WvW is now unplayable.... cannot buy mount without expansions. - Page 2 — Guild Wars 2 Forums

WvW is now unplayable.... cannot buy mount without expansions.

24

Comments

  • Thornwolf.9721Thornwolf.9721 Member ✭✭✭

    @Dawdler.8521 said:

    @Thornwolf.9721 said:
    So let us not forget this mount is a "Living world" mount, and not even that but a "Free update" mount. You didn't pay squat for this mount as it was free and extra content added ontop of the expansion. You paid for PoF core PoF at that, the living world and the like are all additions made for free by the dev's and most of it is harmless but the warclaw is an exception because it directly effects balance, WvW as a whole and performance.

    Path of Fire include the LS season, just like HoT included the previous. You paid for it. Saying its free does not compute. If you miss logging in when its "free", you paid for content you didnt use and have to pay for it twice. Since mounts are part of PoF... You still paid for the warclaw.

    Regardless it's a part of a competitive portion of the game, regardless of what anyone thinks about it. It gives a direct advantage to the user and is an example of what should be an exception to the rule. It's not fair and new players will not stick around seeing it as they can't have it unless they spend money; This doesn't look good from the perspective of a new player. (Of which I am not, but many who start the game just flat out say "Ill never WvW then." ) Which therefor hurts the mode which leads To A-net not adding or working on the mode period. The less players who play or use the mode, the less likely it will ever be something the polish or truly work on as it becomes a waste of resources. And now I don't consider living world to be part of the expansion; Never have and probably never will mate.

  • DemonSeed.3528DemonSeed.3528 Member ✭✭✭✭

    If mount is the least of worries, then any tweaks to them should not matter. I don't see how it affects anyone else who has the mount if others are allowed to use them either.

  • Teon.5168Teon.5168 Member ✭✭✭

    @Ryan.3675 said:
    Just getting back into the game. I cannot afford any expansions, and I want to play WvW, which is one of my all time favorite game modes. I cannot keep up to my group without a mount. This game is now unplayable for me. This is a very disappointing feature that has been added. Please make it so that people without expansions can use or "rent" a mount only in WvW. It is a game killer.

    If you can't afford the cost of a $15-20 expansion, then how are you going to afford renting a mount?

  • Mil.3562Mil.3562 Member ✭✭✭
    edited May 29, 2019

    @DemonSeed.3528 said:
    If mount is the least of worries, then any tweaks to them should not matter. I don't see how it affects anyone else who has the mount if others are allowed to use them either.

    Please read properly before you comment.
    The mount is the least of worries if you are not bothered or handicapped by not having any xpac elites.

    Tweaks? Let me correct you, it's nerfs.

    It's' not a question of affecting anyone or not.
    If we have a rented mount in WvW, why not have them in PVE too? Or perhaps we can even have a rental for ascended gears? Legendaries? A line has to be drawn somewhere.

  • DemonSeed.3528DemonSeed.3528 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Mil.3562 said:

    @DemonSeed.3528 said:
    If mount is the least of worries, then any tweaks to them should not matter. I don't see how it affects anyone else who has the mount if others are allowed to use them either.

    Please read properly before you comment.
    The mount is the least of worries if you are not bothered or handicapped by not having any xpac elites.

    Tweaks? Let me correct you, it's nerfs.

    It's' not a question of affecting anyone or not.
    If we have a rented mount in WvW, why not have them in PVE too? Or perhaps we can even have a rental for ascended gears? Legendaries? A line has to be drawn somewhere.

    This is wvw, not pve. Why not make the mount wvw only and not available to pve then hrm? A line has to be drawn somewhere.

  • Xykris.6758Xykris.6758 Member ✭✭✭

    @DemonSeed.3528 said:
    This is wvw, not pve. Why not make the mount wvw only and not available to pve then hrm? A line has to be drawn somewhere.

    I can’t speak for everyone but I couldn’t care less if it was available in PvE or not, it really doesn’t serve a purpose in PvE but Anet decided to make it available, probably because they were worried people would complain about not being able to use their new mount outside of WvW. Regardless of that though, there is a line and it’s a very clear one, no expansion, no mount. Plain and simple. If they want the mount, then they can pay the 15 to 20 dollars for the expansion. Mounts were literally a selling point of PoF so giving them to FTP players would devalue it and cause backlash. Sure people didn’t pay specifically for the Warclaw, but some DID pay specifically for mounts in general.

  • DemonSeed.3528DemonSeed.3528 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Mounts were a selling point of POF in pve, otherwise warclaw would've launched in wvw together with pof.

  • juno.1840juno.1840 Member ✭✭✭

    Buy the expansion, support the developers.

    No reason to get something linked to a paid expansion on a F2P account. Other games don't do this, why would you expect GW2 to be any different? (that's rhetorical, don't bother answering).

  • shiri.4257shiri.4257 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I would like an uber mount service. It's just unplayable having to manually take myself from point A to point B.

    Spectre [VII] - Wood League Champion. Making "fight guilds" stack on higher tiers since 2013.
    Michelin rated WvW guild since 2015. The gold standard. Never transferred, never reformed, adapting and reloading with or without Anet.

  • mindcircus.1506mindcircus.1506 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Soulock.1752 said:
    I'm living proof as I play Core Mesmer for Solo/Party Roaming and hunting squishy Zerg tail 😏👌 there are other Core Players who Roam/Zerg in WvW that can proof it! 😊

    Any player can do this. The absolute easiest players to kill in WvW are the ones at the tail of the zerg. They tend to be the lowest skilled or newest players. Many simply curse the game format and respawn without even fighting back.
    They are struggling to keep up.
    Being able to score kills on these players is not a measure of a skilled player or a viable wvw build.

    There is no class that does not get a direct upgrade in power from at least one (if not both) of their respective elite specs. Running some kind of meme build and picking off PvE mains trying to get thier gift of battle is not the proper measure of a good build.

    This is by design. While the PvE progression offered by the expansions has been mostly vertical, the PvP progression offered has indeed been horizontal.

    The best advice in this thread is the one who said if you aren't willing to buy at least one of the expansions, WvW in GW2 is likely not something for you to invest yourself in.

  • DemonSeed.3528DemonSeed.3528 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Kaiser.9873 said:
    So players can buy the game, and enjoy all the items and perks that go along with purchasing the game. Seems right.

    So players can play the game for free, but some of the items and perks that come with the purchased game are not available to them. Seems right.

    Free players complain that items and perks should be available to them the same as to the players that spent money on the game. Something off here.

    Can f2p players make posts in forum?

