrate the view point of high skill hard core players and the issues they face.
    I'm pretty sure I was wearing my bias on my sleeves there, what you want to read into that further is up to you.

    Not sure how that invalidates or addresses the points made though. We can fight about semantics all day, but it won't address my call for some simple baseline empathy.
    Not just for for new players trying to get into the content and the real struggles they face with that, but also for the sizeable non static running hardcore population and their real struggles.

    You can shout statics all you want, but that doesn't relate to the argument of KP's and applies to both sides equally as alternative solution, KP or not.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Because the best tool to gauge playerskill is already there: socialize and experience how good the players are. And in that was you can form a community. This is an MMORPG, not a single player game. You will have to deal with people.

    So you don't have an argument for that, got it.

    So you don‘t want to discuss, k. It‘s probably why you‘d rather use KPs instead of build actual strong relationships to form statics. MMMORPG communities nowadays.

    You have a heart of gold. Don't let them take it from you.
    Remaster confirmed! Umbasa!

  • Asum.4960Asum.4960 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Asum.4960 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    His explanation is pretty biased against the players of „lesser skill“ he originally called „toxic casuals“.
    The term itself is the problem. It insinuates those „toxic casuals“ are all part of the „casual“ playerbase.
    Being a casual is unrelated to playerskill, though. People that do nothing in the game but raid once a week would be part of the casual playerbase, as they only play GW2 casually. Someone that farms silverwastes 24/7 is hardcore.

    It‘s the original problem. What you see and I see as casual and hardcore is completely different. There are pretty much maybe 0.5% of actual hardcore people in this game, the rest is just average. The casuals don‘t play the game much.

    Seriously, just create a static and you wouldn‘t have the problem of meeting those „egoistical“ players.

    My post in question you are talking about literally was intended to showcase and illustrate the view point of high skill hard core players and the issues they face.
    I'm pretty sure I was wearing my bias on my sleeves there, what you want to read into that further is up to you.

    Not sure how that invalidates or addresses the points made though. We can fight about semantics all day, but it won't address my call for some simple baseline empathy.
    Not just for for new players trying to get into the content and the real struggles they face with that, but also for the sizeable non static running hardcore population and their real struggles.

    You can shout statics all you want, but that doesn't relate to the argument of KP's and applies to both sides equally as alternative solution, KP or not.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Because the best tool to gauge playerskill is already there: socialize and experience how good the players are. And in that was you can form a community. This is an MMORPG, not a single player game. You will have to deal with people.

    So you don't have an argument for that, got it.

    So you don‘t want to discuss, k. It‘s probably why you‘d rather use KPs instead of build actual strong relationships to form statics. MMMORPG communities nowadays.

    You are straight up gaslighting a strawman right now, arguing completely besides the point without addressing or providing a single argument to the discussion of KP at hand.

    R.I.P. Build Templates, 15.10.2019

  • Raknar.4735Raknar.4735 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 18, 2020

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @YtseJam.9784 said:
    Titles are not 100% trustworthy, people can buy those. You need some kind of proof that you can beat them frequently :)

    You could just create a static with people you know. 100% trustworthy, and the proof are your past runs with the group.
    Only like minded players.
    It‘s not that hard to create your own groups ;)

    Unrelated to op, but related to some other posters:
    Guess it‘s just easier to complain about „toxic casuals“, even though you would actually never see casuals anywhere near to T4.
    They‘re just the scapegoat term for some „hardcore“ (LULW) players. Big cope.
    Hint: The people you are pugging with aren‘t actually casual players, those bad players belong to your same group of „hardcore“ people, you‘re just cannibalizing your own community. Nice job.

    There is no binary switch which makes one player casual or hardcore, even if that is the most easy approach by players, of any part of the community, to easily blame and demonize other players. As such, a vast majority of players who play T4 fractals are in fact casual, if performance and ability is used as definition for someone being casual or hardcore.

    It would also not matter. The term used is irrelevant. The fact that there is a huge discrepancy even ONLY within T4 tier is the actual issue. Mind you the even bigger discrepancy going higher up into CMs. The fact you treat all players as "hardcore" above a certain skill threshold is just plain insulting. That's like saying every single person with a certain shade of darker skin are all black. Way to put all minority groups into one basket (maybe this analogy will make you realize how toxic your statement is, with real world similarities).

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    You mean the same way you just now marginalized an entire group of different skilled players as all being "hardcore" and as such "elitist"? How are you not being toxic at this point in time? Doesn't even matter if you consider yourself casual or what ever, toxic is toxic, and that's the exact mentality which others refer to as "toxic casual". Thought I will agree, the added descriptor is not needed. Strait up toxic suffices in this case.

    To your entitlement argument: every player has the same right to shape and form the groups they want. If one group of players is not allowed to shape and form their groups, no one is.

    So, you didn‘t get my post at all. Nice. I have never said being hardcore is about skill level, not sure where you got that from. Insinuating that is just insulting. What I have said is that some people that use the label „hardcore“ for themselves are being toxic to their own community by calling other people „toxic casuals“, for some reason, thus cannibalizing the instance-going community.

    Your blatant misrepresentation of my post and opinion is pretty toxic, straight up toxic.

    You never gave a definition for what you define as casual or hardcore, and as such I gave one for how I used the terms. If your definition varied, you are welcome to give that differing one, though it will not change any of the facts that:
    1. the main issue here is difference in player skill, which is present no matter in which content but of significant importance in more challenging content
    2. you still approach this entire issue the same way as other toxic members of either side of the spectrum approach it: as binary "us versus them" and no definition you could give would alleviate your wording here
    3. the terms "casual" and "hardcore" are absolutely insufficient to even remotely give justice to the vast amount of difference in player skill or individual approach to this issue. Which is exactly WHY a crude system like KP is in effect in the first place the way it is handled, because numeric values can distinguish

    Hurts when one points out what was actually said, doesn't it? Your wording and approach is part of the problem the community of this game faces, and it does not matter which side of the argument you think you are on.

