Achievement Point Discussion - Page 7 — Guild Wars 2 Forums
Home Guild Wars 2 Discussion

Achievement Point Discussion

123457>

Comments

  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I'm not asking you about them. I'm asking you about you. Do you recognize that reality or not? Do you acknowledge that anet has recognized that LS1 was a design error, specifically as to its temporary nature . . ?

    The real question is, whether You acknowledge, that these Anet statements were always about story and story alone, and Anet has never recognized transient nature of many achievements and APs from that time as an error.

    Because it's quite clear that the "reality" you speak of is your personal misinterpretation of Anet statements, that do not really say what you think they do.

    The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.

  • Zaklex.6308Zaklex.6308 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't feel that providing you with facts is constructive, as you do not find them persuasive. It would be a waste of my time to provide you with something you will deny if you don't provide it yourself, as you did with the original ap number . . .

    So you base your entire argument on "facts" that you do not possess. Tells a lot about your argument.

    Do you acknowledge that anet has recognized that LS1 was a design error, specifically as to its temporary nature . . ?

    What did they acknowledge? Post a link.

    I'm not asking you about them. I'm asking you about you. Do you recognize that reality or not? Do you acknowledge that anet has recognized that LS1 was a design error, specifically as to its temporary nature . . ?

    I'm about to end this discussion once and for all. LS1 AP's are missing, currently the highest AP track reward that is available is the one at 40K(the one at 45K is not available right now). People have been complaining about the reduced amount of AP being given out in the last 2 or 3 LW's, there's a reason for that, had LS1 + other no longer available AP rewards still existed we would have enough to reach the 42K+ that you can already obtain in game, which allows everyone to reach the 40K reward. ArenaNet has already added the missing AP in previous LW season and the Expax's to make up for the "lost" AP, it's why the highest AP earners are already past the 40K reward mark.

    If anyone questions the above, it's simple math and this whole entire discussion could've been avoided many pages and days ago.

    Yes...no...maybe...what do you want, can't you see I'm busy saving the world...AGAIN!

  • Gop.8713Gop.8713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't feel that providing you with facts is constructive, as you do not find them persuasive. It would be a waste of my time to provide you with something you will deny if you don't provide it yourself, as you did with the original ap number . . .

    So you base your entire argument on "facts" that you do not possess. Tells a lot about your argument.

    Do you acknowledge that anet has recognized that LS1 was a design error, specifically as to its temporary nature . . ?

    What did they acknowledge? Post a link.

    I'm not asking you about them. I'm asking you about you. Do you recognize that reality or not? Do you acknowledge that anet has recognized that LS1 was a design error, specifically as to its temporary nature . . ?

    I'm still waiting for you to post a link with a developer quote that confirms what you are saying, I have a feeling your entire argument revolves around something that you probably never even read. Or didn't understand.

    Well, to be fair I did ask first. But as I've mentioned a few times, you've expressed some reluctance to accept facts that are contrary to your preferences, so I will not provide you with something that you can find for yourself as easily as I can provide it to you. We went through this before with the number of ap available. You kept insisting there was no number and asking me to provide it. If I had done so, I believe you would have disputed it. By waiting for you to provide the number and accepting your response, I avoided another needless page of squabbling over what the value was. What is important here is not what is real or what I can prove, but what you will accept, as you have demonstrated that the latter has nothing to do with the former. So I will ask again:

    Do you acknowledge that anet has recognized that LS1 was a design error, specifically as to its temporary nature . . ?

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I'm not asking you about them. I'm asking you about you. Do you recognize that reality or not? Do you acknowledge that anet has recognized that LS1 was a design error, specifically as to its temporary nature . . ?

    The real question is, whether You acknowledge, that these Anet statements were always about story and story alone, and Anet has never recognized transient nature of many achievements and APs from that time as an error.

    Because it's quite clear that the "reality" you speak of is your personal misinterpretation of Anet statements, that do not really say what you think they do.

    So is it fair to say that you acknowledge that anet sees the loss of LS1 as the result of a mistake/design error/regrettable design choice or w/e roughly equivalent phrase makes you most comfortable . . ?

    I feel like I'm going to need a scorecard for this . . .

    @Zaklex.6308 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't feel that providing you with facts is constructive, as you do not find them persuasive. It would be a waste of my time to provide you with something you will deny if you don't provide it yourself, as you did with the original ap number . . .

    So you base your entire argument on "facts" that you do not possess. Tells a lot about your argument.

    Do you acknowledge that anet has recognized that LS1 was a design error, specifically as to its temporary nature . . ?

    What did they acknowledge? Post a link.

    I'm not asking you about them. I'm asking you about you. Do you recognize that reality or not? Do you acknowledge that anet has recognized that LS1 was a design error, specifically as to its temporary nature . . ?