  • Kaiser.9873Kaiser.9873 Member ✭✭✭

    @DemonSeed.3528 said:

    @Kaiser.9873 said:
    So players can buy the game, and enjoy all the items and perks that go along with purchasing the game. Seems right.

    So players can play the game for free, but some of the items and perks that come with the purchased game are not available to them. Seems right.

    Free players complain that items and perks should be available to them the same as to the players that spent money on the game. Something off here.

    Can f2p players make posts in forum?

    No expacs. Base game. Might as well be F2P.

  • Cuks.8241Cuks.8241 Member ✭✭✭

    I guess I'm radical on this topic. I would even give f2p players access to basic raptor (Warclaw in all modes would be fine also) and gliding (no masteries) and access to Verdant Brink and Crystal Oasis.
    I think this would be good for the longevity of the game. Both expansions really improved the game and it would be a good advertisement of what is available if they buy.

  • DeceiverX.8361DeceiverX.8361 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @mindcircus.1506 said:
    I see no reason to accommodate a portion of the player base who do not spend money on this game.

    In PvP games/modes, the single most important thing to provide players with is a competitive experience.
    Lots of players bring more competition, like it or not. That's truth, and almost every single game's competitive PvP scene has stats to back that claim by tournaments won vs regional play-hours/populations.

    Would people play League of Legends if it had imbalanced matchups and long queue times? No. That's also what our sPvP field is like, and look how successful that's been going :wink: Nobody in League would ever say they'd never want to face a F2P player, because that has no bearing on the experience of playing the game.

    Unlike PvE, you need actual humans to beat in competitive play. Low/no cost upkeep to help those out in other parts of the world and never stop building player populations is absolutely essential to growing a competitive community.

    Unfortunately, ANet's also failed to maintain their existing playerbase with this atrocious profession design/balance/powercreep. Nobody's going to continue playing when it stops being fun.

    You sure that Sniper idea is as good as you thought it was gonna be?
    Because I think my original idea is better.
    Quit/Inactive. No, you can't have my stuff.

  • mindcircus.1506mindcircus.1506 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @DeceiverX.8361 said:

    @mindcircus.1506 said:
    I see no reason to accommodate a portion of the player base who do not spend money on this game.

    In PvP games/modes, the single most important thing to provide players with is a competitive experience.
    Lots of players bring more competition, like it or not. That's truth, and almost every single game's competitive PvP scene has stats to back that claim by tournaments won vs regional play-hours/populations.

    Would people play League of Legends if it had imbalanced matchups and long queue times? No. That's also what our sPvP field is like, and look how successful that's been going :wink: Nobody in League would ever say they'd never want to face a F2P player, because that has no bearing on the experience of playing the game.

    Unlike PvE, you need actual humans to beat in competitive play. Low/no cost upkeep to help those out in other parts of the world and never stop building player populations is absolutely essential to growing a competitive community.

    Unfortunately, ANet's also failed to maintain their existing playerbase with this atrocious profession design/balance/powercreep. Nobody's going to continue playing when it stops being fun.

    GW2 it is marketed the same way to the PvP crowd as it is the PvE. You are given a limited taste to the experience which is in itself pretty enjoyable. But if you want to be serious you will need to pay a few dollars (and let's be honest here, it's not a lot of money for a single expansion).

    What League of Legends does is habitually release overtuned Heroes for cash and then later tune them down. They cash in on those who want to be meta by offering a purposefully overtuned new hero and "forcing" those who want to be even casually competitive to habitually upgrade into the new hotness.

    Personally I find Arenanet's model to be a fair bit more honest.
    Serious online PVPers will never gravitate towards an MMO for their primary source of gratification, all but the truly hardcore have moved on from MOBAs. League's not the juggernaught it once was, largely due to a playbase that moved on to other games, tired of being milked.
    Riot's speedy downfall is not one to hold up to Arenanet and say "here , do what THEY do".
    They are a different company, with different values and very different methods of measuring success. If NCSoft thought Riot's money was still the one to chase, they would still be throwing money at MXM.

  • DeceiverX.8361DeceiverX.8361 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @mindcircus.1506 said:

    @DeceiverX.8361 said:

    @mindcircus.1506 said:
    I see no reason to accommodate a portion of the player base who do not spend money on this game.

    In PvP games/modes, the single most important thing to provide players with is a competitive experience.
    Lots of players bring more competition, like it or not. That's truth, and almost every single game's competitive PvP scene has stats to back that claim by tournaments won vs regional play-hours/populations.

    Would people play League of Legends if it had imbalanced matchups and long queue times? No. That's also what our sPvP field is like, and look how successful that's been going :wink: Nobody in League would ever say they'd never want to face a F2P player, because that has no bearing on the experience of playing the game.

    Unlike PvE, you need actual humans to beat in competitive play. Low/no cost upkeep to help those out in other parts of the world and never stop building player populations is absolutely essential to growing a competitive community.

    Unfortunately, ANet's also failed to maintain their existing playerbase with this atrocious profession design/balance/powercreep. Nobody's going to continue playing when it stops being fun.

    GW2 it is marketed the same way to the PvP crowd as it is the PvE. You are given a limited taste to the experience which is in itself pretty enjoyable. But if you want to be serious you will need to pay a few dollars (and let's be honest here, it's not a lot of money for a single expansion).

    What League of Legends does is habitually release overtuned Heroes for cash and then later tune them down. They cash in on those who want to be meta by offering a purposefully overtuned new hero and "forcing" those who want to be even casually competitive to habitually upgrade into the new hotness.

    Personally I find Arenanet's model to be a fair bit more honest.
    Serious online PVPers will never gravitate towards an MMO for their primary source of gratification, all but the truly hardcore have moved on from MOBAs. League's not the juggernaught it once was, largely due to a playbase that moved on to other games, tired of being milked.
    Riot's speedy downfall is not one to hold up to Arenanet and say "here , do what THEY do".
    They are a different company, with different values and very different methods of measuring success. If NCSoft thought Riot's money was still the one to chase, they would still be throwing money at MXM.

    What are you on about? Their new champion cycle is one every several months which provides ample time to unlock them all as they're released. Every single champion in the game is available for free, and has been a focal point of their business model since the game's inception. "OP's" rotate by the meta and the patches surrounding the meta as it evolves, and some of the most dominant champions for the most extended periods have been around or at launch, such as Jax and Rammus (the latter being one of the oldest champions in the game and is being nerfed tomorrow due to an insane win rate from recent buffs and some of the meta changes). They've screwed up, sure, but not every new champion is OP. Usually they over-buff after it launches weak and tone it down gradually (Sylas), or in more recent cases, end up reworking a super old champion and its new kit is super broken, but everyone who's played a little while already has these old and cheap champions as it is (Urgot/Akali/Irelia/Aatrox).

