Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Including Strike Mission Achievements as a Required Part of the Zone Meta


Vayne.8563

Recommended Posts

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@Obtena.7952 said:The relevance is all about how this change impacts the players and if that has a big enough impact to the health of the game.

The players impacted by this change will be the players that go after the meta achievements of the zones. Judging by the gw2efficiency numbers, that number of the population is very low. A tiny minority of the overall population of the game so I'm not sure it can have an impact to the health of the game

In the particular instance, sure... I'm talking about something grander than JUST this one instance and I'm sure the OP made a thread about this particular time because THIS particular one (of which there are MANY examples) is the example that affected him. You aren't getting it ... it's not that Anet has been inconsistent THIS time ... it's that Anet is inconsistent LOTS of times and in each instance, it affects some tiny minority, and those tiny minorities over many times becomes a rather significant group of players. Frankly, I already explained this in the thread you are replying to. I can only conclude you can't comprehend this ... or just ignoring it to be disagreeable.

So while you want to argue that this one instance isn't going to have that big an impact to the health of the game (and that could be right, I don't know), everyone that recognizes the long-term inconsistency is an ongoing issue that has existed for a long time is a mile ahead of you and sees how bad it is for the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@"Ayrilana.1396" said:What this means is the the total percentage of GW2 players that complete these meta achievements are lower than the percentage shown on GW2E. This means that Vayne’s doom and gloom argument is grossly over-exaggerated. If less than 10% of the population complete the meta achievements then they’re likely not as big of a deal to the player base as they’re being made out to be.

Vayne's "doom and gloom" is about the abysmal percentage of Shadow in the Ice, which is the lowest percentage the game ever had. But that's normal in my opinion given how much grind the Shadow in the Ice achievements require and how recent it is. Let's wait and see the percentages after 2-3 months and have a better opinion on that data.

As for the population, GW2efficiency is
VERY
representative of the top achievement hunters, there are 147 players with Furious Achiever on GW2E and there are 45 (NA)+132(EU) = 177 players on the official leaderboards with 40k AP (so they possess that title). There are 1,862 players with Exalted Achiever (35k) on GW2E and there are 804 players in NA with that amount, all 1000 top EU accounts are beyond 35k and the lowest is at 36437, how many exist between that and 35k is anyone's guess, but it shouldn't be a number in the thousands. Meaning GW2efficiency is very representative of the 35k+ population as well.

And I'm willing to bet that the results will be very similar for the 30k+ and the 20k+ AP players. Yes there are lots of secondary (or more) accounts but those can be filtered using higher AP amounts. Remember, 90% of the global population is under 2870 AP, meaning 90% of the population doesn't care about meta achievements, if they did, they'd be beyond that point by now because each meta achievement offers more than 200 AP for completion. So yes, no matter the results this affects a tiny minority of the global population, but it's useful data when designing future meta achievements.

Vaynes doom and gloom doesn't believe casual players have Guild Wars 2 efficiency accounts, but they represent a significant portion of the playerbase. Until you can prove that most players have Guild Wars 2 efficiency accounts that are playing today, we're only getting a percnetage of people who have accounts on GW 2 efficiency. Many of those are likely harder core players and they may not do zone meta at all because they have their own end game. As this game moves further and further away from what I want, I will personally be looking for another game. Obviously if that happens some of my guild will come with me, probably only a couple of dozen people, because we've played together for years. But you can't just change the game by trying to encourage people who raid who have already basically said they're not interest in raiding. It's like throwing good money after bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Randulf.7614 said:

@Amy of Darkness.5248 said:34 people thumbs-upped this post, yet there's like, 3 maybe 4 people insisting they are the majority opinion? Risible!

@Randulf.7614 said:This isn’t about consistency, it is just people’s irrational phobias over instanced content.

NO.
I absolutely resent your implication and you are putting words in OP's mouth while making a sweeping generalization about other players. Nobody in this thread has said or even implied even once that they are afraid of it, not OP or anyone else who is unhappy with this change. They said they already tried and they didn't LIKE it.

Why is it so hard for you all to understand that we want to do this content
on our own terms
. Funneling people into content as a requirement so they can pretend there's more interest in it than there is, it sets a
bad precedent
.

In which case I apologise for a sweeping implication which was not meant in that way so shouldn't have been written by me. I have removed that line completely. My context was based on the OP later saying they hated instances from experiences in other games and was influencing in part their opinion here. Since I can understand you thought I was making a general sweep about players, I have removed that bit since it wasn't really necessary I agree.