    So you put words into my mouth that were based on your assumptions and shared all your anger based on that? Wow.
    Maybe you should have asked first before assuming things. That‘s key to conversation. This really is part of the problem of this community.

    I didn't assume. There is literally NO definition you can use which would change the wording you used. Which was strait up binary, but nice try to deflect.

    Except I‘m not deflecting. You‘re just assuming.

    Let's move on. I'm sure you would phrase quite a few things differently in hindsight, given your persistence that any type of definition used could change the wording you used.

    I wouldn‘t!

    Suit yourself. In that case I'll just consider your very binary approach into dividing players and selectively putting half of them down as toxic.

    Can‘t be any more toxic than your assumptions about me making racist remarks based on your definition of terms /shrug

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Also, just getting a static would fix most of the proplems some people here have. Can’t be that hard to create your own group, can it?

    Sure, doesn't this apply to all players? No matter how skilled they are? Couldn't weaker players not also form statics? Does the ability to form a static supersede or benefit a specific group of players?

    Yes this applies to everyone,, nowhere have i stated something else. Are you trying to move the goalpost?

    So if it aplies to everyone, it is of no value as argument that one type of players should be required to take this step instead of using the LFG. No?

    ??? Stop moving the goalpost. Creating a static would solve so many problems.

    Yes it would, for each and every player. So I fail how suggesting this as solution to part of the player base is any argument. Outside of this suggestion though, everyone has the same right to the LFG and creating the group they desire.

    Yeah, every player has the same right to use the LFG. But that‘s the problem, toxic people also will use it. In a static the chance is lowered dramatically.

    That's again no argument for or against KP. On the contrary, going along this argument, any system in place which reduces toxicity as result of different players meshing, would be benficial.

    Sure, guilds and statics are a good start for the different players meshing thing. Just create your own statics!

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Sure, you have the right do shape your group how you want, but you don‘t have the right to be toxic to others, as simple as that.

    I never claimed anyone has a right to be toxic, but that is not what you said now is it? You gave descriptors and lade the blame clearly on a subsection of the payer base. You literally wrote:

    I didn‘t say you did claim that? It was just a general statement everyone should agree on: Don‘t be toxic.

    Agreed.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    That is by far not the same as stating no one should be toxic.

    Yeah, I blame the subsection of the player base that calls other people names and is toxic, in this case the term „toxic casual“.
    I also tell them that not everyone will behave how they want, unless they create a static. So to fix their problems with meeting „toxic casuals“, as they call them, they could simply create a static group.

    Okay, that is more understandable, yet this also applies to all players. If players don't want to meet "toxic elitist", they should form a static. In fact they should simply make their own groups. Yet I will yield that even with making personal groups, some cross over of toxic players from any part of the player base might join, but it is a step towards healthier group compositions.

    Yes, exactly. That is my point. Just create statics and you won‘t have to deal with people that might be toxic. (Or atleast the chance is way lower)
    Asum would be an example of someone calling others names with his free use of „toxic casual“

    Actually he explains nicely how a specific mindset present in some players creates toxicity. He uses terms like toxic casual and toxic elitist while explaining exactly to which type of player this might apply. In relation to toxic casual, he specifically refers to players who:

    • lack the required experience and/or skill
    • yet still want to get taken along demanding more experienced players do so
    • will likely be just as toxic or even more toxic once they have gained the experience and skill required

    In summary: players with egoistical nature.

    Being an egoist is unrelated to player skill. His explanation does show though how even non egoistical players, or less egoistical players, will be in favor of gate keeping by simple matter of repetition and time constraints. It's simple really:

    • there are a ton of experienced players helping out on their own terms as often as they can, who still want their smooth runs when they want them.
    • There are a ton of less experienced players willing to learn and progress naturally or find others to teach them, then progress and improve as they play the game.
    • Then finally there are the 2 small subgroups of egoists, often among the most vocal on the forums in demands: in one case, those who demand others take them along far outside their own abilities. In the other case, not willing to extend a helping hand ever when more experienced.

    Hint: that last minority is often one and the same type of player, just at a different place in their in-game skill and ability.

    His explanation is pretty biased against the players of „lesser skill“ he originally called „toxic casuals“.
    The term itself is the problem. It insinuates those „toxic casuals“ are all part of the „casual“ playerbase.

    Except he clearly defines which part of the player base he means.

    Your respone mentioned many types of toxic people, yet he only talked about one. So yes, it is very biased.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Being a casual is unrelated to playerskill, though. People that do nothing in the game but raid once a week would be part of the casual playerbase, as they only play GW2 casually. Someone that farms silverwastes 24/7 is hardcore.

    It‘s the original problem. What you see and I see as casual and hardcore is completely different. There are pretty much maybe 0.5% of actual hardcore people in this game, the rest is just average. The casuals don‘t play the game much.

    Again with the binary approach to define an entire player base. I don't see players as casual or hardcore, and to me it makes no difference. I see as players on dozens of different levels of personal skill, and under that view, the term casual incompasses a lot more than 0.5% of the player base.

    Yeah, you’re still assuming this „binary“ thing i never mentioned, don‘t see them as binary, either. It‘s like a bell curve.
    Most people are average. Casuals and hardcore people are not that big of a population. Never said casuals only ecompass 0.5%, that was only for the actual hardcore people.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Seriously, just create a static and you wouldn‘t have the problem of meeting those „egoistical“ players.

    I have statics. For both raids and fractals. That does not mean I have to accept bogus arguments why the LFG should be a total mess and unusable by players of each skill level.

    Good that you have statics! The LFG is usable by players of all skill levels, isn‘t that the problem? Just create a community of people with the skill level you want. Socialize, this is an MMORPG, not a singleplayer game!