    P.S. I've been playing LoL actively since beta nearly 10 years ago. I think I've spent a total of $40 on the game. I've spent around $1k on GW2 all said and done.
    You actually don't know what you're saying.

    The MOBA market is dominated by LoL. It's the #1 most-played game in the world, not even just MOBA. There's no point in trying to beat them at their own game, especially considering its operating budget is a hundred times larger than ANet's and its staff 10x the size. But one can look at what makes game successful, and it's the same story for GW2 when it launched: Affordability and competitiveness at one price point, with cosmetics accounting for the rest. The game's been on a decline, dropping harshly in players after each powercreep expansion. You talk about measuring success, but ANet just had a huge set of layoffs nearing a quarter of its overall workforce. Meanwhile Riot is literally carrying international ESports on its back. You can't possibly spin those as being "different metrics of success." One company is ailing, the other is booming. NCSoft is too small to buy into the business. NCSoft is absolutely dwarved by the investment in LoL.

    The point is their game made a name for itself being newbie-friendly, casual-friendly, and free to foster competition. Its graphics at launch nearly sucked. The gameplay was buggy. Some of the balance was out of whack. There was no spectator mode. It didn't launch and become an instant success. It fostered competition and growth.

    ANet had larger sPvP tournament prizes than League did for several years. Yet the former's competitive scene is literally dead and gone.

    It's not about copying League. It's about understanding how to create community growth, and why these kinds of decisions which explicitly alienate a non-insubstantial amount of players are horrible ones long-term, and ultimately it's why we're in the state we're in. The logic of "pay up to compete" is nonsense when it comes to making a smash-hit title which has been proven over and over in recent years as the gaming industry and businesses in general have evolved. ANet has failed on that at every step of the way in this game's history. It's not an MMO thing, either, when WoW can still thrive with F2P options, OSRS is thriving, and the "competitive" shiny new OWL is dying fast.

    You sure that Sniper idea is as good as you thought it was gonna be?
    Because I think my original idea is better.
    Quit/Inactive. No, you can't have my stuff.

  • Fat Disgrace.4275Fat Disgrace.4275 Member ✭✭✭✭

    You can afford to pay for an internet service provider with a rolling direct debit monthly pay, but not a 1 time €20?

  • babazhook.6805babazhook.6805 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited May 30, 2019

    @DeceiverX.8361 said:

    @mindcircus.1506 said:

    @DeceiverX.8361 said:

    @mindcircus.1506 said:
    I see no reason to accommodate a portion of the player base who do not spend money on this game.

    In PvP games/modes, the single most important thing to provide players with is a competitive experience.
    Lots of players bring more competition, like it or not. That's truth, and almost every single game's competitive PvP scene has stats to back that claim by tournaments won vs regional play-hours/populations.

    Would people play League of Legends if it had imbalanced matchups and long queue times? No. That's also what our sPvP field is like, and look how successful that's been going :wink: Nobody in League would ever say they'd never want to face a F2P player, because that has no bearing on the experience of playing the game.

    Unlike PvE, you need actual humans to beat in competitive play. Low/no cost upkeep to help those out in other parts of the world and never stop building player populations is absolutely essential to growing a competitive community.

    Unfortunately, ANet's also failed to maintain their existing playerbase with this atrocious profession design/balance/powercreep. Nobody's going to continue playing when it stops being fun.

    GW2 it is marketed the same way to the PvP crowd as it is the PvE. You are given a limited taste to the experience which is in itself pretty enjoyable. But if you want to be serious you will need to pay a few dollars (and let's be honest here, it's not a lot of money for a single expansion).

    What League of Legends does is habitually release overtuned Heroes for cash and then later tune them down. They cash in on those who want to be meta by offering a purposefully overtuned new hero and "forcing" those who want to be even casually competitive to habitually upgrade into the new hotness.

    Personally I find Arenanet's model to be a fair bit more honest.
    Serious online PVPers will never gravitate towards an MMO for their primary source of gratification, all but the truly hardcore have moved on from MOBAs. League's not the juggernaught it once was, largely due to a playbase that moved on to other games, tired of being milked.
    Riot's speedy downfall is not one to hold up to Arenanet and say "here , do what THEY do".
    They are a different company, with different values and very different methods of measuring success. If NCSoft thought Riot's money was still the one to chase, they would still be throwing money at MXM.

    What are you on about? Their new champion cycle is one every several months which provides ample time to unlock them all as they're released. Every single champion in the game is available for free, and has been a focal point of their business model since the game's inception. "OP's" rotate by the meta and the patches surrounding the meta as it evolves, and some of the most dominant champions for the most extended periods have been around or at launch, such as Jax and Rammus (the latter being one of the oldest champions in the game and is being nerfed tomorrow due to an insane win rate from recent buffs and some of the meta changes). They've screwed up, sure, but not every new champion is OP. Usually they over-buff after it launches weak and tone it down gradually (Sylas), or in more recent cases, end up reworking a super old champion and its new kit is super broken, but everyone who's played a little while already has these old and cheap champions as it is (Urgot/Akali/Irelia/Aatrox).

    P.S. I've been playing LoL actively since beta nearly 10 years ago. I think I've spent a total of $40 on the game. I've spent around $1k on GW2 all said and done.
    You actually don't know what you're saying.

    The MOBA market is dominated by LoL. It's the #1 most-played game in the world, not even just MOBA. There's no point in trying to beat them at their own game, especially considering its operating budget is a hundred times larger than ANet's and its staff 10x the size. But one can look at what makes game successful, and it's the same story for GW2 when it launched: Affordability and competitiveness at one price point, with cosmetics accounting for the rest. The game's been on a decline, dropping harshly in players after each powercreep expansion. You talk about measuring success, but ANet just had a huge set of layoffs nearing a quarter of its overall workforce. Meanwhile Riot is literally carrying international ESports on its back. You can't possibly spin those as being "different metrics of success." One company is ailing, the other is booming. NCSoft is too small to buy into the business. NCSoft is absolutely dwarved by the investment in LoL.

    The point is their game made a name for itself being newbie-friendly, casual-friendly, and free to foster competition. Its graphics at launch nearly sucked. The gameplay was buggy. Some of the balance was out of whack. There was no spectator mode. It didn't launch and become an instant success. It fostered competition and growth.

    ANet had larger sPvP tournament prizes than League did for several years. Yet the former's competitive scene is literally dead and gone.