I hate raids in particular for experience in other games, not broadly instanced content, considering Guild Wars 1 was my main game and it was all instanced content and I had no problems at all with any of the instanced content in Guild Wars 1 because it was all segmented. Not beating the Underworld didn't affect my GWAMM title or my ability to get 50/50 in the Hall of Monuments because there were other options. I actually did finish DOA, FIssuer of Woe, Slavers Exile, THe Deep and Urgoz's Warren. In fact, I finished DOA with my wife and six heroes. There were options. And all I'm asking for here is options.

You want to take people out of their comfort zones after years of playing you do so at your own risk. I'm not saying don't have raids. I'm not saying don't have strike missions. I'm asking that raids and strike missions exist without overtly affecting the game I've been playing for years. I'm not sure who this is unreaonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:

@Randulf.7614 said:This isn’t inconsistent though.

It sure as hell is inconsistent ... it's EXCEPTIONALLY inconsistent to throw 10 man achievements into OW meta achieves ... I can't even believe I have to explicitly state that.

That's because you cherry picked a few words out of context with the statement I made against the question posed and cut the rest of the line out

The rest of the statement I made in reply to Anet being consistent in philosophy to how they deliver was;

"Anet have always tried to bring players together. Metas have often included multi player achievements and we have at least one example of there being a requirement before as well."

Them including the strikes in the meta is part of that goal and is consistent with the design goals they have strived for over the years

You're spin doctoring. @""Obtena.7952" is correct.

Please don't post off topic replies nor twist what I wrote. This is nothing to do with spin doctoring. You just disagree. There is a difference

"Anet have always tried to bring players together. Metas have often included multi player achievements"

You are pulling the "anet wants us to be friends" card that has zero relevance to the topic. "Metas" are OPEN WORLD meta events made for large groups of players. FORCING people to do raid "stepping stones" to complete zone achievements is not what MOST people want. If we wanted raids and raid stuff, then we wouldn't have the devs saying they don't want to spend money making more bc the raid population is so small.

You ARE spin doctoring.

The majority 94 percent don't even do the meta so MOST people don't care. Some want raids. We already know you don't. I and MOST people don't care raids exist tho for those that enjoys it same as strike missions MOST people don't care if they exist either way. A SMALL minority wants to do the meta and even less of that SMALL minority is upset they can't do it because of not even being willing to do the easy strike missions to get it. I still support this SMALL minority and hope anet removes strikes from meta so those FEW can get the shiver emote.

If you're getting that number of 94% from GW 2 efficiency all you can really say is that 94% of people who have accounts on efficiency and still play don't do the meta. I mean obvoiusly people who left the game two years ago don't do the meta, but may still have accounts on efficiency. That's why I used it as a recent comparative stat rather than a long term stat. The longer you go out the more inaccurate it becomes. I chose a very small snap shot to make a compartive study not an absolute one.

Tell me, what percentage of my guild of 400 casuals do you think have Guild Wars 2 efficiency accounts? I have ten accounts. I do the meta on one of them. Therefore 90% of the meta doesn't get done on GW2 efficiency. My wife has ten accounts and the same applies to her. It's just not a valid source of the over all statement that only 6% of the population does the meta. But we can do an analysis of how many people comparatively do the meta that are guild wars 2 efficiency users from one chapter to the next, because we're ONLY looking at efficiency users.

On the other topic, I don't believe most casuals even know what efficiency is or have accounts there or entered their API. Most of my guild doesn't. But many of them do go for the metas. Again it's the casual end game. That and collecting stuff like skins. Emotes would bea perfect thing to give a casual as a reward. Role players are the guys who most care about emotes. Are we saying role players are the most likely guys to enjoy strike missions?

It's just a bad change. It's even a worse change if it doesnt' work to get more people into raids and I don't think it will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Vayne.8563 said:

@Amy of Darkness.5248 said:34 people thumbs-upped this post, yet there's like, 3 maybe 4 people insisting they are the majority opinion? Risible!

@Randulf.7614 said:This isn’t about consistency, it is just people’s irrational phobias over instanced content.

NO.
I absolutely resent your implication and you are putting words in OP's mouth while making a sweeping generalization about other players. Nobody in this thread has said or even implied even once that they are afraid of it, not OP or anyone else who is unhappy with this change. They said they already tried and they didn't LIKE it.

Why is it so hard for you all to understand that we want to do this content
on our own terms
. Funneling people into content as a requirement so they can pretend there's more interest in it than there is, it sets a
bad precedent
.