    I'm about to end this discussion once and for all. LS1 AP's are missing, currently the highest AP track reward that is available is the one at 40K(the one at 45K is not available right now). People have been complaining about the reduced amount of AP being given out in the last 2 or 3 LW's, there's a reason for that, had LS1 + other no longer available AP rewards still existed we would have enough to reach the 42K+ that you can already obtain in game, which allows everyone to reach the 40K reward. ArenaNet has already added the missing AP in previous LW season and the Expax's to make up for the "lost" AP, it's why the highest AP earners are already past the 40K reward mark.

    If anyone questions the above, it's simple math and this whole entire discussion could've been avoided many pages and days ago.

    I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. It's also possible that you do not understand the problem you are trying to solve. You acknowledge the ap is missing, but say it has been 'made up' already, from what I understand. For that to be true, AP would have had to be introduced into the game that covered the lost ap but was not available to players who obtained the lost ap when it was available. Is this what you are saying . . ?

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

    @Gop.8713 said:
    Well, to be fair I did ask first.

    You gave an argument and provided zero evidence to support it. I asked for you to do so, so my question comes first.

    But as I've mentioned a few times, you've expressed some reluctance to accept facts that are contrary to your preferences

    I accept facts, you gave only your opinion, but I realize now that you do not know the meaning of the word Fact

    so I will not provide you with something that you can find for yourself as easily as I can provide it to you.

    Meaning, your entire argument is baseless and you have nothing to support it. No I won't find it myself, I expect YOU to support YOUR claim. I supported my side with links already, now, unless you have nothing to prove your claims, I'm waiting for you to provide yours.

    We went through this before with the number of ap available.

    Selective memory is a funny thing. Oh right you proved that you don't know the meaning of the word finite.

    You kept insisting there was no number and asking me to provide it.

    My crystal ball doesn't see that far in the future. I asked because you were so certain about the finite Achievements that yours might be more powerful.

    If I had done so, I believe you would have disputed it.

    Since it's unlikely to know that number unless you can see the future or you are a time traveler, I'd dispute obviously, since I know you are neither. Or you are?

    By waiting for you to provide the number and accepting your response

    I did not provide the upper cap of Achievement Points as was the subject of that discussion. I provided the current cap, which isn't the actual upper cap of achievement points, that's impossible to measure, impossible to count.

    I avoided another needless page of squabbling over what the value was.

    You did not. And funny thing is, you brought back your failure just now. And at the same time, fail to provide your evidence to validate your argument.

    What is important here is not what is real or what I can prove

    What is real is what is important, proving it is even better, you've done nothing of the sort.

    but what you will accept

    I refuse to accept lies and projections. Provide facts and I will gladly accept them.

    as you have demonstrated that the latter has nothing to do with the former.

    You provided nothing that is real and zero proof, so I'm not sure what you are on about here.

    Do you acknowledge that anet has recognized that LS1 was a design error, specifically as to its temporary nature . . ?

    Show me the post stating that temporary achievements were a design error, this is about temporary achievement points, not the story. You seem to be mixing the two.
    Did they remove an achievement just 16 days ago? If temporary achievements were indeed a design error, how come they did it again 16 days ago?

  • Gop.8713Gop.8713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    Well, to be fair I did ask first.

    You gave an argument and provided zero evidence to support it. I asked for you to do so, so my question comes first.

    No, you can go back and look at the timeline if you like. I asked a question, and you responded with a question. I'll ask it again . . :

    Do you acknowledge that anet has recognized that LS1 was a design error, specifically as to its temporary nature . . ?

    But as I've mentioned a few times, you've expressed some reluctance to accept facts that are contrary to your preferences

    I accept facts, you gave only your opinion, but I realize now that you do not know the meaning of the word Fact

    so I will not provide you with something that you can find for yourself as easily as I can provide it to you.

    Meaning, your entire argument is baseless and you have nothing to support it. No I won't find it myself, I expect YOU to support YOUR claim. I supported my side with links already, now, unless you have nothing to prove your claims, I'm waiting for you to provide yours.

    We went through this before with the number of ap available.

    Selective memory is a funny thing. Oh right you proved that you don't know the meaning of the word finite.

    You kept insisting there was no number and asking me to provide it.

    My crystal ball doesn't see that far in the future. I asked because you were so certain about the finite Achievements that yours might be more powerful.

    If I had done so, I believe you would have disputed it.

    Since it's unlikely to know that number unless you can see the future or you are a time traveler, I'd dispute obviously, since I know you are neither. Or you are?

    By waiting for you to provide the number and accepting your response

    I did not provide the upper cap of Achievement Points as was the subject of that discussion. I provided the current cap, which isn't the actual upper cap of achievement points, that's impossible to measure, impossible to count.

    I avoided another needless page of squabbling over what the value was.

    You did not. And funny thing is, you brought back your failure just now. And at the same time, fail to provide your evidence to validate your argument.