    It's not about copying League. It's about understanding how to create community growth, and why these kinds of decisions which explicitly alienate a non-insubstantial amount of players are horrible ones long-term, and ultimately it's why we're in the state we're in. The logic of "pay up to compete" is nonsense when it comes to making a smash-hit title which has been proven over and over in recent years as the gaming industry and businesses in general have evolved. ANet has failed on that at every step of the way in this game's history. It's not an MMO thing, either, when WoW can still thrive with F2P options, OSRS is thriving, and the "competitive" shiny new OWL is dying fast.

    Balance has to be seperated from the Business model. If ANET provided the base game for free , all of the expansion packs for free , all of the stuff one buys from the gem shop for free, there would be no complaints about balance because they would go out of business paying salaries to employees and providing the infrastructure for the game platform because they would not make any money doing so.

    If people do NOT want to pay for Xpacs they made a concious decision not to. They are clearly stating the 20 bucks saved more important than the Elite skills and or adds like the Warclaw. When they make that choice they should not complain about having made that choice.

    https://kotaku.com/league-of-legends-is-too-expensive-1704015868

    Here is an alternate take on the LOL model. in GW2 you can still play the game without having to fork over extra dollars. In LOL they allow more stuff to be accessed via time input. They also have an option where you can bypass time grinding in game by paying real world money. If ANET decided "Warclaws will be available to all but they have to earn XXXXX WXP points in WvW" , I do not think you will suddenly get a pile of new subscribers. Look a the GIFT of battle just as example. People complain about all the time they have to spend in game to earn it.

    LOL attracts a different crowd and among them are players PAID to play hours on end to level up characters or earn all of that gear , this then sold to other players. There are Companies that make money just hiring people to sit at home and grind so they can then sell those accounts to persons who do not want to grind for real world dollars. The LOL model can be just as onerous as the GW2 model dependent on what type of player the individual is. Some do not mind endless hours of Grind. Some do not mind forking over coin so they do not have to grind.

  • Timelord.8190Timelord.8190 Member ✭✭✭
    edited May 31, 2019

    @oOStaticOo.9467 said:
    People, in general, are a bunch of cheapskates. They will whinge and moan about everything to try to get as much for free as they possibly can. Sorry, but it's pay to play. You don't pay, you don't play.

    Anet is a bunch of cheapskates themself when it comes to WvW. No bug fixes. No alliances. No new exclusive rewards. No proper GvG arena.

    Only adding powercreep features that destroy the game, which also forcing people to pay for expansion, which also adds 0 good content for WvW'ers.

    Far Shiverpeaks
    My YT- channel: Toxilo

  • iKeostuKen.2738iKeostuKen.2738 Member ✭✭✭

    Amazing how entitled a lot of these players are to go for pushing a p2w service on the game just because they paid for a expansion that had 0 to do with WvW aside from breaking the balance even more.

    Owning the mount you already know how much of a disadvantage you are at if you are in combat and other players are running at you on mounts. Not having the powercrept expansion already puts many core classes behind, not having gliding also does the same.

    No player should have to purchase PoF in order to have access to a mount in WvW because for one, PoF wasnt a WvW update. The plan to have a mount in PoF for WvW was not a idea either. People are seriously saying that it took anet time and resources to implement a mount in WvW dont understand how weak there argument really is because its a option already in the game that has to be enabled through programming to be used in WvW, it doesnt take much effort, the animations can be done by 1 person, code as well.

    If its PvP it needs to keep the field of competition near a certain ratio of fairness. No expansion classes is ok, but no mount is not.

    This community never stops disappointing.

  • shiri.4257shiri.4257 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @iKeostuKen.2738 said:
    Amazing how entitled a lot of these players are to go for pushing a p2w service on the game just because they paid for a expansion that had 0 to do with WvW aside from breaking the balance even more.

    Owning the mount you already know how much of a disadvantage you are at if you are in combat and other players are running at you on mounts. Not having the powercrept expansion already puts many core classes behind, not having gliding also does the same.

    No player should have to purchase PoF in order to have access to a mount in WvW because for one, PoF wasnt a WvW update. The plan to have a mount in PoF for WvW was not a idea either. People are seriously saying that it took anet time and resources to implement a mount in WvW dont understand how weak there argument really is because its a option already in the game that has to be enabled through programming to be used in WvW, it doesnt take much effort, the animations can be done by 1 person, code as well.

    If its PvP it needs to keep the field of competition near a certain ratio of fairness. No expansion classes is ok, but no mount is not.

    This community never stops disappointing.

    Totally agree that this community never stops disappointing. In game and out of game. It's just absurd how entitled a lot of people or players are to go pushing FREE services that have 0 to do with wvw aside from balancing some mobility issues for other classes.

    Spectre [VII] - Wood League Champion. Making "fight guilds" stack on higher tiers since 2013.
    Michelin rated WvW guild since 2015. The gold standard. Never transferred, never reformed, adapting and reloading with or without Anet.

  • Cuks.8241Cuks.8241 Member ✭✭✭

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:
    F2P accounts should also get a button on-screen that they can press once a day to receive 2 gold and 10AP. Not fair that they can't do dailies.

    They should also get 200 free gems per week since they can't convert gold to gems. It's not fair that people who paid get such an advantage!

    How about we add a feature that gives players extra power in wvw based on the amount of money they spent on the game? One is expansion is nothing compared to what many people spent on the game. Why should people that spent that measly amount on PoF and Hot be on the same level field as those who regularly buy gems. Warclaw was not part of Pof anyway. Only people that spent more than 40 $ in the last 2 months should have it.

  • shiri.4257shiri.4257 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Cuks.8241 said:

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:
    F2P accounts should also get a button on-screen that they can press once a day to receive 2 gold and 10AP. Not fair that they can't do dailies.

    They should also get 200 free gems per week since they can't convert gold to gems. It's not fair that people who paid get such an advantage!

    How about we add a feature that gives players extra power in wvw based on the amount of money they spent on the game? One is expansion is nothing compared to what many people spent on the game. Why should people that spent that measly amount on PoF and Hot be on the same level field as those who regularly buy gems. Warclaw was not part of Pof anyway. Only people that spent more than 40 $ in the last 2 months should have it.

    Cuz those who regularly buy gems for a skin vs POF for a mount or the xpac are poor investors. we shouldn't reward poor investments.

    Spectre [VII] - Wood League Champion. Making "fight guilds" stack on higher tiers since 2013.
    Michelin rated WvW guild since 2015. The gold standard. Never transferred, never reformed, adapting and reloading with or without Anet.

  • Out of all the mmo ive played... Gw2 has the cheapest mount system, while keeping rhem unique and interesting. PoF not too expensive even when its not on special have has some awesome content will it

  • OutOfOrder.3719OutOfOrder.3719 Member ✭✭✭
    edited May 31, 2019

    Free to play players don't deserve everything that paying customers do.