In which case I apologise for a sweeping implication which was not meant in that way so shouldn't have been written by me. I have removed that line completely. My context was based on the OP later saying they hated instances from experiences in other games and was influencing in part their opinion here. Since I can understand you thought I was making a general sweep about players, I have removed that bit since it wasn't really necessary I agree.

I hate raids in particular for experience in other games, not broadly instanced content, considering Guild Wars 1 was my main game and it was all instanced content and I had no problems at all with any of the instanced content in Guild Wars 1 because it was all segmented. Not beating the Underworld didn't affect my GWAMM title or my ability to get 50/50 in the Hall of Monuments because there were other options. I actually did finish DOA, FIssuer of Woe, Slavers Exile, THe Deep and Urgoz's Warren. In fact, I finished DOA with my wife and six heroes. There were options. And all I'm asking for here is options.

You want to take people out of their comfort zones after years of playing you do so at your own risk. I'm not saying don't have raids. I'm not saying don't have strike missions. I'm asking that raids and strike missions exist without overtly affecting the game I've been playing for years. I'm not sure who this is unreaonable.

I have from the beginning both disagreed with you and said your feedback is equally as valid. I have been clear on that multiple times. So no, your feedback is not unreasonable. I just don't support your viewpoint and do support Anet's implementation (and frankly that's somewhat of a miracle given my criticisms of Anet at time over the last year) and do believe this isn't either anything fundamentally new or a long term problem for the game.

I do think what Anet is doing is the right way forward for all the reasons I have stated previously. I'm not sure why it is unreasonable to so many others to have a contrary opinion. It is allowed. I have put forward my reasons why. I even agreed I wouldn't mind if they did reduce the reqs, despite believing in the current method.

The only real issues I have had contention with is this belief players have they represent the majority. But I think we eventually got past that for most people.The other being that players ignore that Anet have stated players do want raids based on the feedback they gathered. It's the difficulty gap that is being fedback by players most commonly as the cited issue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sure as hell is inconsistent ... it's EXCEPTIONALLY inconsistent to throw 10 man achievements into OW meta achieves ... I can't even believe I have to explicitly state that.

That's because you cherry picked a few words out of context with the statement I made against the question posed and cut the rest of the line out

The rest of the statement I made in reply to Anet being consistent in philosophy to how they deliver was;

"Anet have always tried to bring players together. Metas have often included multi player achievements and we have at least one example of there being a requirement before as well."

Them including the strikes in the meta is part of that goal and is consistent with the design goals they have strived for over the years

You're spin doctoring. @""Obtena.7952" is correct.

Please don't post off topic replies nor twist what I wrote. This is nothing to do with spin doctoring. You just disagree. There is a difference

"Anet have always tried to bring players together. Metas have often included multi player achievements"

You are pulling the "anet wants us to be friends" card that has zero relevance to the topic. "Metas" are OPEN WORLD meta events made for large groups of players. FORCING people to do raid "stepping stones" to complete zone achievements is not what MOST people want. If we wanted raids and raid stuff, then we wouldn't have the devs saying they don't want to spend money making more bc the raid population is so small.

You ARE spin doctoring.

The majority 94 percent don't even do the meta so MOST people don't care. Some want raids. We already know you don't. I and MOST people don't care raids exist tho for those that enjoys it same as strike missions MOST people don't care if they exist either way. A SMALL minority wants to do the meta and even less of that SMALL minority is upset they can't do it because of not even being willing to do the easy strike missions to get it. I still support this SMALL minority and hope anet removes strikes from meta so those FEW can get the shiver emote.

If you're getting that number of 94% from GW 2 efficiency all you can really say is that 94% of people who have accounts on efficiency and still play don't do the meta. I mean obvoiusly people who left the game two years ago don't do the meta, but may still have accounts on efficiency. That's why I used it as a recent comparative stat rather than a long term stat. The longer you go out the more inaccurate it becomes. I chose a very small snap shot to make a compartive study not an absolute one.

Tell me, what percentage of my guild of 400 casuals do you think have Guild Wars 2 efficiency accounts? I have ten accounts. I do the meta on one of them. Therefore 90% of the meta doesn't get done on GW2 efficiency. My wife has ten accounts and the same applies to her. It's just not a valid source of the over all statement that only 6% of the population does the meta. But we can do an analysis of how many people comparatively do the meta that are guild wars 2 efficiency users from one chapter to the next, because we're ONLY looking at efficiency users.