    You have a heart of gold. Don't let them take it from you.
    Remaster confirmed! Umbasa!

  • Raknar.4735Raknar.4735 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 18, 2020

    @Asum.4960 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Asum.4960 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    His explanation is pretty biased against the players of „lesser skill“ he originally called „toxic casuals“.
    The term itself is the problem. It insinuates those „toxic casuals“ are all part of the „casual“ playerbase.
    Being a casual is unrelated to playerskill, though. People that do nothing in the game but raid once a week would be part of the casual playerbase, as they only play GW2 casually. Someone that farms silverwastes 24/7 is hardcore.

    It‘s the original problem. What you see and I see as casual and hardcore is completely different. There are pretty much maybe 0.5% of actual hardcore people in this game, the rest is just average. The casuals don‘t play the game much.

    Seriously, just create a static and you wouldn‘t have the problem of meeting those „egoistical“ players.

    My post in question you are talking about literally was intended to showcase and illustrate the view point of high skill hard core players and the issues they face.
    I'm pretty sure I was wearing my bias on my sleeves there, what you want to read into that further is up to you.

    Not sure how that invalidates or addresses the points made though. We can fight about semantics all day, but it won't address my call for some simple baseline empathy.
    Not just for for new players trying to get into the content and the real struggles they face with that, but also for the sizeable non static running hardcore population and their real struggles.

    You can shout statics all you want, but that doesn't relate to the argument of KP's and applies to both sides equally as alternative solution, KP or not.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Because the best tool to gauge playerskill is already there: socialize and experience how good the players are. And in that was you can form a community. This is an MMORPG, not a single player game. You will have to deal with people.

    So you don't have an argument for that, got it.

    So you don‘t want to discuss, k. It‘s probably why you‘d rather use KPs instead of build actual strong relationships to form statics. MMMORPG communities nowadays.

    You are straight up gaslighting a strawman right now, arguing completely besides the point without addressing or providing a single argument to the discussion of KP at hand.

    Wrong, you‘re moving the goalpost. My argument is to simply create a static and you wouldn‘t meet players you don‘t want to meet every week.
    That way you don‘t need KP. OP was looking for a way that is 100% trustworthy. Statics are the way.
    The systems are already in place, xou just have to use them.

    Edit: last post for now, got to get some sleep, cya tomorrow ;D

    You have a heart of gold. Don't let them take it from you.
    Remaster confirmed! Umbasa!

  • Asum.4960Asum.4960 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 18, 2020

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Asum.4960 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Asum.4960 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    His explanation is pretty biased against the players of „lesser skill“ he originally called „toxic casuals“.
    The term itself is the problem. It insinuates those „toxic casuals“ are all part of the „casual“ playerbase.
    Being a casual is unrelated to playerskill, though. People that do nothing in the game but raid once a week would be part of the casual playerbase, as they only play GW2 casually. Someone that farms silverwastes 24/7 is hardcore.

    It‘s the original problem. What you see and I see as casual and hardcore is completely different. There are pretty much maybe 0.5% of actual hardcore people in this game, the rest is just average. The casuals don‘t play the game much.

    Seriously, just create a static and you wouldn‘t have the problem of meeting those „egoistical“ players.

    My post in question you are talking about literally was intended to showcase and illustrate the view point of high skill hard core players and the issues they face.
    I'm pretty sure I was wearing my bias on my sleeves there, what you want to read into that further is up to you.

    Not sure how that invalidates or addresses the points made though. We can fight about semantics all day, but it won't address my call for some simple baseline empathy.
    Not just for for new players trying to get into the content and the real struggles they face with that, but also for the sizeable non static running hardcore population and their real struggles.

    You can shout statics all you want, but that doesn't relate to the argument of KP's and applies to both sides equally as alternative solution, KP or not.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Because the best tool to gauge playerskill is already there: socialize and experience how good the players are. And in that was you can form a community. This is an MMORPG, not a single player game. You will have to deal with people.

    So you don't have an argument for that, got it.

    So you don‘t want to discuss, k. It‘s probably why you‘d rather use KPs instead of build actual strong relationships to form statics. MMMORPG communities nowadays.

    You are straight up gaslighting a strawman right now, arguing completely besides the point without addressing or providing a single argument to the discussion of KP at hand.

    Wrong, you‘re moving the goalpost. My argument is to simply create a static and you wouldn‘t meet players you don‘t want to meet every week.
    That way you don‘t need KP. OP was looking for a way that is 100% trustworthy. Statics are the way.

    I agreed with you on numerous occasions how statics are a good solution that exists, but stating how they also aren't perfect and don't suit everybody at every time.
    Without ever addressing any of those concerns, or even making a point relating to KP, you just keep repeating your original point about statics existing as possible solution.

    Indeed they do, so what? Why can't other alternatives exist?

    I've literally stated in responses to you how I've had many, many statics over the years, hell my last (raid) static for roughly 3 years broke down just 2 weeks ago.
    Now suddenly you are accusing me of refusing to form a static and relationships and fabricating/inserting false intentions into what I said through your own personal bias, while accusing me of having one (even though I clarified the meaning of my post and wearing the bias and point of view it was meant to illustrate on my sleeve), to even painting me as example of the problem/sorry state of modern day MMO communities.

    Do you really not see how you are missing the point and being fairly toxic and manipulative, or at the very least dishonest here?

    The discussion at hand was the merit of KP as well as possible replacements of that kind (aka. beyond just a static, specifically for LFG), while you, failing arguments, are trying to move the goalpost by repeatedly shouting "statics", without addressing any critic levied at that.

    Even as someone highly favouring and encouraging statics myself, that "Static or GTFO" mentality is nonsense and LFG can still be a valuable tool besides that.