    You get what you pay for in life and in this game.

    Buy Path of Fire, most core classes are not meta for WvW anyway. More groups will want you in their party with an elite specialization.

    Having a mount in WvW is a great selling point for Path of Fire and should remain the way it is.

  • Etterwyn.5263Etterwyn.5263 Member ✭✭✭

    @Cuks.8241 said:

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:
    F2P accounts should also get a button on-screen that they can press once a day to receive 2 gold and 10AP. Not fair that they can't do dailies.

    They should also get 200 free gems per week since they can't convert gold to gems. It's not fair that people who paid get such an advantage!

    How about we add a feature that gives players extra power in wvw based on the amount of money they spent on the game? One is expansion is nothing compared to what many people spent on the game. Why should people that spent that measly amount on PoF and Hot be on the same level field as those who regularly buy gems. Warclaw was not part of Pof anyway. Only people that spent more than 40 $ in the last 2 months should have it.

    POF gives access to mounts, just like HOT gives access to gliding. By your reasoning, just because Warclaw wasn't in the game in September 2017, it should be available for everybody. And why would somebody spend $40 on gems instead of $20 for the expansion?

    Oh, should core/F2P get Skyscale and Roller Beetle too? Only fair, because they weren't int he game in 2017, right? If I roll my eyes any harder I'll be able to see my brain.

    WvW™ - where you find more Red Rings of Death than an Xbox repair facility.

  • iKeostuKen.2738iKeostuKen.2738 Member ✭✭✭

    @grouchybhaal.4275 said:
    Out of all the mmo ive played... Gw2 has the cheapest mount system, while keeping rhem unique and interesting. PoF not too expensive even when its not on special have has some awesome content will it

    @OutOfOrder.3719 said:
    Free to play players don't deserve everything that paying customers do.

    You get what you pay for in life and in this game.

    Buy Path of Fire, most core classes are not meta for WvW anyway. More groups will want you in their party with an elite specialization.

    Having a mount in WvW is a great selling point for Path of Fire and should remain the way it is.

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:

    @Cuks.8241 said:

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:
    F2P accounts should also get a button on-screen that they can press once a day to receive 2 gold and 10AP. Not fair that they can't do dailies.

    They should also get 200 free gems per week since they can't convert gold to gems. It's not fair that people who paid get such an advantage!

    How about we add a feature that gives players extra power in wvw based on the amount of money they spent on the game? One is expansion is nothing compared to what many people spent on the game. Why should people that spent that measly amount on PoF and Hot be on the same level field as those who regularly buy gems. Warclaw was not part of Pof anyway. Only people that spent more than 40 $ in the last 2 months should have it.

    POF gives access to mounts, just like HOT gives access to gliding. By your reasoning, just because Warclaw wasn't in the game in September 2017, it should be available for everybody. And why would somebody spend $40 on gems instead of $20 for the expansion?

    Oh, should core/F2P get Skyscale and Roller Beetle too? Only fair, because they weren't int he game in 2017, right? If I roll my eyes any harder I'll be able to see my brain.

    They could put flying mounts that drop 1hko bombs for $1000 and I bet you will all think thats perfectly okay.

  • @iKeostuKen.2738 said:

    @grouchybhaal.4275 said:
    Out of all the mmo ive played... Gw2 has the cheapest mount system, while keeping rhem unique and interesting. PoF not too expensive even when its not on special have has some awesome content will it

    @OutOfOrder.3719 said:
    Free to play players don't deserve everything that paying customers do.

    You get what you pay for in life and in this game.

    Buy Path of Fire, most core classes are not meta for WvW anyway. More groups will want you in their party with an elite specialization.

    Having a mount in WvW is a great selling point for Path of Fire and should remain the way it is.

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:

    @Cuks.8241 said:

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:
    F2P accounts should also get a button on-screen that they can press once a day to receive 2 gold and 10AP. Not fair that they can't do dailies.

    They should also get 200 free gems per week since they can't convert gold to gems. It's not fair that people who paid get such an advantage!

    How about we add a feature that gives players extra power in wvw based on the amount of money they spent on the game? One is expansion is nothing compared to what many people spent on the game. Why should people that spent that measly amount on PoF and Hot be on the same level field as those who regularly buy gems. Warclaw was not part of Pof anyway. Only people that spent more than 40 $ in the last 2 months should have it.

    POF gives access to mounts, just like HOT gives access to gliding. By your reasoning, just because Warclaw wasn't in the game in September 2017, it should be available for everybody. And why would somebody spend $40 on gems instead of $20 for the expansion?

    Oh, should core/F2P get Skyscale and Roller Beetle too? Only fair, because they weren't int he game in 2017, right? If I roll my eyes any harder I'll be able to see my brain.

    They could put flying mounts that drop 1hko bombs for $1000 and I bet you will all think thats perfectly okay.

    Came back from eso, 2 expansions for $80aus is perfectly fine rather than $250 per year for a craft bag and zero content @iKeostuKen.2738 or should everything be free? Or should anet make like fornite for some reason?

  • iKeostuKen.2738iKeostuKen.2738 Member ✭✭✭

    @grouchybhaal.4275 said:

    @iKeostuKen.2738 said:

    @grouchybhaal.4275 said:
    Out of all the mmo ive played... Gw2 has the cheapest mount system, while keeping rhem unique and interesting. PoF not too expensive even when its not on special have has some awesome content will it

    @OutOfOrder.3719 said:
    Free to play players don't deserve everything that paying customers do.

    You get what you pay for in life and in this game.

    Buy Path of Fire, most core classes are not meta for WvW anyway. More groups will want you in their party with an elite specialization.

    Having a mount in WvW is a great selling point for Path of Fire and should remain the way it is.

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:

    @Cuks.8241 said:

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:
    F2P accounts should also get a button on-screen that they can press once a day to receive 2 gold and 10AP. Not fair that they can't do dailies.

    They should also get 200 free gems per week since they can't convert gold to gems. It's not fair that people who paid get such an advantage!

    How about we add a feature that gives players extra power in wvw based on the amount of money they spent on the game? One is expansion is nothing compared to what many people spent on the game. Why should people that spent that measly amount on PoF and Hot be on the same level field as those who regularly buy gems. Warclaw was not part of Pof anyway. Only people that spent more than 40 $ in the last 2 months should have it.

    POF gives access to mounts, just like HOT gives access to gliding. By your reasoning, just because Warclaw wasn't in the game in September 2017, it should be available for everybody. And why would somebody spend $40 on gems instead of $20 for the expansion?