On the other topic, I don't believe most casuals even know what efficiency is or have accounts there or entered their API. Most of my guild doesn't. But many of them do go for the metas. Again it's the casual end game. That and collecting stuff like skins. Emotes would bea perfect thing to give a casual as a reward. Role players are the guys who most care about emotes. Are we saying role players are the most likely guys to enjoy strike missions?

It's just a bad change. It's even a worse change if it doesnt' work to get more people into raids and I don't think it will.

No you gave me those numbers but you back-peddle so hard now cause that was a mistake. Now in order to win this argument you will never let end I have to prove stuff no one but an anet employee can. A person linked alot more info later and shows a steady decrease from starting story on each map(which I call at least active) to finishing meta like 3-11 percent from the last 9 maps which destroys the entire premise of this thread. Now again you talking how you are going to quit and I still don't care if anet puts strikes into it's own category but you will argue forever if we don't cow tow completely to your every opinion.

Stop throwing the 10 accounts. Did all 10 start story cause if they didn't they already got weeded out but even if you did 1 outta 11 is 9 percent which is still higher then most overall numbers who completed meta. You love this.

@Randulf.7614 said:This isn’t inconsistent though.

It sure as hell is inconsistent ... it's EXCEPTIONALLY inconsistent to throw 10 man achievements into OW meta achieves ... I can't even believe I have to explicitly state that.

That's because you cherry picked a few words out of context with the statement I made against the question posed and cut the rest of the line out

The rest of the statement I made in reply to Anet being consistent in philosophy to how they deliver was;

"Anet have always tried to bring players together. Metas have often included multi player achievements and we have at least one example of there being a requirement before as well."

Them including the strikes in the meta is part of that goal and is consistent with the design goals they have strived for over the years

You're spin doctoring. @""Obtena.7952" is correct.

Please don't post off topic replies nor twist what I wrote. This is nothing to do with spin doctoring. You just disagree. There is a difference

"Anet have always tried to bring players together. Metas have often included multi player achievements"

You are pulling the "anet wants us to be friends" card that has zero relevance to the topic. "Metas" are OPEN WORLD meta events made for large groups of players. FORCING people to do raid "stepping stones" to complete zone achievements is not what MOST people want. If we wanted raids and raid stuff, then we wouldn't have the devs saying they don't want to spend money making more bc the raid population is so small.

You ARE spin doctoring.

The majority 94 percent don't even do the meta so MOST people don't care. Some want raids. We already know you don't. I and MOST people don't care raids exist tho for those that enjoys it same as strike missions MOST people don't care if they exist either way. A SMALL minority wants to do the meta and even less of that SMALL minority is upset they can't do it because of not even being willing to do the easy strike missions to get it. I still support this SMALL minority and hope anet removes strikes from meta so those FEW can get the shiver emote.

If you're getting that number of 94% from GW 2 efficiency all you can really say is that 94% of people who have accounts on efficiency and still play don't do the meta. I mean obvoiusly people who left the game two years ago don't do the meta, but may still have accounts on efficiency. That's why I used it as a recent comparative stat rather than a long term stat. The longer you go out the more inaccurate it becomes. I chose a very small snap shot to make a compartive study not an absolute one.

Tell me, what percentage of my guild of 400 casuals do you think have Guild Wars 2 efficiency accounts? I have ten accounts. I do the meta on one of them. Therefore 90% of the meta doesn't get done on GW2 efficiency. My wife has ten accounts and the same applies to her. It's just not a valid source of the over all statement that only 6% of the population does the meta. But we can do an analysis of how many people comparatively do the meta that are guild wars 2 efficiency users from one chapter to the next, because we're ONLY looking at efficiency users.

On the other topic, I don't believe most casuals even know what efficiency is or have accounts there or entered their API. Most of my guild doesn't. But many of them do go for the metas. Again it's the casual end game. That and collecting stuff like skins. Emotes would bea perfect thing to give a casual as a reward. Role players are the guys who most care about emotes. Are we saying role players are the most likely guys to enjoy strike missions?

It's just a bad change. It's even a worse change if it doesnt' work to get more people into raids and I don't think it will.

No you gave me those numbers but you back-peddle so hard now cause that was a mistake. Now in order to win this argument you will never let end I have to prove stuff no one but an anet employee can. A person linked alot more info later and shows a steady decrease from starting story on each map(which I call at least active) to finishing meta like 3-11 percent from the last 9 maps which destroys the entire premise of this thread. Now again you talking how you are going to quit and I still don't care if anet puts strikes into it's own category but you will argue forever if we don't cow tow completely to your every opinion.