    R.I.P. Build Templates, 15.10.2019

  • Raknar.4735Raknar.4735 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 18, 2020

    @Asum.4960 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Asum.4960 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Asum.4960 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    His explanation is pretty biased against the players of „lesser skill“ he originally called „toxic casuals“.
    The term itself is the problem. It insinuates those „toxic casuals“ are all part of the „casual“ playerbase.
    Being a casual is unrelated to playerskill, though. People that do nothing in the game but raid once a week would be part of the casual playerbase, as they only play GW2 casually. Someone that farms silverwastes 24/7 is hardcore.

    It‘s the original problem. What you see and I see as casual and hardcore is completely different. There are pretty much maybe 0.5% of actual hardcore people in this game, the rest is just average. The casuals don‘t play the game much.

    Seriously, just create a static and you wouldn‘t have the problem of meeting those „egoistical“ players.

    My post in question you are talking about literally was intended to showcase and illustrate the view point of high skill hard core players and the issues they face.
    I'm pretty sure I was wearing my bias on my sleeves there, what you want to read into that further is up to you.

    Not sure how that invalidates or addresses the points made though. We can fight about semantics all day, but it won't address my call for some simple baseline empathy.
    Not just for for new players trying to get into the content and the real struggles they face with that, but also for the sizeable non static running hardcore population and their real struggles.

    You can shout statics all you want, but that doesn't relate to the argument of KP's and applies to both sides equally as alternative solution, KP or not.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Because the best tool to gauge playerskill is already there: socialize and experience how good the players are. And in that was you can form a community. This is an MMORPG, not a single player game. You will have to deal with people.

    So you don't have an argument for that, got it.

    So you don‘t want to discuss, k. It‘s probably why you‘d rather use KPs instead of build actual strong relationships to form statics. MMMORPG communities nowadays.

    You are straight up gaslighting a strawman right now, arguing completely besides the point without addressing or providing a single argument to the discussion of KP at hand.

    Wrong, you‘re moving the goalpost. My argument is to simply create a static and you wouldn‘t meet players you don‘t want to meet every week.
    That way you don‘t need KP. OP was looking for a way that is 100% trustworthy. Statics are the way.

    I agreed with you on numerous occasions how statics are a good solution that exists, but stating how they also aren't perfect and don't suit everybody at every time.
    Without ever addressing any of those concerns, or even making a point relating to KP, you just keep repeating your original point about statics existing as possible solution.

    Indeed they do, so what? Why can't other alternatives exist?

    I've literally stated in responses to you how I've had many, many statics over the years.
    Now suddenly you are accusing me of refusing to form a static and relationships and fabricating/inserting false intentions into what I said through your own personal bias, while accusing me of having one (even though I clarified the meaning of my post and wearing the bias and point of view it was meant to illustrate on my sleeve), to even painting me as example of the problem/sorry state of modern day MMO communities.

    Do you really not see how you are missing the point and being fairly toxic and manipulative, or at the very least dishonest here?

    The discussion at hand was the merit of KP as well as possible replacements of that kind (aka. beyond just a static, specifically for LFG), while you, failing arguments, are trying to move the goalpost by repeatedly shouting "statics", without addressing any critic levied at that.

    One last response, because yours came pretty quick before I head to sleep.

    I've also mentioned other alternatives besides statics: guilds, discord communities you could create with similiar thinking people. You ignored them.

    I'm not fabricating anything, your response "you don't have a argument" came off as brash and non inviting, as well as completely ignoring my other arguments. I deduced if that's the way you talk to others, it is only reasonable to assume that other's wouldn't like that.
    Describing yourself as a high-skilled hardcore player (even though I'm not sure if you fit into that category, since most hardcore players I know are static players, like Snow Crows e.g.), won't bring you any simpathy points from me. Escpecially since you make it sound like you're the victim of "new" players or "lesser skilled" players. Like, just don't group up with them and find a static or a community of worthy individuals?

    KPs are just like Gearscore in WoW, where players aren't players anymore, but just simple NPCs with numbers on them. This has been a problem of newer MMORPG communities. I won't treat anyone as just a number.

    The only toxic things I've seen here is your original post that classified some individuals as "toxic casuals" (which you have edited by now, but it still is kind of off), and Cyninja's assumptions about my use of the words hardcore and casual, that for some reason turned into a race-based argument in his head (sorry, not sure about pronoun, correct me please if i'm wrong).

    The original discussion was OP wanting to be able to link KP from the wallet, since titles weren't 100% reliable, since they could be bought.
    Statics solve that problem. You were the one that closed off any communication by ignoring my arguments about guilds and communities, solutions that are beyond a static.

    Don't think i'm going to answer again, you seem to be closed off to solutions that aren't to your liking, atleast in this discussion.

    You have a heart of gold. Don't let them take it from you.
    Remaster confirmed! Umbasa!

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @YtseJam.9784 said:
    Titles are not 100% trustworthy, people can buy those. You need some kind of proof that you can beat them frequently :)

    You could just create a static with people you know. 100% trustworthy, and the proof are your past runs with the group.
    Only like minded players.
    It‘s not that hard to create your own groups ;)

    Unrelated to op, but related to some other posters:
    Guess it‘s just easier to complain about „toxic casuals“, even though you would actually never see casuals anywhere near to T4.
    They‘re just the scapegoat term for some „hardcore“ (LULW) players. Big cope.
    Hint: The people you are pugging with aren‘t actually casual players, those bad players belong to your same group of „hardcore“ people, you‘re just cannibalizing your own community. Nice job.

    There is no binary switch which makes one player casual or hardcore, even if that is the most easy approach by players, of any part of the community, to easily blame and demonize other players. As such, a vast majority of players who play T4 fractals are in fact casual, if performance and ability is used as definition for someone being casual or hardcore.

    It would also not matter. The term used is irrelevant. The fact that there is a huge discrepancy even ONLY within T4 tier is the actual issue. Mind you the even bigger discrepancy going higher up into CMs. The fact you treat all players as "hardcore" above a certain skill threshold is just plain insulting. That's like saying every single person with a certain shade of darker skin are all black. Way to put all minority groups into one basket (maybe this analogy will make you realize how toxic your statement is, with real world similarities).