    Oh, should core/F2P get Skyscale and Roller Beetle too? Only fair, because they weren't int he game in 2017, right? If I roll my eyes any harder I'll be able to see my brain.

    They could put flying mounts that drop 1hko bombs for $1000 and I bet you will all think thats perfectly okay.

    Came back from eso, 2 expansions for $80aus is perfectly fine rather than $250 per year for a craft bag and zero content @iKeostuKen.2738 or should everything be free? Or should anet make like fornite for some reason?

    Not sure when a WvW mount meant all the expansion content of the game.

  • @iKeostuKen.2738 said:

    @grouchybhaal.4275 said:

    @iKeostuKen.2738 said:

    @grouchybhaal.4275 said:
    Out of all the mmo ive played... Gw2 has the cheapest mount system, while keeping rhem unique and interesting. PoF not too expensive even when its not on special have has some awesome content will it

    @OutOfOrder.3719 said:
    Free to play players don't deserve everything that paying customers do.

    You get what you pay for in life and in this game.

    Buy Path of Fire, most core classes are not meta for WvW anyway. More groups will want you in their party with an elite specialization.

    Having a mount in WvW is a great selling point for Path of Fire and should remain the way it is.

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:

    @Cuks.8241 said:

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:
    F2P accounts should also get a button on-screen that they can press once a day to receive 2 gold and 10AP. Not fair that they can't do dailies.

    They should also get 200 free gems per week since they can't convert gold to gems. It's not fair that people who paid get such an advantage!

    How about we add a feature that gives players extra power in wvw based on the amount of money they spent on the game? One is expansion is nothing compared to what many people spent on the game. Why should people that spent that measly amount on PoF and Hot be on the same level field as those who regularly buy gems. Warclaw was not part of Pof anyway. Only people that spent more than 40 $ in the last 2 months should have it.

    POF gives access to mounts, just like HOT gives access to gliding. By your reasoning, just because Warclaw wasn't in the game in September 2017, it should be available for everybody. And why would somebody spend $40 on gems instead of $20 for the expansion?

    Oh, should core/F2P get Skyscale and Roller Beetle too? Only fair, because they weren't int he game in 2017, right? If I roll my eyes any harder I'll be able to see my brain.

    They could put flying mounts that drop 1hko bombs for $1000 and I bet you will all think thats perfectly okay.

    Came back from eso, 2 expansions for $80aus is perfectly fine rather than $250 per year for a craft bag and zero content @iKeostuKen.2738 or should everything be free? Or should anet make like fornite for some reason?

    Not sure when a WvW mount meant all the expansion content of the game.

    Well when i got mine it was pretty much $30 aus each, dirt cheap to unlock most the content.
    Gotta give the f2p a reason to buy the game (apart from the dirt cheap price).

  • If they have Mount licenses, I hope they are temporary. 2 week license for 50 gold, idk. Then, you buy using gems.

    Pay for the features. At least this isn't WoW or FFXIV asking money to play every week!

  • iKeostuKen.2738iKeostuKen.2738 Member ✭✭✭
    edited June 1, 2019

    @grouchybhaal.4275 said:

    @iKeostuKen.2738 said:

    @grouchybhaal.4275 said:

    @iKeostuKen.2738 said:

    @grouchybhaal.4275 said:
    Out of all the mmo ive played... Gw2 has the cheapest mount system, while keeping rhem unique and interesting. PoF not too expensive even when its not on special have has some awesome content will it

    @OutOfOrder.3719 said:
    Free to play players don't deserve everything that paying customers do.

    You get what you pay for in life and in this game.

    Buy Path of Fire, most core classes are not meta for WvW anyway. More groups will want you in their party with an elite specialization.

    Having a mount in WvW is a great selling point for Path of Fire and should remain the way it is.

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:

    @Cuks.8241 said:

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:
    F2P accounts should also get a button on-screen that they can press once a day to receive 2 gold and 10AP. Not fair that they can't do dailies.

    They should also get 200 free gems per week since they can't convert gold to gems. It's not fair that people who paid get such an advantage!

    How about we add a feature that gives players extra power in wvw based on the amount of money they spent on the game? One is expansion is nothing compared to what many people spent on the game. Why should people that spent that measly amount on PoF and Hot be on the same level field as those who regularly buy gems. Warclaw was not part of Pof anyway. Only people that spent more than 40 $ in the last 2 months should have it.

    POF gives access to mounts, just like HOT gives access to gliding. By your reasoning, just because Warclaw wasn't in the game in September 2017, it should be available for everybody. And why would somebody spend $40 on gems instead of $20 for the expansion?

    Oh, should core/F2P get Skyscale and Roller Beetle too? Only fair, because they weren't int he game in 2017, right? If I roll my eyes any harder I'll be able to see my brain.

    They could put flying mounts that drop 1hko bombs for $1000 and I bet you will all think thats perfectly okay.

    Came back from eso, 2 expansions for $80aus is perfectly fine rather than $250 per year for a craft bag and zero content @iKeostuKen.2738 or should everything be free? Or should anet make like fornite for some reason?

    Not sure when a WvW mount meant all the expansion content of the game.

    Well when i got mine it was pretty much $30 aus each, dirt cheap to unlock most the content.
    Gotta give the f2p a reason to buy the game (apart from the dirt cheap price).

    There reason for purchasing the expansions is because they want to play PoF PvE content or the elite specs.

    What other games have you paying real money for 1 mount for PvP which is the only way to obtain it? Not even EA is that scummy.

  • Etterwyn.5263Etterwyn.5263 Member ✭✭✭

    @iKeostuKen.2738 said:

    @grouchybhaal.4275 said:
    Out of all the mmo ive played... Gw2 has the cheapest mount system, while keeping rhem unique and interesting. PoF not too expensive even when its not on special have has some awesome content will it

    @OutOfOrder.3719 said:
    Free to play players don't deserve everything that paying customers do.

    You get what you pay for in life and in this game.

    Buy Path of Fire, most core classes are not meta for WvW anyway. More groups will want you in their party with an elite specialization.

    Having a mount in WvW is a great selling point for Path of Fire and should remain the way it is.

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:

    @Cuks.8241 said:

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:
    F2P accounts should also get a button on-screen that they can press once a day to receive 2 gold and 10AP. Not fair that they can't do dailies.

    They should also get 200 free gems per week since they can't convert gold to gems. It's not fair that people who paid get such an advantage!