Stop throwing the 10 accounts. Did all 10 start story cause if they didn't they already got weeded out but even if you did 1 outta 11 is 9 percent which is still higher then most overall numbers who completed meta. You love this.

I did start the story on most of those accounts, yes. It's how I get characters to those locations. In fact I've finished the story on mutliple accounts without going for the meta. I do it to help guildies, since i don't have any characters that need those stories on my main account anymore. Might as well get alt accounts through. Comes under the playing with friends banner.

No, it was not a mistake to introduce Guild Wars 2 effiency into this equation. It didn't exactly what I intended it to do in my first post. It talked about recent compartive numbers, which is precisely what it's useful for.

It's reasonable to assume there's value in recent numbers, but that doesnt' necessarily follow that those numbers would represent everyone in the game. It's very simple. Fortunately for me, Anet has the real numbers and I guarnatee you they're higher than you think.

Reread your last to yourself a dozen times and realize you can't keep saying you speak for the majority and link numbers to prove a point then dismiss the same numbers to disprove any counterpoint. Just like my and your opinion don't represent every one in the game as every day after work 6pm est you can't wait to argue. And I even get that. I don't get why you can't compromise and see we all are ok with strikes being removed from the meta so you or anyone in guild don't have to do them.

I can say I speak for the majority if the majority of the players don't have a Guild Wars 2 efficiency account, because they're casual. It's pretty simple. I can guarantee you more hard core players have GW2 efficiency accounts that casual players just logically. I can also guarantee you that most of the 400 people in my guild don't have an efficiency account. If my guild were reprsentative of the game, that would mean less than 15% of the playerbase has an efficiency account. So it's useful to compare people with efficiency accounts but not useful to talk about over all population.

I've already mentioned about the dev from Lotro who left the game and said that though 50% of forum posts are by raiders and PvPers only 10% of the game's population ever raided or PvPed. The casual playerbase isnt' so loud, generally. Most casuals never come to forums, or reddit and why would they? Most casuals logically wouldn't have a GW 2 efficiency account too. My that logic most casuals don't raid and most casuals wouldn't be here to have this discussion.

I'm a different kind of casual it's true. But I'm fairly certainly that causual who are often solo players will chip away at zone metas because they can do most of that stuff by themselves. That includes world bosses they can just show up. I've seen this behavior in my guild over and over over the years. People obviously come and go, but the casuals are more into achievements generally and less into instanced harder content.

You dont' have to believe me. But everything I've said is logical. if you think somehow that most casuals ran out, learned about efficiency, learned with an API code is and took the time to fill it in, I'm not sure what to tell you. Which doesn't at all invalidate a compartive study of efficiency users.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:Now you want to speak on behalf of a community you are not apart of. So if you think those who don't have a GW2 efficiency account are the majority and you do wait for it. You are in the minority. So you think this baseline of 3-11 percent completing meta of Hard core gw2 efficiency players numbers will be lower then the vast amount of casuals. Are you really going that route and saying everything you say is logical?

You mean a guild leader shouldn't talk for his guild. You can be part of a community and still be an outlier. I call myself a hard core casual for a reason. I'm the hardest core casual there is. Doesnt' really stop me from being casual. I do all the same stuff people in my guild do, just more of it. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:And don't swap arguments where most don't raid because everyone knows raiders are a minority. And that's where I know you base comes from. You hate raids because they had to adjust stats and builds that affected your pve and I will guess you were a Chrono main. I was too. I never raided but the gold and changes we had to go thru was endless but I still do strikes until I get the achieves.

I never had a problem with the chrono main changes. I've spent more hours on my soul beast than my chrono btw, and almost as many hours on an engie. I have 14 characters that have played every single story and completed every single map in this game. 8 of them are in full ascended gear (two even have ascended aqua breathers).

I hate raids because of other games more than how they're implemented in this game. I feel about raids the way I feel about PvP. It's fine that it's there as long as I'm not affected by it. Let me have a PvP lobby, go to that lobby if I want to do that content, which occasionally I do.

But taking something I've been doing all along and changing it for the benefit of raiders? That's precisely what I was worried about in the first place and it's starting to happen. What should I do? Sit around and wait until it's too late to say something. It's a change I feel is bad for the game, so sure i'm going to say something. And if you haven't noticed I'm not alone.