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    You mean the same way you just now marginalized an entire group of different skilled players as all being "hardcore" and as such "elitist"? How are you not being toxic at this point in time? Doesn't even matter if you consider yourself casual or what ever, toxic is toxic, and that's the exact mentality which others refer to as "toxic casual". Thought I will agree, the added descriptor is not needed. Strait up toxic suffices in this case.

    To your entitlement argument: every player has the same right to shape and form the groups they want. If one group of players is not allowed to shape and form their groups, no one is.

    So, you didn‘t get my post at all. Nice. I have never said being hardcore is about skill level, not sure where you got that from. Insinuating that is just insulting. What I have said is that some people that use the label „hardcore“ for themselves are being toxic to their own community by calling other people „toxic casuals“, for some reason, thus cannibalizing the instance-going community.

    Your blatant misrepresentation of my post and opinion is pretty toxic, straight up toxic.

    You never gave a definition for what you define as casual or hardcore, and as such I gave one for how I used the terms. If your definition varied, you are welcome to give that differing one, though it will not change any of the facts that:
    1. the main issue here is difference in player skill, which is present no matter in which content but of significant importance in more challenging content
    2. you still approach this entire issue the same way as other toxic members of either side of the spectrum approach it: as binary "us versus them" and no definition you could give would alleviate your wording here
    3. the terms "casual" and "hardcore" are absolutely insufficient to even remotely give justice to the vast amount of difference in player skill or individual approach to this issue. Which is exactly WHY a crude system like KP is in effect in the first place the way it is handled, because numeric values can distinguish

    Hurts when one points out what was actually said, doesn't it? Your wording and approach is part of the problem the community of this game faces, and it does not matter which side of the argument you think you are on.

    So you put words into my mouth that were based on your assumptions and shared all your anger based on that? Wow.
    Maybe you should have asked first before assuming things. That‘s key to conversation. This really is part of the problem of this community.

    I didn't assume. There is literally NO definition you can use which would change the wording you used. Which was strait up binary, but nice try to deflect.

    Except I‘m not deflecting. You‘re just assuming.

    Let's move on. I'm sure you would phrase quite a few things differently in hindsight, given your persistence that any type of definition used could change the wording you used.

    I wouldn‘t!

    Suit yourself. In that case I'll just consider your very binary approach into dividing players and selectively putting half of them down as toxic.

    Can‘t be any more toxic than your assumptions about me making racist remarks based on your definition of terms /shrug

    I merely showed how your continued wording and approach in dealing with this issue relates to real life issues. Sorry you are unhappy facing your own biases.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Also, just getting a static would fix most of the proplems some people here have. Can’t be that hard to create your own group, can it?

    Sure, doesn't this apply to all players? No matter how skilled they are? Couldn't weaker players not also form statics? Does the ability to form a static supersede or benefit a specific group of players?

    Yes this applies to everyone,, nowhere have i stated something else. Are you trying to move the goalpost?

    So if it aplies to everyone, it is of no value as argument that one type of players should be required to take this step instead of using the LFG. No?

    ??? Stop moving the goalpost. Creating a static would solve so many problems.

    Yes it would, for each and every player. So I fail how suggesting this as solution to part of the player base is any argument. Outside of this suggestion though, everyone has the same right to the LFG and creating the group they desire.

    Yeah, every player has the same right to use the LFG. But that‘s the problem, toxic people also will use it. In a static the chance is lowered dramatically.

    That's again no argument for or against KP. On the contrary, going along this argument, any system in place which reduces toxicity as result of different players meshing, would be benficial.

    Sure, guilds and statics are a good start for the different players meshing thing. Just create your own statics!

    Great, and for any one else, they have the same freedom to use and access the LFG. We are in agreement.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Sure, you have the right do shape your group how you want, but you don‘t have the right to be toxic to others, as simple as that.

    I never claimed anyone has a right to be toxic, but that is not what you said now is it? You gave descriptors and lade the blame clearly on a subsection of the payer base. You literally wrote:

    I didn‘t say you did claim that? It was just a general statement everyone should agree on: Don‘t be toxic.

    Agreed.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    You’re not entitled to play with good players every time, if you don’t build a static. Oh well, I guess it is hard to socialize for some people, they‘d rather blame the boogeyman „toxic casual“ for their own shortcomings.

    That is by far not the same as stating no one should be toxic.

    Yeah, I blame the subsection of the player base that calls other people names and is toxic, in this case the term „toxic casual“.
    I also tell them that not everyone will behave how they want, unless they create a static. So to fix their problems with meeting „toxic casuals“, as they call them, they could simply create a static group.

    Okay, that is more understandable, yet this also applies to all players. If players don't want to meet "toxic elitist", they should form a static. In fact they should simply make their own groups. Yet I will yield that even with making personal groups, some cross over of toxic players from any part of the player base might join, but it is a step towards healthier group compositions.

    Yes, exactly. That is my point. Just create statics and you won‘t have to deal with people that might be toxic. (Or atleast the chance is way lower)
    Asum would be an example of someone calling others names with his free use of „toxic casual“

    Actually he explains nicely how a specific mindset present in some players creates toxicity. He uses terms like toxic casual and toxic elitist while explaining exactly to which type of player this might apply. In relation to toxic casual, he specifically refers to players who:

    • lack the required experience and/or skill
    • yet still want to get taken along demanding more experienced players do so
    • will likely be just as toxic or even more toxic once they have gained the experience and skill required

    In summary: players with egoistical nature.

