Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Kill Proof idea - Let us ping from the Wallet


YtseJam.9784

Recommended Posts

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

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

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ayrilana.1396 said:

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

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

Nope.

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the gatekeeping issues/accusations,

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

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

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

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Raknar.4735 said:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Linken.6345 said:Is this on Na servers?don't know how it is on Na. I am about Eu

Never seen a fractal party demand fractal god on Euas I say it not main requirement, kp first. Part time I have open lfg t4 window, so for example then last cm100 come I see that additional requirement in 5+ parties fro some achiv/modes per 2-3 hours. Don't prioritize that as main part of kp value

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Cyninja.2954 said:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Raknar.4735 said:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

You never gave a definition for what you define as casual or hardcore, and as such I gave one for how I used the terms. If your definition varied, you are welcome to give that differing one, though it will not change any of the facts that:

  1. the main issue here is difference in player skill, which is present no matter in which content but of significant importance in more challenging content
  2. you still approach this entire issue the same way as other toxic members of either side of the spectrum approach it: as binary "us versus them" and no definition you could give would alleviate your wording here
  3. the terms "casual" and "hardcore" are absolutely insufficient to even remotely give justice to the vast amount of difference in player skill or individual approach to this issue. Which is exactly WHY a crude system like KP is in effect in the first place the way it is handled, because numeric values can distinguish, even with all its flaws

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Cyninja.2954 said:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I was giving a suggestion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Raknar.4735 said:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@Raknar.4735 said:

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

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

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

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

@Raknar.4735 said:

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

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

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

Agreed.

@Raknar.4735 said:

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

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Cyninja.2954 said:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Agreed.

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

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

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Raknar.4735 said:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Raknar.4735 said:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@Raknar.4735 said:

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

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

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

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

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

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

@Raknar.4735 said:

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

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

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

Agreed.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In summary: players with egoistical nature.

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

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

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

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...