And again, a large percentage of casuals will never post here, or even see this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:Now you want to speak on behalf of a community you are not apart of. So if you think those who don't have a GW2 efficiency account are the majority and you do wait for it. You are in the minority. So you think this baseline of 3-11 percent completing meta of Hard core gw2 efficiency players numbers will be lower then the vast amount of casuals. Are you really going that route and saying everything you say is logical?

You mean a guild leader shouldn't talk for his guild. You can be part of a community and still be an outlier. I call myself a hard core casual for a reason. I'm the hardest core casual there is. Doesnt' really stop me from being casual. I do all the same stuff people in my guild do, just more of it. lol

Yes of course talk to your guild. But the MAJORITY of us are not in your guild so speaking for the entire I'm president of GW2 is what I don't get. Ok. reset time. I do a ton of kitten. Till tomorrow if this thread doesn't die and because of you I know it won't.

Yes the majority of players aren't in my guild. But the majority of players aren't likely in raid guilds either. Are you suggesting there are more raiders than casuals? Are you suggesting there are more raiders who care about zone metas than casuals. If casuals make up the bulk of the population (and I believe they do) and casuals are more likely to do stuff like zone metas (because that's always been what they do, story stuff and running around the open world) then logically more casuals will care about the zone metas by percentage than raiders.

If you can accept that logic, then you can also accept this logic. If only 10% of casuals care about zone metas but half the game is casual, that's a much bigger percentage than people likely to love this idea of haivng to do strike missions to get their zone meta. It's really is all about percentage. My best guess is that more people will be annoyed by this change than any advantage gained. And Anet will have some idea of that from zone completion and decide if they want to change it.

It'll be their decision in the end, not me, not you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:And don't swap arguments where most don't raid because everyone knows raiders are a minority. And that's where I know you base comes from. You hate raids because they had to adjust stats and builds that affected your pve and I will guess you were a Chrono main. I was too. I never raided but the gold and changes we had to go thru was endless but I still do strikes until I get the achieves.

I never had a problem with the chrono main changes. I've spent more hours on my soul beast than my chrono btw, and almost as many hours on an engie. I have 14 characters that have played every single story and completed every single map in this game. 8 of them are in full ascended gear (two even have ascended aqua breathers).

I hate raids because of other games more than how they're implemented in this game. I feel about raids the way I feel about PvP. It's fine that it's there as long as I'm not affected by it. Let me have a PvP lobby, go to that lobby if I want to do that content, which occasionally I do.

But taking something I've been doing all along and changing it for the benefit of raiders? That's precisely what I was worried about in the first place and it's starting to happen. What should I do? Sit around and wait until it's too late to say something. It's a change I feel is bad for the game, so sure i'm going to say something. And if you haven't noticed I'm not alone.

And again, a large percentage of casuals will never post here, or even see this thread.

But according to Vayne The MAJORITY of those casuals who don't use the forums agree with him. Last one this time no lie.

Actually I never said that. But I do think it's far more likely that casuals would be interested in zone metas compared to hard core players who tend toward more instanced content.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Jayden Reese.9542"

Sorry pal, but Vayne is right. Confirmed by the devs.

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/97028/a-message-from-andrew-gray

“Raids are a trickier beast. They're a unique experience and community that we want to find better ways to support, the biggest challenge in creating more is the small audience they attract.”

Devs can’t justify spending money on the “small audience they attract”. The majority have spoken on raid and raid stuff over the past 5 years. We don’t want raids or forced 10 person raid junk in open world zones for achieves for that matter. You can say what you like, but ultimately you are wrong period. End of story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:

Sorry pal, but Vayne is right. Confirmed by the devs.

“Raids are a trickier beast. They're a unique experience and community that we want to find better ways to support, the biggest challenge in creating more is the small audience they attract.”

Devs can’t justify spending money on the “small audience they attract”. The majority have spoken on raid and raid stuff over the past 5 years. We don’t want raids or forced 10 person raid junk in open world zones for achieves for that matter. You can say what you like, but ultimately you are wrong period. End of story.

Ok, waiting on Drakk escort. Never once did I say raids attract a large audience or they aren't the minority. I also say go ahead remove strikes from this meta into it's own category. You guys like to swap between to win any argument. IDK why. It is impressive how you guys keep this thread going tho even if at the core the person agrees but you find something to nitpick to carry on.

Devs confirmed the large audience do not like raid stuff. Vayne is right period. Accept it or not, but those are the facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:

Sorry pal, but Vayne is right. Confirmed by the devs.