    Being an egoist is unrelated to player skill. His explanation does show though how even non egoistical players, or less egoistical players, will be in favor of gate keeping by simple matter of repetition and time constraints. It's simple really:

    • there are a ton of experienced players helping out on their own terms as often as they can, who still want their smooth runs when they want them.
    • There are a ton of less experienced players willing to learn and progress naturally or find others to teach them, then progress and improve as they play the game.
    • Then finally there are the 2 small subgroups of egoists, often among the most vocal on the forums in demands: in one case, those who demand others take them along far outside their own abilities. In the other case, not willing to extend a helping hand ever when more experienced.

    Hint: that last minority is often one and the same type of player, just at a different place in their in-game skill and ability.

    His explanation is pretty biased against the players of „lesser skill“ he originally called „toxic casuals“.
    The term itself is the problem. It insinuates those „toxic casuals“ are all part of the „casual“ playerbase.

    Except he clearly defines which part of the player base he means.

    Your respone mentioned many types of toxic people, yet he only talked about one. So yes, it is very biased.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Being a casual is unrelated to playerskill, though. People that do nothing in the game but raid once a week would be part of the casual playerbase, as they only play GW2 casually. Someone that farms silverwastes 24/7 is hardcore.

    It‘s the original problem. What you see and I see as casual and hardcore is completely different. There are pretty much maybe 0.5% of actual hardcore people in this game, the rest is just average. The casuals don‘t play the game much.

    Again with the binary approach to define an entire player base. I don't see players as casual or hardcore, and to me it makes no difference. I see as players on dozens of different levels of personal skill, and under that view, the term casual incompasses a lot more than 0.5% of the player base.

    Yeah, you’re still assuming this „binary“ thing i never mentioned, don‘t see them as binary, either. It‘s like a bell curve.
    Most people are average. Casuals and hardcore people are not that big of a population. Never said casuals only ecompass 0.5%, that was only for the actual hardcore people.

    Exactly, and I don't consider the top 0.5% of that bellcurve as hardcore. I also don't consider player divided into hardcore, avergae and casual (which you again fail to define what you mean and by what metric? Are you talking player skill? Playtime hours?) You are just throwing around buzzwords at this point.

    My point stands:
    Players of similar skill want to play together and peoblems arise the bigger the gap. The terminology used which portrais these players as belonging to one of 2 or 3 groups is divisive and toxic and lacks any depth or substance to actually grasp the issue and problem here.

    @Raknar.4735 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Seriously, just create a static and you wouldn‘t have the problem of meeting those „egoistical“ players.

    I have statics. For both raids and fractals. That does not mean I have to accept bogus arguments why the LFG should be a total mess and unusable by players of each skill level.

    Good that you have statics! The LFG is usable by players of all skill levels, isn‘t that the problem? Just create a community of people with the skill level you want. Socialize, this is an MMORPG, not a singleplayer game!

    No, I think it's great that the LFG is accessible by everyone. That's not a problem, that's a benefit. The problem arise when the LFG is misused or meets it's limitations, which so far was solved via crude player found solutions. One of which was KP.

  • Exchanging UCE for UFE should not have been a choice. It should've been a forced exchange on all accounts at release. The situation there is right now will cause a rift in the Fractal community. There are those that exchanged their KP and now can't join a lot of LFG groups anymore who are still asking for a few hundred UCE. People who are starting to get into Fractals from now on will have no KP to show, ever. And if the old groups keep their UCE and keep using it in their LFG's, you will basically get 2 Fractal communities: the ones who did CM's before Sunqua Peak was released, and the ones who started doing CM's after its release. I don't see how that's a tennable situation in the long run.

  • Asum.4960Asum.4960 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    I've also mentioned other alternatives besides statics: guilds, discord communities you could create with similiar thinking people. You ignored them.

    I didn't. They follow the line on non-lfg based solutions which wasn't the topic at hand, which I do feel like have merit as well in addition to static or semi static groups such as guilds and discord communities, all of which I'm part of, or in some cases was until recently part of - and of which I agreed on multiple occasions to be the superior way to experience this type of content over all.

    But, for the 5th(?) time, I just don't think they should be the only viable way to select players as they aren't a reasonable option for everybody at all times due to a variety of reasons.

    Statics and semi-statics existing as superior solutions to LFG/pugging does not disqualify the existence of other LFG-bases tools to select players.
    That was the point of contention, which you glossed over again and again and again.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    I'm not fabricating anything, your response "you don't have a argument" came off as brash and non inviting, as well as completely ignoring my other arguments. I deduced if that's the way you talk to others, it is only reasonable to assume that other's wouldn't like that.

    Considering you ignored my points to just answer "static" and making unfavourable and false assumption about myself repeatedly, I felt it appropriate to assume you simply didn't have any arguments or interest in the actual discussion at hand.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Describing yourself as a high-skilled hardcore player (even though I'm not sure if you fit into that category, since most hardcore players I know are static players, like Snow Crows e.g.), won't bring you any simpathy points from me.

    That was hardly a focus point of anything I said, nor was I fishing for any sympathy. And again, you can keep your assumptions/implications about my character. Besides me having stated, also for the about 5th time now, that I have been indeed part of Fractal and Raiding statics for many years now.
    I don't know why you repeatedly ignore that besides it not fitting into your strawman/narrative you have build on me.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    Escpecially since you make it sound like you're the victim of "new" players or "lesser skilled" players. Like, just don't group up with them and find a static or a community of worthy individuals?

    I didn't present myself as victim. I simply stated that both low and high skilled players utilising LFG to group up, which is a significant portion of the community playing that content, suffers if they are not given the tools to find each other, and them and their expectations clashing being a leading cause of toxicity.

    I'm not sure how you got from that that I was boasting about being highly skilled (or whatever you were trying to insinuate by highlighting that as point) or that I see myself as victim by proposing to empathise with both sides and giving each player an LFG-based solution to find the people they actually want to play with.

    I myself indeed highly favour statics, as repeatedly stated.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    KPs are just like Gearscore in WoW, where players aren't players anymore, but just simple NPCs with numbers on them. This has been a problem of newer MMORPG communities. I won't treat anyone as just a number.