    How about we add a feature that gives players extra power in wvw based on the amount of money they spent on the game? One is expansion is nothing compared to what many people spent on the game. Why should people that spent that measly amount on PoF and Hot be on the same level field as those who regularly buy gems. Warclaw was not part of Pof anyway. Only people that spent more than 40 $ in the last 2 months should have it.

    POF gives access to mounts, just like HOT gives access to gliding. By your reasoning, just because Warclaw wasn't in the game in September 2017, it should be available for everybody. And why would somebody spend $40 on gems instead of $20 for the expansion?

    Oh, should core/F2P get Skyscale and Roller Beetle too? Only fair, because they weren't int he game in 2017, right? If I roll my eyes any harder I'll be able to see my brain.

    They could put flying mounts that drop 1hko bombs for $1000 and I bet you will all think thats perfectly okay.

    Nope. But if they had a new expansion for $30 that added flying mounts who dropped bombs, I would think that's perfectly okay. That's been their model since GW1. Buy base game for base content, then buy expansions for new content. Absolutely nothing has changed. I'm just going to stop posting in these entitlement threads. It's mentally exhausting.

    WvW™ - where you find more Red Rings of Death than an Xbox repair facility.

  • iKeostuKen.2738iKeostuKen.2738 Member ✭✭✭
    edited June 1, 2019

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:

    @iKeostuKen.2738 said:

    @grouchybhaal.4275 said:
    Out of all the mmo ive played... Gw2 has the cheapest mount system, while keeping rhem unique and interesting. PoF not too expensive even when its not on special have has some awesome content will it

    @OutOfOrder.3719 said:
    Free to play players don't deserve everything that paying customers do.

    You get what you pay for in life and in this game.

    Buy Path of Fire, most core classes are not meta for WvW anyway. More groups will want you in their party with an elite specialization.

    Having a mount in WvW is a great selling point for Path of Fire and should remain the way it is.

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:

    @Cuks.8241 said:

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:
    F2P accounts should also get a button on-screen that they can press once a day to receive 2 gold and 10AP. Not fair that they can't do dailies.

    They should also get 200 free gems per week since they can't convert gold to gems. It's not fair that people who paid get such an advantage!

    How about we add a feature that gives players extra power in wvw based on the amount of money they spent on the game? One is expansion is nothing compared to what many people spent on the game. Why should people that spent that measly amount on PoF and Hot be on the same level field as those who regularly buy gems. Warclaw was not part of Pof anyway. Only people that spent more than 40 $ in the last 2 months should have it.

    POF gives access to mounts, just like HOT gives access to gliding. By your reasoning, just because Warclaw wasn't in the game in September 2017, it should be available for everybody. And why would somebody spend $40 on gems instead of $20 for the expansion?

    Oh, should core/F2P get Skyscale and Roller Beetle too? Only fair, because they weren't int he game in 2017, right? If I roll my eyes any harder I'll be able to see my brain.

    They could put flying mounts that drop 1hko bombs for $1000 and I bet you will all think thats perfectly okay.

    Nope. But if they had a new expansion for $30 that added flying mounts who dropped bombs, I would think that's perfectly okay. That's been their model since GW1. Buy base game for base content, then buy expansions for new content. Absolutely nothing has changed. I'm just going to stop posting in these entitlement threads. It's mentally exhausting.

    Sadly with the previous mentality of a lot in this thread, if you pay you deserve to have such a ridiculous advantage and those who dont pay dont understand that this is a business that they are running and should suck it up.

    Pretty much flipping the entitlement argument on the ones that think p2w is perfectly ok.

    @ParaNoidAndroid.1406 said:
    If they have Mount licenses, I hope they are temporary. 2 week license for 50 gold, idk. Then, you buy using gems.

    Pay for the features. At least this isn't WoW or FFXIV asking money to play every week!

    How ridiculous. Have them pay with Honor Points, Memories, WvW Marks, or less then 3 gold. Pick one.

  • Kaiser.9873Kaiser.9873 Member ✭✭✭

    @iKeostuKen.2738 said:

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:

    @iKeostuKen.2738 said:

    @grouchybhaal.4275 said:
    Out of all the mmo ive played... Gw2 has the cheapest mount system, while keeping rhem unique and interesting. PoF not too expensive even when its not on special have has some awesome content will it

    @OutOfOrder.3719 said:
    Free to play players don't deserve everything that paying customers do.

    You get what you pay for in life and in this game.

    Buy Path of Fire, most core classes are not meta for WvW anyway. More groups will want you in their party with an elite specialization.

    Having a mount in WvW is a great selling point for Path of Fire and should remain the way it is.

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:

    @Cuks.8241 said:

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:
    F2P accounts should also get a button on-screen that they can press once a day to receive 2 gold and 10AP. Not fair that they can't do dailies.

    They should also get 200 free gems per week since they can't convert gold to gems. It's not fair that people who paid get such an advantage!

    How about we add a feature that gives players extra power in wvw based on the amount of money they spent on the game? One is expansion is nothing compared to what many people spent on the game. Why should people that spent that measly amount on PoF and Hot be on the same level field as those who regularly buy gems. Warclaw was not part of Pof anyway. Only people that spent more than 40 $ in the last 2 months should have it.

    POF gives access to mounts, just like HOT gives access to gliding. By your reasoning, just because Warclaw wasn't in the game in September 2017, it should be available for everybody. And why would somebody spend $40 on gems instead of $20 for the expansion?

    Oh, should core/F2P get Skyscale and Roller Beetle too? Only fair, because they weren't int he game in 2017, right? If I roll my eyes any harder I'll be able to see my brain.

    They could put flying mounts that drop 1hko bombs for $1000 and I bet you will all think thats perfectly okay.

    Nope. But if they had a new expansion for $30 that added flying mounts who dropped bombs, I would think that's perfectly okay. That's been their model since GW1. Buy base game for base content, then buy expansions for new content. Absolutely nothing has changed. I'm just going to stop posting in these entitlement threads. It's mentally exhausting.

    Sadly with the previous mentality of a lot in this thread, if you pay you deserve to have such a ridiculous advantage and those who dont pay dont understand that this is a business that they are running and should suck it up.

    Pretty much flipping the entitlement argument on the ones that think p2w is perfectly ok.

    @ParaNoidAndroid.1406 said:
    If they have Mount licenses, I hope they are temporary. 2 week license for 50 gold, idk. Then, you buy using gems.

    Pay for the features. At least this isn't WoW or FFXIV asking money to play every week!

    How ridiculous. Have them pay with Honor Points, Memories, WvW Marks, or less then 3 gold. Pick one.

    Entitlement is wanting what the paying customer gets without paying yourself. You want to play the game you need to support the game. Every game requires expac purchase to get expac features.