“Raids are a trickier beast. They're a unique experience and community that we want to find better ways to support, the biggest challenge in creating more is the small audience they attract.”

Devs can’t justify spending money on the “small audience they attract”. The majority have spoken on raid and raid stuff over the past 5 years. We don’t want raids or forced 10 person raid junk in open world zones for achieves for that matter. You can say what you like, but ultimately you are wrong period. End of story.

Ok, waiting on Drakk escort. Never once did I say raids attract a large audience or they aren't the minority. I also say go ahead remove strikes from this meta into it's own category. You guys like to swap between to win any argument. IDK why. It is impressive how you guys keep this thread going tho even if at the core the person agrees but you find something to nitpick to carry on.

Devs confirmed the large audience do not like raid stuff. Vayne is right period. Accept it or not, but those are the facts.

I can't. Could you show me by linking a thread or video where they said that? Like there is no way at least 95 percent of us don't raid. Unless you can prove otherwise idk. And don't go use GW2 efficiency cause those don't represent the hard core raider population. I need anets data. Hmu when you get that ty.

I don’t need gw2 efficiency for anything. That’s useless to me. I already quoted Andrew Gray, and the devs don’t want to waste time and money on something for a small audience. That means the large audience has spoken, and we certainly don’t want raid type achievements forced on us for open world achievements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MMO encouraging socializing and playing content in a group? How dare they!

On a more serious note, though, you can get the emote without doing the strikes, so. Where's the issue? They're seeing what works and what is disliked. If enough people actually voice their discomfort with the choice, they'll change it in the future. Everyone wins, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@NorthernRedStar.3054 said:MMO encouraging socializing and playing content in a group? How dare they!

On a more serious note, though, you can get the emote without doing the strikes, so. Where's the issue? They're seeing what works and what is disliked. If enough people actually voice their discomfort with the choice, they'll change it in the future. Everyone wins, right?

How can you get the emote without doing strikes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Vayne.8563 said:

@NorthernRedStar.3054 said:MMO encouraging socializing and playing content in a group?
How dare they!

On a more serious note, though, you can get the emote without doing the strikes, so. Where's the issue? They're seeing what works and what is disliked. If enough people
actually
voice their discomfort with the choice, they'll change it in the future. Everyone wins, right?

How can you get the emote without doing strikes?

IIRC (might be off by 1 achi), if you do every other achievement in the episode category, you will have 37/37 w/o touching the strikes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@NorthernRedStar.3054 said:MMO encouraging socializing and playing content in a group? How dare they!

Thats the whole point in this argument. Gw2 is a single player mmo outside of fractals, raids and wvsw. As soon as any grouping is required or you even have to talk to other players to work together to synergize builds this happens. build swapping is very easy but some players become extremely toxic when they are asked to change traits, weapons or skills. this is probably why another very popular mmo removed the whole talent system and most of the gear choices. balancing becomes much easier if bad builds cant be created.rip 14/14/14/14/14. still one of the high impact systems. traits and sigils can more than double the damage or greatly increase sustain.This is also an episode meta achievement. should require all parts of the episode to complete. and strikes are not raids. try them with an actual raid group and they die extremely fast. they are still designed for open world players but they require the players to work together, not having everyone playing unkillable tagging leech builds like open world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Nephalem.8921 said:

@NorthernRedStar.3054 said:MMO encouraging socializing and playing content in a group?
How dare they!

Thats the whole point in this argument. Gw2 is a single player mmo outside of fractals, raids and wvsw. As soon as any grouping is required or you even have to talk to other players to work together to synergize builds this happens.

Fancy. Has pretty much never happened to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do require a few achievement involving Strike in order to get the emote(not sure of the exact number, sorry). Kinda remembered this because I found out about it later, was focusing on map event achievements. Thus, had to put everything else aside, missed a strike rotation and that delayed my completion by a week. (Still have 10-11 incomplete Strike achievement after getting the emote.) Did it by joining players asking/advertising in map chat, LFG and even solo'd some (doesn't require kill).

From my perspective, no issues with the achievement. PvE players do need to go into WvW to obtain the Warclaw. Players stayed or learned something about it after, while those who doesn't like it; didn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@NorthernRedStar.3054 said:

@NorthernRedStar.3054 said:MMO encouraging socializing and playing content in a group?
How dare they!

On a more serious note, though, you can get the emote without doing the strikes, so. Where's the issue? They're seeing what works and what is disliked. If enough people
actually
voice their discomfort with the choice, they'll change it in the future. Everyone wins, right?