    What is important here is not what is real or what I can prove

    What is real is what is important, proving it is even better, you've done nothing of the sort.

    but what you will accept

    I refuse to accept lies and projections. Provide facts and I will gladly accept them.

    as you have demonstrated that the latter has nothing to do with the former.

    You provided nothing that is real and zero proof, so I'm not sure what you are on about here.

    Do you acknowledge that anet has recognized that LS1 was a design error, specifically as to its temporary nature . . ?

    Show me the post stating that temporary achievements were a design error, this is about temporary achievement points, not the story. You seem to be mixing the two.
    Did they remove an achievement just 16 days ago? If temporary achievements were indeed a design error, how come they did it again 16 days ago?

  • maddoctor.2738maddoctor.2738 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 28, 2020

    @Gop.8713 said:
    No, you can go back and look at the timeline if you like.

    I asked you first:
    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/1173070/#Comment_1173070

    You said:

    namely the fact that anet has acknowledged LS1's temporary status as a design error and left all subsequent story ap in place moving forward

    I said:

    I want to see that quote where they acknowledged the temporary achievement points as a design error.

    You then started the question, yet you haven't provided evidence to your claim.
    So once again, your failure to comprehend an ongoing discussion is apparent.

    edit: maybe I went at this the wrong way and it's not that you don't want to post links, but you can't.
    When you see a post, click on the date/time at the top right corner, it will give a direct link to the specific post. Type > and then provide a small excerpt from the post that validates your claim, it will appear as a quote, and will allow anyone to understand the point without clicking the link. That's for forum post links, you of course read the developers acknowledging the temporary status of LS1 as a design error, therefore it will be easy for you to go to that post and use the method above to add it to your next post.
    I'm certain you can copy/paste links outside the forums just fine but if you are having difficulties with that as well I'll be glad to help out. Just point your cursor to the address bar, click at the end, then either press CTRL+C on your keyboard, or right click and select Copy. Then either use CTRL+V on your keyboard or right click and select Paste in your post. That way we can all see your reference point for that claim. The one that forms your entire argument yet you fail to provide.

    I'll be waiting for your links in your next post.

  • Zaklex.6308Zaklex.6308 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 2, 2020

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't feel that providing you with facts is constructive, as you do not find them persuasive. It would be a waste of my time to provide you with something you will deny if you don't provide it yourself, as you did with the original ap number . . .

    So you base your entire argument on "facts" that you do not possess. Tells a lot about your argument.

    Do you acknowledge that anet has recognized that LS1 was a design error, specifically as to its temporary nature . . ?

    What did they acknowledge? Post a link.

    I'm not asking you about them. I'm asking you about you. Do you recognize that reality or not? Do you acknowledge that anet has recognized that LS1 was a design error, specifically as to its temporary nature . . ?

    I'm still waiting for you to post a link with a developer quote that confirms what you are saying, I have a feeling your entire argument revolves around something that you probably never even read. Or didn't understand.

    Well, to be fair I did ask first. But as I've mentioned a few times, you've expressed some reluctance to accept facts that are contrary to your preferences, so I will not provide you with something that you can find for yourself as easily as I can provide it to you. We went through this before with the number of ap available. You kept insisting there was no number and asking me to provide it. If I had done so, I believe you would have disputed it. By waiting for you to provide the number and accepting your response, I avoided another needless page of squabbling over what the value was. What is important here is not what is real or what I can prove, but what you will accept, as you have demonstrated that the latter has nothing to do with the former. So I will ask again:

    Do you acknowledge that anet has recognized that LS1 was a design error, specifically as to its temporary nature . . ?

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I'm not asking you about them. I'm asking you about you. Do you recognize that reality or not? Do you acknowledge that anet has recognized that LS1 was a design error, specifically as to its temporary nature . . ?

    The real question is, whether You acknowledge, that these Anet statements were always about story and story alone, and Anet has never recognized transient nature of many achievements and APs from that time as an error.

    Because it's quite clear that the "reality" you speak of is your personal misinterpretation of Anet statements, that do not really say what you think they do.

    So is it fair to say that you acknowledge that anet sees the loss of LS1 as the result of a mistake/design error/regrettable design choice or w/e roughly equivalent phrase makes you most comfortable . . ?

    I feel like I'm going to need a scorecard for this . . .

    @Zaklex.6308 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @maddoctor.2738 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't feel that providing you with facts is constructive, as you do not find them persuasive. It would be a waste of my time to provide you with something you will deny if you don't provide it yourself, as you did with the original ap number . . .

    So you base your entire argument on "facts" that you do not possess. Tells a lot about your argument.

    Do you acknowledge that anet has recognized that LS1 was a design error, specifically as to its temporary nature . . ?

    What did they acknowledge? Post a link.