  • iKeostuKen.2738iKeostuKen.2738 Member ✭✭✭
    edited June 2, 2019

    @Kaiser.9873 said:

    @iKeostuKen.2738 said:

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:

    @iKeostuKen.2738 said:

    @grouchybhaal.4275 said:
    Out of all the mmo ive played... Gw2 has the cheapest mount system, while keeping rhem unique and interesting. PoF not too expensive even when its not on special have has some awesome content will it

    @OutOfOrder.3719 said:
    Free to play players don't deserve everything that paying customers do.

    You get what you pay for in life and in this game.

    Buy Path of Fire, most core classes are not meta for WvW anyway. More groups will want you in their party with an elite specialization.

    Having a mount in WvW is a great selling point for Path of Fire and should remain the way it is.

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:

    @Cuks.8241 said:

    @Etterwyn.5263 said:
    F2P accounts should also get a button on-screen that they can press once a day to receive 2 gold and 10AP. Not fair that they can't do dailies.

    They should also get 200 free gems per week since they can't convert gold to gems. It's not fair that people who paid get such an advantage!

    How about we add a feature that gives players extra power in wvw based on the amount of money they spent on the game? One is expansion is nothing compared to what many people spent on the game. Why should people that spent that measly amount on PoF and Hot be on the same level field as those who regularly buy gems. Warclaw was not part of Pof anyway. Only people that spent more than 40 $ in the last 2 months should have it.

    POF gives access to mounts, just like HOT gives access to gliding. By your reasoning, just because Warclaw wasn't in the game in September 2017, it should be available for everybody. And why would somebody spend $40 on gems instead of $20 for the expansion?

    Oh, should core/F2P get Skyscale and Roller Beetle too? Only fair, because they weren't int he game in 2017, right? If I roll my eyes any harder I'll be able to see my brain.

    They could put flying mounts that drop 1hko bombs for $1000 and I bet you will all think thats perfectly okay.

    Nope. But if they had a new expansion for $30 that added flying mounts who dropped bombs, I would think that's perfectly okay. That's been their model since GW1. Buy base game for base content, then buy expansions for new content. Absolutely nothing has changed. I'm just going to stop posting in these entitlement threads. It's mentally exhausting.

    Sadly with the previous mentality of a lot in this thread, if you pay you deserve to have such a ridiculous advantage and those who dont pay dont understand that this is a business that they are running and should suck it up.

    Pretty much flipping the entitlement argument on the ones that think p2w is perfectly ok.

    @ParaNoidAndroid.1406 said:
    If they have Mount licenses, I hope they are temporary. 2 week license for 50 gold, idk. Then, you buy using gems.

    Pay for the features. At least this isn't WoW or FFXIV asking money to play every week!

    How ridiculous. Have them pay with Honor Points, Memories, WvW Marks, or less then 3 gold. Pick one.

    Entitlement is wanting what the paying customer gets without paying yourself. You want to play the game you need to support the game. Every game requires expac purchase to get expac features.

    Actually no, cause f2p players arent asking for elite specs, gliding, expansion pack sigils or runes. They are asking for mounts, 1 thing to even the playing field a little more. Thats not entitlement.

    Entitlement is on the other hand saying no just because you feel you spent money on something that was never meant to come with the expansion pack and others cant have it.

    Players paid for PoF, they didnt pay for warclaw.

    Anyways, done making this point. This mode is a sinking ship and will only get worse. Community is actually pushing for P2W saying its "supportiing the company". That's literally the sign of this game mode never getting any better.

  • OutOfOrder.3719OutOfOrder.3719 Member ✭✭✭

    You can purchase the expansion with gems. It will take you a long time, but it is possible. I would not recommend trying to do this playing WvW exclusively as it will take years. But this is perfectly possible with most PvE content.

    But in all seriousness, free to play players in other game modes like PvP, are idiots to play core classes in Ranked matches.

    It's extremely hard to carry any core classes besides thieves and guardians. I would argue that these free to play players ruin Ranked PvP matches in general.

    Simply, these players ruin the PvP gaming experience for players that want to win.

    In WvW, these free to play players drag their server down and prevent other players from moving up WvW tiers. You should be really happy that you can play WvW and PvP at all with free to play accounts.

    If it were up to me, free to play players would only play Unranked PvP and would be isolated on a newbie WvW server by themselves where mounts are excluded for everyone. This would make the most sense honestly.

  • DemonSeed.3528DemonSeed.3528 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @OutOfOrder.3719 said:
    You can purchase the expansion with gems.

    You cannot purchase expansion with gems/gold. You can get upgrades for the expansions, like digital deluxe etc with gems/gold.

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited June 2, 2019

    @iKeostuKen.2738 said:
    Players paid for PoF, they didnt pay for warclaw.

    Again, and so done making this point, players paid for the mounts. They are a feature of PoF and just like we paid for the "free" living story (cost for LS4 included in PoF, just like cost for LS3 was included in HoT and LS1-2 in GW2) we already paid for any "free" content that require the expansion. Its called payment in advance or for a service.

    Dont look a gift Asura in the mouth.
    No seriously, dont. Shark teeth.

  • iKeostuKen.2738iKeostuKen.2738 Member ✭✭✭

    @Dawdler.8521 said:

    @iKeostuKen.2738 said:
    Players paid for PoF, they didnt pay for warclaw.

    Again, and so done making this point, players paid for the mounts. They are a feature of PoF and just like we paid for the "free" living story (cost for LS4 included in PoF, just like cost for LS3 was included in HoT and LS1-2 in GW2) we already paid for any "free" content that require the expansion. Its called payment in advance or for a service.

    That would be correct if you knew what you'd be getting ahead of time when you purchased the expansion. But to say you paid in advance for warclaw is bs. It's a WvW exclusive mount with the only thing PoF bringing to WvW is imbalanced elite specs. It wasnt a expansion centered around bringing mounts to WvW, it was strictly a PvE decision.

    The fact its behind a p2w wall is poor planning and implementation. Almost feels as though those who say "I paid for it" really need a elite spec + a fast moving, CC immune, 10k shield to have an advantage against f2p core class players. It's pretty pathetic.

  • Kylden Ar.3724Kylden Ar.3724 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Or, you could just get the xpac and be competitive, because F2P accounts do not have elite specs either and are therefore free bags in WvW.

    How many times we gotta tell you GRIND IS NOT CONTENT there ANet?

    Leader of Tyrian Adventure Corp [TACO], [RaW][TACO] Alliance, Kaineng.

©2010–2018 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, Heart of Thorns, Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire, ArenaNet, NCSOFT, the Interlocking NC Logo, and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCSOFT Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.