    ..okay? I won't treat anyone as a number either, but I do think a number representing the amount of experience someone has in the content that I'm looking for players for is quite valuable. Not sure how we go straight to dehumanisation from there.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    The only toxic things I've seen here is your original post that classified some individuals as "toxic casuals" (which you have edited by now, but it still is kind of off), and Cyninja's assumptions about my use of the words hardcore and casual, that for some reason turned into a race-based argument in his head (sorry, not sure about pronoun, correct me please if i'm wrong).

    What is toxic about calling toxic people who happen to be casuals toxic casuals? Are you saying that type of player doesn't exists?
    I don't want to fight about semantics and how to define casual or hardcore again (and I didn't edit any meaning), but I think it's fairly indisputable that toxicity exists on both sides of the spectrum.
    I made it clear in that post that I was talking about the perspective of a hardcore player, so that (and the issues from that PoV) was what the post was about.

    I also feel like you missed Cyninja's point there, along with most others.

    @Raknar.4735 said:
    The original discussion was OP wanting to be able to link KP from the wallet, since titles weren't 100% reliable, since they could be bought.
    Statics solve that problem. You were the one that closed off any communication by ignoring my arguments about guilds and communities, solutions that are beyond a static.

    Don't think i'm going to answer again, you seem to be closed off to solutions that aren't to your liking, atleast in this discussion.

    Again, these things aren't a direct solution to LFG-based grouping which is what KP or KP replacements/wallet based solutions are about. Quite the opposite.

    Yes, statics and semi-statics are the superior way to experience hardcore content - but those solutions aren't always available or sustainable.
    There is an LFG as different way of grouping for a reason. Why not make/keep it useful?

    That was the argument, which I repeatedly tried to bring you back to.
    I didn't ignore your arguments about statics and semi-statics, I was discussing LFG-based solutions akin to KP - which you closed yourself completely off to by just restating Static and semi-static options existing, and then painting me as someone unknowing of or unwilling for that option, despite me repeatedly stating being and having been part of such things.

    I really don't know what to tell you anymore or how to make that any clearer.

    I'm not ignoring your points about statics and semi-statics. I'm myself an advocate for them, I am and have been part of many of them. The vast majority of my playtime over the last 5+ years has been as part of statics.
    And still, we are discussing LFG-based group finding solutions here.

    R.I.P. Build Templates, 15.10.2019

  • maddoctor.2738maddoctor.2738 Member ✭✭✭✭

    The only reason any form of gatekeeping is even needed in the game is due to how entitled, disrespectful and dishonest this community is. I mean, if players were honest about their own abilities and had a sliver of respect for other people around them, by honoring their LFG requests, we wouldn't need KP or anything similar to that.

  • SeikeNz.3526SeikeNz.3526 Member ✭✭✭✭

    this forum is plato's cave in a nut shell, rofl

  • lare.5129lare.5129 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @TheNecrosanct.4028 said:
    People who are starting to get into Fractals from now on will have no KP to show, ever. And if the old groups keep their UCE and keep using it in their LFG's, you will basically get 2 Fractal communities: the ones who did CM's before Sunqua Peak was released, and the ones who started doing CM's after its release.

    you still can buy KP from UFE. This is Celestial Infusions (Red). Ping more that 20 - and you a welcome to any cm fractal group without any UCE

    want solid balance ? - play chess.

  • yann.1946yann.1946 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @maddoctor.2738 said:
    The only reason any form of gatekeeping is even needed in the game is due to how entitled, disrespectful and dishonest this community is. I mean, if players were honest about their own abilities and had a sliver of respect for other people around them, by honoring their LFG requests, we wouldn't need KP or anything similar to that.

    It doesn't always have to do with respect. Some people just don't realise they're missing some vital mechanic, or are just not performing on the level others ask.

  • Dadnir.5038Dadnir.5038 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I'm pretty sure asking for "kill proof" is a kind of discrimination and ANet do not support discriminations. Whether players use "kill proof" on a regular basis since years or not, probably don't change the position of the devveloppers on that point.

    Thus they probably won't satisfy the OP's plea.

  • sigur.9453sigur.9453 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    I'm pretty sure asking for "kill proof" is a kind of discrimination and ANet do not support discriminations. Whether players use "kill proof" on a regular basis since years or not, probably don't change the position of the devveloppers on that point.

    Thus they probably won't satisfy the OP's plea.

    Its not discrimination. Its not Inclusive at best.
    Please dont Overuse words like harresment, discimination, etc. because they already lost enough meaning and Thats hurting the „real fight“

  • @lare.5129 said:

    @TheNecrosanct.4028 said:
    People who are starting to get into Fractals from now on will have no KP to show, ever. And if the old groups keep their UCE and keep using it in their LFG's, you will basically get 2 Fractal communities: the ones who did CM's before Sunqua Peak was released, and the ones who started doing CM's after its release.

    you still can buy KP from UFE. This is Celestial Infusions (Red). Ping more that 20 - and you a welcome to any cm fractal group without any UCE

    Spending currency and matrices on accountbound items (multiples even) you don't want? That's your idea of KP? That's about the most ludicrous idea I've heard. There's a new weapon set I'd much rather complete. And my matrices go towards stat infusions. I'm also sure I'm not the only one.

    Any other brilliant ideas for gatekeeping?

  • Dadnir.5038Dadnir.5038 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @sigur.9453 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    I'm pretty sure asking for "kill proof" is a kind of discrimination and ANet do not support discriminations. Whether players use "kill proof" on a regular basis since years or not, probably don't change the position of the devveloppers on that point.

    Thus they probably won't satisfy the OP's plea.

    Its not discrimination. Its not Inclusive at best.
    Please dont Overuse words like harresment, discimination, etc. because they already lost enough meaning and Thats hurting the „real fight“

    I'm sorry but whether you like it or not it's a factor of discrimination.