    I'm not asking you about them. I'm asking you about you. Do you recognize that reality or not? Do you acknowledge that anet has recognized that LS1 was a design error, specifically as to its temporary nature . . ?

    I'm about to end this discussion once and for all. LS1 AP's are missing, currently the highest AP track reward that is available is the one at 40K(the one at 45K is not available right now). People have been complaining about the reduced amount of AP being given out in the last 2 or 3 LW's, there's a reason for that, had LS1 + other no longer available AP rewards still existed we would have enough to reach the 42K+ that you can already obtain in game, which allows everyone to reach the 40K reward. ArenaNet has already added the missing AP in previous LW season and the Expax's to make up for the "lost" AP, it's why the highest AP earners are already past the 40K reward mark.

    If anyone questions the above, it's simple math and this whole entire discussion could've been avoided many pages and days ago.

    I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. It's also possible that you do not understand the problem you are trying to solve. You acknowledge the ap is missing, but say it has been 'made up' already, from what I understand. For that to be true, AP would have had to be introduced into the game that covered the lost ap but was not available to players who obtained the lost ap when it was available. Is this what you are saying . . ?

    That's exactly what I'm saying, there was a higher amount of AP given out in previous seasons/expansions than we are currently getting, had season one been permanent content they would not have had to artificially increase the AP amount given out in LWS2, 3 and the HoT, PoF expansions. The means to get the necessary AP has already been added in, think about it, the highest AP earners are already passed 40K, they most likely have LWS1 AP points, that means those that don't can reach 40K with what is actually available in game right at this moment, and that is currently the highest available AP reward.

    Yes...no...maybe...what do you want, can't you see I'm busy saving the world...AGAIN!

  • Etria.3642Etria.3642 Member ✭✭✭✭

    So apparently my googlefu is lacking. I decided to attempt to locate just what Anet did or didn't say about Season 1 being a mistake, design or otherwise and I could not. I found a bazillion threads on reddit and here from PLAYERS saying it was or wasn't.

    Perhaps someone with more patience or better filters could find the exact wording. Otherwise it's pretty hard to acknowledge anything.

  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 3, 2020

    from https://guildwars2.com/en/the-game/releases/march-17-2020/:

    Season 1 Story Missions

    Replay four story missions from the first season of Living World for the first time ever! Get to know Rox and Braham, face Scarlet’s toxic forces, and remember how far Canach’s come in his time with you.

    It seems, that Anet is out to correct what they believe was the core of the problem. Which, again, seems to be lost access to story, not to achievements. And they decided to do it the right way - by adding access to said story for new players, not by removing access to other stuff for everyone.

    The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.

  • Inculpatus cedo.9234Inculpatus cedo.9234 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Thus, this thread can finally be laid to rest.

  • hellsqueen.3045hellsqueen.3045 Member ✭✭✭

    @Etria.3642 said:
    You do realize that birthday presents are not loyalty rewards, right? If I created a character on day one and never played until today, I would receive all the birthday gifts upon logging in?

    It's closer to a loyalty reward than anything else in the game.
    It rewards you based on having at least tried to join the game's community and if you stopped playing for a while and then logged on then there is a good chance you are giving the game another shot and that initial character/account creation is pretty substantial because suddenly the player now has these cool things and that might entice them to stay.

    Founder of Affinitus Nemus [AFNM]
    "Join Us, We're Lonely" - Our Guild At Some Point

    JUST LIKE THE LORAX, WE SPEAK FOR THE TREES!

  • Etria.3642Etria.3642 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @hellsqueen.3045 said:

    @Etria.3642 said:
    You do realize that birthday presents are not loyalty rewards, right? If I created a character on day one and never played until today, I would receive all the birthday gifts upon logging in?

    It's closer to a loyalty reward than anything else in the game.
    It rewards you based on having at least tried to join the game's community and if you stopped playing for a while and then logged on then there is a good chance you are giving the game another shot and that initial character/account creation is pretty substantial because suddenly the player now has these cool things and that might entice them to stay.

    A loyalty reward is actually a device that encourages frequent and repeat /purchases/. Companies usually use points, apps, cards, etc. The closest thing GW2 has to it, oddly enough, is actually the achievement reward track, which awards GEMS every 5,000 points earned. The next closest thing in GW2 is the daily login rewards, which offer a benefit to entice folks to simply login to collect. The Living World is actually another. Login every couple months, receive the newest update for free.

    Moving a reward from a program that by its nature requires a good deal of active playtime to one that does not, will not benefit the company at all. And the birthday gifts as they already are, do exactly what you mentioned: entices players to return to collect goodies. The anniversary awards, not to be confused with character birthday gifts, are indeed pretty substantial. But the effort required to get them doesn't even equal the effort to get the first 5,000k chest that awards gems, let alone the 40k. It isn't comparing apples and oranges, it's comparing inheriting an estate to earning it yourself.