How can you get the emote without doing strikes?

IIRC (might be off by 1 achi), if you do every other achievement in the episode category, you will have 37/37 w/o touching the strikes.

You need 7 achievements from strike missions to get the meta.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Obtena.7952 said:So while you want to argue that this one instance isn't going to have that big an impact to the health of the game (and that could be right, I don't know), everyone that recognizes the long-term inconsistency is an ongoing issue that has existed for a long time is a mile ahead of you and sees how bad it is for the game.

Yes Arenanet is known to be inconsistent, that doesn't change the fact that very few players will be affected by this change because very few players even care about map meta achievements. It's a good thing that I only provided data to support that and never made any other connection, nor disputed the OP, nor said that the change is good (or bad).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Vayne.8563" said:Vaynes doom and gloom doesn't believe casual players have Guild Wars 2 efficiency accounts, but they represent a significant portion of the playerbase. Until you can prove that most players have Guild Wars 2 efficiency accounts that are playing today, we're only getting a percnetage of people who have accounts on GW 2 efficiency. Many of those are likely harder core players and they may not do zone meta at all because they have their own end game. As this game moves further and further away from what I want, I will personally be looking for another game. Obviously if that happens some of my guild will come with me, probably only a couple of dozen people, because we've played together for years. But you can't just change the game by trying to encourage people who raid who have already basically said they're not interest in raiding. It's like throwing good money after bad.

I put the "doom and gloom" in quotes because I didn't like the way Ayrilana used it, maybe I should've used different words instead. You used GW2E data to prove that the Shadow in the Ice meta completion is abysmally low (0.7%) and now you discredit yourself???? No, you got it right the first time, the rates for the Shadow in the Ice are very low, we only have to wait a few months to see if they get any better, because it's not only the Strike achievements, there are others that take a considerable amount of time to finish. Do remember that Whisper in the Dark is so far the best episode, in terms of meta completion compared to episode start. One in 4 players that started Whisper in the Dark, finished the map meta. This means they did something good with that meta.

It's not that most players have a GW2E account. It's that the vast majority of players with high AP counts have a GW2E account, and those are going after map meta achievements. A player with 3k AP or less is not going for map meta achievements, if they did, they wouldn't have 3k AP. It's simple math. Meaning out of the possible players that could go for map meta achievements, GW2E accounts are a very very high percentage. So your initial point about the completion rates being very low is correct. If you used the entire population of the game, then the rates of map meta completion would be considerably lower than the GW2E numbers

Edit: aimed at the entire last page: when did this turn into casual vs hardcore??????????????? mind blown

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Vayne.8563" said:Tell me, what percentage of my guild of 400 casuals do you think have Guild Wars 2 efficiency accounts?

Question: what's the percentage of the players in your guild that have 40k+, 35k+ and 3k+ AP? The numbers are chosen intentionally (they are numbers we have data of) and aren't random. You can go here and check it out: https://leaderboards.guildwars2.com/en/eu it's faster than using the in-game browser, you can also copy/paste the names into an excel spreadsheet and do the calculations there.Better yet, on the page you can see the percentage each member is at, so I guess an even better question is: how many of your guild members are in the 90% of the population (you can see it in front of their name) on the page, not available in-game.

This isn't a debate question, just statistics. If anyone else wants to participate, feel free.In my own Guilds, nobody is at 40k+, only 3 people are in the 35k+ range and about 88% of the members are in the 90% category.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@"Vayne.8563" said:Tell me, what percentage of my guild of 400 casuals do you think have Guild Wars 2 efficiency accounts?

Question: what's the percentage of the players in your guild that have 40k+, 35k+ and 3k+ AP? The numbers are chosen intentionally (they are numbers we have data of) and aren't random. You can go here and check it out:
it's faster than using the in-game browser, you can also copy/paste the names into an excel spreadsheet and do the calculations there.Better yet, on the page you can see the percentage each member is at, so I guess an even better question is: how many of your guild members are in the 90% of the population (you can see it in front of their name) on the page, not available in-game.

This isn't a debate question, just statistics. If anyone else wants to participate, feel free.In my own Guilds, nobody is at 40k+, only 3 people are in the 35k+ range and about 88% of the members are in the 90% category.

Doesn't really tell me anything, since even people who started recently in my guild go for map meta achievements, having learned from others who do it. It's a list of stuff to do and people like lists..well some people anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...