    Discrimination is also prejudice against people and a refusal to give them their rights. cambridge dictionnary

    The right of each player in the game is to be able to play whatever they want through the whole content (after all they've paid for it). Asking for "kill proof" or "meta builds" in order to allow someone into a group/raid go against those rights and thus is a form of discrimination.

    Understand that if you let slide discrimination in a game because it's convenient, nothing will prevent from doing the same in real life. Harrasment in game exist and I garanty you that it's not an overused word, it probably is even be underused. And discrimination from players to players are everywhere. You're already willing to let it slide by understating it, what's next? Will you deny a job irl to a potentially very qualified person because he got tatoos and say that "it's not discrimination, at best it's just non inclusive"? You sure will have your mind free of guilt because it doesn't "hurt the real fight".

    It's a mistake to think that focusing on a single kind of discrimination you'll fix it. To fix discriminations you have to make people have the habit to not discriminate against anything. You have to make people be open minded in any situation and in front of anyone. Asking for kill proof here just make you suspicious of the player's capacities, your approach of the player isn't openminded, it's narrow minded and, well, exclusive. You are judging the player at what it can show you, in short, it's look.

    For all those reasons, It's not to ANet's ethic benefits to help players show "kill proofs". The only result that it can lead to is some players being shuned for lack of "proofs". Which often lead to a post in this forum asking if it's really ok to have been kicked out of a group, refused based on profession played... etc.

  • maddoctor.2738maddoctor.2738 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    I'm sorry but whether you like it or not it's a factor of discrimination.

    Discrimination is also prejudice against people and a refusal to give them their rights. cambridge dictionnary

    Discrimination is about treating people differently based on external/irrelevant criteria. The way you are forming your argument is that when a hospital creates a new job opening for a doctor, they discriminate against all people that do not own a doctor degree.

    The right of each player in the game is to be able to play whatever they want through the whole content (after all they've paid for it). Asking for "kill proof" or "meta builds" in order to allow someone into a group/raid go against those rights and thus is a form of discrimination.

    Only nobody has ANY right on any other person's time, that's a rather fundamental rule that you are missing. That's not discrimination, that's avoiding exploitation and abuse, other players are not slaves to do whatever anyone else asks of them. Always remember, one person's rights end when another person's rights begin.

  • lare.5129lare.5129 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @TheNecrosanct.4028 said:
    Spending currency and matrices on accountbound items (multiples even) you don't want?

    yes, spend part account bound currency and small amount matrix for that.

    That's your idea of KP?

    not my, but sometimes people link it, and I and others accept it.

    There's a new weapon set I'd much rather complete.

    new wep set complete per short time. It not some magic big value.

    Any other brilliant ideas for gatekeeping?

    personal I use https://killproof.me/proof/75VK

    want solid balance ? - play chess.

  • sigur.9453sigur.9453 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 18, 2020

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @sigur.9453 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:
    I'm pretty sure asking for "kill proof" is a kind of discrimination and ANet do not support discriminations. Whether players use "kill proof" on a regular basis since years or not, probably don't change the position of the devveloppers on that point.

    Thus they probably won't satisfy the OP's plea.

    Its not discrimination. Its not Inclusive at best.
    Please dont Overuse words like harresment, discimination, etc. because they already lost enough meaning and Thats hurting the „real fight“

    I'm sorry but whether you like it or not it's a factor of discrimination.

    Discrimination is also prejudice against people and a refusal to give them their rights. cambridge dictionnary

    Being able to choose who I want to play with based on a (not perfect) variable (kp,etc) has nothing to do with discrimination.
    IF I would not want to play with you because you are a women, gay, Australian,.... would be, but that’s not for debate. And putting it on, even just verbally the same status like the others is borderline insulting to people facing „real discrimination“.

    The right of each player in the game is to be able to play whatever they want through the whole content (after all they've paid for it). Asking for "kill proof" or "meta builds" in order to allow someone into a group/raid go against those rights and thus is a form of discrimination.

    Understand that if you let slide discrimination in a game because it's convenient, nothing will prevent from doing the same in real life. Harrasment in game exist and I garanty you that it's not an overused word, it probably is even be underused. And discrimination from players to players are everywhere. You're already willing to let it slide by understating it, what's next? Will you deny a job irl to a potentially very qualified person because he got tatoos and say that "it's not discrimination, at best it's just non inclusive"? You sure will have your mind free of guilt because it doesn't "hurt the real fight".

    I understand that you want define what those words mean by yourself, but i would prefer to base it on the Dictionary meaning, WITHOUT interpreting it in you own way aswell.

    Otherwise a discussion without a common ground is useless. Sry

    You making the assumption that me, who „does not allow everyone in my party“ is also likely be part in one of your scenarios, is ironically, prejudice itself.

    It's a mistake to think that focusing on a single kind of discrimination you'll fix it. To fix discriminations you have to make people have the habit to not discriminate against anything. You have to make people be open minded in any situation and in front of anyone. Asking for kill proof here just make you suspicious of the player's capacities, your approach of the player isn't openminded, it's narrow minded and, well, exclusive. You are judging the player at what it can show you, in short, it's look.

    I agree on the first part, but as said above. I’d rather focus on the real world problems, than „these 9 people do not want to play with me“, which again, does not have anything to to with discrimination.

    It’s look? Is this a desperate attempt To make it look like discrimination?
    I „judge“ on proof of experience. By your definition every cv would be a judge on look. Again, I stick with the deictonary definition.

    For all those reasons, It's not to ANet's ethic benefits to help players show "kill proofs". The only result that it can lead to is some players being shuned for lack of "proofs". Which often lead to a post in this forum asking if it's really ok to have been kicked out of a group, refused based on profession played... etc.

    For the rest pretty much what @maddoctor.2738 already said.